Summary
A 63-year-old married man, employed for over 25 years as an administrative representative for a defense contractor, was denied a security clearance. The denial was based on concerns under Guideline D (Sexual Behavior) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct).
The applicant was arrested for lewd and lascivious conduct with a woman not his wife in a car in a public park. Although the charge was later reduced to disorderly conduct, and he received deferred prosecution, he did not inform his wife of the incident. This lack of disclosure raised concerns about potential undue influence or coercion, as well as a lack of discretion.
The applicant's conduct, specifically the lewd and lascivious acts in a public place, demonstrated poor judgment. His failure to disclose the incident to his wife further contributed to the determination that he posed a security risk, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant's conduct involved lewd and lascivious acts, which raised concerns under Guideline D for sexual behavior.
- The applicant's failure to disclose the incident to his wife indicated potential for undue influence or coercion.
- The nature of the conduct, occurring in a public place, reflected a lack of judgment.
Conditions referenced
- D.C.1raisedSexual Behavior of a Criminal Nature
- D.C.3raisedSexual Behavior That Causes an Individual to Be Vulnerable to Undue Influence or Coercion
- D.C.4raisedSexual Behavior of a Public Nature And/or That Which Reflects Lack of Discretion or Judgment
- J.C.1raisedAny Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged
- D.M.C.2appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent and There Is No Evidence of Subsequent Conduct of a Similar Nature
- D.M.C.3appliedThere Is No Other Evidence of Questionable Judgment, Irresponsibility, or Emotional Instability
- D.M.C.4rejectedThe Behavior No Longer Serves as a Basis for Undue Influence or CoercionThe applicant's failure to inform his wife indicates ongoing potential for undue influence.
- J.M.C.2appliedThe Crime Was an Isolated Incident
- J.M.C.5appliedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation
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 issuedAug 3, 2005
- Answer filedAug 18, 2005Applicant denied one and admitted one allegation.
- Hearing held—Decided on the written record.
- Decision dateFeb 13, 2006
Cite for
- Disqualifying Conditions Under Guideline D for Sexual Behavior
- Disqualifying Conditions Under Guideline J for Criminal Conduct
- Considerations of Undue Influence in Security Clearance Determinations