How to Mitigate Concerns About Your Fitness for a Security Clearance
Obtaining a security clearance for a federal job or as a federal contractor can be a lengthy and invasive process. As we mentioned in a previous post, the federal government measures an applicant’s continued fitness for a security clearance against several adjudicative guidelines. Those guidelines concern both negative factors and mitigating factors; if the adjudicator identifies a negative factor, the applicant may highlight mitigating factors. If your security clearance is in jeopardy, that means your job is also in jeopardy, and a Norfolk federal employment attorney can help you argue your case.
Concerns About Finances
Financial considerations are one of the most common reasons why security clearances are denied or revoked. While financial issues are not necessarily disqualifying, they can indicate poor self-control, lack of judgment, and failure to meet obligations, none of which are ideal qualities in persons handling classified information.
Conditions that could mitigate any financial security concerns identified include:
- The behavior occurred long ago, was infrequent, or occurred under circumstances that are unlikely to recur
- The conditions that resulted in the financial issue were beyond the individual’s control (e.g., loss of employment, business downturn, unexpected medical emergency, etc.)
- The individual has received financial counseling for the issue from a legitimate and credible source
- The individual is making good faith efforts to resolve their debts
- The individual has a reasonable basis to dispute the legitimacy of past-due debt
- The individual has made arrangements with the appropriate tax authority to pay overdue taxes
Concerns About Foreign Influence
Foreign influence is a serious concern for the federal government because it can indicate that a person’s loyalties are not 100% to the United States. Adjudicators typically identify foreign influence concerns where the individual has significant contacts or interests in foreign countries that could make them susceptible to pressure or coercion.
To mitigate concerns about foreign influence, show that:
- The nature of the relationships with foreign persons, the country those persons are located in, or the activities of those persons are such that it is unlikely that the individual will have to choose between the foreign interest and the interest of the U.S.
- The individual’s loyalty to the foreign interest is so minimal or their loyalty to the U.S. is so deep and longstanding that any conflict of interest will be resolved in favor of the U.S.
- Contacts with foreign citizens is casual and infrequent
- Foreign contacts and activities are on U.S. government business
- The individual promptly complied with reporting requirements concerning foreign contacts
- The value of the foreign business interest is minimal and unlikely to be used to pressure the individual
The adjudicator will also consider the country in which the foreign contact or interest is located. If it is a country with a history of terrorism against the U.S., for example, that will raise more of a red flag than if it is a country with which the U.S. has a close security relationship. Talk to a Norfolk federal employment attorney for more information about how the federal government assesses potential foreign influence.
Concerns About Personal Conduct
“Personal conduct” in the security clearance context generally refers to conduct that is not necessarily illegal but is nonetheless undesirable for government employees entrusted with classified information. This could include lying about relevant facts during investigations, lying by omission, or misrepresenting information.
An applicant can mitigate concerns about personal conduct by showing that:
- They made a prompt, good-faith effort to correct omissions, concealments, or falsifications before being confronted with the facts
- The personal behavior at issue was on the advice of legal counsel
- The offense was minor, infrequent, or long ago and does not cast doubt on their character
- They have acknowledged the behavior and obtained counseling to address it
- They have taken positive steps to reduce or eliminate vulnerabilities to exploitation, manipulation, or duress
- The information was unsubstantiated or from a source of questionable reliability
- Their association with persons involved in criminal activities was unwitting or has ceased
Concerns About Criminal Conduct
A history of criminal conduct can seriously jeopardize an individual’s ability to obtain or maintain a security clearance. However, there are a few mitigating circumstances, including:
- Significant time has passed since the criminal behavior occurred or it happened under such unusual circumstances that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt on the individual’s character
- The individual was pressured into committing the act and those pressures are no longer present in the individual’s life
- There is no reliable evidence to support the offense
- There is evidence of successful rehabilitation.
Concerns about criminal conduct are more serious and generally less subjective than concerns about personal conduct. There are also fewer ways to mitigate the concerns it raises. You should speak to a Norfolk federal employment attorney if criminal conduct is an issue for your security clearance.
Concerns About Drug Use and Substance Misuse
Former drug users are not per se disqualified from obtaining or keeping a security clearance. To mitigate concerns about previous drug use, an applicant may show that:
- The drug use occurred long ago, was infrequent, or happened under circumstances unlikely to recur
- They acknowledge the drug use, provide evidence of actions taken to overcome the problem, and have established a pattern of abstinence
- Abuse of prescription drugs was after a severe or prolonged illness and the abuse has since ended
- Satisfactory completion of a drug treatment program
Concerns About Alcohol Use
Similar to drug use, alcohol use will not necessarily lead to the revocation of a security clearance. Individuals who struggled with alcohol in the past may mitigate concerns about their alcohol usage by showing that:
- The alcohol abuse occurred long ago, was infrequent, or happened under circumstances unlikely to recur
- They acknowledge the alcohol abuse, provide evidence of actions taken to overcome the abuse, and have established a pattern of modified consumption or abstinence
- They are participating in a counseling or treatment program and have no history of treatment and relapse
- They have successfully completed a treatment program
Fight for Your Security Clearance With Help From a Norfolk Federal Employment Attorney
If your security clearance is in jeopardy, you need experienced representation to put forth the best arguments possible. To get started, please contact a Norfolk federal employment attorney at Pierce / Jewett by calling 757-624-9323 or using our online contact form.