Summary
A 59-year-old widowed applicant was denied a security clearance under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) due to a history of criminal convictions in the 1960s. The Statement of Reasons detailed several incidents, beginning in March 1963 with an arrest for a bad-check offense, auto theft, and carrying a deadly weapon, resulting in a guilty plea to the bad-check offense and one year of probation.
In July 1963, the applicant was arrested for burglary and later indicted for grand larceny, pleading guilty in October 1963 and receiving a sentence of one to five years in state prison, from which he was released in March 1965. While on parole in May 1965, he was found guilty of being drunk and vagrancy, fined $200, and returned to prison for a parole violation. His criminal conduct continued in August 1968 when he was arrested for burglary, arson, auto theft, and embezzlement after breaking into a store, stealing televisions, and setting the store's van on fire. In September 1968, he pled guilty to burglary and was sentenced to one to five years in the same state penitentiary.
Despite demonstrating rehabilitation and continuous employment since 1971, the judge denied the clearance. The denial was based on the applicant's history of illegal behavior and, critically, his ineligibility under 10 U.S.C. § 986, which statutorily disqualifies individuals with certain criminal convictions, specifically his 1968 sentence to confinement exceeding one year, from holding a security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant's criminal conduct occurred between 1963 and 1968, creating a history of illegal behavior that raises security concerns.
- The applicant is ineligible for access to classified information under 10 U.S.C. § 986 due to his sentences exceeding one year.
- The judge found that the government established its case under Guideline J, leading to a denial of the security clearance.
Conditions Referenced
- DC araisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged.
- DC braisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses.
- MC aappliedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not Recent.
- MC brejectedThe Crime Was an Isolated Incident.The applicant was involved in multiple crimes.
- MC dappliedThe Person Did Not Voluntarily Commit the Act And/or the Factors Leading to the Violation Are Not Likely to Recur.
- MC fappliedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation.
Key Rule Quoted
“"It should be obvious that no one has a 'right' to a security clearance," and "the clearly consistent standard indicates that security clearance determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials."”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 22, 2002
- Answer filedJun 14, 2002
- Hearing heldSep 11, 2002at a location near Applicant's place of employment.
- Decision dateJan 21, 2003
Cite For
- Application of 10 U.S.C. § 986 Regarding Criminal Convictions and Security Clearance Eligibility
- Consideration of Rehabilitation in the Context of Guideline J
- Impact of Historical Criminal Conduct on Current Security Clearance Determinations.