ISCR Case 08-09800.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-09800.h1

deniedMay 12, 2009· Hon. Wilford H. Ross· hearing

Summary

A 58-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant admitted to significant unpaid debts totaling over $11,464.00, including amounts owed to a state taxing authority and multiple charged-off bank accounts. These debts remained unpaid at the time of the decision.

Further, the applicant provided false information on his security clearance application. Specifically, he answered "No" to questions asking if he had been more than 180 days delinquent on any debts within the last seven years, and if he was currently more than 90 days delinquent on any debts. These answers were determined to be false, as he failed to disclose the aforementioned delinquent debts.

The judge found that the applicant did not demonstrate responsible behavior in addressing his financial obligations and failed to mitigate the security concerns arising from his conduct. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to being financially overextended with significant unpaid debts totaling over $11,464.00.
The applicant provided false answers on his security clearance application regarding his financial delinquencies.
The applicant failed to demonstrate responsible actions to resolve his financial issues or mitigate the concerns raised.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)rejectedBehavior Happened so Long Ago, Was Infrequent, or Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's financial difficulties have persisted for several years without resolution.
AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions That Resulted in Financial Problems Were Largely Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant did not provide evidence of responsible actions to address his debts.
AG ¶ 20(c)rejectedClear Indications That the Problem Is Being Resolved or Is Under ControlThe applicant only expressed intent to resolve debts without evidence of action.

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 issuedDec 3, 2008
Answer filedDec 22, 2008
Hearing held—Decision made without a hearing at the applicant's request.
Decision dateMay 12, 2009

Cite For

Financial Overextension as a Disqualifying Condition Under Guideline F
False Statements on Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Failure to Mitigate Financial and Personal Conduct Issues in Security Clearance Cases

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	Question 28.a. of Item 4 asks the Applicant whether, within the last seven years, he had been more than 180 days delinquent on any debts. He answered, “No,” and did not set forth any of the delinquent debts described under Paragraph 1, above. This answer was, therefore, false.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	Question 28.b. of Item 4 asks the Applicant whether he was currently more than 90 days delinquent on any of his debts. He answered, “No,” and did not state any of the delinquent debts described under Paragraph 1, above. This answer was, therefore, false.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Question 28.a. of Item 4 asks the Applicant whether, within the last seven years, he had been more than 180 days delinquent on any debts. He answered, “No,” and did not set forth any of the delinquent debts described under Paragraph 1, above. This answer was, therefore, false.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Admitted

—

2.b

Question 28.b. of Item 4 asks the Applicant whether he was currently more than 90 days delinquent on any of his debts. He answered, “No,” and did not state any of the delinquent debts described under Paragraph 1, above. This answer was, therefore, false.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant admits that he is indebted to his State taxing authority in the approximate amount of $263.00. (Item 7.) This debt has not been paid. $263	Against Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	The Applicant admits that he is indebted to a bank for an account that has been charged off in the amount of $2,101.00. This debt has not been paid. $2,101	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	The Applicant admits that he is indebted to the same bank for another account that has been charged off in the amount of $1,575.00. This debt has not been paid. $1,575	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	The Applicant admits that he is indebted to the same bank for a third account that has been charged off in the amount of $2,387.00. This debt has not been paid. $2,387	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	The Applicant admits that he is indebted to the same bank for a fourth account that has been charged off in the amount of $2,243.00. This debt has not been paid. $2,243	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	The Applicant admits that he is indebted to a second bank for an account that has been charged off in the amount of $2,895.00. This debt has not been paid. $2,895	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant admits that he is indebted to his State taxing authority in the approximate amount of $263.00. (Item 7.) This debt has not been paid.

$263

Against Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Admitted

—

1.b

The Applicant admits that he is indebted to a bank for an account that has been charged off in the amount of $2,101.00. This debt has not been paid.

$2,101

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.c

The Applicant admits that he is indebted to the same bank for another account that has been charged off in the amount of $1,575.00. This debt has not been paid.

$1,575

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.d

The Applicant admits that he is indebted to the same bank for a third account that has been charged off in the amount of $2,387.00. This debt has not been paid.

$2,387

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.e

The Applicant admits that he is indebted to the same bank for a fourth account that has been charged off in the amount of $2,243.00. This debt has not been paid.

$2,243

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.f

The Applicant admits that he is indebted to a second bank for an account that has been charged off in the amount of $2,895.00. This debt has not been paid.

$2,895

Against 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