Summary
The applicant, a 42-year-old employee of a defense contractor, faced security clearance denial under Guideline F due to unresolved financial issues totaling approximately $44,681. Despite admitting to some debts, he failed to demonstrate a good-faith effort to address them, leading to concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: SOR ¶ 1.a ($103) is an insurance bill placed for collection (1.a). SOR ¶ 1.b ($7,838) an account placed for collection by a lender (1.b). SOR ¶ 1.c ($575) an account placed for collection by a phone or internet provider (1.c). SOR ¶ 1.d ($952) an account placed for collection by a bank (1.d). SOR ¶ 1.e ($4,831) is an account charged off by a financial institution (1.e). SOR ¶ 1.f ($106), a charged-off debt to a financial institution, had been paid after it went to collection (1.f). SOR ¶ 1.g ($11,941) is the balance owed on a repossessed auto (1.g). SOR ¶ 1.h ($1,569) is a gas credit card account that has been charged off (1.h). SOR ¶ 1.i ($2,985) is a department-store credit card account that has been charged off (1.i). SOR ¶ 1.j ($8,193) is an account charged off by a bank (1.j). SOR ¶ 1.k ($5,561) is an account charged off by a credit union (1.k).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(c). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(a), AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(c), AG ¶ 20(d), AG ¶ 20(e). The decision turned on the following: The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to mitigate financial concerns stemming from delinquent debts; He failed to demonstrate a good-faith effort to resolve his debts, raising doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to mitigate financial concerns stemming from delinquent debts.
- He failed to demonstrate a good-faith effort to resolve his debts, raising doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
- AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- AG ¶ 20(a)rejectedBehavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's debts are ongoing and unresolved.
- AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s ControlThe applicant did not establish that his actions to resolve debts were reasonable.
- AG ¶ 20(c)rejectedReceived or Is Receiving Financial CounselingThe applicant did not show participation in credit counseling.
- AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedInitiated and Is Adhering to a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant did not establish a track record of payments.
- AG ¶ 20(e)rejectedReasonable Basis to Dispute the Legitimacy of the Past-due DebtThe applicant did not provide evidence to support his assertions.
Key Rule Quoted
“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 issuedSep 13, 2022
- Answer filedSep 21, 2022
- Hearing held—Decision made on the written record.
- Decision dateFeb 23, 2023
Cite For
- Insufficient Evidence to Mitigate Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
- Lack of Good-faith Effort to Resolve Debts
- Ongoing Financial Irresponsibility Raising Security Concerns