ISCR Case 14-00426.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 14-00426.h1

grantedFeb 26, 2015· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A long-term employee with 22 years at his current job and 11 years holding a security clearance was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant faced allegations of financial delinquencies and a failure to disclose these on a security questionnaire. Specifically, he was indebted to Creditor A for approximately $8,945, which was settled for $4,472, and to Creditor B for about $2,903, settled for $1,590. He also had a past-due debt of approximately $11,219 with Creditor C, which was in settlement negotiations.

The applicant admitted to the delinquencies and to answering "No" to a question about financial delinquencies, stating it was a mistake and not an intentional falsification. Disqualifying conditions raised included F.19.a, F.19.c, and E.16.a.

The clearance was granted due to several mitigating factors. The applicant's financial difficulties stemmed primarily from a divorce. He demonstrated responsible behavior by engaging a debt consolidation service and actively working to resolve his debts, successfully settling two of the three identified. His long history of stable employment and 11 years of holding a security clearance without issues also contributed to the decision. Mitigating conditions applied included F.20.b, F.20.c, F.20.d, and E.17.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant has a long history of stable employment and has held a security clearance for 11 years without violations.
Financial difficulties were primarily due to a divorce, which is a mitigating factor under AG ¶ 20(b).
Applicant has taken proactive steps to address his debts through a debt consolidation service and has settled multiple debts.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F.19.araisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
F.19.craisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
E.16.araisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts

Mitigating

F.20.bappliedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s Control
F.20.cappliedClear Indications That the Problem Is Being Resolved or Is Under Control
F.20.dappliedEvidence Shows the Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors
E.17appliedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Address the Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“The administrative judge’s over-arching adjudicative goal is a fair, impartial and commonsense decision.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 16, 2014
Answer filedMay 2, 2014
Hearing heldNov 24, 2014
Decision dateFeb 26, 2015

Cite For

Mitigating Factors Related to Financial Difficulties Under Guideline F
Consideration of Personal Conduct and Honesty in Security Clearance Evaluations Under Guideline E
Application of the Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions

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	Applicant answered “No” to “Section 26 - Financial Record . . . Delinquency Involving Routine Accounts.” By doing so, he failed to disclose the three delinquencies admitted, above. In his Answer and at his hearing, Applicant has repeatedly averred that this “error” was a “mistake” on his part, but it was not an intentional falsification. He avers he had no intention of deceiving the Government.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	—	(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant answered “No” to “Section 26 - Financial Record . . . Delinquency Involving Routine Accounts.” By doing so, he failed to disclose the three delinquencies admitted, above. In his Answer and at his hearing, Applicant has repeatedly averred that this “error” was a “mistake” on his part, but it was not an intentional falsification. He avers he had no intention of deceiving the Government.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Financial

Admitted

—

(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant admits that he was indebted to Creditor A for a past-due debt in the amount of about $8,945. Through the services of his debt consolidation company, this debt was settled for $4,472, as evidenced by correspondence from that company. $8,945	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly	Documented Debt Paid in Full
1.b	Applicant admits that he was indebted to Creditor B for a past-due debt in the amount of about $2,903. Through the services of his debt consolidation company, this debt was settled for $1,590, as evidenced by correspondence from that company. $2,903	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly	Documented Debt Paid in Full
1.c	Applicant admits that he is indebted to Creditor C for a past-due debt in the amount of about $11,219. He is negotiating a settlement of this debt through the services of his debt consolidation company. $11,219	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly	Claimed Debt Disputed with Creditor

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant admits that he was indebted to Creditor A for a past-due debt in the amount of about $8,945. Through the services of his debt consolidation company, this debt was settled for $4,472, as evidenced by correspondence from that company.

$8,945

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly

Documented

Debt Paid in Full

1.b

Applicant admits that he was indebted to Creditor B for a past-due debt in the amount of about $2,903. Through the services of his debt consolidation company, this debt was settled for $1,590, as evidenced by correspondence from that company.

$2,903

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly

Documented

Debt Paid in Full

1.c

Applicant admits that he is indebted to Creditor C for a past-due debt in the amount of about $11,219. He is negotiating a settlement of this debt through the services of his debt consolidation company.

$11,219

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly

Claimed

Debt Disputed with Creditor

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

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