Summary
The applicant, a former U.S. Army service member, faced security clearance denial under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct) and F (Financial Considerations) due to unresolved delinquent debts and a history of misconduct, including a marijuana possession charge and wrongful appropriation of a vehicle. The judge determined that the applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns stemming from her financial irresponsibility and personal conduct issues.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: charged with possession of marijuana and trespassing on posted property. Applicant performed community service and the charges were disposed of by nolle prosequi (2.a). received nonjudicial punishment and was reduced in rank due to multiple incidents of being late for duty and disobeying orders (2.b). involved in wrongful appropriation of a rental car and making a false official statement (2.c). deliberately falsified her SCA by failing to disclose the incidents in SOR 2.a and 2.c (2.d). deliberately omitted material facts during her interview with a security investigator (2.e). car loan charged off for $13,643. Applicant purchased a car but did not enter her name on the title. The car was repossessed (1.a). credit union account charged off for $2,236. Applicant negotiated an agreement to settle this account for $894.65 (1.b). credit union account charged off for $1,432. Applicant negotiated an agreement to settle this account for $573.12 (1.c). credit union account charged off for $1,389. Applicant negotiated an agreement to settle this account for $555.68 (1.d). educational loan placed for collection of $613. This debt was incurred when Applicant dropped out of a class (1.e). collection account for $2,176. Applicant has not contacted this creditor or made any payments on this debt (1.f). jewelry store account charged off for $3,742. Applicant has not contacted this creditor or made any payments on this debt (1.g). furniture store account charged off for $3,742. Applicant has not contacted this creditor or made any payments on this debt (1.h). credit-card charged off for $1,407. The creditor cancelled this debt in December 2017 and issued an IRS Form 1099-C documenting the transaction (1.i). telecommunications account placed for collection of $900. Applicant testified that she had resolved this debt but did not submit documentation (1.j).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(c), AG ¶ 16(a), AG ¶ 16(b), AG ¶ 16(c). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(c), AG ¶ 17(c). The decision turned on the following: The applicant had multiple unresolved delinquent debts, indicating financial irresponsibility; The applicant's history of misconduct in the military raised concerns about her reliability and trustworthiness; The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to mitigate the financial and personal conduct issues raised against her.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant had multiple unresolved delinquent debts, indicating financial irresponsibility.
- The applicant's history of misconduct in the military raised concerns about her reliability and trustworthiness.
- The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to mitigate the financial and personal conduct issues raised against her.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 19(a)appliedInability to Satisfy Debts
- AG ¶ 19(c)appliedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- AG ¶ 16(a)appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
- AG ¶ 16(b)appliedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information
- AG ¶ 16(c)appliedCredible Adverse Information in Several Adjudicative Issue Areas
- AG ¶ 20(b)appliedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person's ControlSome debts were due to circumstances beyond her control, such as marital separation.
- AG ¶ 20(c)appliedReceived Financial CounselingThe applicant received financial counseling but did not demonstrate clear resolution of her financial issues.
- AG ¶ 17(c)appliedOffense Is so Minor or Infrequent That It Is Unlikely to RecurThe marijuana possession charge was mitigated by the passage of time without recurrence.
Key Rule Quoted
“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 3, 2022
- Answer filedMay 4, 2022
- Hearing heldMay 8, 2023conducted by video teleconference
- Decision dateJun 28, 2023
Cite For
- Financial Irresponsibility and Its Impact on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Personal Conduct Issues Related to Military History and Their Implications
- The Importance of Providing Complete and Truthful Information During Security Clearance Processes