Summary
A 41-year-old vice president at a defense contractor was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) due to his failure to report a January 2001 DUI arrest. The Statement of Reasons alleged that the applicant was arrested for DUI and was required to report adverse information in compliance with the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM).
Disqualifying conditions E1, E4, and E5 were raised, while mitigating conditions E1 and E5 were applied. Despite a long history of favorable performance and character references, the applicant's delay in disclosure was a significant concern.
The denial was based on the applicant's failure to report the DUI arrest to security personnel in a timely manner, violating NISPOM requirements. This delay increased his vulnerability to coercion and exploitation, undermining his trustworthiness. The applicant's embarrassment over the incident was not considered a valid justification for his failure to report.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant failed to report his DUI arrest to security personnel in a timely manner, violating NISPOM requirements.
- The applicant's delay in disclosure increased his vulnerability to coercion and exploitation, undermining trustworthiness.
- The applicant's embarrassment over the DUI incident was not a valid justification for his failure to report.
Conditions Referenced
- E1raisedReliable, Unfavorable Information Provided by Associates, Employers, Coworkers, Neighbors, and Other Acquaintances
- E4raisedPersonal Conduct or Concealment of Information That Increases an Individual's Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation or Duress
- E5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rules Violations, Including Violation of Any Written or Recorded Agreement Made Between the Individual and the Agency
- E1rejectedThe Information Was Unsubstantiated or Not Pertinent to a Determination of Judgment, Trustworthiness, or Reliability
- E5rejectedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion Exploitation and 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 issuedFeb 6, 2002
- Answer filedFeb 19, 2002
- Hearing held—Applicant elected to have the case decided on a written record.
- Decision dateApr 30, 2002
Cite For
- Failure to Report Adverse Information Under NISPOM as a Disqualifying Factor
- Impact of Personal Conduct on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Judgment and Reliability Concerns Stemming From Alcohol-related Incidents