ISCR Case 16-01486.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 16-01486.h1

deniedMar 22, 2017· Hon. Robert J. Tuider· hearing

Summary

A 53-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant's personal conduct issues included a history of over 20 traffic violations, two DUI convictions, and several arrests. These included a felony grand theft charge in 1982 that was dismissed, and a 1994 battery and resisting officer charge that resulted in pretrial diversion. He was also found guilty of battery in 1995, which was dismissed after he completed anger-management counseling, and convicted of driving with a suspended license in 2014.

Regarding financial considerations, the applicant had significant unresolved debts. These included a charged-off home-equity bank debt for $50,513 and a bank-collection debt for $46,846.

The judge determined that the applicant failed to mitigate these concerns. Specifically, his extensive history of traffic violations and DUI convictions indicated questionable judgment and reliability. Furthermore, he did not provide sufficient evidence of responsible actions to address his substantial financial obligations. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has a history of over 20 traffic violations, including two DUI convictions, indicating questionable judgment and reliability.
The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of responsible actions taken to address his significant financial debts, which included charged-off debts and collection accounts.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 16(d)appliedCredible Adverse Information
AG ¶ 16(e)appliedPersonal Conduct Creating Vulnerability
AG ¶ 19(a)appliedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)appliedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 17(e)appliedPositive Steps to Reduce VulnerabilityThe applicant fully disclosed his offenses.
AG ¶ 20(b)raisedConditions Beyond ControlThe applicant's divorce negatively impacted his finances.
AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Effort to Repay DebtsThe applicant did not demonstrate sufficient efforts to address his delinquent debts.

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 2, 2016
Answer filedJul 18, 2016
Hearing heldNov 17, 2016
Decision dateMar 22, 2017

Cite For

Denial Based on Extensive Personal Conduct Violations Under Guideline E
Denial Due to Unresolved Financial Obligations Under Guideline F
Importance of Demonstrating Responsible Actions in Mitigating Financial Concerns

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
1.a	Applicant was arrested in January 1982 and charged with felony grand theft. The charge was nolle prosequi and the case was dismissed. Applicant had no recollection of the facts relating to this arrest.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant was charged with battery and resist or obstruct officer without violence in October 1994. The case was nolle prosequi, and he received pretrial diversion. Applicant had a dispute with his domestic partner. He denied that he committed a battery.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	—	—	—
1.e	Applicant was cited for failure to stop/yield at intersection in February 1995.	Against Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Admitted	—	—	—
1.i	Applicant was charged with and found guilty of battery. Adjudication was withheld pending completion of court-ordered conditions. Applicant denied that he committed battery on his domestic partner. He completed anger-management counseling, and the charge was dismissed.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	—	—	—
1.j	Applicant was convicted of driving while license suspended 1st offense in May 2014.	Against Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant was arrested in January 1982 and charged with felony grand theft. The charge was nolle prosequi and the case was dismissed. Applicant had no recollection of the facts relating to this arrest.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

—

1.d

Applicant was charged with battery and resist or obstruct officer without violence in October 1994. The case was nolle prosequi, and he received pretrial diversion. Applicant had a dispute with his domestic partner. He denied that he committed a battery.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Denied

—

1.e

Applicant was cited for failure to stop/yield at intersection in February 1995.

Against Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Admitted

—

1.i

Applicant was charged with and found guilty of battery. Adjudication was withheld pending completion of court-ordered conditions. Applicant denied that he committed battery on his domestic partner. He completed anger-management counseling, and the charge was dismissed.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Denied

—

1.j

Applicant was convicted of driving while license suspended 1st offense in May 2014.

Against Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
2.a	a charged-off home-equity bank debt for $50,513. $50,513	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
2.b	a bank-collection debt for $46,846. $46,846	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

2.a

a charged-off home-equity bank debt for $50,513.

$50,513

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

2.b

a bank-collection debt for $46,846.

$46,846

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

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

FOOTNOTES