Summary
The applicant, a 64-year-old janitor employed by a defense contractor for over 38 years, faced security concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to numerous delinquent debts, judgments, and a car repossession. The judge found that the applicant failed to mitigate financial concerns but did not find evidence of intentional falsification regarding his personal conduct. Ultimately, the applicant's indifference towards his financial obligations led to the denial of his security clearance.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: $907 in a charged off account to Capital One Bank (1.a). $12,803 for a collection account to Midland Credit/Bank of America (1.b). $2,052 in a charged off account to Eastern Bank (1.c). $3,749 for Credit Acceptance for a vehicle repossession (1.d). $17,488 on a charged off account to Bank of America (1.e). $1,225 for a collection account for BankNorth (1.f). $2,431 to BankNorth for a charged off account (1.g). $3,034 for judgments entered against Applicant for Saratoga Inc (1.h). $1,254 for judgments entered against Applicant for Colonial Gas (1.i). $10,469 judgment entered against Applicant in favor of the car repossession creditor (1.j).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions FC DC ¶ 19(a), FC DC ¶ 19(c). The judge applied mitigating conditions FC MC ¶ 20(a), FC MC ¶ 20(b), FC MC ¶ 20(c), FC MC ¶ 20(d). The decision turned on the following: The applicant has numerous delinquent debts and judgments that he refuses to address or inquire about; He did not disclose debts on his security clearance application, claiming ignorance of their existence, which the judge found insufficient to mitigate concerns; The applicant's indifference towards his financial situation raised questions about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant has numerous delinquent debts and judgments that he refuses to address or inquire about.
- He did not disclose debts on his security clearance application, claiming ignorance of their existence, which the judge found insufficient to mitigate concerns.
- The applicant's indifference towards his financial situation raised questions about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Conditions Referenced
- FC DC ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- FC DC ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- FC MC ¶ 20(a)rejectedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to RecurThe applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to support this condition.
- FC MC ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s ControlThe applicant did not demonstrate that his financial issues were beyond his control.
- FC MC ¶ 20(c)rejectedThe Person Has Received or Is Receiving Counseling for the ProblemThe applicant did not present any information on financial counseling.
- FC MC ¶ 20(d)rejectedThe Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve DebtsThe applicant took no action to inquire about or resolve his debts.
Key Rule Quoted
“An individual who is financially irresponsible may also be irresponsible, unconcerned, or careless in their obligation to protect classified information.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedJun 26, 2006
- Answer filedJul 18, 2006Applicant admitted one and denied nine allegations.
- Hearing held—Applicant elected to have the matter decided on the written record.
- Decision dateJun 21, 2007
Cite For
- Indifference Towards Financial Obligations Under Guideline F
- Lack of Intentional Falsification Under Guideline E
- Impact of Financial Irresponsibility on Security Clearance Eligibility