Loading case…

Summary

The applicant, a 41-year-old cybersecurity analyst and U.S. Army veteran, faced security clearance denial under Guideline F due to unresolved financial issues, including multiple delinquent accounts and tax obligations. Despite claims of seeking assistance for his financial problems, the applicant failed to provide sufficient documentation to support his assertions or demonstrate effective financial management, leading to the conclusion that he did not mitigate the security concerns.

Under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: This is an automobile loan with a past-due and unpaid balance of $8,103 that was charged off. Applicant claimed his ex-wife was ordered to pay the balance, but she failed to do so. Applicant disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. Nevertheless, in his response to the SOR, Applicant stated he would make monthly payments of $10 or more to resolve the account. Despite his claim regarding legal responsibility for the account, and his promise to make payments, Applicant submitted no documents, such as the court order, cancelled checks, receipts, etc., to support his claims. The account has not been resolved (1.a). This is a personal bank loan with a balance of $7,925 that was charged off in April 2006. Applicant claimed that he had reached out to the collection agent to establish repayment options, but they were not acceptable to the collection agent. He was advised to contact the creditor. Applicant disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. Applicant submitted no documents to support any resolution efforts or to reflect any payments by him. The account has not been resolved (1.b). This is an installment sales contract with a balance of $1,696 that was charged off in February 2016. Applicant claimed that the account was unknown to him. He disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. The account has not been resolved (1.c). This is a bank-issued credit card with a balance of $954 that was charged off. Applicant contended that he paid the account in full, but he failed to submit any documents, such as canceled checks, bank registers, or receipts, to support his contention. He also disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. In the absence of documentation reflecting otherwise, I must conclude that the account has not been resolved (1.d). This is a bank-issued credit card with a balance of $73 that was charged off. Applicant contended that he paid the account in full, but he failed to submit any documents, such as canceled checks, bank registers, or receipts, to support his contention. He also disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. In the absence of documentation reflecting otherwise, I must conclude that the account has not been resolved (1.e). This is a credit union account reported by the credit reporting agency as an automobile loan, but claimed by Applicant to be a credit card, with a balance of $11,987 that was charged off in May 2010. Applicant claimed his ex-wife was ordered to pay one-half of the balance, but she failed to do so. He stated that he contacted the creditor to work out a resolution. He also disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. Despite his claim regarding legal responsibility for the account, and his professed efforts to resolve the account, Applicant submitted no documents, such as the court order, cancelled checks, receipts, etc., to support his claims. The account has not been resolved (1.f). This is a credit union-issued credit card claimed by Applicant to be the same credit card as the account in SOR ¶ 1.f., with a balance of $10,922 that was charged off in August 2010. Applicant claimed the account was listed in his credit report by error. He disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. Despite his claim regarding legal responsibility for the account, or that the account was a duplicate of the other credit union account, Applicant submitted no documents to support his claims. The account has not been resolved (1.g). This is a credit union automobile loan with a balance of $4,990 that was charged off in December 2010. Applicant contended that he had an automobile accident in 2011, and that he had Guaranteed Auto Protection (GAP) insurance, but that the lender disputed the coverage. He disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. Nevertheless, in his response to the SOR, Applicant stated he was seeking to enter into negotiations with the creditor to arrive at a settlement. Applicant submitted no documents, such as his loan papers with references to GAP coverage, letters, a repayment agreement, cancelled checks, receipts, etc., to support his claims. In the absence of documentation reflecting otherwise, I must conclude that the account has not been resolved (1.h). This is an unspecified type of credit union account with a past-due and unpaid balance of $2,619. Applicant claimed that the account was unknown to him. He disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. The account has not been resolved (1.i). This is a charge account with a balance of $2,774 that was charged off in May 2010. Applicant claimed he used the card for an unexpected expense in 2011. He also contended that he entered into an installment agreement on an unspecified date, and that he was making payments of $133.79, without mentioning the frequency of such payments. Applicant submitted no documents, such as an installment agreement, letters, cancelled checks, receipts, etc., to support his claims. In the absence of documentation reflecting otherwise, I must conclude that the account has not been resolved (1.j). This is a home mortgage loan – obtained in 2005 – with a balance of $193,349, of which $107,573 was past due. Applicant claimed he has been in various discussions with the lender for several years in an effort to obtain either a loan modification or a repayment plan, and that the lender has refused to accept any payments until such time as either a loan modification or a repayment plan is accepted. The lender addressed Applicant’s concerns for relief under the Civil Relief Act (SCRA) in March 2012; September 2013; October 2015; November 2015; December 2015; and January 2016, but he was repeatedly informed that his mortgage loan was not eligible for service member interest rate and fee benefits under SCRA because his loan originated while he was on active duty. Unhappy with the results of his efforts, Applicant filed a complaint with the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in early 2018. Applicant also indicated that he had listed the residence – in which he still resides – for rent. Other than the one 2018 letter from the lender, Applicant submitted no other documents, such as loan modification applications, SCRA applications, letters, or escrow deposits, etc., to support his loan modification efforts, his relationship with a realtor, or his plans to repay the past-due amount. The account has not been resolved (1.k). This is a cellular telephone account with an unpaid balance of $460. Applicant claimed his ex-wife was ordered to pay the balance, but she failed to do so. Applicant disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. Nevertheless, in his response to the SOR, Applicant stated he would be willing to negotiate payment options to resolve the account. Despite his claim regarding legal responsibility for the account, and his promise to make payments, Applicant submitted no documents, such as the court order, cancelled checks, receipts, etc., to support his claims. The account has not been resolved (1.l). This is a medical account with an unpaid balance of $155. Applicant claimed that the account was unknown to him, and indicated that it may be related to one of the other listed accounts, but he did not explain why or to which account. He disputed the account with the credit-reporting agency seeking to have the account deleted from his credit report. The account has not been resolved (1.m). These are federal income taxes owed to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the amounts of $1,135 (for the tax year 2014) and $1,815 (for the tax year 2015). With respect to the 2014 income taxes, Applicant established an installment agreement in March 2016, but that agreement terminated in January 2017. It was reestablished in February 2017, only after a notice of intent to levy was issued. The agreement lapsed in December 2017. During 2015-17, Applicant was credited with some minor payments, as well as the attachment of a refund from his 2016 income taxes. A levy was issued on January 8, 2018. As of January 22, 2018, Applicant had an unpaid balance of $1,135.57. Applicant stated that the balance would be resolved when he receives his refund for the 2017 federal income tax return. On April 15, 2018, $1,168.39 from that refund was transferred to his 2014 balance. The account has been resolved. With respect to the 2015 income taxes, Applicant established an installment agreement in May 2016, but that agreement terminated in January 2017. It was reestablished in February 2017, only after a notice of intent to levy was issued. The agreement lapsed in December 2017. During 2016-17, Applicant was credited with some minor payments. A levy was issued on January 8, 2018. As of January 15, 2018, Applicant had an unpaid balance of $1,815.93. Applicant stated that the balance would be resolved when he receives his refund for the 2017 federal income tax return. On April 15, 2018, $1,879.50 from that refund was transferred to his 2015 balance. The account has been resolved (1.n). These are federal income taxes owed to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the amounts of $1,135 (for the tax year 2014) and $1,815 (for the tax year 2015). With respect to the 2014 income taxes, Applicant established an installment agreement in March 2016, but that agreement terminated in January 2017. It was reestablished in February 2017, only after a notice of intent to levy was issued. The agreement lapsed in December 2017. During 2015-17, Applicant was credited with some minor payments, as well as the attachment of a refund from his 2016 income taxes. A levy was issued on January 8, 2018. As of January 22, 2018, Applicant had an unpaid balance of $1,135.57. Applicant stated that the balance would be resolved when he receives his refund for the 2017 federal income tax return. On April 15, 2018, $1,168.39 from that refund was transferred to his 2014 balance. The account has been resolved. With respect to the 2015 income taxes, Applicant established an installment agreement in May 2016, but that agreement terminated in January 2017. It was reestablished in February 2017, only after a notice of intent to levy was issued. The agreement lapsed in December 2017. During 2016-17, Applicant was credited with some minor payments. A levy was issued on January 8, 2018. As of January 15, 2018, Applicant had an unpaid balance of $1,815.93. Applicant stated that the balance would be resolved when he receives his refund for the 2017 federal income tax return. On April 15, 2018, $1,879.50 from that refund was transferred to his 2015 balance. The account has been resolved (1.o).

The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions F1, F2, F3. The judge applied mitigating conditions F2, F3. The decision turned on the following: The applicant failed to provide documentation supporting his claims of financial assistance and resolution efforts; The applicant had multiple unresolved delinquent accounts totaling approximately $163,181; The applicant's financial situation was not under control, as evidenced by his failure to submit a Personal Financial Statement or evidence of a budget.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

• The applicant failed to provide documentation supporting his claims of financial assistance and resolution efforts.
• The applicant had multiple unresolved delinquent accounts totaling approximately $163,181.
• The applicant's financial situation was not under control, as evidenced by his failure to submit a Personal Financial Statement or evidence of a budget.

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

“no one has a ‘right’ to a security clearance.”

Procedural Posture

• SOR issuedFeb 23, 2018
• Answer filedMar 19, 2018Applicant elected to proceed without a hearing.
• Hearing held—Written record decision.
• Decision dateOct 3, 2018

Cite For

• Failure to Mitigate Financial Issues Under Guideline F
• Insufficient Documentation to Support Claims of Financial Assistance
• Lack of Evidence Demonstrating Financial Responsibility and Control