ISCR Case 02-18737.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-18737.h1

deniedSep 30, 2005· Hon. Robert J. Tuider· hearing

Summary

A 57-year-old married man was denied a security clearance due to unresolved issues under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), and J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant had a history of criminal charges, including a conviction for non-support and two counts of contempt, resulting in a three-year suspended jail sentence. He also faced significant financial challenges, with 15 debts totaling over $76,000, including a judgment debt of $1,768.48, a civil suit for rent arrearage of $21,204.63, and a lien for state unemployment compensation of $5,466.99. Other financial issues included civil suits from his mother, for back rent and attorney's fees, and from an appliance company.

Additionally, the applicant deliberately falsified his security application submitted on April 21, 2003, by failing to disclose an unpaid judgment and two civil suits. While some criminal and personal conduct concerns were mitigated, the applicant failed to provide evidence of payment or resolution for his substantial financial obligations.

Crucially, he did not submit evidence of compliance with a proposed Chapter 13 bankruptcy filing. The unresolved financial issues were the primary reason for the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant successfully mitigated criminal conduct concerns due to the age of the conviction and evidence of rehabilitation.
The applicant's personal conduct concerns were mitigated as the judge found no intent to falsify his security clearance application.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A6.1.2.1raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
E2.A6.1.2.3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts

Mitigating

E2.A10.1.3.1appliedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not Recent
E2.A10.1.3.4appliedThe Factors Leading to the Violations Are Not Likely to Recur
E2.A10.1.3.6appliedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation
E2.A6.1.3.1rejectedThe Individual Has Received or Is Receiving Counseling for the ProblemNo evidence of financial counseling was presented.

Key Rule Quoted

“"Any doubt as to whether access to classified information is clearly consistent with national security will be resolved in favor of the national security."”
— Directive ¶ E2.2.2

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 18, 2003
Answer filedSep 10, 2003
Hearing heldJun 30, 2004
Decision dateSep 30, 2005

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unresolved Financial Obligations Under Guideline F
Mitigation of Criminal Conduct Concerns Based on Rehabilitation Efforts
Consideration of Personal Conduct in the Context of Intent and Good Faith Efforts in Security Clearance Applications

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
3.a	Applicant deliberately falsified his responses on his security application submitted April 21, 2003, pertaining to past judgments and civil court actions.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	Applicant failed to list an unpaid judgment that should have been included when responding to question 37.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—
3.c	Applicant failed to list two civil suits that should have been included when responding to question 40.	For Applicant	Falsification Security Form	Other	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

Applicant deliberately falsified his responses on his security application submitted April 21, 2003, pertaining to past judgments and civil court actions.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

3.b

Applicant failed to list an unpaid judgment that should have been included when responding to question 37.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

3.c

Applicant failed to list two civil suits that should have been included when responding to question 40.

For Applicant

Falsification Security Form

Other

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant was in arrears on 15 debts totaling $76,419.68. $76,419	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
2.b	Applicant has a judgment debt in the amount of $1,768.48. $1,768	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
2.c	Applicant has a civil suit for rent arrearage in the amount of $21,204.63. $21,204	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
2.d	Applicant has a civil suit for a lien filed for state unemployment compensation in the amount of $5,466.99. $5,466	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
2.e	Applicant has a civil suit filed by his mother for breach of contract.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
2.f	Applicant has a civil suit filed for back rent and attorney's fees.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
2.g	Applicant has a civil suit filed against him by an appliance company.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
2.h–2.o	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

2.a

Applicant was in arrears on 15 debts totaling $76,419.68.

$76,419

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

2.b

Applicant has a judgment debt in the amount of $1,768.48.

$1,768

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

2.c

Applicant has a civil suit for rent arrearage in the amount of $21,204.63.

$21,204

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

2.d

Applicant has a civil suit for a lien filed for state unemployment compensation in the amount of $5,466.99.

$5,466

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

2.e

Applicant has a civil suit filed by his mother for breach of contract.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

2.f

Applicant has a civil suit filed for back rent and attorney's fees.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

2.g

Applicant has a civil suit filed against him by an appliance company.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

2.h–2.o

8 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	Criminally charged with one count of non-support and two counts of contempt for which he was convicted pursuant to his guilty plea and sentenced to three years in jail, which was suspended for three years.	For Applicant	Probation or Court Order Violation	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.) (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	Credited Rehabilitation Evidence
1.b	The applicant was sentenced to three years in jail, which was suspended for three years.	For Applicant	Probation or Court Order Violation	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.) (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	Credited Rehabilitation Evidence

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

Criminally charged with one count of non-support and two counts of contempt for which he was convicted pursuant to his guilty plea and sentenced to three years in jail, which was suspended for three years.

For Applicant

Probation or Court Order Violation

Convicted

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

Credited

Rehabilitation Evidence

1.b

The applicant was sentenced to three years in jail, which was suspended for three years.

For Applicant

Probation or Court Order Violation

Convicted

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

Credited

Rehabilitation Evidence

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES