ISCR Case 02-21085.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-21085.h1

grantedMar 2, 2004· Hon. Barry M. Sax· hearing

Summary

A 39-year-old engineer employed by a major defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline F (Financial Considerations), and Guideline M (Use of Information Technology).

The applicant filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in August 2002, which was discharged in March 2003, listing assets of $8,205 and liabilities of $58,971.75. This action was taken to avoid a lawsuit from a major creditor. However, she subsequently reassumed responsibility for all discharged debts, with 13 delinquent debts paid in full and student loans consolidated and being repaid. The judge determined she was no longer financially overextended.

Additionally, allegations regarding the storage of pornographic material and jokes on her office computer, violation of company policy by "chatting" on the Internet, and verbal abuse towards a company president were not established. The judge found no evidence of intentional misconduct related to her previous employment, and her demonstrated integrity in resolving her debts led to the decision to grant the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant has resolved her financial issues and is no longer overextended.
There was no evidence of intentional misconduct related to her previous employment.
The applicant demonstrated integrity by reassuming responsibility for her discharged debts.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F1raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
F3raisedInability (but Not Unwillingness) to Satisfy Debts

Mitigating

F3appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Behavior Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control
F4appliedThe Person Has Received or Is Receiving Counseling for the Problem and There Are Clear Indications That the Problem Is Being Resolved or Is Under Control
F6appliedThe Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
M1appliedAny Misuse Was Not Recent or Significant
M2appliedThe Conduct, If Improper, Was Unintentional or Inadvertent
E1rejectedReliable, Unfavorable Information Provided by Associates, Employers, Co-workers, Neighbors, and Other Acquaintances
E1appliedThe Information Was Not Substantiated or Not Pertinent to a Determination of Judgment, Reliability, or Trustworthiness

Key Rule Quoted

“An applicant's admission of the information in specific allegations relieves the Government of having to prove those allegations.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 9, 2003
Answer filedJul 31, 2003Applicant elected for a hearing.
Hearing heldNov 17, 2003Government did not call witnesses.
Decision dateMar 2, 2004

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Lack of Substantiated Evidence for Allegations Under Guidelines M and E
The Importance of an Applicant's Credibility and Integrity in Security Clearance Determinations

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–3.c	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a–3.c

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

For Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	On August 2, 2002, Applicant filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 7 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. She listed total assets of $8,205.00 and total liabilities of $58,971.75. Applicant filed to avoid a lawsuit by one of her major creditors. A discharged was granted on March 18, 2003 (GX 4) but Applicant subsequently reassumed responsibility for all of the debts. A letter from a financial management consulting company, dated April 22, 2002, states that 13 of the delinquent debts covered by the now discharged Chapter 7 filing had been "paid off . . . in full" and that delinquent debts relating to student loans had been consolidated into one (AX B, dated June 11, 2003) and were now being paid off (AX A). Consequently, I find that Applicant is no longer financially overextended. $58,971	For Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(c) received/receiving counseling; problem being resolved (d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts (g) arrangements made with the tax authority; in compliance	Documented Debt Paid in Full Documented Debt Settlement Documented Financial Counseling

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

On August 2, 2002, Applicant filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 7 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. She listed total assets of $8,205.00 and total liabilities of $58,971.75. Applicant filed to avoid a lawsuit by one of her major creditors. A discharged was granted on March 18, 2003 (GX 4) but Applicant subsequently reassumed responsibility for all of the debts. A letter from a financial management consulting company, dated April 22, 2002, states that 13 of the delinquent debts covered by the now discharged Chapter 7 filing had been "paid off . . . in full" and that delinquent debts relating to student loans had been consolidated into one (AX B, dated June 11, 2003) and were now being paid off (AX A). Consequently, I find that Applicant is no longer financially overextended.

$58,971

For Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

(c) received/receiving counseling; problem being resolved

(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts

(g) arrangements made with the tax authority; in compliance

Documented

Debt Paid in Full

Documented

Debt Settlement

Documented

Financial Counseling

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶40)	Mitigating applied (¶41)	Mitigation
2.a	It has not been established that Applicant stored pornographic pictures and jokes on her office computer or that she knowingly violated Company A's Sexual Harassment Policy.	For Applicant	Pornography or Inappropriate Content on System	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	It has not been established that Applicant violated Company A's policy against using company property for personal use by "chatting" on the Internet.	For Applicant	Unauthorized Use of System	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	Applicant's employment with Company A was not terminated because of or when Applicant became verbally abusive to the President of Company A after receiving a policy memorandum regarding a violation of office procedures.	For Applicant	Unspecified IT Misuse	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶40)

Mitigating applied (¶41)

Mitigation

2.a

It has not been established that Applicant stored pornographic pictures and jokes on her office computer or that she knowingly violated Company A's Sexual Harassment Policy.

For Applicant

Pornography or Inappropriate Content on System

Denied

—

2.b

It has not been established that Applicant violated Company A's policy against using company property for personal use by "chatting" on the Internet.

For Applicant

Unauthorized Use of System

Denied

—

2.c

Applicant's employment with Company A was not terminated because of or when Applicant became verbally abusive to the President of Company A after receiving a policy memorandum regarding a violation of office procedures.

For Applicant

Unspecified IT Misuse

Denied

—

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