Summary
Darlene D. Lokey Anderson, a 47-year-old applicant with an Associate’s degree, was denied a security clearance due to significant financial issues under Guideline F, with delinquent debts exceeding $24,297. Despite acknowledging her debts and seeking assistance, she failed to demonstrate sufficient progress in resolving them, leading the judge to conclude that her financial irresponsibility raised doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness.
Under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was charged off in the amount of $14,914 (1.a). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was charged off in the amount of $2,578 (1.b). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was charged off in the amount of $1,421 (1.c). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was placed for collection in the amount of $1,000 (1.d). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was placed for collection in the amount of $979 (1.e). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was placed for collection in the amount of $532 (1.f). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was placed for collection in the amount of $408 (1.g). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $315 (1.h). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $270 (1.i). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $232 (1.j). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $223 (1.k). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was placed for collection in the amount of $181 (1.l). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $165 (1.m). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was placed for collection in the amount of $140 (1.n). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $135 (1.o). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $110 (1.p). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $100 (1.q). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection the amount of $100 (1.r). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $100 (1.s). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $100 (1.t). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $65 (1.u). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $63 (1.v). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $56 (1.w). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $55 (1.x). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account that was placed for collection in the amount of $55 (1.y).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(b), AG ¶ 19(c). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(a), AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(d), AG ¶ 20(e). The decision turned on the following: Applicant has a long history of financial hardship and admitted to multiple delinquent debts totaling over $24,297; No mitigating conditions were applicable as the applicant failed to show progress in resolving her debts or financial responsibility.
Why the applicant was denied
- Applicant has a long history of financial hardship and admitted to multiple delinquent debts totaling over $24,297.
- No mitigating conditions were applicable as the applicant failed to show progress in resolving her debts or financial responsibility.
Conditions referenced
- AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- AG ¶ 19(b)raisedUnwillingness to Satisfy Debts Regardless of the Ability to Do So
- AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- AG ¶ 20(a)rejectedBehavior Happened so Long Ago, Was Infrequent, or Occurred Under Circumstances Unlikely to RecurApplicant's financial issues are recent and ongoing.
- AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions That Resulted in Financial Problems Were Largely Beyond the Person's ControlApplicant's debts were incurred after her divorce and are her responsibility.
- AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedIndividual Initiated and Is Adhering to a Good Faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsApplicant has not demonstrated any significant efforts to resolve her debts.
- AG ¶ 20(e)rejectedIndividual Has a Reasonable Basis to Dispute the Legitimacy of the Past-due DebtNo evidence was provided to dispute the debts listed.
Key rule quoted
“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedMay 10, 2021
- Answer filed—Date uncertain
- Hearing heldApr 5, 2022
- Decision dateApr 27, 2022
Cite for
- Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unresolved Financial Issues Under Guideline F
- Insufficient Evidence of Financial Responsibility
- Impact of Financial Irresponsibility on Reliability and Trustworthiness