Summary
A 36-year-old military training specialist and 90% disabled veteran was granted a security clearance after addressing concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons alleged financial delinquencies totaling approximately $27,000, including two vehicle repossessions resulting in charged-off debts of about $26,000, a small delinquent phone service debt, and two disputed apartment rental debts. Additionally, the applicant faced allegations of falsifying his 2016 security clearance application by not reporting financial delinquencies, and providing false or contradictory information during interviews regarding a 1996 arrest, as well as not reporting a juvenile felony arrest on his 2011 and 2016 applications.
The judge found that the applicant had resolved his financial delinquencies, noting they were dated and no longer appeared on his credit report. He also provided plausible explanations for the omissions on his security clearance application, which demonstrated no intent to falsify.
The applicant's honorable military service and current financial responsibility further supported his case. Ultimately, the judge determined that the applicant had mitigated the financial concerns and did not intentionally falsify his application, thereby granting him eligibility for access to classified information.
Why the applicant prevailed
- The applicant resolved his financial delinquencies, which were dated and no longer reported on his credit report.
- He provided plausible explanations for omissions on his security clearance application, demonstrating no intent to falsify.
- The applicant's honorable military service and current financial responsibility supported his case.
Conditions referenced
- F.19.araisedInability to Satisfy Debts
- F.19.craisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- E.16.araisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
- E.16.braisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information
- F.20.aappliedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
- F.20.bappliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control
- F.20.dappliedThe Individual Initiated and Is Adhering to a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
- F.20.eappliedThe Individual Has a Reasonable Basis to Dispute the Legitimacy of the Past-due Debt
- E.15rejectedConduct Involving Questionable Judgment, Lack of Candor, Dishonesty, or Unwillingness to Comply with Rules and RegulationsThe judge found no evidence of intentional falsification.
Key rule quoted
“An omission, standing alone, does not prove falsification.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedJan 27, 2017
- Answer filedFeb 10, 2017
- Hearing heldJul 12, 2017
- Decision dateJan 11, 2018
Cite for
- Mitigation of Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
- Rebuttable Presumption of Intent in Personal Conduct Allegations Under Guideline E
- Whole-person Analysis in Security Clearance Determinations