ISCR Case 05-07149.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 05-07149.h1

deniedMar 19, 2007· Hon. LeRoy F. Foreman· hearing

Summary

A 47-year-old quality engineer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant had a history of financial difficulties, including two unpaid judgments and several other delinquent debts. These included judgments for $782 and $1,488, a $1,940 penalty for breaking a lease with an unpaid balance of $1,820, and a $14,240 credit card debt where the applicant admitted owing $5,600, which remained unpaid. Other debts included a settled $570 telephone bill, a $5,637 credit card debt that was cancelled and reported as income, an $839 car repossession, and $86 in bank fees.

The denial was primarily based on the applicant's failure to disclose these financial issues on his security clearance application (SF 86). Specifically, he answered "no" to questions regarding being more than 180 days delinquent on any debt in the last seven years and being currently more than 90 days delinquent. Furthermore, the applicant falsely denied altering a bank statement before admitting to it.

The judge found that the applicant did not mitigate the security concerns arising from his financial situation or personal conduct, particularly regarding the undisclosed debts and the falsification of information. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had two unpaid judgments and several other delinquent debts.
He did not disclose the unpaid judgments and delinquent debts on his security clearance application (SF 86).
The applicant did not refute the allegations of falsification regarding his financial disclosures.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A5.1.2.2appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
E2.A6.1.2.1raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
E2.A6.1.2.3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts

Mitigating

E2.A6.1.3.1rejectedDelinquent Debts Were Not Recent
E2.A6.1.3.2rejectedIsolated Incident
E2.A6.1.3.3rejectedConditions Largely Beyond the Person's Control
E2.A6.1.3.4rejectedReceived or Is Receiving Counseling for the Problem
E2.A6.1.3.6rejectedGood-faith Effort to Resolve Debts

Key Rule Quoted

“"[N]o one has a 'right' to a security clearance."”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 10, 2006
Answer filedMar 6, 2006Requested decision on the record.
Hearing heldFeb 6, 2007
Decision dateMar 19, 2007

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Undisclosed Financial Issues
Falsification of Information on Security Clearance Application
Impact of Financial Irresponsibility on Security Clearance Eligibility

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	Applicant did not disclose the unpaid judgments and other delinquent debts on his security clearance application (SF 86).	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.b	Applicant answered "no" to question 38, asking if he had ever been more than 180 days delinquent on any debt during the last seven years.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.c	Applicant answered "no" to question 39, asking if he was currently more than 90 days delinquent on any debt.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.d	Applicant falsely denied altering the bank statement and then admitted it.	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in Interview	—	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant did not disclose the unpaid judgments and other delinquent debts on his security clearance application (SF 86).

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Denied

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

—

2.b

Applicant answered "no" to question 38, asking if he had ever been more than 180 days delinquent on any debt during the last seven years.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Denied

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

—

2.c

Applicant answered "no" to question 39, asking if he was currently more than 90 days delinquent on any debt.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Denied

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

—

2.d

Applicant falsely denied altering the bank statement and then admitted it.

For Applicant

Lack of Candor in Interview

—

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Judgment $782 Judgment entered May 02; paying $20 per month since Dec 05. $782	Against Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Unknown	—	—	—
1.b	Judgment $1,488 Judgment entered Jan 02; paying $20 per month since Dec 05. $1,488	Against Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Unknown	—	—	—
1.c	Penalty for breaking lease $1,940 Placed for collection Nov 01; paid $20 per month Oct 05 to Aug 06; balance of $1,820 unpaid. $1,940	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
1.d	Telephone $570 Placed for collection Apr 05; paid $20 per month since Oct 05; settled Jan 06. $570	For Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
1.e	Credit card $14,240 Charged off Nov 00; amount disputed; Applicant admits owing $5,600, which is unpaid. $14,240	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
1.f	Credit card $5,637 Placed for collection June 00; paid $20 per month from Oct 05 to Aug 06; debt cancelled and reported to IRS as income. $5,637	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
1.g	Car repossession $839 Charged off March 02; included in judgments alleged in SOR ¶¶ 1.a-1.b. $839	For Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
1.h	Bank fees $86 Charged off May 02; Applicant says he paid it but has no evidence; credit reports show it unpaid. $86	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Judgment $782 Judgment entered May 02; paying $20 per month since Dec 05.

$782

Against Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Unknown

—

1.b

Judgment $1,488 Judgment entered Jan 02; paying $20 per month since Dec 05.

$1,488

Against Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Unknown

—

1.c

Penalty for breaking lease $1,940 Placed for collection Nov 01; paid $20 per month Oct 05 to Aug 06; balance of $1,820 unpaid.

$1,940

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

1.d

Telephone $570 Placed for collection Apr 05; paid $20 per month since Oct 05; settled Jan 06.

$570

For Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Unknown

—

1.e

Credit card $14,240 Charged off Nov 00; amount disputed; Applicant admits owing $5,600, which is unpaid.

$14,240

Against Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Unknown

—

1.f

Credit card $5,637 Placed for collection June 00; paid $20 per month from Oct 05 to Aug 06; debt cancelled and reported to IRS as income.

$5,637

For Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Unknown

—

1.g

Car repossession $839 Charged off March 02; included in judgments alleged in SOR ¶¶ 1.a-1.b.

$839

For Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Unknown

—

1.h

Bank fees $86 Charged off May 02; Applicant says he paid it but has no evidence; credit reports show it unpaid.

$86

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

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

WHOLE PERSON ANALYSIS

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES