ISCR Case 09-01570.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-01570.h1

deniedMay 25, 2010· Hon. Shari Dam· hearing

Summary

A 59-year-old software engineer with a Master's degree was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The denial stemmed from significant financial delinquencies and a lack of candor regarding past marijuana use.

Specifically, the applicant falsified information on his e-QIP and May 2009 Interrogatories concerning the extent of his marijuana use between December 2001 and January 2002. Financially, in February 2008, the IRS filed a $20,661 tax lien for tax years 2000 and 2001, related to child support deductions, leading to wage garnishment. A $298 monthly repayment plan was initiated in May 2009, lifting the garnishment, with a remaining balance of $12,295 as of February 2010, which included a small liability for 2006 and 2007. This debt is being resolved. Additionally, six other delinquent debts totaling $7,800 remained unpaid due to insufficient funds. A $2,285 debt to an electric company for his former wife’s residence, which was not his responsibility per his divorce agreement, was resolved.

The judge found that the applicant's ongoing financial issues, which began in late 2002, and his deliberate falsification of information, undermined his credibility and trustworthiness. The applicant did not demonstrate a good-faith effort to resolve his financial obligations, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has a history of financial delinquencies that began in late 2002 and continue to the present.
The applicant's lack of candor regarding his marijuana use undermined his credibility and trustworthiness.
The applicant did not demonstrate a good-faith effort to resolve his financial obligations.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

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

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(b)appliedConditions Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant's financial problems were attributed to unemployment and high child support obligations.
AG ¶ 20(e)appliedDispute of Legitimacy of Past-due DebtThe applicant provided proof that one debt was not his responsibility.
AG ¶ 20(c)rejectedCounseling or Resolution of the ProblemThe applicant did not obtain credit counseling and did not demonstrate a good-faith effort to resolve all debts.

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 issuedSep 9, 2009
Answer filedOct 5, 2009
Hearing heldFeb 23, 2010
Decision dateMay 25, 2010

Cite For

Financial Delinquencies Impacting Security Clearance Eligibility
Lack of Candor Regarding Drug Use as a Disqualifying Factor
Mitigating Conditions Related to Financial Issues and Personal Conduct

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 answers to a question on his e-QIP and a question on the May 2009 Interrogatories, regarding the extent of his marijuana use between December 2001 and January 2002.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant falsified his answers to a question on his e-QIP and a question on the May 2009 Interrogatories, regarding the extent of his marijuana use between December 2001 and January 2002.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

2.b

specific text not stated in this decision

Against Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	In February 2008, the federal Internal Revenue Service (IRS) filed a $20,661 tax lien against Applicant for the tax years of 2000 and 2001, relating to his child support deductions, and garnished his wages. In May 2009, he entered into a $298 monthly repayment plan with the IRS and the garnishment order was lifted. As of February 2010, the balance on the tax debt is $12,295 and includes a small liability amount for 2006 and 2007. (Tr. 32-34; AE A.) The debt is being resolved. $20,661	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	—	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly (c) received/receiving counseling; problem being resolved	—
1.b	These six delinquent debts total $7,800 and remain unpaid because Applicant has not had enough money at the end of the month to negotiate payments with the creditors. (Tr. 44-45.) $7,800	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly	—
1.c–1.f	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant			—	—	—
1.g	The $2,285 debt is owed to an electric company for his former wife’s residence. According to Applicant’s divorce agreement, the debt is not his responsibility. (Tr. 45; AE B.) This debt is resolved. $2,285	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	(e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	—
1.h	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

In February 2008, the federal Internal Revenue Service (IRS) filed a $20,661 tax lien against Applicant for the tax years of 2000 and 2001, relating to his child support deductions, and garnished his wages. In May 2009, he entered into a $298 monthly repayment plan with the IRS and the garnishment order was lifted. As of February 2010, the balance on the tax debt is $12,295 and includes a small liability amount for 2006 and 2007. (Tr. 32-34; AE A.) The debt is being resolved.

$20,661

For Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Admitted

—

(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly

(c) received/receiving counseling; problem being resolved

—

1.b

These six delinquent debts total $7,800 and remain unpaid because Applicant has not had enough money at the end of the month to negotiate payments with the creditors. (Tr. 44-45.)

$7,800

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly

—

1.c–1.f

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

For Applicant

—

1.g

The $2,285 debt is owed to an electric company for his former wife’s residence. According to Applicant’s divorce agreement, the debt is not his responsibility. (Tr. 45; AE B.) This debt is resolved.

$2,285

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

—

(e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt

—

1.h

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

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