Guideline K Addresses - One Barrier to Obtaining Security Clearance

SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA - The attorneys at Security Clearance Law Group have written in recent months about several reasons why a person may not be successful in obtaining security clearance after having completed the SF-86 security questionnaire.

One reason for denial is Guideline K of the Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Information (www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/guidelines.html). This outlines the reasons provided to an applicant when a security clearance application is denied.

This is a timely topic, considering the verdict reached July 30 in the Army Pfc. Bradley Manning court-martial. A judge acquitted Manning of aiding the enemy, but found him guilty of violations to the Espionage Act. He previously had pleaded guilty to multiple lesser charges related to his giving about 750,000 pages of classified documents and videos to WikiLeaks (www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks) in 2010.

The Manning case creates an appropriate backdrop for explaining Guideline K: handling protected information.

When a military security clearance is denied and Guideline K is listed as the reason in the official Statement of Reasons, it means concerns exist that the applicant has intentionally or negligently failed to abide by the rules and regulations pertaining to protecting classified or other sensitive information, said John Griffith, who founded Security Clearance Law Group and specializes in security clearance issues.

"In the government's eyes, it means doubts exist as to the applicant's trustworthiness or willingness to protect secure information," Griffith said.

According to information provided to the public on the U.S. Government Printing Office website (www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=e25aa42780f899f368e7f47104156c17&rgn=div5&view=text&node=32:1.1.1.4.65&idno=32#32:1.1.1.4.65.1.58.13), factors that could raise security concerns and possibly disqualify a Department of Defense security clearance applicant include:

Deliberately or negligently releasing classified or other protected information to unauthorized persons, such as personal and business contacts, or media outlets.Collecting or keeping classified or other protected information in an unauthorized location.Loading, writing, editing, altering, storing, sending or otherwise handling classified reports, data or other information on unapproved computer hardware, software and other equipment.Inappropriate efforts to obtain or view classified or other protected information outside a person's need to know.Copying classified or other protected information in a fashion designed to hide or remove classification or other document control markings.Viewing or downloading information from a secure system when the information is beyond the individual's need to know.Failing to abide by rules designed to protect classified or other sensitive information.Negligence or sloppy security habits that persist, even after being counseled on the issue.Deliberately or negligently failing to comply with rules or regulations, which results in damage to national security.

"If your security clearance has been denied and Guideline K is listed in the Statement of Reasons, it is important to consult a lawyer to determine the best course of action," Griffith said. "An attorney with experience in this legal area can counsel you as to whether you have a good shot at appealing the decision."

Some mitigating circumstances exist. For example, if the person's actions were inadvertent, isolated or infrequent, a lawyer might be able to help him/her overturn the denial. Another exception would be if the mishandling of sensitive information was due to improper or inadequate training.

Applicants who are denied clearance have the right to request a hearing before an administrative judge. The hearing request must be made within 15 days of receiving the Statement of Reasons, and failing to make the request within that window means forfeiting the right to a hearing.

A Statement of Reasons response must be prepared prior to the hearing. A security clearance attorney can offer assistance in drafting a proper response that will provide the best chance at successfully appealing the decision.

"The point we strive to drive home with every client is that quite often, a Statement of Reasons doesn't mean you'll be stripped of your security clearance," Griffith said. "We have a good track record of assisting clients in appealing this decision so they can continue their livelihood."

© 2013 Sinai Marketing and Griffith, Young & Lass. Authorization to post is granted, with the stipulation that Sinai Marketing and Griffith, Young & Lass are credited as sole source. Linking to other sites from this document is strictly prohibited, with the exception of herein imbedded links.

Learn More
For more information or to request a complimentary consultation, complete the online form on the Security Clearance Law Group website: http://www.keepyourclearance.com/ or call (858) 345-1720. About Security Clearance Law Group
Security Clearance Law Group is the law firm of John Griffith, Catie Young and Amy Lass . It represents service members, government employees and government contractors nationwide on all issues relating to obtaining and securing a national security clearance or other access authorization.