ISCR Case 23-00853

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 23-00853

deniedSep 24, 2024· Hon. Pamela C. Benson· hearing

Summary

A 55-year-old protective security officer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The denial stemmed from a history of multiple bankruptcies and significant workplace misconduct, including theft and falsification of information.

Regarding financial considerations, the applicant filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in November 1999, discharged in February 2000. This was followed by a Chapter 13 filing in September 2004, dismissed in January 2007. In May 2008, another Chapter 7 bankruptcy was filed and discharged in August 2008. Joint Chapter 13 bankruptcies with a former spouse occurred in May 2015 (dismissed March 2016) and April 2016, with the applicant refiling individually in July 2017 after divorce. The applicant attributed these bankruptcies to former spouse's medical expenses.

For personal conduct, the applicant falsified a background interview in August 2022 by denying prior workplace discipline. He was suspended in September 2019 for failing a covert bag screening test and again for allowing someone with knives through security. A July 2017 suspension followed a complaint of unwanted sexual advances, and a verbal warning was issued in August 2016 for cell phone use on duty. Additionally, the applicant was charged with and convicted of stealing funds while serving as treasurer for the Fraternal Order of Police. The judge concluded that the applicant's financial irresponsibility and dishonesty raised significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to multiple bankruptcies, demonstrating a pattern of financial irresponsibility.
The applicant's workplace misconduct included theft and falsification of information, undermining his trustworthiness.
The applicant failed to provide credible evidence of rehabilitation or responsible financial management.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)appliedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)appliedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 16(a)appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
AG ¶ 16(b)appliedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 30, 2024
Answer filed—Applicant provided an undated response.
Hearing heldJul 17, 2024Conducted via video teleconference on Microsoft Teams.
Decision dateSep 24, 2024

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Financial Irresponsibility Under Guideline F
Denial of Security Clearance Based on Personal Conduct Issues Under Guideline E
Impact of Dishonesty and Lack of Candor on Security Clearance Eligibility

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant falsified his August 2022 background interview with an authorized DOD investigator when he denied that in the last seven years, he had never received a written warning, been officially reprimanded, suspended, or disciplined for misconduct in the workplace.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant was suspended from his current employment as a security guard for approximately a week in September 2019 because he failed a covert test meant to assess whether he was properly screening bags as they came into the x-ray machine.	Against Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Admitted	—	—	—
2.c	Applicant was suspended from his current employment as a security guard for approximately a day in September 2019 because he had allowed someone through security who had multiple knives in their bag.	Against Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Admitted	—	—	—
2.d	Applicant was suspended from his current employment as a security guard for approximately a week in July 2017 after an employee in the building complained that he had made unwanted sexual advances towards her.	Against Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Admitted	—	—	—
2.e	Applicant received a verbal warning in August 2016 from his current employer because he had used his personal cell phone while he was on duty as a security guard.	Against Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Admitted	—	—	—
2.f	Applicant's theft of FOP funds and conviction while acting as the FOP treasurer.	Against Applicant	Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule ViolationsFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Unknown	—	—	—
2.g	Applicant was charged with stealing funds from the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) in his role as treasurer.	Against Applicant	Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule ViolationsFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant falsified his August 2022 background interview with an authorized DOD investigator when he denied that in the last seven years, he had never received a written warning, been officially reprimanded, suspended, or disciplined for misconduct in the workplace.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Denied

—

2.b

Applicant was suspended from his current employment as a security guard for approximately a week in September 2019 because he failed a covert test meant to assess whether he was properly screening bags as they came into the x-ray machine.

Against Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Admitted

—

2.c

Applicant was suspended from his current employment as a security guard for approximately a day in September 2019 because he had allowed someone through security who had multiple knives in their bag.

Against Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Admitted

—

2.d

Applicant was suspended from his current employment as a security guard for approximately a week in July 2017 after an employee in the building complained that he had made unwanted sexual advances towards her.

Against Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Admitted

—

2.e

Applicant received a verbal warning in August 2016 from his current employer because he had used his personal cell phone while he was on duty as a security guard.

Against Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Admitted

—

2.f

Applicant's theft of FOP funds and conviction while acting as the FOP treasurer.

Against Applicant

Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule ViolationsFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Unknown

—

2.g

Applicant was charged with stealing funds from the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) in his role as treasurer.

Against Applicant

Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule ViolationsFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in November 1999, which was discharged in February 2000.	Against Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy in September 2004. The bankruptcy was dismissed in January 2007.	Against Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	In May 2015, he and his former spouse filed a joint Chapter 13 bankruptcy. This bankruptcy was dismissed in March 2016.	Against Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	In May 2008, Applicant filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and his debts were discharged in August 2008.	Against Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	In April 2016, Applicant and his former spouse filed a joint Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Due to their divorce, Applicant refiled a Chapter 13 bankruptcy in July 2017 in his name only.	Against Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant attributed all of the bankruptcies alleged in SOR ¶¶ 1.a through 1.f, due to excessive medical expenses incurred from his former spouse.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Other
1.g–1.i	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant).	Against Applicant			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in November 1999, which was discharged in February 2000.

Against Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Admitted

—

1.b

Applicant filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy in September 2004. The bankruptcy was dismissed in January 2007.

Against Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Admitted

—

1.c

In May 2015, he and his former spouse filed a joint Chapter 13 bankruptcy. This bankruptcy was dismissed in March 2016.

Against Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Admitted

—

1.d

In May 2008, Applicant filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and his debts were discharged in August 2008.

Against Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Admitted

—

1.e

In April 2016, Applicant and his former spouse filed a joint Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Due to their divorce, Applicant refiled a Chapter 13 bankruptcy in July 2017 in his name only.

Against Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Admitted

—

1.f

Applicant attributed all of the bankruptcies alleged in SOR ¶¶ 1.a through 1.f, due to excessive medical expenses incurred from his former spouse.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

Claimed

Other

1.g–1.i

3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant).

Against Applicant

—

Loading case…

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision