ISCR Case 05-05555.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 05-05555.h1

deniedJun 30, 2006· Hon. Barry M. Sax· hearing

Summary

A 50-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), G (Alcohol Consumption), and J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from unresolved financial issues, a history of alcohol-related offenses, and multiple falsifications on his security clearance application.

The applicant had a history of 26 past due debts, including a state tax lien from 1996, IRS tax liens for tax years 1993, 1995, and 1998, and unpaid child support. Additionally, he faced multiple alcohol-related arrests in 1995, including three charges of Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and one charge of Reckless Driving, resulting in convictions, probation, jail time, and fines.

Crucially, the applicant deliberately falsified material facts on his security clearance application and in a sworn statement to a Department of Defense investigator. He omitted mention of prior arrests and failed to report tax liens, a civil judgment, and other delinquent debts, despite acknowledging he understood the questions and their importance. The judge found insufficient evidence of mitigation for these issues, leading to the denial of the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had a history of 26 past due debts, including significant tax liens and child support arrears.
The applicant's alcohol-related arrests indicated a pattern of behavior that raised security concerns.
The applicant intentionally falsified material facts on his security clearance application, violating 18 U.S.C. 1001.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19raisedFinancial ConsiderationsA history of not meeting financial obligations.
AG ¶ 20raisedFinancial ConsiderationsInability or unwillingness to satisfy debts.
AG ¶ 21raisedAlcohol ConsumptionAlcohol-related incidents away from work.
AG ¶ 22raisedAlcohol ConsumptionHabitual or binge consumption of alcohol.
AG ¶ 15raisedPersonal ConductDeliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant and material facts.
AG ¶ 31raisedCriminal ConductAllegations or admissions of criminal conduct.

Key Rule Quoted

“"any doubt as to whether access to classified information is clearly consistent with the interests of national security will be resolved in favor of the nation's security."”
— DoD Directive 5220.6, E2.2.2.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 25, 2005
Answer filedDec 19, 2005
Hearing heldMar 21, 2006
Decision dateJun 30, 2006

Cite For

Denial Based on Unresolved Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Pattern of Alcohol-related Offenses Under Guideline G
Falsification of Application Responses Under Guideline E and 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
3.a	In a signed sworn statement, dated October 15, 2004, and presented to an authorized investigator for the Department of Defense, Applicant falsified material facts in that he stated, "I have had no other unfavorable police involvement prior to 1994 and since 1997, whereas in truth he deliberately omitted any mention of the arrests in 2.f. and 2.g.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
3.b	Applicant knew the "importance of the application" and he reviewed it before signing. He understood the question and knew that he had a tax lien he should have reported. He knows he did not report it correctly, but he doesn't know why.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
3.c	He read the question and understood it. He knew he had a judgment against him. He admits he answered the question incorrectly, but he doesn't know why.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
3.d	He read and understood the question about delinquent debts, and knew he should have answered "yes," and reported the delinquent debts cited in the SOR. He was warned by his boss that DoD "was gonna know everything anyway," so he wasn't "trying to hide anything". Nonetheless, he did answer falsely and he still can't explain why.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

In a signed sworn statement, dated October 15, 2004, and presented to an authorized investigator for the Department of Defense, Applicant falsified material facts in that he stated, "I have had no other unfavorable police involvement prior to 1994 and since 1997, whereas in truth he deliberately omitted any mention of the arrests in 2.f. and 2.g.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

—

3.b

Applicant knew the "importance of the application" and he reviewed it before signing. He understood the question and knew that he had a tax lien he should have reported. He knows he did not report it correctly, but he doesn't know why.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

3.c

He read the question and understood it. He knew he had a judgment against him. He admits he answered the question incorrectly, but he doesn't know why.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

3.d

He read and understood the question about delinquent debts, and knew he should have answered "yes," and reported the delinquent debts cited in the SOR. He was warned by his boss that DoD "was gonna know everything anyway," so he wasn't "trying to hide anything". Nonetheless, he did answer falsely and he still can't explain why.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Data Information Service A (civil judgment) $2,121	For Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	State Tax Lien, filed September 1996 $5,344	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Internal Revenue Service Tax Lien for tax years 1993, 1995, and 1998 $7,720	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	Superior Court D (fine cited in 2.f., below, referred for collection) $3,069	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.e	County E - unpaid child support, referred for collection $183,000	Against Applicant	Child Support Debt	Denied	(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.f	Creditor F $10	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—
1.g	State G - (judgment for benefit overpayment) $4,344	Against Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Denied	—	—	—
1.h	Credit Card Company H $1,614	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Data Information Service A (civil judgment)

$2,121

For Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Admitted

—

1.b

State Tax Lien, filed September 1996

$5,344

For Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Admitted

—

1.c

Internal Revenue Service Tax Lien for tax years 1993, 1995, and 1998

$7,720

For Applicant

Tax Unpaid

Admitted

—

1.d

Superior Court D (fine cited in 2.f., below, referred for collection)

$3,069

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.e

County E - unpaid child support, referred for collection

$183,000

Against Applicant

Child Support Debt

Denied

(b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.f

Creditor F

$10

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

—

1.g

State G - (judgment for benefit overpayment)

$4,344

Against Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Denied

—

1.h

Credit Card Company H

$1,614

Against Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	The applicant was arrested on March 8, 1995 and charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years' probation, 90 days in jail; and a fine of $1,675.00.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	The applicant was arrested on March 25, 1995 and charged with Reckless Driving. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years' probation, 80 days in jail, and a fine of $1,000.00.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Admitted	—	—	—
2.c	The applicant was arrested on October 18, 1995 and charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol; and Chemical Test Refusal. He pleaded guilty to Count (1), and was sentenced to five years probation, with 24 months formal probation, and 36 years summary probation, 90 days in jail, fined $1,100.00, and had his driver's license restricted for three years.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

The applicant was arrested on March 8, 1995 and charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years' probation, 90 days in jail; and a fine of $1,675.00.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

2.b

The applicant was arrested on March 25, 1995 and charged with Reckless Driving. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years' probation, 80 days in jail, and a fine of $1,000.00.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Admitted

—

2.c

The applicant was arrested on October 18, 1995 and charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol; and Chemical Test Refusal. He pleaded guilty to Count (1), and was sentenced to five years probation, with 24 months formal probation, and 36 years summary probation, 90 days in jail, fined $1,100.00, and had his driver's license restricted for three years.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
4.a	Based on my conclusion that Applicant deliberately answered falsely as to all four SOR questions, as cited under 3.a., 3.b., 3.c., and 3.d., above, I further conclude that all four falsifications violate 18 U.S.C. 1001, a felony.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

4.a

Based on my conclusion that Applicant deliberately answered falsely as to all four SOR questions, as cited under 3.a., 3.b., 3.c., and 3.d., above, I further conclude that all four falsifications violate 18 U.S.C. 1001, a felony.

Against Applicant

Fraud or Deception Criminal

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

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES