Loading case…

Summary

The applicant, a 31-year-old help desk analyst and former U.S. Army specialist, faced security clearance denial under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) due to unresolved financial issues and a history of criminal conduct. Despite mitigating some concerns related to criminal conduct, the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient financial responsibility or efforts to address his significant debts, totaling approximately $35,000, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: There is an automobile loan with a high credit of $25,302 that was placed for collection and $13,044 was charged off (1.a). There is an unspecified type of account with a high credit of $9,891 and past-due and unpaid balance of $9,831 that was placed for collection and charged off (1.b). There is an unspecified type of account with a high credit of $5,621 and past-due and unpaid balance of $6,712 that was placed for collection and charged off (1.c). There is an automobile loan account with an unpaid balance of $3,125 that was placed for collection and charged off (1.d). There is a bank-issued credit card with a $500 credit limit and past-due and unpaid balance of $590 that was placed for collection and charged off (1.e). There is an unspecified type of account with a past-due and unpaid balance of $495 that was placed for collection and charged off (1.f). There is an unspecified type of credit union account with a past-due and unpaid balance of $432 that was placed for collection and charged off (1.g). There is an unspecified type of account with an unpaid balance of $255 (1.h). There is a bank-issued credit card with a $300 credit limit and past-due and unpaid balance of $483 that was placed for collection and charged off (1.i). There is a cellular telephone account with an unpaid balance of $62 that was placed for collection (1.j). In March 2013, when Applicant was exercising his weekend parental visitation, he and his ex-wife got into an argument over the visitation schedule and parenting plan they had in place. In an effort to end the argument, he attempted to leave with his children, carrying the youngest in his arms. As he approached his car, his ex-wife approached him from behind and began pulling his daughter out of his arms. In anticipation of dropping her, Applicant instinctively kicked his ex-wife in the shin to get her to release the child. His ex-wife called the police. Applicant was arrested and charged with domestic assault, a misdemeanor. Applicant was ordered to attend eight anger management classes, and he did so in June and July 2013. In August 2013, the charge was dismissed nolle prosequi. Applicant acknowledged that what he did was shameful and ill-advised. He vowed that such conduct will never recur (2.a). In September 2014, Applicant was again exercising his parental visitation. One night, his youngest daughter woke up yelling and crying for a lengthy period, and he was unable to calm her down. He held her too tightly in an effort to stop her from crying. The next day, when he dropped her off for childcare, she had a mark on her face from the previous evening. The childcare provider alerted the department of children’s services, and Applicant was charged with child abuse and ordered to appear in court in February 2015. He was again ordered to take anger management classes. Applicant failed to submit documentation to reflect the disposition of the charge. Applicant stated that his actions, even unintentionally, caused him “an inexpressible amount of grief.” (2.b).

The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(c), AG ¶ 19(b), AG ¶ 19(e). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(a), AG ¶ 20(c), AG ¶ 20(d), AG ¶ 20(e). The decision turned on the following: The applicant failed to mitigate financial concerns due to a history of not meeting financial obligations and an inability to satisfy debts; The applicant did not provide evidence of efforts to resolve his delinquent debts or to contact creditors for repayment agreements; The applicant's financial issues were ongoing and attributed to personal circumstances, but he did not demonstrate a proactive approach to managing his debts.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

• The applicant failed to mitigate financial concerns due to a history of not meeting financial obligations and an inability to satisfy debts.
• The applicant did not provide evidence of efforts to resolve his delinquent debts or to contact creditors for repayment agreements.
• The applicant's financial issues were ongoing and attributed to personal circumstances, but he did not demonstrate a proactive approach to managing his debts.

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence.”

Procedural Posture

• SOR issuedMar 24, 2016
• Answer filedApr 20, 2016Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
• Hearing held—No hearing was held.
• Decision dateAug 28, 2017

Cite For

• Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unresolved Financial Obligations Under Guideline F
• Impact of Criminal Conduct on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline J
• Importance of Demonstrating Proactive Financial Management in Security Clearance Cases