ISCR Case 04-08788.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 04-08788.h1

deniedDec 29, 2006· Hon. Kathryn Moen Braeman· hearing

Summary

A 57-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant had a history of criminal behavior, including a 1995 arrest for Assault & Battery and two shoplifting arrests in 2003. Following these incidents, she sought medical help for bipolar disorder and has had no further arrests since 2003, demonstrating rehabilitation for her criminal conduct.

However, significant financial concerns remained unresolved. The applicant admitted to multiple outstanding debts, including $542 to Creditor #1, a $523 judgment to Creditor #2, $7,441 in IRS taxes with a federal tax lien (though a HUD-1 statement showed a $5,262.99 payment for the lien), $2,576 to Creditor #4, $50 to Creditor #6, $2,805 to Creditor #7, and $500 to Creditor #5. While she resolved two debts to Creditor #5 totaling $1,463 and $1,223 by payments of $1,011 and $1,554 respectively in February 2005, several other debts remained unaddressed.

The denial was primarily based on the applicant's failure to resolve all outstanding debts and her inability to provide a sufficient plan for managing her financial obligations, despite possessing other assets. Although her criminal conduct showed signs of mitigation, the unresolved financial issues, coupled with her criminal history, led to the denial of her security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to resolve all debts to several creditors, leaving significant financial concerns unaddressed.
No evidence was provided of financial counseling or a plan to manage her debts, despite having other assets.
The applicant's history of criminal conduct raised doubts about her judgment and reliability.

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.A10.1.3.4appliedThe Person Did Not Voluntarily Commit the Act And/or the Factors Leading to the Violation Are Not Likely to Recur
E2.A10.1.3.6appliedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation

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 issuedJun 7, 2005
Answer filedSep 26, 2005Notarized response requesting administrative determination.
Hearing held—
Decision dateDec 29, 2006

Cite For

Failure to Provide a Plan for Debt Resolution Under Guideline F
Mitigation of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J Due to Rehabilitation Efforts
Insufficient Evidence of Financial Counseling or Management Plans.

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #1 for $542 for an account charged off as a bad debt and placed for collection in 2000. $542	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
2.b	Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #2 for $523 for a judgment entered against her in December 2002. $523	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
2.c	Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #3, the IRS, for $7,441 in taxes, penalties and interest as well as a Federal Tax Lien filed against her in January 2003; however she stated she had paid this debt; her HUD-1 Settlement statement shows a payment of $5,262.99 for the Federal Tax Lien. $7,441	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	—	—	—
2.d	Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #4 for $2,576 for a debt placed for collection in June 2003. $2,576	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
2.e	Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #5 for $1,223 for an account charged off as a bad debt prior to June 2004. She resolved this debt by payment of $1,554 in February 2005. $1,223	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
2.f	Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #6, for $50 for an account charged off as a bad debt prior to June 2004. $50	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
2.g	Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #5, for $1,463 for an account charged off as a bad debt prior to 2004. She resolved this debit by payment of $1,011 in February 2005. $1,463	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
2.h	Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #7 for $2,805 for an account charged off as a bad debt prior to June 2004. $2,805	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
2.i	Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #5 for $500 for a debt charged off as a bad debt prior to June 2004. $500	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
2.j	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #1 for $542 for an account charged off as a bad debt and placed for collection in 2000.

$542

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

2.b

Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #2 for $523 for a judgment entered against her in December 2002.

$523

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

2.c

Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #3, the IRS, for $7,441 in taxes, penalties and interest as well as a Federal Tax Lien filed against her in January 2003; however she stated she had paid this debt; her HUD-1 Settlement statement shows a payment of $5,262.99 for the Federal Tax Lien.

$7,441

For Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Admitted

—

2.d

Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #4 for $2,576 for a debt placed for collection in June 2003.

$2,576

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

2.e

Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #5 for $1,223 for an account charged off as a bad debt prior to June 2004. She resolved this debt by payment of $1,554 in February 2005.

$1,223

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

2.f

Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #6, for $50 for an account charged off as a bad debt prior to June 2004.

$50

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

2.g

Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #5, for $1,463 for an account charged off as a bad debt prior to 2004. She resolved this debit by payment of $1,011 in February 2005.

$1,463

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

2.h

Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #7 for $2,805 for an account charged off as a bad debt prior to June 2004.

$2,805

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

2.i

Applicant admitted a debt to Creditor #5 for $500 for a debt charged off as a bad debt prior to June 2004.

$500

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

—

2.j

specific text not stated in this decision

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant revealed in her SF 86 a 1995 arrest for Assault & Battery in State #1 where she was awarded two years probation; she reported also a pending charge for Shoplifting in January 2003 in State #2 where she was awarded probation.	For Applicant	Assault or Battery	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—
1.b	Applicant had another 2003 misdemeanor arrest for shoplifting at the same mall where she paid a large fine and was barred from that mall for two years.	For Applicant	Theft or Larceny	Convicted	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—
1.c	Subsequently, she sought medical help for her bipolar disorder and has not been arrested since 2003.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant revealed in her SF 86 a 1995 arrest for Assault & Battery in State #1 where she was awarded two years probation; she reported also a pending charge for Shoplifting in January 2003 in State #2 where she was awarded probation.

For Applicant

Assault or Battery

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

—

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

—

1.b

Applicant had another 2003 misdemeanor arrest for shoplifting at the same mall where she paid a large fine and was barred from that mall for two years.

For Applicant

Theft or Larceny

Convicted

Admitted

—

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

—

1.c

Subsequently, she sought medical help for her bipolar disorder and has not been arrested since 2003.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

—

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

—

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