ISCR Case 09-07105.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-07105.h1

deniedJul 1, 2009· Hon. Noreen A. Lynch· hearing

Summary

A 40-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), and J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a history of financial instability, a felony conviction for theft, and a recent conviction for forgery, with the judge finding insufficient evidence of rehabilitation or insight into his behavior.

The applicant admitted to significant financial issues, including delinquent debts totaling approximately $222,070 and a Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharged in 1996. He had not provided documentation of payments on two charged-off mortgage accounts and made no attempts to resolve his debt until after receiving the Statement of Reasons.

Additionally, the applicant had a criminal record, including a 1989 felony grand larceny conviction for stealing property while employed as a baggage handler, for which he received probation. In 2008, he forged his supervisor's signature on an insurance document, leading to a 2009 guilty plea for false/misleading information/fraud and a sentence of unsupervised probation, a fine, and court costs. The applicant also admitted to deliberately falsifying material facts in 2009 DOHA interrogatories by misrepresenting his guilty plea and probation for the 1989 theft.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to significant financial problems, including a bankruptcy and charged-off debts totaling approximately $222,070.
The applicant engaged in criminal conduct, including a felony theft in 1989 and forgery in 2009, which raised serious concerns about his judgment and reliability.
The applicant provided misleading information regarding his criminal history in his responses to DOHA interrogatories, indicating a lack of candor.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
AG ¶ 31(c)raisedAllegation or Admission of Criminal Conduct
AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
AG ¶ 16(b)raisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 23, 2010
Answer filedApr 8, 2010
Hearing heldAug 24, 2010
Decision dateNot specified

Cite For

Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Financial Instability as a Disqualifying Factor Under Guideline F
Criminal Conduct Raising Doubts About Reliability Under Guideline J

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	Applicant admitted that he deliberately falsified his material facts in his response to DOHA 2009 interrogatories. He did not disclose his guilty plea, and one-day probation. His answer was the 'case was thrown out.' This is a misleading statement.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

Applicant admitted that he deliberately falsified his material facts in his response to DOHA 2009 interrogatories. He did not disclose his guilty plea, and one-day probation. His answer was the 'case was thrown out.' This is a misleading statement.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Admitted

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has delinquent debts in the amount of $222,070. $222,070	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.b	In March 1996, Applicant filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 7. The bankruptcy was discharged in June 1996.	Against Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.c	He has not provided documentation to show he has made any payments on the two charged-off mortgage accounts.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.d	There is no record of any attempts to eliminate his debt until after he received the SOR.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant has delinquent debts in the amount of $222,070.

$222,070

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.b

In March 1996, Applicant filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 7. The bankruptcy was discharged in June 1996.

Against Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.c

He has not provided documentation to show he has made any payments on the two charged-off mortgage accounts.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.d

There is no record of any attempts to eliminate his debt until after he received the SOR.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	In 1989, Applicant stole property from passengers’ baggage while employed as a baggage handler with an airline. He admitted that he engaged in this illegal practice months before his arrest. Applicant was charged with felony grand larceny in November 1989. After finding him guilty, the court sentenced Applicant to six-months probation. Applicant’s charges were dismissed in 1991.	Against Applicant	Theft or Larceny	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—
2.b	In August 2008, Applicant forged the signature of his supervisor on an insurance company document to verify time and compensation for lost wages due to the accident. As a result of an investigation, Applicant was charged with two counts of (1) false/misleading information Fraud + $300, (3) Att-Theft: Less $500 value and (5) Forgery. He pleaded guilty of one count of false/misleading info/fraud+$300. In 2009, Applicant received unsupervised probation before judgment and was ordered to pay a fine and court costs. The other charges were nolle prosequi.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception 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

2.a

In 1989, Applicant stole property from passengers’ baggage while employed as a baggage handler with an airline. He admitted that he engaged in this illegal practice months before his arrest. Applicant was charged with felony grand larceny in November 1989. After finding him guilty, the court sentenced Applicant to six-months probation. Applicant’s charges were dismissed in 1991.

Against Applicant

Theft or Larceny

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Admitted

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

2.b

In August 2008, Applicant forged the signature of his supervisor on an insurance company document to verify time and compensation for lost wages due to the accident. As a result of an investigation, Applicant was charged with two counts of (1) false/misleading information Fraud + $300, (3) Att-Theft: Less $500 value and (5) Forgery. He pleaded guilty of one count of false/misleading info/fraud+$300. In 2009, Applicant received unsupervised probation before judgment and was ordered to pay a fine and court costs. The other charges were nolle prosequi.

Against Applicant

Fraud or Deception 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

FOOTNOTES