Summary
The applicant, a 31-year-old defense contractor with five children, faced security clearance denial under Guidelines E and F due to significant financial issues and a lack of candor in his security clearance application. The judge found that the applicant had numerous overdue debts and provided misleading information regarding his financial status and past drug use, leading to doubts about his trustworthiness.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant executed a signed SCA on November 3, 2006. Question 28.a. asks, “In the last 7 years, have you been over 180 days delinquent on any debt(s)?” Applicant answered “No” to this question, and he listed no debts. The Government alleges that Applicant should have included the debts listed in the SOR as 1.d., and 1.g., above. It appears that Applicant should have included all of the debts listed as 1.a. through 1.i., above (2.a). Question 28.b. asks, “Are you currently over 90 days delinquent on any debt(s)?” Applicant answered “No” to this question, and he listed no debts. The Government alleges that Applicant should have included the debts listed in the SOR as 1.d., 1.f, and 1.g., above. It appears that Applicant should have also included all of the debts listed as 1.a. through 1.i., above (2.b). Question 27.a. asks, “In the last 7 years, have you filed a petition under any chapter of the bankruptcy code (to include Chapter 13)?” Applicant answered “No” to this question. The Government alleges that Applicant should have included the Chapter 13 bankruptcy, as reviewed in 1.j., above (2.c). Question 23.d. asks, “Have you ever been charged with or convicted of any offense(s) related to alcohol or drugs?” Applicant answered “No” to this question. The Government alleges that Applicant should have included his arrest and conviction for Possession of Marijuana on June 1, 1999, for which he was fined $100 and required to attend a drug treatment program. At the hearing, Applicant admitted the 1999 marijuana conviction (2.d). Question 24.a. asks, “Since the age of 16 or in the last 7 years, whichever is shorter, have you illegally used any controlled substance . . .” Applicant answered “No” to this question. The Government alleges that Applicant should have included his marijuana usage during the period within seven years of his completion of the SCA. Applicant admitted that he used marijuana from 1992 to at least October 2000. At the hearing, Applicant admitted he had used marijuana in the years stated (2.e). This overdue debt to Creditor 1 is cited in the SOR in the amount of $1,365 (1.a). This overdue debt also to Creditor 1 is cited in the SOR in the amount of $600 (1.b). This third overdue debt to Creditor 1 is cited in the SOR in the amount of $1,200 (1.c). This overdue debt to Creditor 2 is cited in the SOR in the amount of $847 (1.d). This overdue debt to Creditor 3 is cited in the SOR in the amount of $396 (1.e). This overdue debt to Creditor 4 is cited in the SOR in the amount of $30,597 (1.f). This overdue debt to Creditor 5 is cited in the SOR in the amount of $10,092 (1.g). This overdue debt to Creditor 6 is cited in the SOR in the amount of $807 (1.h). This overdue debt to Creditor 7 is cited in the SOR in the amount of $1,223 (1.i).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions F.1, E.2. The decision turned on the following: The applicant admitted to multiple overdue debts that remained unpaid; The applicant provided inconsistent explanations for his financial difficulties, undermining his credibility; The applicant failed to provide truthful and complete information on his security clearance application, indicating an intent to mislead.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant admitted to multiple overdue debts that remained unpaid.
- The applicant provided inconsistent explanations for his financial difficulties, undermining his credibility.
- The applicant failed to provide truthful and complete information on his security clearance application, indicating an intent to mislead.
Conditions Referenced
- F.1appliedFinancial Considerations
- E.2appliedPersonal Conduct
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 issuedApr 17, 2008
- Answer filedJun 25, 2008
- Hearing heldOct 2, 2008
- Decision dateOct 16, 2008
Cite For
- Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unresolved Financial Issues Under Guideline F
- Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Application Under Guideline E
- Impact of Credibility on Security Clearance Eligibility Decisions.