Summary
The applicant, a 33-year-old single mother with three children, faced security concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to approximately $3,650 in delinquent debt and a failure to disclose a past drug-related arrest on her security clearance application. Despite these issues, the applicant demonstrated significant remorse, settled most of her debts, and had not incurred new delinquencies, leading to the granting of her security clearance.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Deliberately falsified her October 29, 2003, security clearance application (SF 86) by responding negatively to questions about any unpaid judgments in the past seven years (2.a). Deliberately falsified her October 29, 2003, security clearance application (SF 86) by responding negatively to questions about any debts over 180 days delinquent in the past seven years (2.b). Deliberately falsified her October 29, 2003, security clearance application (SF 86) by responding negatively to questions about any debts then over 90 days delinquent (2.c). Intentionally did not disclose her arrest in January 1997 for disorderly conduct, possession of marijuana, and possession of drug paraphernalia, in response to police record inquiry question 23d (2.d). Stated under oath during an interview of April 14, 2005, that she was aware of her delinquent accounts when she completed her SF 86 and that she chose to not list them as she feared she would lose her job (2.e). Applicant owed unpaid judgment debts of $294 (1.a). Applicant owed unpaid judgment debts of $507 (1.b). three debts in collection totaling $2,941 (1.c). one charged off consumer credit debt of $969 (1.d). three debts in collection totaling $2,941 (1.e). three debts in collection totaling $2,941 (1.f). her monthly expenses exceeded her net income as of April 14, 2005 (1.g).
The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions E2.A6.1.2.1, E2.A6.1.2.3, E2.A5.1.2.2. The judge applied mitigating conditions E2.A6.1.3.6, E2.A5.1.3.2, E2.A5.1.3.3. The decision turned on the following: The applicant expressed deep remorse for her falsifications on the SF 86; She settled or paid in full most of her delinquent debts; The applicant has not incurred any recent delinquency.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant expressed deep remorse for her falsifications on the SF 86.
- She settled or paid in full most of her delinquent debts.
- The applicant has not incurred any recent delinquency.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A6.1.2.1raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- E2.A6.1.2.3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- E2.A5.1.2.2raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
- E2.A6.1.3.6appliedInitiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
- E2.A5.1.3.2rejectedThe Falsification Was an Isolated Incident, Was Not Recent, and the Individual Has Subsequently Provided Correct Information VoluntarilyThe rectification involved the same subject matter as the falsification.
- E2.A5.1.3.3rejectedPrompt, Good Faith Efforts to Correct the Falsification Before Being Confronted with the FactsThe rectification in April 2005 of October 2003 misrepresentations cannot reasonably be characterized as prompt.
Key Rule Quoted
“An individual who is financially overextended is at risk of having to engage in illegal acts to generate funds.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedJun 12, 2006
- Answer filedJun 23, 2006Applicant elected a determination on the written record without a hearing.
- Hearing held—No hearing; determination made on the written record.
- Decision dateMay 29, 2007
Cite For
- Mitigating Conditions for Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
- Personal Conduct Issues Related to Falsification of Security Clearance Applications
- Consideration of Life Circumstances in Security Clearance Determinations