ISCR Case 12-11152.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 12-11152.h1

deniedMar 7, 2016· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 62-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The denial stemmed from unresolved financial issues and misrepresentations made on his security clearance application (e-QIP).

Specifically, the applicant failed to disclose multiple delinquent debts totaling approximately $34,039, including a charged-off vehicle loan for $8,158, a charged-off credit card for $1,838 or $1,839, and other charged-off accounts. While one telephone account with a $483 balance was settled for $254.28, and another account for $1,382 was reduced to $744 and was reportedly in resolution, the applicant had answered "no" to several e-QIP questions about financial delinquencies, repossessions, and debts turned over to collections, certifying these responses as "true, complete, and correct."

The judge found that the applicant did not take sufficient action to mitigate his financial problems, nor did he provide adequate documentation or evidence of efforts to resolve the majority of his debts. This failure to address financial concerns and the misrepresentations on his application led to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to mitigate financial concerns related to 11 delinquent debts totaling approximately $34,039.
The applicant misrepresented his financial status on his e-QIP, indicating a lack of judgment and reliability.
The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of efforts to resolve his financial issues or to demonstrate financial stability.

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(a)rejectedBehavior Happened so Long Ago, Was Infrequent, or Occurred Under Circumstances Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's financial issues were ongoing and unresolved.
AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions That Resulted in Financial Problems Were Largely Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant's financial difficulties were not adequately explained as being beyond his control.

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 5, 2015
Answer filedJul 27, 2015Applicant elected to have his case decided on the written record.
Hearing held—No hearing was held; decision made on the written record.
Decision dateMar 7, 2016

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unresolved Financial Obligations Under Guideline F
Misrepresentation of Financial Status on E-qip Under Guideline E
Failure to Demonstrate Sufficient Mitigation of Financial Concerns.

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	On May 16, 2012, when Applicant completed his e-QIP, he responded to questions pertaining to his financial record. Several of those questions in Section 26 – Financial Record – asked if, in the past seven years, he had any possessions or property voluntarily or involuntarily repossessed or foreclosed; if he had defaulted on any type of loan; if he had bills or debts turned over to a collection agency; if he had any account or credit card suspended, charged off, or cancelled for failing to pay as agreed; if he had been over 120 days delinquent on any debt not previously entered; or if he was currently over 120 days delinquent on any debt. Applicant answered “no” to those questions. He certified that the responses were “true, complete, and correct” to the best of his knowledge and belief, but the responses to those questions were, in fact, incorrect, for at that time Applicant had several accounts that fell within the stated parameters.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Unknown	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

On May 16, 2012, when Applicant completed his e-QIP, he responded to questions pertaining to his financial record. Several of those questions in Section 26 – Financial Record – asked if, in the past seven years, he had any possessions or property voluntarily or involuntarily repossessed or foreclosed; if he had defaulted on any type of loan; if he had bills or debts turned over to a collection agency; if he had any account or credit card suspended, charged off, or cancelled for failing to pay as agreed; if he had been over 120 days delinquent on any debt not previously entered; or if he was currently over 120 days delinquent on any debt. Applicant answered “no” to those questions. He certified that the responses were “true, complete, and correct” to the best of his knowledge and belief, but the responses to those questions were, in fact, incorrect, for at that time Applicant had several accounts that fell within the stated parameters.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Unknown

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	a vehicle loan for which Applicant was a co-signer for his son for $12,066 that was charged off in the amount of $8,158 $8,158	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.b	a credit card that was charged off in the amount of $1,838 or $1,839 $1,839	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.c	a telephone account with an unpaid balance of $483 that was settled when $254.28 was paid in April 2015 $483	For Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
1.d	an installment sales contract that was charged off in the amount of $479 $479	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.k	an unspecified type of account with an unpaid balance of $1,382 that was charged off, but subsequently reduced to $744, and according to Applicant, is in the process of being resolved $1,382	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
1.l	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	(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

a vehicle loan for which Applicant was a co-signer for his son for $12,066 that was charged off in the amount of $8,158

$8,158

Against Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Unknown

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.b

a credit card that was charged off in the amount of $1,838 or $1,839

$1,839

Against Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Unknown

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.c

a telephone account with an unpaid balance of $483 that was settled when $254.28 was paid in April 2015

$483

For Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Unknown

—

1.d

an installment sales contract that was charged off in the amount of $479

$479

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.k

an unspecified type of account with an unpaid balance of $1,382 that was charged off, but subsequently reduced to $744, and according to Applicant, is in the process of being resolved

$1,382

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

1.l

specific text not stated in this decision

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

(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