Summary
A 45-year-old married man with three children was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant had approximately $116,000 in delinquent debts, including a $1,812 homeowner’s association judgment, a $41,000 state income tax delinquency, a $15,300 judgment for a delinquent car note, and a $59,000 mortgage delinquency.
The Statement of Reasons alleged that the applicant intentionally failed to disclose the homeowner’s association judgment and the state tax lien, as well as the car loan and mortgage delinquencies, on his security clearance application. Disqualifying conditions under Guideline F, specifically AG ¶ 19(a) and AG ¶ 19(c), were raised.
While the applicant successfully mitigated some debts, he failed to resolve the substantial state income tax delinquency and did not file his 2015 income tax returns. Despite the application of mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(d), AG ¶ 20(c), and AG ¶ 20(e), the applicant did not provide evidence of progress in resolving the disputed tax delinquency, which remained outstanding. Consequently, his security clearance was denied.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant did not falsify his security clearance application as alleged, demonstrating no personal conduct security concerns.
- The applicant settled and paid the delinquent homeowner dues, resolving that specific allegation favorably.
- The applicant disputed the car loan delinquency and provided evidence of payments made through garnishment.
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 That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s Control
- AG ¶ 20(d)appliedIndividual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors
- AG ¶ 20(c)rejectedReceived or Is Receiving Counseling for the ProblemThe applicant did not provide evidence of counseling or resolution of the tax delinquency.
- AG ¶ 20(e)rejectedIndividual Has a Reasonable Basis to Dispute the Legitimacy of the Past-due DebtThe applicant did not provide documented proof to substantiate the basis of the dispute.
Key Rule Quoted
“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedAug 27, 2015
- Answer filedOct 15, 2015
- Hearing heldJul 20, 2016
- Decision dateSep 21, 2016
Cite For
- Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unresolved Financial Obligations Under Guideline F
- No Personal Conduct Concerns When Applicant Did Not Intentionally Omit Debts From Application
- Mitigating Conditions Under AG ¶ 20 Applied Partially Due to Circumstances Beyond the Applicant's Control.