ISCR Case 12-12065.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 12-12065.h1

deniedJan 28, 2016· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 61-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 a history of unresolved financial delinquencies and false statements made on his e-QIP regarding both his financial and criminal history. The judge determined that the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to mitigate these security concerns.

Specifically, the applicant falsely answered "no" to multiple financial questions on his July 24, 2012 e-QIP, despite having several accounts that met the criteria for repossession, loan default, collection, or being over 120 days delinquent. These included a home mortgage with a $30,512 past-due balance, two automobile loans with significant past-due amounts, and various other delinquent accounts for cellular phones, satellite television, utilities, furniture rental, medical services, and an auto insurance account, totaling approximately $108,105. Additionally, a home equity line of credit with a $14,851 balance was charged off in 2010.

On the same e-QIP, the applicant also falsely stated he had never been charged with felony offenses or offenses involving alcohol or drugs. In June 1991, at age 35, he was charged with felony possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, for which adjudication was withheld, and he received four years of probation. The applicant admitted to the financial omissions as a mistake but did not admit or deny the criminal history allegation, stating he had a hearing for it years prior. He failed to provide documentation to support claims of resolving debts or achieving financial stability.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had multiple unresolved delinquent accounts totaling approximately $108,105.
The applicant failed to provide documentation to support claims of resolving debts or financial stability.
The applicant made false statements on his e-QIP regarding his financial and criminal history.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F.19.araisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
F.19.craisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
E.2.araisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information

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 issuedMay 1, 2015
Answer filedJul 13, 2015Applicant elected for a written record decision.
Hearing held—No hearing; decided on the written record.
Decision dateJan 28, 2016

Cite For

Denial Based on Unresolved Financial Issues Under Guideline F
False Statements on E-qip Under Guideline E
Failure to Provide Evidence of Financial Stability or Mitigation Efforts

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 July 24, 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; 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; 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. During his OPM interview, Applicant stated that his omissions were a mistake. In his Answer to the SOR, Applicant admitted the allegation, without comment.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	On the same day, Applicant also responded to questions pertaining to his police record. Several of those questions in Section 22 – Police Record – asked if he had “EVER” been charged with any felony offenses; or been charged with an offense involving alcohol or drugs. 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, false for, in June 1991, at the age of 35, Applicant was charged with: (1) purchasing over 20 grams of marijuana, a felony; (2) possession of marijuana, a misdemeanor; and (3) possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, a felony. No action was taken with respect to counts (1) and (2), but he was prosecuted for count (3). Adjudication was withheld, and Applicant was sentenced to probation for four years. He told the OPM investigator that “he did not realize this information was to be included on the [e-QIP].” In his Answer to the SOR, Applicant failed to admit or deny the allegation, but simply commented: “I went to a hearing for this two or three years ago.”	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

On July 24, 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; 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; 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. During his OPM interview, Applicant stated that his omissions were a mistake. In his Answer to the SOR, Applicant admitted the allegation, without comment.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Admitted

—

2.b

On the same day, Applicant also responded to questions pertaining to his police record. Several of those questions in Section 22 – Police Record – asked if he had “EVER” been charged with any felony offenses; or been charged with an offense involving alcohol or drugs. 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, false for, in June 1991, at the age of 35, Applicant was charged with: (1) purchasing over 20 grams of marijuana, a felony; (2) possession of marijuana, a misdemeanor; and (3) possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, a felony. No action was taken with respect to counts (1) and (2), but he was prosecuted for count (3). Adjudication was withheld, and Applicant was sentenced to probation for four years. He told the OPM investigator that “he did not realize this information was to be included on the [e-QIP].” In his Answer to the SOR, Applicant failed to admit or deny the allegation, but simply commented: “I went to a hearing for this two or three years ago.”

For Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	This is a conventional home mortgage account with a high credit of $91,597, an over 120 days past-due balance of $30,512, and a remaining balance of $100,259. It was placed for collection and sold or transferred to another company in October 2014. $100,259	Against Applicant	Mortgage or Home Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.b	This is an automobile loan account with a high credit reflected as both $10,616 and $19,696 and past-due balance of $11,483 that was placed for collection, and charged off. $11,972	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.c	This is an automobile loan account with a high credit of $20,011, a past-due balance of $782, and a remaining balance of $19,503, that was placed for collection, and $10,703 was charged off. $19,503	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.d	This is a cellular telephone account with an unpaid balance of $891 that became delinquent in February 2013 and was subsequently placed for collection in December 2014. $891	Against Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.e	This is a cellular telephone account with a past-due and unpaid balance of $450 that became delinquent in June 2012 and was subsequently placed for collection, charged off, and transferred or sold to another debt collection company. $450	Against Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.f	This is a satellite television account with an unpaid balance of $299 that became delinquent in December 2012 and was subsequently placed for collection in April 2014. $299	Against Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.g	This is an electric utility account, incorrectly alleged in the SOR as a satellite television account, with a high credit of $477 and a past-due balance of $126, that became delinquent in August 2013. It was subsequently placed for collection and charged off in the amount of $477. $477	Against Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.h	This is an account with a furniture rental company with a high credit of $194 and a past-due and remaining balance of $109. It became delinquent in April 2013 and was subsequently placed for collection and charged off in the amount of $194. $109	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.i	This is a medical account with an unpaid balance of $70 that became delinquent in February 2012 and was placed for collection in July 2012. $70	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.j	This is a home equity line of credit with a high credit of $15,000 and a past-due and remaining balance of $14,851 that was placed for collection and charged off in 2010. $14,851	Against Applicant	Mortgage or Home Loan Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.k	Duplicate of 1.b. (low confidence)	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
1.l	This is an automobile insurance account with a remaining balance of $279 that was placed for collection in June 2012. $279	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	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

This is a conventional home mortgage account with a high credit of $91,597, an over 120 days past-due balance of $30,512, and a remaining balance of $100,259. It was placed for collection and sold or transferred to another company in October 2014.

$100,259

Against Applicant

Mortgage or Home Loan Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.b

This is an automobile loan account with a high credit reflected as both $10,616 and $19,696 and past-due balance of $11,483 that was placed for collection, and charged off.

$11,972

Against Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.c

This is an automobile loan account with a high credit of $20,011, a past-due balance of $782, and a remaining balance of $19,503, that was placed for collection, and $10,703 was charged off.

$19,503

Against Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.d

This is a cellular telephone account with an unpaid balance of $891 that became delinquent in February 2013 and was subsequently placed for collection in December 2014.

$891

Against Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.e

This is a cellular telephone account with a past-due and unpaid balance of $450 that became delinquent in June 2012 and was subsequently placed for collection, charged off, and transferred or sold to another debt collection company.

$450

Against Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.f

This is a satellite television account with an unpaid balance of $299 that became delinquent in December 2012 and was subsequently placed for collection in April 2014.

$299

Against Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.g

This is an electric utility account, incorrectly alleged in the SOR as a satellite television account, with a high credit of $477 and a past-due balance of $126, that became delinquent in August 2013. It was subsequently placed for collection and charged off in the amount of $477.

$477

Against Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.h

This is an account with a furniture rental company with a high credit of $194 and a past-due and remaining balance of $109. It became delinquent in April 2013 and was subsequently placed for collection and charged off in the amount of $194.

$109

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.i

This is a medical account with an unpaid balance of $70 that became delinquent in February 2012 and was placed for collection in July 2012.

$70

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.j

This is a home equity line of credit with a high credit of $15,000 and a past-due and remaining balance of $14,851 that was placed for collection and charged off in 2010.

$14,851

Against Applicant

Mortgage or Home Loan Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.k

Duplicate of 1.b. (low confidence)

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

1.l

This is an automobile insurance account with a remaining balance of $279 that was placed for collection in June 2012.

$279

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

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