ISCR Case 05-15637.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 05-15637.h1

deniedNov 24, 2008· Hon. Wilford H. Ross· hearing

Summary

A 50-year-old retired senior non-commissioned officer, seeking a security clearance for an Engineering Technician position with a defense contractor, was denied due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant faced allegations of significant financial issues and making false statements on a security clearance application.

Specifically, the applicant admitted to an outstanding debt of at least $11,900 to Crescent/Providian, on which he has been making $150 monthly payments since at least February 2008. He also had a $79 debt to another creditor, which is now current after a payment of $199.02. However, the judge noted the applicant had over $30,000 in past due debts outstanding for several years and had only recently begun making payments, indicating a lack of good-faith effort.

Regarding personal conduct, the applicant denied falsifying his September 8, 2006, security clearance questionnaire by answering "No" to a question about prior clearance denials, suspensions, or revocations. Documentary evidence showed his eligibility was denied in January 2004 for failing to return financial interrogatories. The judge found that the applicant's financial difficulties raised unmitigated security concerns, leading to the denial of his security clearance application.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has over $30,000 in past due debts, which have been outstanding for several years.
The applicant has not demonstrated a good-faith effort to pay off his creditors, as he only recently began making payments on his debts.
The applicant's financial circumstances raise concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)rejectedBehavior Happened Long Ago, Infrequent, or Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's financial difficulties are recent and he has not made consistent efforts to resolve them.
AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Effort to Repay DebtsThe applicant has only recently begun to address his debts and lacks a track record of repayment.

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 22, 2008
Answer filedFeb 16, 2008
Hearing heldJun 30, 2008Rescheduled due to applicant's active duty.
Decision dateNov 24, 2008

Cite For

Financial Overextension as a Disqualifying Condition Under Guideline F
False Statements During the Security Clearance Process Under Guideline E
The Importance of Demonstrating a Good-faith Effort to Resolve Financial Issues for Mitigation

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	Documentary evidence in the record shows that the Applicant’s security clearance eligibility was denied in January 2004. The reason for this action was the Applicant’s failure to return financial interrogatories to the Government. (Government Exhibits 3 and 4.) The Applicant filled out a security clearance questionnaire on September 8, 2006, in which he gave the false answer “No” to question 26.b., which asks: To your knowledge, have you ever had a clearance or access authorization denied, suspended or revoked, or have you ever been debarred from government employment? If “Yes” give date of action and agency. Note: An administrative downgrade or termination of a security clearance is not a revocation. The Applicant denies falsifying this answer, stating that he had no knowledge his clearance authorization had been revoked. In addition, the Applicant testified that he had returned to the Government every form he had been asked to fill out through the years. Finally, the Applicant completely denied any intent to deceive the Government concerning this fact. (Transcript at 58-60, 68-71, 78-80.)	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE	—	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	The Government alleges in this subparagraph that the Applicant falsified a security clearance application dated November 26, 2001. The Applicant denied this allegation and the Government failed to produce the questionnaire. In addition, the Applicant did not have any independent knowledge of his filling out this questionnaire. (Transcript at 71.) The Government failed to prove this subparagraph, and it is found for the Applicant.	For Applicant	Falsification Security Form	—	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Documentary evidence in the record shows that the Applicant’s security clearance eligibility was denied in January 2004. The reason for this action was the Applicant’s failure to return financial interrogatories to the Government. (Government Exhibits 3 and 4.) The Applicant filled out a security clearance questionnaire on September 8, 2006, in which he gave the false answer “No” to question 26.b., which asks: To your knowledge, have you ever had a clearance or access authorization denied, suspended or revoked, or have you ever been debarred from government employment? If “Yes” give date of action and agency. Note: An administrative downgrade or termination of a security clearance is not a revocation. The Applicant denies falsifying this answer, stating that he had no knowledge his clearance authorization had been revoked. In addition, the Applicant testified that he had returned to the Government every form he had been asked to fill out through the years. Finally, the Applicant completely denied any intent to deceive the Government concerning this fact. (Transcript at 58-60, 68-71, 78-80.)

For Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE

—

Denied

—

2.b

The Government alleges in this subparagraph that the Applicant falsified a security clearance application dated November 26, 2001. The Applicant denied this allegation and the Government failed to produce the questionnaire. In addition, the Applicant did not have any independent knowledge of his filling out this questionnaire. (Transcript at 71.) The Government failed to prove this subparagraph, and it is found for the Applicant.

For Applicant

Falsification Security Form

—

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant admits that he is indebted to Crescent/Providian in the amount of at least $11,900.00. The Applicant is currently making payments on this debt of $150.00 a month, as agreed to by the creditor. The Applicant submitted evidence showing he has been making these payments since at least February 2008. $11,900	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	The Applicant admits that he was indebted to a creditor in the amount of $79.00. The Applicant stated that this account is current, and he submitted a wire transfer receipt in the amount of $199.02. The Government’s most recent credit report dated June 26, 2008, confirms that this payment was made and that the Applicant is current on this debt. $79	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant admits that he is indebted to Crescent/Providian in the amount of at least $11,900.00. The Applicant is currently making payments on this debt of $150.00 a month, as agreed to by the creditor. The Applicant submitted evidence showing he has been making these payments since at least February 2008.

$11,900

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.b

The Applicant admits that he was indebted to a creditor in the amount of $79.00. The Applicant stated that this account is current, and he submitted a wire transfer receipt in the amount of $199.02. The Government’s most recent credit report dated June 26, 2008, confirms that this payment was made and that the Applicant is current on this debt.

$79

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

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