ISCR Case 14-06321.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 14-06321.h1

deniedMar 8, 2016· Hon. Matthew E. Malone· hearing

Summary

A 69-year-old retired Navy officer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline F (Financial Considerations), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from an unresolved felony conviction for child abuse, related personal conduct issues, and significant financial problems.

Specifically, the applicant was charged in January 2004 with multiple offenses, including sexual battery and felony child abuse. In January 2006, he was found guilty of third-degree felony child abuse and misdemeanor violation of a protective injunction, receiving a fine, court costs, and five years of supervised probation. While he completed counseling and was released from probation two years early, and his references recommended him, a concern remained that he minimized the severity of his past conduct.

Additionally, the applicant had substantial delinquent debts, including $124,074 for a mortgage, $1,200 and $1,500 for medical debts, and $1,000 for a cable and internet account. He was also 120 days past due on another mortgage, with the property in foreclosure. Despite evidence of rehabilitation and community involvement, the judge found that the applicant failed to mitigate concerns regarding his criminal conduct and financial issues, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant did not fully accept responsibility for his criminal conduct, which included felony child abuse and violations of protective injunctions.
The applicant's financial issues included significant delinquent debts, raising concerns about his judgment and reliability.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

J 31(a)raisedCriminal Conduct
E 31(c)raisedPersonal Conduct
F 19(a)raisedFinancial Considerations

Mitigating

J 32(a)rejectedCriminal ConductThe passage of time since the criminal behavior did not mitigate concerns due to the serious nature of the conduct.
F 20(a)rejectedFinancial ConsiderationsThe applicant's financial issues were ongoing and indicated a lack of judgment.

Key Rule Quoted

“A security clearance decision is intended only to resolve whether it is clearly consistent with the national interest for an applicant to either receive or continue to have access to classified information.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 22, 2015
Answer filed—
Hearing heldOct 23, 2015
Decision dateMar 8, 2016

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Failure to Resolve Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation and Acceptance of Responsibility for Past Conduct Under Guideline E

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	The conduct for which Applicant was convicted occurred about 12 years before the SOR was issued. He completed all of his counseling requirements without issue, and he was released from supervised probation two years early. One of the factors underlying his conduct was his abuse of alcohol, which had worsened in the months leading up to his arrest. He is active in his church and, by extension, in his community. All of his references express knowledge, not otherwise specified, of accusations made against him, and they recommend him for continued access to classified information. A remaining concern is that Applicant has tried to minimize the severity of the conduct documented by the Government’s information.	Against Applicant	Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations	—	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

The conduct for which Applicant was convicted occurred about 12 years before the SOR was issued. He completed all of his counseling requirements without issue, and he was released from supervised probation two years early. One of the factors underlying his conduct was his abuse of alcohol, which had worsened in the months leading up to his arrest. He is active in his church and, by extension, in his community. All of his references express knowledge, not otherwise specified, of accusations made against him, and they recommend him for continued access to classified information. A remaining concern is that Applicant has tried to minimize the severity of the conduct documented by the Government’s information.

Against Applicant

Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations

—

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant owed $124,074 for a delinquent mortgage debt. $124,074	Against Applicant	Mortgage or Home Loan Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
3.b	Applicant owed $1,200 for a medical debt. $1,200	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
3.c	Applicant owed $1,000 for a cable television and internet account. $1,000	Against Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
3.d	Applicant owed $1,500 for a medical debt. $1,500	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
3.e	Applicant was 120 days past due for a mortgage, with the property secured by that mortgage being in foreclosure.	Against Applicant	Mortgage or Home Loan 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

3.a

Applicant owed $124,074 for a delinquent mortgage debt.

$124,074

Against Applicant

Mortgage or Home Loan Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

3.b

Applicant owed $1,200 for a medical debt.

$1,200

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

3.c

Applicant owed $1,000 for a cable television and internet account.

$1,000

Against Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

3.d

Applicant owed $1,500 for a medical debt.

$1,500

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

3.e

Applicant was 120 days past due for a mortgage, with the property secured by that mortgage being in foreclosure.

Against Applicant

Mortgage or Home Loan Debt

Denied

(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
1.a	In January 2004, Applicant was charged with sexual battery - capital felony, 3rd degree felony child abuse, two counts of misdemeanor violation of a protective injunction against domestic violence, and 3rd degree felony neglect of a child. In January 2006 plea agreement, he was found guilty of the 3rd degree felony child abuse and the misdemeanor violation of a protective injunction charges. The other two charges were not further prosecuted, and Applicant was assessed a fine and court costs, and placed on a total of five years of supervised probation for both convictions.	Against Applicant	Domestic Violence	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

1.a

In January 2004, Applicant was charged with sexual battery - capital felony, 3rd degree felony child abuse, two counts of misdemeanor violation of a protective injunction against domestic violence, and 3rd degree felony neglect of a child. In January 2006 plea agreement, he was found guilty of the 3rd degree felony child abuse and the misdemeanor violation of a protective injunction charges. The other two charges were not further prosecuted, and Applicant was assessed a fine and court costs, and placed on a total of five years of supervised probation for both convictions.

Against Applicant

Domestic Violence

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

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES