Sexual, Drug, and More Issues Sink Clearance Reinstatement for IT Contractor
In most security clearance denial cases, you see one, two or maybe three issues that result in the denial. It is rare to see four types of issues, but that is exactly what happened in this particular case. A federal contractor IT specialist held a security clearance from 1989 until 2017 when his clearance was suspended. The Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals (DOHA) appeal summary does not indicate why it was suspended, but the contractor was asked to fill out a new SF-86 in 2018 and several issues came to light. He was subsequently denied clearance reinstatement eligibility and appealed to DOHA. Here are the highlights:
The first category of issues under financial considerations resulted from the discovery that he had filed his taxes one to three years late from 2010 to 2018, claiming his tax advisor said he had up to three years to file if owed a refund. The investigation revealed that the only years he received a refund were in 2016 and 2018. Next is marijuana use. He claimed he only used marijuana three times at parties with friends between 2010-15 while he had a clearance. During the hearing, he was evasive about how many times he really used marijuana. He admitted to being fully aware as a clearance holder that that was a major no-no. Next up, sexual conduct. Before his divorce in 2017, he and his ex-wife participated in an “alternative sexual lifestyle” with other couples. This led to a difference of opinion between him and his wife, as well as issues at work since they were co-workers uner the same company.
Moving on to personal conduct, he went out of control and started being aggressive in trying to get her fired, posting letters and nude pictures of her on websites. She got a restraining order against him and eventually he was fired for posting pictures of a flag officer for the Agency he was working for. The list of transgressions on his part goes on and on. He was eventually referred for psychological evaluation and was diagnosed with ADHD and a major depressive order. In the end the DOHA judge, quite correctly, opined he had not mitigated concerns under psychological conditions, financial considerations, illegal drug involvement, and personal conduct. For your reading pleasure, you can read the entire case here.