ISCR Case 18-02388

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 18-02388

grantedMar 19, 2019· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A 40-year-old defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The allegations primarily stemmed from past-due debts associated with a failed business.

The applicant demonstrated significant efforts to resolve these financial issues. Prior to the Statement of Reasons (SOR), a state sales tax lien of $1,000 was paid and released in June 2018. Other state sales tax liens, totaling approximately $16,101, were reduced to $6,553.41 under a February 2015 payment plan. Additionally, a $1,434 business-related judgment was paid, and a $167 debt to Creditor G was paid in full in November 2018. A debt of about $1,295 to Creditor H was resolved, showing a $0.00 balance in November 2018, and a $50 debt to Creditor I was paid in December 2016.

The administrative judge found that the applicant had addressed all alleged past-due debts before the SOR was issued, established a positive monthly budget of about $400, and was well-respected in the workplace. These actions mitigated the security concerns, leading to the decision to grant the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant addressed all alleged past-due debts prior to the issuance of the SOR.
The applicant demonstrated a positive monthly budget of about $400.
The applicant is well respected in the workplace.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 19(f)notedFailure to File or Fraudulently Filing Annual Federal, State, or Local Income Tax Returns or Failure to Pay Annual Federal, State, or Local Income Tax as Required

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Individual Initiated and Is Adhering to a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
AG ¶ 20(g)notedThe Individual Has Made Arrangements with the Appropriate Tax Authority to File or Pay the Amount Owed and Is in Compliance with Those Arrangements

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 26, 2018
Answer filedNov 29, 2018
Hearing heldFeb 12, 2019hearing was convened as scheduled
Decision dateMar 19, 2019

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Consideration of the Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions
Evidence of Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Debts as a Mitigating Factor

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	The state sales tax lien, in the amount of $1,000, was paid and released by the state in June of 2018, four months prior to the issuance of the SOR, as evidenced by documents from the state. $1,000	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Allegations 1.b. and 1.c., and 1.d. and 1.e., are two and the same state sales tax liens, filed in two different counties, totaling about $16,101. Pursuant to a February 2015 payment plan, Applicant has reduced this tax lien to $6,553.41, as evidenced by documents from the state. $16,501	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Denied	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant has paid a $1,434 business related judgment, as evidenced by documentation from Creditor F. $1,434	For Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	In November of 2018, Applicant paid in full the alleged $167 debt to Creditor G, as evidenced by documentation from Creditor G. $167	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.h	These are one and the same debt to Creditor H in the amount of about $1,295. In November of 2018, the current balance on this account was noted as $0.00, as evidenced by documentation from Creditor H. $1,295	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.i	In December of 2016, Applicant paid the alleged $50 debt to Creditor I, as evidenced by documentation from Creditor I. $50	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

The state sales tax lien, in the amount of $1,000, was paid and released by the state in June of 2018, four months prior to the issuance of the SOR, as evidenced by documents from the state.

$1,000

For Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Admitted

—

1.b

Allegations 1.b. and 1.c., and 1.d. and 1.e., are two and the same state sales tax liens, filed in two different counties, totaling about $16,101. Pursuant to a February 2015 payment plan, Applicant has reduced this tax lien to $6,553.41, as evidenced by documents from the state.

$16,501

For Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Denied

—

1.f

Applicant has paid a $1,434 business related judgment, as evidenced by documentation from Creditor F.

$1,434

For Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Admitted

—

1.g

In November of 2018, Applicant paid in full the alleged $167 debt to Creditor G, as evidenced by documentation from Creditor G.

$167

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.h

These are one and the same debt to Creditor H in the amount of about $1,295. In November of 2018, the current balance on this account was noted as $0.00, as evidenced by documentation from Creditor H.

$1,295

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.i

In December of 2016, Applicant paid the alleged $50 debt to Creditor I, as evidenced by documentation from Creditor I.

$50

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION