Summary
This case concerns a 41-year-old engineer with a secret security clearance, whose eligibility was reviewed under Guidelines D (Sexual Behavior), E (Personal Conduct), and M (Use of Information Technology). The Statement of Reasons alleged that the applicant accessed numerous pornographic websites on his government contractor employer's computer during a five-day period in January 2001. Additionally, he failed to complete his time card daily as required by government regulations during the same timeframe.
Despite these allegations, the judge determined that the security concerns were mitigated. Key factors included the absence of a specific employer policy prohibiting access to such websites outside of work hours at the time of the incidents. The misconduct was also characterized as isolated, occurring over a short duration.
Furthermore, the applicant demonstrated good character and trustworthiness, supported by testimony from senior management. Based on these mitigating factors, the applicant's security clearance was GRANTED.
Why the applicant prevailed
- The applicant's employer did not have a policy prohibiting access to pornographic websites outside of work hours.
- The applicant's misconduct was isolated and occurred over a short period of time.
- The applicant demonstrated good character and trustworthiness through testimony from senior management.
Conditions referenced
- DC 1raisedReliable, Unfavorable Information Provided by Associates, Employers, Coworkers, Neighbors, and Other Acquaintances
- DC 4raisedPersonal Conduct or Concealment of Information That Increases an Individual's Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation or Duress
- DC 5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations, Including Violation of Any Written or Recorded Agreement Made Between the Individual and the Agency
- MC 1appliedThe Misuse Was Not Recent or Significant
- MC 2appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent and There Is No Evidence of Subsequent Conduct of a Similar Nature
- MC 4appliedThe Misuse Was an Isolated Event
- MC 5appliedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
Key rule quoted
“The sole purpose of a security clearance decision is to decide if it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for an applicant.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedDec 8, 2003
- Answer filedJan 6, 2004
- Hearing heldJun 15, 2004
- Decision dateSep 17, 2004
Cite for
- Mitigation of Security Concerns Under Guideline M Due to Lack of Employer Policy
- Isolated Incidents of Misconduct Not Indicative of a Pattern
- Character References From Senior Management as Mitigating Evidence