ISCR Case 08-10432.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-10432.h1

grantedApr 29, 2010· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 46-year-old defense contractor with an Associate's Degree in Computer Science was subject to a security clearance review under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). Allegations included financial irresponsibility and past criminal conduct, specifically a court-martial for larceny and forgery. The Statement of Reasons detailed an outstanding judgment from August 2002 for $3,772.00 owed to a rental car company, and a false answer on a June 12, 2008 Questionnaire for National Security Positions regarding unpaid judgments.

Additional financial concerns included a $202.00 debt to a cable company, a $201.00 debt to a creditor, and a $269.00 debt to another creditor, all of which have since been paid. A significant delinquent debt of approximately $16,823.00 for back child support is being addressed through automatic paycheck deductions of $420.00 per month.

The judge ultimately granted the security clearance, finding that the applicant had made significant efforts to resolve his financial issues and demonstrated rehabilitation. This included a good faith effort to repay overdue creditors, with three of the five debts paid off and active work on the remaining obligations. The applicant's past military service and positive character references further supported the finding of rehabilitation.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated a good faith effort to repay overdue creditors and resolve debts.
He has paid off three of the five debts and is actively working on the remaining debts.
The applicant's past military service and positive character references supported his case for rehabilitation.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
31(a)raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Offenses
31(c)raisedAllegation or Admission of Criminal Conduct
16(d)raisedCredible Adverse Information

Mitigating

20(d)appliedThe Individual Initiated a Good Faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
32(a)appliedSo Much Time Has Elapsed Since the Criminal Behavior Happened
32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful Rehabilitation
17(d)appliedThe Individual Has Acknowledged the Behavior and Obtained Counseling

Key Rule Quoted

“The adjudicative process is an examination of a sufficient period of a person’s life to make an affirmative determination that the person is an acceptable security risk.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 16, 2009
Answer filedMay 18, 2009
Hearing heldNov 18, 2009
Decision dateApr 29, 2010

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions for Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
Successful Rehabilitation After Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
The Importance of Demonstrating Good Faith Efforts to Resolve Debts 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
3.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he has engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or unwillingness to protect classified information.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	Applicant completed a Questionnaire for National Security Positions dated June 12, 2008. Question 27(d) of the application asked the Applicant if in the last seven years, he had any judgements against him that have not been paid? The Applicant answered, “NO.” This was a false answer. The Applicant failed to disclose that in August 2002, a judgment was entered against him in the amount of $3,772.00.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Financial	Denied	(d) pattern of dishonesty, rule violations, or other untrustworthy behavior	—	—
3.c	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he has engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or unwillingness to protect classified information.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Denied

—

3.b

Applicant completed a Questionnaire for National Security Positions dated June 12, 2008. Question 27(d) of the application asked the Applicant if in the last seven years, he had any judgements against him that have not been paid? The Applicant answered, “NO.” This was a false answer. The Applicant failed to disclose that in August 2002, a judgment was entered against him in the amount of $3,772.00.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Financial

Denied

(d) pattern of dishonesty, rule violations, or other untrustworthy behavior

—

3.c

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	A judgment entered against the Applicant in August 2002, by a rental car company in the amount of $3,772.00 remains outstanding. $3,772	For Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	—
1.b	This delinquent debt owed to a cable company in the amount of $202.00 has been paid. $202	For Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	A delinquent debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $201.00 has been paid. $201	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	This delinquent debt owed to a state for back child support in the amount of approximately $16,823.00 is being paid through automatic paycheck deductions in the amount of $420.00 per month. $16,823	For Applicant	Child Support Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	—
1.e–1.h	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant			—	—	—
1.i	A delinquent debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $269.00 has been paid. $269	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
2.a–3.c	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

A judgment entered against the Applicant in August 2002, by a rental car company in the amount of $3,772.00 remains outstanding.

$3,772

For Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts

—

1.b

This delinquent debt owed to a cable company in the amount of $202.00 has been paid.

$202

For Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Admitted

—

1.c

A delinquent debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $201.00 has been paid.

$201

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.d

This delinquent debt owed to a state for back child support in the amount of approximately $16,823.00 is being paid through automatic paycheck deductions in the amount of $420.00 per month.

$16,823

For Applicant

Child Support Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts

—

1.e–1.h

4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)

For Applicant

—

1.i

A delinquent debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $269.00 has been paid.

$269

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

2.a–3.c

4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)

For Applicant

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION