Summary
The applicant, a 51-year-old defense contractor, sought reinstatement of his security clearance after previous convictions for armed and unarmed robbery and subsequent sexual misconduct. Despite demonstrating rehabilitation and a lack of recent misconduct, his application was denied due to the statutory requirement of 10 U.S.C. §986, which mandates denial for applicants sentenced to more than one year in prison.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: For the Applicant (1.a). Against the Applicant (1.b).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions E2.A10.1.2.3. The judge applied mitigating conditions E2.A10.1.3.6, E2.A5.1.3.1. The decision turned on the following: The applicant was sentenced to more than one year in prison for armed robbery, which requires denial of his clearance under 10 U.S.C. §986; The law changed since the applicant's previous clearance was granted, now mandating denial based on his past sentence.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant was sentenced to more than one year in prison for armed robbery, which requires denial of his clearance under 10 U.S.C. §986.
- The law changed since the applicant's previous clearance was granted, now mandating denial based on his past sentence.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A10.1.2.3raisedConviction in a Federal or State Court, Including a Court-martial, of a Crime and Sentenced to Imprisonment for a Term Exceeding One Year.
- E2.A10.1.3.6rejectedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation.Although the applicant demonstrated rehabilitation, the disqualifying condition under 10 U.S.C. §986 was not mitigated.
- E2.A5.1.3.1notedThe Information Was Unsubstantiated or Not Pertinent to a Determination of Judgment, Trustworthiness, or Reliability.
Key Rule Quoted
“The statute requires that I not renew Applicant's clearance because he was sentenced to four to twenty-five years imprisonment, notwithstanding that he served substantially less prison time, completed his probation without incident, and had his civil rights restored shortly after completing his probation.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedOct 15, 2002
- Answer filedNov 12, 2002
- Hearing held—Administrative decision on the record requested.
- Decision dateMay 6, 2003
Cite For
- Application of 10 U.S.C. §986 Regarding Security Clearance Denial for Felony Convictions
- Impact of Prior Criminal Conduct on Current Security Clearance Eligibility
- Consideration of Rehabilitation in the Context of Statutory Requirements for Clearance Denial