Previously Favorable Adjudicated


#1

I have held a clearance since 1992 (started in the military with a Secret, then Top Secret then TS /SCI, so on and so on) Minus about a year when I was in transition from Military to civilian life (that would be in 2000 - 2001).

My Current DOE "Q" clearance was granted in 2001. In 2010, I was involved in a minor issue, and without going into details I was fired. I have been before MSPB in 2 separate hearing, and a full review of the issue. all times (5 Judges in total) have said I did nothing wrong, never lied, etc etc. I was ordered re instated each time (2011, 2012, and 2013). I held a "Q" until 2011 (until the day I was terminated). In 2014, the Agency now came to the decision that I was no longer worthy of a clearance. They prepared a LOI with about 19 different charges. ALL of which were throw out except for 3.

My question is now this. Some of the issues they are citing, are issues which occurred as far back as 2005. I have been through re investigation and clearance updates / upgrades in that time. Prior to this date (2014) they were always previously favorable adjudicated, and no action was ever taken (by security) I received a counseling statement for being late, but never was my clearance tampered with. Suddenly now, in 2014, these are now major issues, and make me no longer worthy of holding a clearance. I have always disclosed and discussed the issues, and never made any attempt to hide them. They were minor tardiness issues.

So the question is, if an issue is previously disclosed, and you are granted your update / continued clearance, can an Agency NOW come back 10, 9, 8, years later and say this is an issue? I could understand if it was a pattern of behavior that was frequently repeated, but to come back and now say, sure we let this by in the past, (I mean this was such an obviously big deal that when it happened 10 years ago, we issued you a warning statement, but now 10 years later, after we have always known about this for all this time, now we have to deny your clearance) but well now 9 years later we are going to deny your clearance. I know that passage of time is a mitigating factor but is there any hard or fast rule or general rule what constitutes a reasonable time?


#2

It is impossible to advise you on your situation without knowing the full details of all the issues in your case. All of the issues in the SOR are not mitigated if, as you stated, there are still three that are not. The SOR identifies the issues and your response either mitigates or does not mitigate them. Issues are mitigated by time unless a pattern exists, then previous similar issues are taken into consideration. I suggest you obtain or consult with legal counsel.