ISCR Case 12-04270.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 12-04270.h1

deniedNov 26, 2014· Hon. Paul J. Mason· hearing

Summary

A 50-year-old systems administrator was denied a security clearance due to unresolved financial issues totaling $51,910, primarily under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant had nine delinquent accounts, including a state tax lien for $5,227, a charged-off mortgage for $37,869, an auto loan for $5,368, and several medical and cellular phone bills. Despite claims of payment for many of these debts, the applicant failed to provide corroborating evidence, such as legible money orders or documentation of payment plans.

The applicant also faced concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) related to an incident in March 2013. He admitted to threatening his daughter's former boyfriend with a BB gun after the boyfriend appeared at his home playing loud music. The applicant stated his motivation was the boyfriend's history of abusing and stalking his daughter. Although charged with assault, the case was ultimately dismissed when the victim did not appear in court.

Ultimately, the denial was based on the applicant's failure to provide evidence of debt payments and the finding that charged-off debts still remained his responsibility. These issues led to a determination of poor judgment and reliability concerns.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to provide corroborated evidence of debt payments.
The applicant has nine unresolved delinquent accounts totaling $51,910.
The applicant's claims regarding charged-off debts did not relieve him of responsibility.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(b)appliedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant's financial difficulties were linked to periods of unemployment.
AG ¶ 17(c)appliedThe Offense Was so Minor, or so Much Time Has Passed, or the Behavior Is so InfrequentThe personal conduct incident was isolated and the charges were nolle prosequi.

Key Rule Quoted

“The final security clearance decision must be an overall commonsense judgment based upon careful consideration of the specific guidelines, each of which is to be evaluated in the context of the whole person.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 25, 2014
Answer filedMay 29, 2014Applicant chose to proceed pro se.
Hearing held—Decided on the administrative record.
Decision dateNov 4, 2014

Cite For

Failure to Provide Corroborated Evidence of Debt Payments Under Guideline F
Impact of Unresolved Financial Obligations on Security Clearance Eligibility
Mitigation of Personal Conduct Concerns Under Guideline E Despite Financial Issues

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	In his answer to the SOR, Applicant admitted that he was charged with assault by his daughter’s former boyfriend (victim) after threatening to shoot out the boyfriend’s car light with a BB gun. Applicant indicated the former boyfriend had beaten his daughter several times and had been stalking her, motivating her to move back into Applicant’s home. One night in March 2013, the boyfriend appeared at Applicant’s house playing his car stereo very loud. At Applicant’s urging, his wife called the police and made a complaint, believing that the police would stop and arrest the victim after discovering he had multiple warrants for his arrest. The police came and prepared a police report. They left and returned with a complaint from the victim accusing Applicant of shooting the victim with the BB gun. Applicant claims he did not shoot the BB gun. His explanation of events is essentially the same in his September 2013 interrogatory answers. The charge was nolle prosequi when the victim did not appear in court.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances (d) acknowledged the behavior; counseling/positive steps taken	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

In his answer to the SOR, Applicant admitted that he was charged with assault by his daughter’s former boyfriend (victim) after threatening to shoot out the boyfriend’s car light with a BB gun. Applicant indicated the former boyfriend had beaten his daughter several times and had been stalking her, motivating her to move back into Applicant’s home. One night in March 2013, the boyfriend appeared at Applicant’s house playing his car stereo very loud. At Applicant’s urging, his wife called the police and made a complaint, believing that the police would stop and arrest the victim after discovering he had multiple warrants for his arrest. The police came and prepared a police report. They left and returned with a complaint from the victim accusing Applicant of shooting the victim with the BB gun. Applicant claims he did not shoot the BB gun. His explanation of events is essentially the same in his September 2013 interrogatory answers. The charge was nolle prosequi when the victim did not appear in court.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

—

(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances

(d) acknowledged the behavior; counseling/positive steps taken

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	SOR 1.a is a state tax lien for $5,227. The tax lien was filed against Applicant in January 2011. He denied that he owes the lien, claiming that he paid the lien off with his 2012 federal tax refund. The record contains no documentation to support Applicant’s claim. Unresolved. $5,227	Against Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.b	SOR 1.b is a medical account for $740 which became delinquent in August 2009 and was transferred to a collection agency. Applicant admitted the debt. In his answer to the SOR, he provided sequential copies of two money orders. (AE K) Both undated money orders contain figures that are not recognizable or legible. Applicant’s credit report, dated August 13, 2013, shows the account is unpaid. Unresolved. $740	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.c	SOR 1.c is a mortgage for $37,869. The account became delinquent in June 2010 and was charged off. Applicant denied the debt and furnished ten legal documents, including warranty deeds, a quit claim deed, and a motion for relief from the mortgage, in an effort to show the mortgage was no longer his responsibility. The government credit reports and Applicant’s September 2013 credit report show the delinquent mortgage remains his responsibility. Unresolved. $37,869	Against Applicant	Mortgage or Home Loan Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.d	SOR 1.d is a medical account for $1,825 which became delinquent in June 2010 and was transferred to a collection agency. Applicant admitted the debt, and referred to the two money orders (AE K), which are undated and illegible, as representing payments under a payment plan that does not appear in the record. Unresolved. $1,825	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.e	SOR 1.e is a medical account for $293 which became delinquent in December 2011. Applicant denied this debt claiming that he paid it on January 6, 2012, with his bank card. He indicated he provided this information in his September 2013 interrogatory answers. In his September 2013 interrogatory answers, he indicated, 'this [SOR 1.e] has not been paid yet due to insufficient amount of fund[s] to pay it yet - hoping to pay off with my next tax return.' Unresolved. $293	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.f	SOR 1.f is an auto installment loan for $5,368. The account became delinquent in April 2009. Applicant admitted this debt, but indicated, 'the account was charged off - payment due 0.00.' As with SOR 1.c, the charged-off debt status does not relieve Applicant’s responsibility for the debt. Unresolved. $5,368	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.g	SOR 1.g is an unknown loan for $137 which became delinquent in February 2011. Applicant denied the account claiming that he paid the account in January 2012, when he was applying for a security clearance. He supplied no documentation to support his claim. Unresolved. $137	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.h	SOR 1.h is a cellular phone bill for $116 which became delinquent in April 2011. Applicant denied responsibility for the debt because he paid it in January 2012, when he was applying for a security clearance. He produced no documentation to verify that he paid the bill. Unresolved. $116	Against Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.i	SOR 1.i is a cellular phone bill for $335 which became delinquent in October 2011. He denied the account because he indicated he paid it in January 2012, when he was applying for a security clearance. The account no longer appears on his credit report. He never had any problems with the account. The delinquent bill appears on the government’s August 2011 credit report. Unresolved. $335	Against Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Denied	(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

SOR 1.a is a state tax lien for $5,227. The tax lien was filed against Applicant in January 2011. He denied that he owes the lien, claiming that he paid the lien off with his 2012 federal tax refund. The record contains no documentation to support Applicant’s claim. Unresolved.

$5,227

Against Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.b

SOR 1.b is a medical account for $740 which became delinquent in August 2009 and was transferred to a collection agency. Applicant admitted the debt. In his answer to the SOR, he provided sequential copies of two money orders. (AE K) Both undated money orders contain figures that are not recognizable or legible. Applicant’s credit report, dated August 13, 2013, shows the account is unpaid. Unresolved.

$740

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.c

SOR 1.c is a mortgage for $37,869. The account became delinquent in June 2010 and was charged off. Applicant denied the debt and furnished ten legal documents, including warranty deeds, a quit claim deed, and a motion for relief from the mortgage, in an effort to show the mortgage was no longer his responsibility. The government credit reports and Applicant’s September 2013 credit report show the delinquent mortgage remains his responsibility. Unresolved.

$37,869

Against Applicant

Mortgage or Home Loan Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.d

SOR 1.d is a medical account for $1,825 which became delinquent in June 2010 and was transferred to a collection agency. Applicant admitted the debt, and referred to the two money orders (AE K), which are undated and illegible, as representing payments under a payment plan that does not appear in the record. Unresolved.

$1,825

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.e

SOR 1.e is a medical account for $293 which became delinquent in December 2011. Applicant denied this debt claiming that he paid it on January 6, 2012, with his bank card. He indicated he provided this information in his September 2013 interrogatory answers. In his September 2013 interrogatory answers, he indicated, 'this [SOR 1.e] has not been paid yet due to insufficient amount of fund[s] to pay it yet - hoping to pay off with my next tax return.' Unresolved.

$293

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.f

SOR 1.f is an auto installment loan for $5,368. The account became delinquent in April 2009. Applicant admitted this debt, but indicated, 'the account was charged off - payment due 0.00.' As with SOR 1.c, the charged-off debt status does not relieve Applicant’s responsibility for the debt. Unresolved.

$5,368

Against Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.g

SOR 1.g is an unknown loan for $137 which became delinquent in February 2011. Applicant denied the account claiming that he paid the account in January 2012, when he was applying for a security clearance. He supplied no documentation to support his claim. Unresolved.

$137

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.h

SOR 1.h is a cellular phone bill for $116 which became delinquent in April 2011. Applicant denied responsibility for the debt because he paid it in January 2012, when he was applying for a security clearance. He produced no documentation to verify that he paid the bill. Unresolved.

$116

Against Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.i

SOR 1.i is a cellular phone bill for $335 which became delinquent in October 2011. He denied the account because he indicated he paid it in January 2012, when he was applying for a security clearance. The account no longer appears on his credit report. He never had any problems with the account. The delinquent bill appears on the government’s August 2011 credit report. Unresolved.

$335

Against Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

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