Examples of Security Clearance Decisions
You've scoured every website and contact and devoured each tip about obtaining a security clearance that you could hope to find, but maybe you're still worried that you did or might do something wrong. Aside from the fact that the majority of security clearance applicants are cleared, it can help to know why some people in special circumstances were denied. The Department of Defense publishes and updates a list of special cases with links to PDFs that outline each one; personal information isn't included. We've compiled a few of the cases for you below, but check out the full page if you'd like to see more.
Financial - Case Number: 12-04745.h1
Applicant is a 34-year-old employee of a defense contractor. She mitigated the security concerns arising under Guideline F, Financial Considerations. Clearance is granted.
Emotional; Personal Conduct - Case Number: 10-11123.h1
Applicant has mitigated the security concerns under the personal conduct guideline because she did not falsify her 2010 security clearance application or provide false or misleading information to the Government. Applicant did not mitigate the security concerns under Guideline I due to her guarded prognosis based on a 2012 psychological assessment. She has a long history of mental health issues. She is motivated to change, but has not met her burden in this case. Applicant did not present evidence to refute or update the 2012 clinical report describing her current diagnosis. Clearance is denied.
Drugs - Case Number: 11-14460.h1
Applicant used cocaine and marijuana from June 2007 to January 2008. At the time of his drug use, he held an active security clearance and was 49 years old. His drug use was identified after submitting to a random urinalysis. Applicant successfully completed his company's mandatory drug rehabilitation program. His mitigation was insufficient to overcome the security concerns raised as a result of his conduct. Clearance is denied.
Sexual Behavior; Personal Conduct - Case Number: 11-13664.h1
Applicant discontinued viewing nude and sexually explicit pictures of underage females on his home computer more than five years ago and stopped viewing adult pornography on his work computer in 2002. His rationalizations, recantations and denials do not mitigate the misconduct he admitted in 2005 and 2008. Eligibility for access to classified information is denied.
Foreign Influence, Personal Conduct - Case Number: 11-13760.h1
Applicant failed to mitigate the foreign influence concerns raised by his relationships with wife and her parents, all of whom are citizens of the People's Republic of China (China). Applicant also failed to mitigate the security concerns raised by his personal conduct. He did not report suspicious contacts with two women during his December 2009 trip to China. He also gave his wife, a Chinese national, access to sensitive work-related documents. Clearance denied.
Psychological Conditions - Case Number: 09-04696.h1
Applicant's history of erratic compliance with the treatment protocol for his diagnosed bipolar disorder resulted in impairment of his judgment and in dysfunctional behavior requiring psychiatric hospitalization. A credentialed psychologist opined in October 2012 that Applicant will, in all likelihood, remain prone to periods of erratic behavior. While Applicant has been a valuable contributor to his defense contractor employer, psychological conditions security concerns persist. Clearance denied.
Foreign Influence; Foreign Preference - Case Number: 12-07676.h1
Applicant has worked overseas under dangerous conditions in support of the national defense. She mitigated any foreign influence concerns raised by her extended family members in Afghanistan. She surrendered her Afghan passport to the Afghanistan Embassy, thereby mitigating foreign preference security concerns. Clearance is granted.