Summary
A 46-year-old director of operations for a defense contractor was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) due to a history of questionable judgment and a lack of candor. The Statement of Reasons detailed several allegations, including the theft of car stereos, radar detectors, and a luxury automobile in 1986 or 1987, with the proceeds from the stereo sales used to purchase cocaine. Additionally, the applicant was accused of raping a fellow soldier in August 1991.
Further concerns arose from two instances of workplace misconduct. In June 2006, the applicant was fired for inappropriate behavior with female coworkers, and in October 2011, he was again terminated for similar inappropriate behavior with a female coworker. These allegations raised disqualifying conditions under Adjudicative Guidelines paragraphs 16(c), 16(d), and 16(e).
Despite a distinguished military career and positive character references, the judge found that the applicant's admissions of past criminal conduct and drug use, combined with his repeated firings for inappropriate workplace behavior, significantly undermined his reliability and trustworthiness. While mitigating conditions under paragraphs 17(c), 17(d), and 17(e) were considered, they were insufficient to overcome the judge's concerns, leading to the denial of the security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant had a history of questionable judgment and lack of candor regarding his past conduct.
- He was fired from two jobs due to inappropriate behavior with female coworkers.
- The applicant's admissions of past criminal conduct and drug use raised concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 16(c)appliedCredible Adverse Information
- AG ¶ 16(d)appliedCredible Adverse Information Not Covered Under Other Guidelines
- AG ¶ 16(e)appliedPersonal Conduct Creating Vulnerability to Exploitation
- AG ¶ 17(c)appliedBehavior Unlikely to Recur Due to Time Passed
- AG ¶ 17(d)appliedAcknowledgment of Behavior and Counseling
- AG ¶ 17(e)rejectedPositive Steps to Reduce VulnerabilityThe applicant was vague about the specifics of his terminations.
Key Rule Quoted
“"Once a concern arises regarding an Applicant’s security clearance eligibility, there is a strong presumption against the grant or maintenance of a security clearance."”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedOct 28, 2014
- Answer filedDec 8, 2014
- Hearing heldDec 15, 2015
- Decision dateMar 9, 2016
Cite For
- Disqualifying Conditions Under Guideline E Due to Personal Conduct
- Impact of Past Criminal Behavior on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Presumption Against Granting Security Clearance When Concerns Arise