Summary
A 29-year-old applicant, a married but separated woman living with her unemployed boyfriend, was denied a security clearance for an ADP I/II/III position. The denial was based on concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline F (Financial Considerations), and Guideline H (Drug Involvement).
The applicant faced allegations including 12 delinquent debts totaling approximately $29,000, a history of marijuana use from 1995 to 2004, and multiple job terminations due to misconduct. Specific financial issues included a $10,574 balance on a repossessed car from 2001 and a $13,782 judgment from 2002, which the applicant claimed was the same car debt. One delinquent debt of $857.46 was resolved through garnishment by May 2006.
While the applicant successfully mitigated concerns related to drug involvement and personal conduct, she failed to mitigate the financial considerations. The denial was primarily due to her 12 delinquent debts, lack of effort to repay them over seven years, and her financial support of her unemployed boyfriend, which contributed to her financial difficulties.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant has 12 delinquent debts totaling about $29,000 and has made no effort to repay them.
- She supports her unemployed boyfriend, contributing to her financial difficulties.
- The applicant has not demonstrated a commitment to resolving her financial obligations over the past seven years.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A6.1.2.1appliedDC 1: A History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- E2.A6.1.2.3appliedDC 3: Inability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- E2.A8.1.2.1appliedDC 1: Any Drug Abuse
- E2.A5.1.2.1appliedDC 1: Reliable Unfavorable Information Provided by Associates, Employers, or Coworkers
- E2.A5.1.2.4appliedDC 4: Personal Conduct That Increases Vulnerability to Coercion
- E2.A5.1.2.5appliedDC 5: A Pattern of Dishonesty
- E2.A8.1.3.1appliedMC 1: the Drug Involvement Is Not Recent
- E2.A8.1.3.3appliedMC 3: A Demonstrated Intent Not to Abuse Any Drugs in the Future
- E2.A5.1.3.5appliedMC 5: Positive Steps to Reduce Vulnerability to Coercion
Key Rule Quoted
“The standard that must be met for . . . assignment to sensitive duties is that, based on all available information, the person’s loyalty, reliability, and trustworthiness are such that . . . assigning the person to sensitive duties is clearly consistent with the interests of national security.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedAug 1, 2006
- Answer filed—Not dated.
- Hearing heldJan 31, 2007
- Decision dateApr 24, 2007
Cite For
- Financial Obligations and Trustworthiness Under Guideline F
- Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
- Personal Conduct Issues Related to Employment Terminations Under Guideline E