Summary
The applicant, a 41-year-old single mother, faced security clearance denial under Guideline F due to unresolved financial issues, including numerous delinquent accounts and student loans in default. Despite some debts being settled, the applicant failed to demonstrate a consistent effort to resolve her financial problems or seek financial counseling. The administrative judge concluded that the applicant did not mitigate the security concerns, leading to the denial of her eligibility for access to classified information.
Under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: The collection account in SOR ¶ 1.a ($617) on her August 2019 security clearance application (SCA) and indicated it was a collection account, caused by a decrease in her income. She indicated it was resolved in August 2019 because she was on a repayment plan. She testified the account was paid after the creditor contacted her and agreed to settle the debt for $112. She provided documents to suppor (1.a). The collection account in SOR ¶ 1.b ($462) was for cable and Internet service. Applicant testified that she returned the equipment and owed a balance of $228. She arranged a settlement agreement with the creditor to pay $20 a month, but only made one payment last year, and did not follow through with the agreement. The debt is unresolved (1.b). The collection account in SOR ¶ 1.c ($18,157) is for a car loan for a vehicle purchased in 2018. Applicant testified that she got behind a few times in her monthly payments, but she is still paying on the account and has possession of the car. The monthly payment is $466. Her January 2022 credit report reflects that the account is past due $9,710, and the current balance is $15,618, which reflects (1.c). The charged-off account in SOR ¶ 1.d ($12,834) is a vehicle repossession from 2015. Applicant testified that she received an IRS Cancelation of Debt Form 1099C. She provided a copy of the 2019 form reflecting the amount alleged as discharged. She testified that she filed the form with her income tax returns. This debt was not resolved (1.d). The charged-off debt in SOR ¶ 1.e ($269) was for a personal loan Applicant obtained in 2012 or 2013 to improve her credit score. She testified that she made sporadic payments, and a year ago she contacted the creditor wanting to pay the debt. She testified her last payment was sometime last year. She does not have a monthly payment arrangement, but rather will make payments when she can until it i (1.e). The charged-off debt in SOR ¶ 1.f ($554) is a store charge card. Applicant testified that she made payment arrangements to settle the account for $332. She agreed to make six payments of $55, but only made one payment last year and no other payments since. The debt is unresolved (1.f). Applicant testified that the delinquent medical debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.g ($364) was for medical equipment that was returned. She provided a document from the creditor showing her account has a zero balance. The debt is resolved (1.g). The charged-off debt in SOR ¶ 1.h ($711) is for a credit card. In Applicant’s SOR answer she said payment arrangements had been made. She testified at her hearing that she did not have payment arrangements with the creditor. The debt is unresolved (1.h). The collection account in SOR ¶ 1.i ($716) is for a credit card. In Applicant’s SOR answer, she said she was going to validate the debt with the creditor and if it was confirmed then she would make payment arrangements. She testified that she contacted the creditor, but did not make payment arrangements. The debt is unresolved (1.i). The SOR alleges delinquent student loans in ¶¶ 1.j ($1,251), 1.k ($3,945) and 1.l ($20,454). Applicant did not disclose these debts on her 2019 SCA. She stated in her SOR answer that she “was able to get account out of default. Was set up for a repayment program which included paperwork and documents and place[d] on a payment plan.” Her loans are in deferment due to the CARES Act, which provided a (1.j). The SOR alleges delinquent student loans in ¶¶ 1.j ($1,251), 1.k ($3,945) and 1.l ($20,454). Applicant did not disclose these debts on her 2019 SCA. She stated in her SOR answer that she “was able to get account out of default. Was set up for a repayment program which included paperwork and documents and place[d] on a payment plan.” Her loans are in deferment due to the CARES Act, which provided a (1.k). The SOR alleges delinquent student loans in ¶¶ 1.j ($1,251), 1.k ($3,945) and 1.l ($20,454). Applicant did not disclose these debts on her 2019 SCA. She stated in her SOR answer that she “was able to get account out of default. Was set up for a repayment program which included paperwork and documents and place[d] on a payment plan.” Her loans are in deferment due to the CARES Act, which provided a (1.l).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(c). The decision turned on the following: Numerous delinquent debts remained unresolved, including student loans in default; The applicant failed to follow through on repayment plans and did not seek financial counseling; The applicant's financial issues were recent and demonstrated a lack of good-faith efforts to resolve debts.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- Numerous delinquent debts remained unresolved, including student loans in default.
- The applicant failed to follow through on repayment plans and did not seek financial counseling.
- The applicant's financial issues were recent and demonstrated a lack of good-faith efforts to resolve debts.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
- AG ¶ 19(c)raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
Key Rule Quoted
“The security concern relating to the guideline for financial considerations is set out in AG & 18: Failure to live within one’s means, satisfy debts, and meet financial obligations may indicate poor self-control, lack of judgment, or unwillingness to abide by rules and regulations, all of which can raise questions about an individual’s reliability, trustworthiness, and ability to protect classified or sensitive information.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedOct 27, 2020
- Answer filed—undated answer to the SOR
- Hearing heldFeb 1, 2022via Microsoft Teams
- Decision dateMar 22, 2022
Cite For
- Failure to Mitigate Financial Issues Under Guideline F
- Lack of Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Debts
- Impact of Unresolved Debts on Security Clearance Eligibility