ISCR Case 03-14536.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-14536.h1

deniedJul 28, 2004· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 44-year-old applicant was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The denial stemmed from a long history of financial irresponsibility, which the applicant attributed to periods of unemployment and underemployment. This included two civil judgments: one for $956.00 for overpaid food stamps and another for $3,023.00 for past due homeowner dues. Additionally, a $5,150.00 tax lien was filed against him for back taxes from 2001.

The applicant failed to make payments or arrangements for these debts, even after the security clearance review process began. He also filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy twice, with both cases dismissed due to non-compliance with payment plans. Furthermore, in a January 2002 Security Clearance Application (SF 86), the applicant falsely responded "no" to an inquiry about unpaid judgments, later claiming he had forgotten about them.

The judge found that the applicant's consistent lack of effort to resolve his financial obligations, coupled with his lack of candor regarding his judgments, raised significant doubts about his security eligibility. Despite the application of a mitigating condition related to financial considerations, the extensive history of ignored obligations and unfulfilled promises ultimately led to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Applicant has a lengthy history of ignoring financial obligations dating back two decades.
He filed for bankruptcy twice, both times dismissed for failure to make payments.
Applicant made no efforts to resolve his debts even after the security clearance review process commenced.
His lack of candor and unfulfilled promises raised grave questions about his security eligibility.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

FC DC E2.A6.1.2.1raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
FC DC E2.A6.1.2.3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts

Mitigating

FC MC E2.A6.1.3.3appliedConditions Largely Beyond the Person's ControlApplicant's periods of unemployment and underemployment were cited as contributing factors.

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 31, 2003
Answer filedFeb 2, 2004Applicant requested a hearing.
Hearing heldMay 28, 2004
Decision dateJul 28, 2004

Cite For

Denial Based on Long-standing Financial Irresponsibility
Impact of Lack of Candor on Security Clearance Eligibility
Consideration of Personal Conduct in Financial Matters

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	In January 2002, Applicant completed a Security Clearance Application (SF 86), and in response to a finance-related inquiry: ("In the last 7 years, have you had any judgments against you that have not been paid?"), responded "no." He certified his response was true, complete, and accurate. It was obviously false. Applicant denied intending to falsify his response and explained he had simply forgotten about his two civil judgments.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

In January 2002, Applicant completed a Security Clearance Application (SF 86), and in response to a finance-related inquiry: ("In the last 7 years, have you had any judgments against you that have not been paid?"), responded "no." He certified his response was true, complete, and accurate. It was obviously false. Applicant denied intending to falsify his response and explained he had simply forgotten about his two civil judgments.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has a civil judgment in the amount of $956.00 entered against him in favor of the county board of social services for overpaid food stamps. $956	Against Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.b	A tax lien in the amount of $5,150.00 was filed on behalf of the state against Applicant for back taxes from 2001. $5,150	Against Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.c	A civil judgment for past due homeowner dues, interest, and costs, in the amount of $3,023.00 was entered against him in favor of the homeowners association. $3,023	Against Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.d	Applicant has not made any payments to, nor entered into any arrangements with, the creditor identified in the civil judgment for food stamps.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.e	Applicant has not made any payments to, nor entered into any arrangements with, the creditor identified in the civil judgment for homeowner dues.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.f	Applicant filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 13 on two separate occasions, both of which were dismissed for failure to follow through with payments.	Against Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant has a civil judgment in the amount of $956.00 entered against him in favor of the county board of social services for overpaid food stamps.

$956

Against Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

1.b

A tax lien in the amount of $5,150.00 was filed on behalf of the state against Applicant for back taxes from 2001.

$5,150

Against Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

1.c

A civil judgment for past due homeowner dues, interest, and costs, in the amount of $3,023.00 was entered against him in favor of the homeowners association.

$3,023

Against Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

1.d

Applicant has not made any payments to, nor entered into any arrangements with, the creditor identified in the civil judgment for food stamps.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

1.e

Applicant has not made any payments to, nor entered into any arrangements with, the creditor identified in the civil judgment for homeowner dues.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

1.f

Applicant filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 13 on two separate occasions, both of which were dismissed for failure to follow through with payments.

Against Applicant

Bankruptcy Filing

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

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

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES

CONCLUSION