ISCR Case 00-0326.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 00-0326.h1

deniedSep 18, 2002· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A 50-year-old defense contractor 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 a history of financial difficulties, past criminal conduct, and the willful falsification of information on his May 1998 Security Clearance Application (SCA).

Specifically, the Applicant knowingly failed to disclose multiple criminal charges, including felonies in 1969 and 1970, a drug-related offense in 1972, and an alcohol-related offense in 1991. He also failed to disclose past drug abuse. Regarding financial matters, he did not report a 1994 mortgage default or an outstanding hospital debt. Further financial issues included a 1996 vehicle repossession with an outstanding balance of approximately $11,700, and the dismissal of a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy petition in 1998. Additionally, the Applicant was terminated from a company in 1996 for rule violations, including being under the influence of alcohol on company property and insubordination.

The Administrative Judge concluded that the Applicant's lack of candor regarding his criminal history and drug abuse, coupled with his failure to disclose significant financial difficulties and a history of not meeting financial obligations, warranted the denial of his security clearance. His willful falsification of information on the SCA was found to violate 18 U.S.C. Section 1001.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The Applicant was less than candid about his past criminal conduct and drug abuse.
He failed to disclose significant financial difficulties on his Security Clearance Application.
The Applicant's history of not meeting financial obligations and willful falsification violated 18 U.S.C. Section 1001.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F1raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
F3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
E2raisedThe Deliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
E5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations
J1raisedAllegations or Admission of Criminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“[each clearance decision must be a fair and impartial common sense determination based upon consideration of all the relevant and material information and the pertinent criteria and adjudication policy in enclosure 2]”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 13, 2000
Answer filedOct 19, 2000
Hearing held—Determined on a written record in lieu of a hearing.
Decision dateSep 18, 2002

Cite For

Willful Falsification of Information on a Security Clearance Application Under Guideline E
Financial Irresponsibility as a Disqualifying Condition Under Guideline F
Pattern of Dishonesty Impacting Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline J

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.b	In answering questions 23.a. and 23.d. on his May 1998 Security Clearance Application (SCA), the Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with a felony in 1969, that he was charged with another felony in 1970, that he was charged with a drug related offense in 1972, and that he was charged with an alcohol related offense in 1991.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	In answering questions 24.a. and 24.b. on his May 1998 SCA, the Applicant again knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose any of his past drug abuse.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	—	—	—
2.d	In answering questions 28.a. and 28.b. on his May 1998 SCA, the Applicant once again knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he defaulted on his mortgage in 1994, and that he was past due on a hospital debt.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Denied	—	—	—
2.f	In 1996, the Applicant was terminated for violations of his company's rules.	Against Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Denied	—	—	—
2.g–3.a	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.b

In answering questions 23.a. and 23.d. on his May 1998 Security Clearance Application (SCA), the Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with a felony in 1969, that he was charged with another felony in 1970, that he was charged with a drug related offense in 1972, and that he was charged with an alcohol related offense in 1991.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

—

2.c

In answering questions 24.a. and 24.b. on his May 1998 SCA, the Applicant again knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose any of his past drug abuse.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Denied

—

2.d

In answering questions 28.a. and 28.b. on his May 1998 SCA, the Applicant once again knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he defaulted on his mortgage in 1994, and that he was past due on a hospital debt.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Denied

—

2.f

In 1996, the Applicant was terminated for violations of his company's rules.

Against Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Denied

—

2.g–3.a

3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)

Against Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	In 1994, the Applicant defaulted on his mortgage	Against Applicant	Mortgage or Home Loan Debt	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.b	In 1996, a vehicle, the loan for which the Applicant co-signed, was repossessed. There is an outstanding balance past due of about $11,700.00 $11,700	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.c	In 1998, the Applicant had a petition for a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy dismissed	Against Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.d	He is also past due in his indebtedness to a hospital in excess of $100.00 $100	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
2.b–3.a	7 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant).	Against Applicant			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

In 1994, the Applicant defaulted on his mortgage

Against Applicant

Mortgage or Home Loan Debt

Unknown

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

1.b

In 1996, a vehicle, the loan for which the Applicant co-signed, was repossessed. There is an outstanding balance past due of about $11,700.00

$11,700

Against Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Unknown

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

1.c

In 1998, the Applicant had a petition for a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy dismissed

Against Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Unknown

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

1.d

He is also past due in his indebtedness to a hospital in excess of $100.00

$100

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Unknown

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

2.b–3.a

7 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant).

Against Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with a felony in 1969.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with another felony in 1970.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with a drug related offense in 1972.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
1.d	The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with an alcohol related offense in 1991.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose any of his past drug abuse.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he defaulted on his mortgage in 1994.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.d	The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was past due on a hospital debt.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.f	The Applicant was found under the influence of alcohol after being admitted to company property, and was insubordinate by failing to observe company instructions.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.g	The Applicant was terminated for violations of his company's rules.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.h–3.a	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with a felony in 1969.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

1.b

The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with another felony in 1970.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

1.c

The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with a drug related offense in 1972.

Against Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

1.d

The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was charged with an alcohol related offense in 1991.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.b

The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose any of his past drug abuse.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.c

The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he defaulted on his mortgage in 1994.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.d

The Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was past due on a hospital debt.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.f

The Applicant was found under the influence of alcohol after being admitted to company property, and was insubordinate by failing to observe company instructions.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.g

The Applicant was terminated for violations of his company's rules.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.h–3.a

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)

Against Applicant

—

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES