ISCR Case 04-08749.h2

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 04-08749.h2

grantedDec 11, 2006· Hon. Carol G. Ricciardello· hearing

Summary

A 51-year-old senior illustration designer, with 30 years of service at a federal contractor, was granted a security clearance despite concerns raised under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), K (Handling Protected Information), and M (Use of Information Technology). The applicant admitted to misusing classified company equipment for personal purposes, specifically making copies of music CDs and viewing and editing personal photographs on a classified computer. Additionally, the applicant introduced digitized personal photographs onto the classified computer for viewing and editing for both himself and coworkers.

Disqualifying conditions were cited, including those related to personal conduct and the handling of protected information. However, several mitigating conditions were applied. The applicant's long and unblemished career, with no prior disciplinary issues, was a significant factor.

Furthermore, the misuse of equipment was noted as a common practice among coworkers, with tacit approval from supervisors, indicating a lax enforcement of security training at the workplace. Crucially, there was no evidence that classified information was actually compromised. Based on these mitigating factors, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant had a long career with no prior disciplinary issues.
The misuse of equipment was common practice among coworkers, including tacit approval from supervisors.
There was no evidence of actual compromise of classified information.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A11.1.2.2raisedViolations That Are Deliberate or Multiple or Due to Negligence
E2.A13.1.2.3raisedRemoval (or Use) of Hardware, Software or Media From Any Information Technology System Without Authorization
E2.A13.1.2.4raisedIntroduction of Hardware, Software, or Media Into Any Information Technology System Without Authorization
E2.A5.1.2.1raisedReliable, Unfavorable Information Provided by Associates, Employers, Coworkers, Neighbors, and Other Acquaintances
E2.A5.1.2.5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations

Mitigating

E2.A11.1.3.1appliedWere Inadvertent
E2.A11.1.3.2appliedWere Isolated and Infrequent
E2.A11.1.3.3appliedWere Due to Improper or Inadequate Training
E2.A11.1.3.4appliedDemonstrate a Positive Attitude Toward the Discharge of Security Responsibilities
E2.A13.1.3.2appliedThe Conduct Was Unintentional or Inadvertent
E2.A13.1.3.5appliedThe Misuse Was Followed by a Prompt, Good Faith Effort to Correct the Situation
E2.A5.1.3.5appliedThe 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 determination 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 issuedJul 5, 2005
Answer filedJul 19, 2005
Hearing heldNov 1, 2006
Decision dateDec 11, 2006

Cite For

Mitigation of Security Concerns Under Guidelines E, K, and M
Common Practice Defense in Security Clearance Cases
Impact of Inadequate Security Training on Applicant's Actions

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a–2.b	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a–2.b

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).

For Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶34)	Mitigating applied (¶35)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant misused company equipment by making copies of music CDs and viewed and edited personal photographs on a classified computer.	For Applicant	Improperly Compiled or Used Protected Info	Admitted	(a) deliberate or negligent disclosure of protected information to unauthorized persons (personal/business contacts, media, persons at seminars/meetings/c… (b) collecting or storing protected information in any unauthorized location	(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt… (b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili… (c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions	Claimed Other

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶34)

Mitigating applied (¶35)

Mitigation

3.a

Applicant misused company equipment by making copies of music CDs and viewed and edited personal photographs on a classified computer.

For Applicant

Improperly Compiled or Used Protected Info

Admitted

(a) deliberate or negligent disclosure of protected information to unauthorized persons (personal/business contacts, media, persons at seminars/meetings/c…

(b) collecting or storing protected information in any unauthorized location

(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt…

(b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili…

(c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions

Claimed

Other

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶40)	Mitigating applied (¶41)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant misused company equipment by making copies of music CDs and viewed and edited personal photographs on a classified computer.	For Applicant	Unauthorized Use of System	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed since the behavior, or it happened under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt on … (b) the misuse was minor and done solely in the interest of organizational efficiency and effectiveness	—
1.b	Applicant introduced digitized photographs onto his company's classified computer so he could view and edit them for both himself and coworkers.	For Applicant	Protected Info on Unauthorized System	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed since the behavior, or it happened under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt on … (b) the misuse was minor and done solely in the interest of organizational efficiency and effectiveness	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶40)

Mitigating applied (¶41)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant misused company equipment by making copies of music CDs and viewed and edited personal photographs on a classified computer.

For Applicant

Unauthorized Use of System

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed since the behavior, or it happened under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt on …

(b) the misuse was minor and done solely in the interest of organizational efficiency and effectiveness

—

1.b

Applicant introduced digitized photographs onto his company's classified computer so he could view and edit them for both himself and coworkers.

For Applicant

Protected Info on Unauthorized System

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed since the behavior, or it happened under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt on …

(b) the misuse was minor and done solely in the interest of organizational efficiency and effectiveness

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES

APPEARANCES