CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 19-01517 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 19-01517

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date8/4/2020
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Claude R. Heiny II
Government Counsel: Bryan J. Olmos
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 54-year-old software engineer employed by a defense contractor since 2014. The Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudications Facility issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guideline F, related to financial considerations, specifically alleging that the applicant owed approximately $112,000 in unpaid federal taxes for the years 2014 through 2016 and had provided over $660,000 to women for sexual intimacy. The applicant admitted to the financial issues but denied the risk of recurrence regarding his conduct.
Key findings included the applicant's acknowledgment of poor judgment in providing financial assistance to women he met at gentlemen's clubs, which he initially claimed was not for sexual services. However, he later conceded that some of the payments were indeed for sexual acts. The applicant had taken significant financial risks, including cashing out his 401(k) and incurring substantial credit card debt, to support these women, believing he would be repaid. He had entered into an installment agreement with the IRS and was making timely payments on his tax obligations.
The administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's security clearance, citing ongoing concerns about his financial judgment and personal conduct. The judge noted that while the applicant had made efforts to address his tax debts, the nature of his financial dealings raised questions about his reliability and trustworthiness, which are critical for maintaining a security clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · For Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 19-01517

deniedAug 4, 2020· Hon. Claude R. Heiny II· hearing

Summary

A 54-year-old software engineer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant had provided over $660,000 to women for sexual intimacy and owed $112,000 in unpaid federal taxes for the 2014 through 2016 tax years.

While the judge found that the financial issues were mitigated, the personal conduct concerns were not. The substantial financial support provided for sexual intimacy raised serious questions about the applicant's judgment and reliability, leading to the denial.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated timely payments and entered into a repayment agreement with the IRS for his tax obligations.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 15raisedPersonal ConductThe applicant's conduct involved questionable judgment and lack of candor.
AG ¶ 19raisedFinancial ConsiderationsThe applicant owed approximately $112,000 in federal income taxes.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(g)appliedMitigating Condition for Financial ConsiderationsThe applicant has made timely payments under a repayment agreement with the IRS.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedMitigating Condition for Financial ConsiderationsThe applicant initiated a good-faith effort to repay overdue creditors.

Key Rule Quoted

“"Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of the national security."”
— Directive, Enclosure 2 ¶ 2(b)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 26, 2019
Answer filedAug 24, 2019
Hearing heldJan 16, 2020
Decision dateAug 4, 2020

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Personal Conduct Issues Under Guideline E
Mitigation of Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Importance of Personal Conduct in Security Clearance Evaluations

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the personal conduct allegation regarding payments made for sexual intimacy. The applicant's conduct raised significant concerns about his personal judgment and reliability.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant provided over $660,000 to women for sexual intimacy.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline E). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant owed $112,000 in unpaid federal taxes for tax years 2014 through 2016. However, the judge concluded that the applicant had mitigated the financial concerns due to his participation in a debt-relief program, resulting in a favorable finding for the applicant on this allegation.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant owed $112,000 for unpaid federal taxes for tax years 2014 through 2016. $112,000	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Denied	—	(g) arrangements made with the tax authority; in compliance	Claimed Debt Paid in Full

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline F). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.