Summary
The applicant, a 27-year-old defense contractor and former military service member, faced security concerns under Guideline F due to significant financial issues, including multiple delinquent debts totaling approximately $28,000. Despite some payments made towards certain debts, the applicant's overall financial situation remained unresolved, leading to a denial of his security clearance application.
Under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Credit card $710 Payment program to become current. Paid $154 from August to December 2010. Balance of about $556 (1.a). Collection company/auto loan/repossession $8,640 Admitted. Unresolved (1.b). State Attorney General/child support $3,820 Payments through garnishment. Balance of $2,291. Discussed further below (1.c). Utility company $142 Paid December 2010 (1.d). DFAS $5,256 Admitted. Overpayment from when Applicant was in military. Unresolved (1.e). Collection company/telephone company $721 Settlement agreement for $387 through monthly payments. Paid $300 from July to December 2010 (1.f). Retail store/computer $1,290 Unresolved (1.g). Auto loan/repossession $765 Admitted vehicle repossessed. Unable to locate creditor. Creditor no longer in business (1.h). Internet provider $461 Denied. Dispute letter mailed December 2010. Not listed on two most recent credit reports (1.i). Internet provider $274 Denied. Dispute letter mailed December 2010. Not listed on two most recent credit reports (1.j). Collection company/truck school $6,138 Paid $175 in August and September 2010. Current balance $6,862 (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(b), AG ¶ 20(d), AG ¶ 20(e). The decision turned on the following: The applicant failed to demonstrate a good-faith effort to resolve his significant financial obligations; The applicant's financial issues were recent and ongoing, raising doubts about his reliability and judgment; The applicant did not receive financial counseling, and his debts remained substantial despite a high income.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant failed to demonstrate a good-faith effort to resolve his significant financial obligations.
- The applicant's financial issues were recent and ongoing, raising doubts about his reliability and judgment.
- The applicant did not receive financial counseling, and his debts remained substantial despite a high income.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- AG ¶ 20(b)appliedConditions Largely Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant attributed financial problems to his first wife's decision to return to school and periods of absence from work.
- AG ¶ 20(d)appliedGood-faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant made some payments towards certain debts but not enough to demonstrate overall responsibility.
- AG ¶ 20(e)appliedReasonable Basis to Dispute Legitimacy of Past-due DebtThe applicant successfully disputed some debts that were not included in the SOR.
Key Rule Quoted
“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 7, 2010
- Answer filedJun 8, 2010
- Hearing heldJan 14, 2011via video teleconference
- Decision date—
Cite For
- Evaluation of Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
- Impact of Unresolved Debts on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Application of Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions