Summary
The applicant, a 25-year-old machinist for a federal contractor, engaged in sexual relations with two underage girls while in the U.S. Navy, resulting in a bad conduct discharge. The administrative judge found that the applicant did not mitigate the security concerns related to his sexual behavior and criminal conduct, leading to a denial of his security clearance.
Under Guideline D (Sexual Behavior) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant engaged in sexual relations with two underage girls while in the U.S. Navy, resulting in a non-judicial punishment and a court-martial conviction (1.a). The behavior involved underage girls, which reflects a lack of discretion or judgment and makes the applicant vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress (1.b). Applicant engaged in sexual relations with two underage girls while in the U.S. Navy, resulting in a court-martial conviction and a bad conduct discharge (2.a).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 12, AG ¶ 30. The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 14(c), AG ¶ 32(d). The decision turned on the following: The applicant engaged in sexual relations with underage girls, resulting in a court-martial conviction and a bad conduct discharge; The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient rehabilitation or insight into his past behavior, which raised concerns about his judgment and reliability.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant engaged in sexual relations with underage girls, resulting in a court-martial conviction and a bad conduct discharge.
- The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient rehabilitation or insight into his past behavior, which raised concerns about his judgment and reliability.
Conditions referenced
- AG ¶ 12raisedSexual Behavior
- AG ¶ 30raisedCriminal Conduct
- AG ¶ 14(c)appliedSexual Behavior Mitigating ConditionThe applicant provided some evidence of mitigation by disclosing his misconduct to family and employers.
- AG ¶ 32(d)appliedCriminal Conduct Mitigating ConditionThe applicant has not been involved in any form of criminal conduct for five years.
Key rule quoted
“[N]o one has a 'right' to a security clearance.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedOct 31, 2006
- Answer filedNov 20, 2006Applicant initially waived hearing rights.
- Hearing heldMar 1, 2007Hearing was rescheduled from January 31, 2007.
- Decision dateMar 30, 2007
Cite for
- Disqualifying Conditions Under Guidelines D and J Due to Criminal Conduct Involving Minors
- Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation After Serious Criminal Behavior
- The Impact of a Bad Conduct Discharge on Security Clearance Eligibility