ISCR Case 01-01587.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 01-01587.h1

deniedJun 17, 2002· Hon. John Grattan Metz, Jr.· hearing

Summary

A 43-year-old former U.S. Army service member was denied a security clearance due to concerns across four guidelines: Foreign Influence, Personal Conduct, Financial Considerations, and Criminal Conduct. The denial stemmed from multiple instances of falsification on his security clearance application and during interviews, significant delinquent debt, and potential foreign influence from business interests.

Specifically, the applicant was found to have deliberately omitted, concealed, or falsified material facts on his security questionnaire and provided false information during interviews. He also had seven delinquent accounts totaling over $46,000, including three accounts over 180 days delinquent, a nearly $10,000 automobile loan 90 days delinquent, and overdue state and federal income taxes from 1994. While two small delinquent accounts were paid, the overall financial irresponsibility was a significant concern.

Foreign influence concerns arose from the applicant's ownership interest in a Haitian motorcycle taxi company and more substantial holdings in Qatar. Additionally, his mother resides in Haiti six months a year, and he sends her approximately $300 every other month for support. The judge concluded that the applicant's lack of candor and financial irresponsibility raised serious doubts about his trustworthiness and reliability, leading to the denial.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Applicant falsified multiple responses on his security clearance application, indicating a lack of trustworthiness.
Applicant has over $46,000 in delinquent debt without a credible explanation or payment plan.
Applicant's foreign business interests and financial support to his mother in Haiti raised concerns of foreign influence.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A2.1.2.2raisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information Concerning Relevant and Material Matters to an Investigator
E2.A6.1.2.1raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
E2.A10.1.2.1raisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged
E2.A2.1.2.1raisedAn Immediate Family Member, or a Person to Whom the Individual Has Close Ties of Affection or Obligation, Is a Citizen Of, or Resident In, a Foreign Country

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, 531 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 22, 2001
Answer filedJul 11, 2001Applicant requested an administrative decision on the record.
Hearing held—
Decision dateJun 17, 2002

Cite For

Falsification of Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Financial Irresponsibility and Delinquency Under Guideline F
Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has an ownership interest in a Haitian motorcycle taxi company.	Against Applicant	Business Associate in Foreign Country Business or Professional Associate	Haiti	Denied	(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.b	Applicant's mother resides in Haiti six months of the year, and he sends her approximately $300.00 every other month to help support her.	Against Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Haiti	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
1.c	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—	Unknown	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant has business interests in Haiti, which while not large, are still significant, particularly in view of his mother's situation.	Against Applicant	Business Associate in Foreign Country Business or Professional Associate	Haiti	Denied	(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.e	Applicant has more substantial holdings in Qatar which also raise the prospect of foreign influence.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	Qatar	Denied	(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant has an ownership interest in a Haitian motorcycle taxi company.

Against Applicant

Business Associate in Foreign Country

Business or Professional Associate

Haiti

Denied

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.b

Applicant's mother resides in Haiti six months of the year, and he sends her approximately $300.00 every other month to help support her.

Against Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Haiti

Denied

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

—

1.c

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

Unknown

—

1.d

Applicant has business interests in Haiti, which while not large, are still significant, particularly in view of his mother's situation.

Against Applicant

Business Associate in Foreign Country

Business or Professional Associate

Haiti

Denied

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.e

Applicant has more substantial holdings in Qatar which also raise the prospect of foreign influence.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

Qatar

Denied

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	The deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant and material facts from any personnel security questionnaire, personal history statement, or similar form used to conduct investigations, . . . [or] determine security clearance eligibility or trustworthiness. . .;	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	Deliberately providing false or misleading information concerning relevant and material matters to an investigator, . . . in connection with a personnel security or trustworthiness determination;	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Denied	—	—	—
2.c–2.j	8 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.a

The deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant and material facts from any personnel security questionnaire, personal history statement, or similar form used to conduct investigations, . . . [or] determine security clearance eligibility or trustworthiness. . .;

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

2.b

Deliberately providing false or misleading information concerning relevant and material matters to an investigator, . . . in connection with a personnel security or trustworthiness determination;

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Denied

—

2.c–2.j

8 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
4.a	over 180 days delinquent on three accounts totaling over $5,000.00 $5,000	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
4.b	90 days delinquent on a nearly $10,000.00 automobile loan $10,000	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
4.c	over 90 days delinquent on his state and federal income taxes for 1994	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
4.d	seven delinquent accounts totaling over $46,000.00 $46,000	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
4.e	two small delinquent accounts which he has paid	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

4.a

over 180 days delinquent on three accounts totaling over $5,000.00

$5,000

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

4.b

90 days delinquent on a nearly $10,000.00 automobile loan

$10,000

Against Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Admitted

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

4.c

over 90 days delinquent on his state and federal income taxes for 1994

For Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Admitted

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

4.d

seven delinquent accounts totaling over $46,000.00

$46,000

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

4.e

two small delinquent accounts which he has paid

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant's deliberate falsification of his QNSP and providing false information during his subject interviews to an agency of the federal government on matters within that agency's jurisdiction clearly violate 18 U.S.C. §1001.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	—	—	—
3.b	Applicant's trespassing and stalking offenses in 1993--while clearly less significant than the falsification--nevertheless cast doubt on Applicant's fitness for access to classified information.	Against Applicant	Assault or Battery	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

3.a

Applicant's deliberate falsification of his QNSP and providing false information during his subject interviews to an agency of the federal government on matters within that agency's jurisdiction clearly violate 18 U.S.C. §1001.

Against Applicant

Fraud or Deception Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

—

3.b

Applicant's trespassing and stalking offenses in 1993--while clearly less significant than the falsification--nevertheless cast doubt on Applicant's fitness for access to classified information.

Against Applicant

Assault or Battery

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

—

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