Summary
A 58-year-old executive secretary for a defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite allegations under Guideline D (Sexual Behavior) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). These allegations stemmed from a July 1986 incident involving sexual activity with a minor and a subsequent false police report.
The Statement of Reasons specifically cited the applicant's engagement in sexual activity with a minor in July 1986, raising Disqualifying Conditions 3 and 4. However, the judge applied Mitigating Conditions 2, 3, 4, and 5.
The decision to grant the clearance was based on several factors. The applicant provided forthright disclosures regarding the incident in both his sworn statement and at the hearing. The judge also found the applicant's belief that he was in danger of being robbed at the time to be reasonable given the circumstances. Crucially, there was no evidence of any similar conduct by the applicant since the 1986 incident, and the significant passage of time further mitigated concerns about potential coercion.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant provided forthright disclosures about the incident in his sworn statement and at the hearing.
- The applicant's belief that he was in danger of being robbed was reasonable given the circumstances.
- There was no evidence of subsequent conduct of a similar nature since the incident.
Conditions Referenced
- DC 3raisedSexual Behavior That Causes an Individual to Be Vulnerable to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
- DC 4raisedPersonal Conduct or Concealment of Information That Increases an Individual's Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
- MC 2appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent and There Is No Evidence of Subsequent Conduct of a Similar Nature
- MC 3appliedThere Is No Other Evidence of Questionable Judgment, Irresponsibility, or Emotional Instability
- MC 4appliedThe Behavior No Longer Serves as a Basis for Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
- MC 5appliedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
Key Rule Quoted
“The granting (or continuance) of a security clearance under this Directive may only be done upon a finding that to do so is clearly consistent with the national interest.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedOct 8, 2002
- Answer filedNov 7, 2002
- Hearing heldMay 7, 2003
- Decision dateJul 30, 2003
Cite For
- Mitigation of Vulnerability Concerns Under Guideline D Due to Forthright Disclosures
- Consideration of Time Elapsed Since Disqualifying Conduct
- Reasonable Belief of Danger as a Mitigating Factor in Personal Conduct Cases