Summary
A 40-year-old married security officer for a defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline D (Sexual Behavior) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). These concerns stemmed from two past employment incidents. In November 1996, he was involuntarily terminated from a corrections officer position for violating sexual harassment policies. Later, in March 2001, he resigned by mutual consent from a chief security officer role following further allegations of sexual harassment. Additionally, while employed by a cruise ship line, he engaged in sexual conduct with passengers and crew members, which his wife was initially unaware of.
The applicant successfully mitigated these concerns by demonstrating significant lifestyle changes and personal growth. He informed his wife of his past conduct, and she has since forgiven him, which reduced his vulnerability to coercion. There have been no further incidents of similar conduct since 2001, and he has maintained a positive reputation in his current workplace.
Based on these mitigating factors, the applicant's security clearance was granted.
Why the applicant prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated significant lifestyle changes and personal growth since the incidents.
- He informed his wife of his past conduct, which she has forgiven, reducing vulnerability to coercion.
- There have been no incidents of similar conduct since 2001, and he has maintained a positive reputation at work.
Conditions referenced
- E2.A5.1.2.4raisedPersonal Conduct or Concealment of Information That Increases an Individual's Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation or Duress.
- E2.A5.1.2.5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations, Including Violation of Any Written or Recorded Agreement Made Between the Individual and the Agency.
- E2.A4.1.2.3raisedSexual Behavior That Causes an Individual to Be Vulnerable to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress.
- E2.A5.1.3.5appliedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress.
- E2.A4.1.3.2appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent and There Is No Evidence of Subsequent Conduct of a Similar Nature.
- E2.A4.1.3.4appliedThe Behavior No Longer Serves as a Basis for Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress.
Key rule quoted
“"Any doubt as to whether access to classified information is clearly consistent with national security will be resolved in favor of the national security."”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedApr 7, 2005
- Answer filedApr 21, 2005
- Hearing heldSep 14, 2005
- Decision dateMay 12, 2006
Cite for
- Mitigation of Personal Conduct Concerns Through Lifestyle Changes and Transparency with Family
- Rebuttable Presumption of Rehabilitation After Significant Time Without Incidents
- Consideration of Family Dynamics in Security Clearance Decisions