ISCR Case 03-13796.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-13796.h1

deniedFeb 23, 2006· Hon. Kathryn Moen Braeman· hearing

Summary

A 57-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), and J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant had a history of financial instability, including a Chapter 13 bankruptcy filed in April 2001 to address debts, including $20,000 from gambling. While he completed the bankruptcy plan in November 2004 and satisfied two judgments from 2003 by September 2005, his ongoing gambling issues and failure to seek counseling raised doubts about his reliability.

Additionally, the applicant failed to disclose a 2000 arrest for promoting gambling in a lottery pool on his security form, claiming he forgot it because the case was dismissed. This omission was deemed an intentional falsification. While he also initially omitted multiple alcohol-related arrests from 1982 to 1987, the adjudicator found no intent to falsify, as he listed his most recent arrest and had no subsequent incidents after stopping drinking in 1987. He also had a common assault arrest in March 1970.

Ultimately, the clearance was denied because the applicant failed to mitigate concerns regarding his continued gambling, did not seek promised counseling for these issues, and intentionally omitted the gambling-related arrest from his application.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to mitigate security concerns related to ongoing gambling despite a prior bankruptcy.
He did not seek counseling for his gambling issues as promised to his wife.
The applicant omitted a gambling-related arrest from his security clearance application.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A6.1.2.1raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
E2.A6.1.2.3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy All Debts
E2.A6.1.2.5raisedFinancial Problems Linked to Gambling
E2.A5.1.2.2raisedDeliberate Omission or Falsification of Relevant Facts
E2.A10.1.2.1raisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

E2.A6.1.3.4rejectedReceived or Is Receiving Counseling for the ProblemThe applicant did not seek counseling for gambling.
E2.A6.1.3.6appliedInitiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors
E2.A10.1.3.1appliedCriminal Behavior Was Not Recent

Key Rule Quoted

“The responsibility for producing evidence initially falls on the Government to demonstrate that it is not clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue Applicant's access to classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 18, 2004
Answer filedJan 13, 2005undated, notarized
Hearing heldAug 17, 2005in a city near where Applicant lives and works
Decision dateFeb 23, 2006

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Ongoing Gambling Issues Under Guideline F
Disclosure Obligations Under Guideline E
Impact of Criminal Conduct on 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.a–2.d	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (3 against, 1 for the applicant).	Mixed		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a–2.d

4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (3 against, 1 for the applicant).

Mixed

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in April 2001 to clear up the debts that arose from purchases for household goods and clothing as well as from his gambling. Applicant had $20,000 in gambling debts but he has paid off all of his debts and was discharged after he completed the Chapter 13 Plan in November 2004.	For Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant was indebted to Creditor #1 for $2,563 for a judgment entered in September 2003; that judgment was satisfied in February 2005. $2,563	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant was indebted to Creditor #2 for $1,516 for a judgment entered in March 2003; that judgment was satisfied in September 2005. $1,516	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d–1.f	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

Applicant filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in April 2001 to clear up the debts that arose from purchases for household goods and clothing as well as from his gambling. Applicant had $20,000 in gambling debts but he has paid off all of his debts and was discharged after he completed the Chapter 13 Plan in November 2004.

For Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Admitted

—

1.b

Applicant was indebted to Creditor #1 for $2,563 for a judgment entered in September 2003; that judgment was satisfied in February 2005.

$2,563

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.c

Applicant was indebted to Creditor #2 for $1,516 for a judgment entered in March 2003; that judgment was satisfied in September 2005.

$1,516

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

1.d–1.f

3 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
3.a	On his SF 86 Applicant failed to disclose adverse information regarding multiple DUI arrests in response to Question 24. Your Police Record - Alcohol/Drug Offenses. (Exhibit 1; TR 40) In his Answer Applicant admitted eight alcohol-related arrests from 1982 to 1987, but denied he intended to falsify by these omissions on his security form. (SOR 2.a, 2.b.) He denied all of the criminal conduct. (SOR 3.a, 3.b.) He credibly explained that he could not remember all of the times he had alcohol-related arrests, so he listed the last arrest in 1987. Subsequently, he has not had any alcohol-related arrests as he stopped drinking in 1987. (Answer; Exhibit 1; TR 40, 46, 48, 82-84) Weighing all of the evidence, I conclude Applicant had no intent to falsify his DWI criminal record on his security form as he listed the most recent arrest in response to Question 24 and has had no subsequent incidents.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	On the other hand, Applicant failed to disclose adverse information with regard to Question 26, other offenses, regarding his arrest in 2000 for promoting gambling in a lottery pool. While he denied the arrest he admitted that the police came to his job, took him to the police station, questioned him, and booked him. He did not tell his wife about the arrest. Because the case was dismissed, he explained that he never viewed it as an arrest and had forgotten it. (SOR 3.a.) (TR 43-45, 55-59, 68-76, 84-85, 92-93; Exhibit 6) His forgetting such a recent arrest is not credible even though it was dismissed. Weighing all of the evidence, I conclude Applicant had an intent to falsify his criminal record on his security form by omitting this arrest.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.c	Also, Applicant was arrested in March 1970 and charged with common assault. (SOR 3.b.)	Against Applicant	Assault or Battery	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

3.a

On his SF 86 Applicant failed to disclose adverse information regarding multiple DUI arrests in response to Question 24. Your Police Record - Alcohol/Drug Offenses. (Exhibit 1; TR 40) In his Answer Applicant admitted eight alcohol-related arrests from 1982 to 1987, but denied he intended to falsify by these omissions on his security form. (SOR 2.a, 2.b.) He denied all of the criminal conduct. (SOR 3.a, 3.b.) He credibly explained that he could not remember all of the times he had alcohol-related arrests, so he listed the last arrest in 1987. Subsequently, he has not had any alcohol-related arrests as he stopped drinking in 1987. (Answer; Exhibit 1; TR 40, 46, 48, 82-84) Weighing all of the evidence, I conclude Applicant had no intent to falsify his DWI criminal record on his security form as he listed the most recent arrest in response to Question 24 and has had no subsequent incidents.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

3.b

On the other hand, Applicant failed to disclose adverse information with regard to Question 26, other offenses, regarding his arrest in 2000 for promoting gambling in a lottery pool. While he denied the arrest he admitted that the police came to his job, took him to the police station, questioned him, and booked him. He did not tell his wife about the arrest. Because the case was dismissed, he explained that he never viewed it as an arrest and had forgotten it. (SOR 3.a.) (TR 43-45, 55-59, 68-76, 84-85, 92-93; Exhibit 6) His forgetting such a recent arrest is not credible even though it was dismissed. Weighing all of the evidence, I conclude Applicant had an intent to falsify his criminal record on his security form by omitting this arrest.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Denied

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

—

3.c

Also, Applicant was arrested in March 1970 and charged with common assault. (SOR 3.b.)

Against Applicant

Assault or Battery

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

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

SYNOPSIS

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES