ISCR Case 09-02317.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-02317.h1

deniedOct 25, 2010· Hon. David M. White· hearing

Summary

A 52-year-old former Army Ranger was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines D (Sexual Behavior), E (Personal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), and J (Criminal Conduct). The primary issue involved the applicant's admitted sexual molestation of his two stepdaughters and indecent videotaping of one of them during the first six months of 1998. Although the applicant completed a sex offender treatment program and had no recent offenses, the judge found his past actions raised significant questions about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Additionally, the applicant faced several financial issues. While some smaller debts were resolved or no longer appeared on credit reports, others remained outstanding. For instance, a $58 collection item was paid by November 2009, and a $61 medical debt was no longer listed by December 2009. However, five accounts with a collection agency, totaling several thousand dollars, were being paid through monthly withdrawals, though some balances remained.

Specifically, a $550 balance on one account and a $221 balance with interest on another were still due, along with a $1,107 balance with interest on a third. The applicant also had a $13,317 delinquent credit card debt from his divorce for which no payments had been made. The judge determined that the applicant's attempts to minimize his criminal conduct were unpersuasive, and his significant delinquent debt further contributed to the denial.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to sexually molesting his stepdaughters and indecently videotaping one of them, which are serious felonies.
The applicant's attempts to minimize the seriousness of his actions were unpersuasive and lacked credibility.
The applicant's financial issues, including significant delinquent debt, further contributed to concerns about his judgment and reliability.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

J.1.araisedCriminal Conduct
D.1.araisedSexual Behavior
E.1.araisedPersonal Conduct
F.1.araisedFinancial Considerations

Mitigating

J.2.drejectedCriminal ConductThe applicant's completion of a treatment program and lack of recent offenses did not sufficiently mitigate the serious nature of his past crimes.
D.2.brejectedSexual BehaviorThe applicant's past sexual misconduct was not infrequent or under unusual circumstances, and it continued to raise doubts about his reliability.
E.2.crejectedPersonal ConductThe applicant's past actions created ongoing vulnerability to coercion and exploitation.
F.2.dnotedFinancial Considerations

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 30, 2009
Answer filedOct 27, 2009
Hearing heldAug 2, 2010Applicant waived the 15-day notice period.
Decision dateOct 25, 2010

Cite For

Serious Felonies Involving Sexual Misconduct Under Guideline D
Financial Issues Impacting Security Clearance Under Guideline F
Credibility Issues in Minimizing Past Criminal Conduct Under Guideline E

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶13)	Mitigating applied (¶14)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant sexually molested his two stepdaughters and indecently videotaped one of them during the first six months of 1998.	Against Applicant	Criminal Sexual Conduct	Admitted	(a) sexual behavior of a criminal nature, whether or not the individual has been prosecuted (c) sexual behavior that causes an individual to be vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶13)

Mitigating applied (¶14)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant sexually molested his two stepdaughters and indecently videotaped one of them during the first six months of 1998.

Against Applicant

Criminal Sexual Conduct

Admitted

(a) sexual behavior of a criminal nature, whether or not the individual has been prosecuted

(c) sexual behavior that causes an individual to be vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	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

3.a

specific text not stated in this decision

Against Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
4.a	Applicant testified that he paid the $58 collection item alleged in SOR ¶ 4.a, but could not find a receipt to corroborate that fact. His credit bureau reports (CBRs) reflect that debt as unpaid in June 2009, but paid in full by November 2009. $58	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
4.b	He did not recognize the $61 debt listed in SOR ¶ 4.b, but said he easily could and would pay it if he still owed it. That debt was a collection listing for a $41 medical debt. It appeared on his December 2008 and July 2009 CBRs, but was no longer listed on his December 2009 or July 2010 CBRs. $41	For Applicant	Medical Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
4.c	The debts listed in SOR ¶¶ 4.c through 4.g are five accounts all held by the same collection agency. Applicant made an agreement allowing them to withdraw $150 per month from his bank account starting in October 2009. The employee with whom he was working was fired shortly thereafter, and his account was not processed for several months. His regular payments resumed in April 2010. His account records reflect that the agency applied his first five payments, totaling $750, to fully pay off the debts listed in SOR ¶ 4.c, 4.e, and three other small collection accounts not listed on the SOR.	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
4.d	No payments were yet applied toward the debt listed in SOR ¶ 4.d, which continues to show a $550 balance due. $550	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
4.e	The agency applied $150 toward the account alleged in SOR ¶ 4.f, which shows a current balance of $221 with accumulated interest. $221	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
4.f	The agency applied $128 toward the account listed in SOR ¶ 4.g, which now reflects a total due of $1,107 with interest. $1,107	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
4.g	The remaining debts all involved emergency medical services in 2002 and 2003, after his ex-wife took him off her insurance policy without his knowledge. He subsequently enrolled for Veterans Administration medical care and has health insurance through his current employer.	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
4.h	Applicant's final delinquent debt is for a credit card he and his ex-wife jointly used, and for which he was awarded responsibility in their divorce decree. He has not made any payments toward this $13,317 debt. $13,317	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

4.a

Applicant testified that he paid the $58 collection item alleged in SOR ¶ 4.a, but could not find a receipt to corroborate that fact. His credit bureau reports (CBRs) reflect that debt as unpaid in June 2009, but paid in full by November 2009.

$58

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

4.b

He did not recognize the $61 debt listed in SOR ¶ 4.b, but said he easily could and would pay it if he still owed it. That debt was a collection listing for a $41 medical debt. It appeared on his December 2008 and July 2009 CBRs, but was no longer listed on his December 2009 or July 2010 CBRs.

$41

For Applicant

Medical Debt

Unknown

—

4.c

The debts listed in SOR ¶¶ 4.c through 4.g are five accounts all held by the same collection agency. Applicant made an agreement allowing them to withdraw $150 per month from his bank account starting in October 2009. The employee with whom he was working was fired shortly thereafter, and his account was not processed for several months. His regular payments resumed in April 2010. His account records reflect that the agency applied his first five payments, totaling $750, to fully pay off the debts listed in SOR ¶ 4.c, 4.e, and three other small collection accounts not listed on the SOR.

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

4.d

No payments were yet applied toward the debt listed in SOR ¶ 4.d, which continues to show a $550 balance due.

$550

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

4.e

The agency applied $150 toward the account alleged in SOR ¶ 4.f, which shows a current balance of $221 with accumulated interest.

$221

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

4.f

The agency applied $128 toward the account listed in SOR ¶ 4.g, which now reflects a total due of $1,107 with interest.

$1,107

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

4.g

The remaining debts all involved emergency medical services in 2002 and 2003, after his ex-wife took him off her insurance policy without his knowledge. He subsequently enrolled for Veterans Administration medical care and has health insurance through his current employer.

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

4.h

Applicant's final delinquent debt is for a credit card he and his ex-wife jointly used, and for which he was awarded responsibility in their divorce decree. He has not made any payments toward this $13,317 debt.

$13,317

Against Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant sexually molested his two stepdaughters and indecently videotaped one of them during the first six months of 1998, following his retirement after 21 years as an Army Ranger.	Against Applicant	Sexual Offense Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant sexually molested his two stepdaughters and indecently videotaped one of them during the first six months of 1998, following his retirement after 21 years as an Army Ranger.

Against Applicant

Sexual Offense Criminal

Convicted

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

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