2014 Winter Security Clearance Decisions

Service member writing in a document.

Applying for a security clearance is a stressful process, and even if you have every tip under the sun, you might still be fretting. It's important to know that most security clearance applications are cleared. But, there are applicants who do get rejected. Here are a few examples of security clearance applicants who didn't quite make it, who did, and the reasons why. Check out the full page here if you want to see a complete list for 2014.

Financial Case Number: 13-00827.h1 2/21/2014 Applicant’s finances were adversely affected by a business downturn. He has taken steps to resolve his financial problems. Financial considerations security concerns are mitigated. Clearance is granted.

Criminal Conduct; FinancialCase Number: 12-01433.h1 2/19/2014 Applicant's financial problems remain a concern because his debts are largely unaddressed. Allegations of criminal conduct also cause doubts about Applicant's suitability for a security clearance. He was charged at least 13 times with various criminal offenses between 1995 and 2008. Although several years have passed since his last offense, his conflicting statements about some of the charges, combined with the scope of his criminal record, undermine confidence that he is wholly rehabilitated. Clearance is denied.

Alcohol; CriminalCase Number: 12-00678.h1 2/12/2014 Although Applicant's alcohol related conviction was more than three years ago; he has a more recent 2012 probation violation, and he is still on probation until October of 2014. Clearance is denied.

Personal ConductCase Number: 11-15051.h1 1/30/2014 Applicant refuted allegations that she failed to provide proper contract oversight while acting as a contracting officer’s technical representative (COTR), and abused her position by attempting to hire a professional acquaintance as a federal employee, preselecting her for a supervisory position, hiring her at a higher rate of pay than authorized, and improperly assigning her as an executive assistant. Applicant also refuted allegations that she took advantage of an inappropriate personal relationship with her supervisor to gain a reassignment to a location near her home and to engage in excessive official travel. She mitigated instances of abusing her position by exhorting a potential contractor to hire her acquaintance, using government time and equipment to forward her acquaintance’s resume to the potential contractor, using a contractor employee to perform the duties of an executive assistant, and providing non-public information to a potential contractor. Clearance is granted.

FinancialCase Number: 12-01658.h1 1/24/2014 Between 2008 and June 2010, there were several circumstances beyond Applicant's control that resulted in financial problems. However, he has been employed since May 2011, and no delinquent account in the Statement of Reasons has been satisfied. Applicant claims he paid some small unlisted debts. With no documentary evidence to support his testimonial claims, Applicant's case in mitigation does not overcome the financial considerations guideline. Eligibility for access to classified information is denied.

Personal ConductCase Number: 13-00454.h1 1/22/2014 Applicant, a military officer, received non-judicial punishment in 2006 for making false statements to two of his superior officers about the nature of his relationship with a prostitute, with whom he had a paid sexual liaison. When he completed his e-QIP in 2008, he stated that he had received the non-judicial punishment as the result of an extramarital affair reported to his command by his estranged wife. Applicant was not candid in reporting the reason for his non-judicial punishment. In 2012, as a civilian contractor, Applicant forged his superior’s signature on a work order. Applicant’s lack of candor and inability to follow rules and regulations raise concerns about his judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness. He failed to mitigate security concerns under the personal conduct adjudicative guideline. Clearance is denied.

DrugsCase Number: 12-06635.h1 1/21/2014 Applicant used marijuana 2~3 times after having been granted a security clearance. She offers nothing to mitigate her drug involvement. Clearance is denied.

Drug Involvement; Psychological ConditionsCase Number: 12-00322.h1 1/17/2014 Applicant's extensive abuse of a variety of drugs and periodic heroin dependence between ages 12 and 23, is mitigated by his credible case in mitigation. Applicant's diagnosed psychological conditions have not been mitigated due to the absence of current evidence from a mental health professional to corroborate his claim that he no longer needs medication or consultation. Eligibility for access to classified information is denied.

Show Full Article