Summary
The applicant, a 54-year-old production quality clerk employed since September 2007, faced security concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct) and F (Financial Considerations) due to 18 delinquent debts totaling approximately $51,000. The applicant successfully mitigated these concerns by demonstrating that her financial issues were largely due to periods of unemployment and a failed relationship, and she made good-faith efforts to address her debts. The judge found her omissions on the security application credible and not indicative of willful misconduct, ultimately granting her eligibility for access to sensitive information.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: When Applicant completed her SF-85P, and executed it on September 5, 2007, she failed to disclose any loan or financial obligation over 180 days delinquent (2.a). Federal tax lien for $1,251 filed 7/90. Paid/released 3/92 (1.a). Charged off account (medical provider) $50. Disputed/deleted from credit report (1.b). Collection account (utilities) $232. Settled for lesser amount. Paid/deleted from credit report (1.c). Charged off account (medical provider) $50. Disputed/deleted from credit report (1.d). Collection account (medical provider) $1,434. Initially claimed not her debt/disputed. Made $15 payment on 4/17/09 (1.e). Collection account (medical provider) $300. Initially claimed not her debt/disputed. Made $100 payment on 4/24/09 (1.f). Collection account (time share fee) $519. Disputed. Claims former fiancé owes (1.g). Collection account (medical provider) $30. Initially claimed not her debt/disputed. Paid debt in full 4/17/09 (1.h). Collection account (time share) $5,843. Disputed. Claims former fiancé owes (1.i). Collection account (voluntary repossession of van) $5,538. Made timely payments until 12/07 when lost job. Returned van to dealer/dealer sold vehicle. Making payment arrangements (1.j). Delinquent joint auto debt (involuntary possession) $31,795. Disputed. Claims former fiancé owes and refinanced two vehicles without her knowledge. Retained counsel to challenge debt (1.k). Collection account (phone) $1,911.61. Settled for lesser amount (1.l). Charged off (credit card) account $321. Claims account not hers and opened without her authorization. Disputing debt (1.m). Collection account (insurance co.) $198. Disputed/removed from credit report (1.n). Collection account (cable co.) $149. Made payment arrangements. Paid $30 4/17/09 (1.o). Collection account (utility co.) $223. Made payment arrangements. Paid $10 4/17/09 (1.p). Charged off account (credit card) $393. Claims account not hers and opened without her authorization. Disputed/removed from credit report (1.q). Collection account (cable co.) $811. Claims account not hers. Disputed/removed from credit report (1.r).
The judge granted 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 demonstrated that her financial difficulties were primarily due to circumstances beyond her control, including unemployment and a failed relationship; She made good-faith efforts to address her debts, including settlements and payment arrangements; The applicant's omissions on her security application were found to be credible and not indicative of willful misconduct.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated that her financial difficulties were primarily due to circumstances beyond her control, including unemployment and a failed relationship.
- She made good-faith efforts to address her debts, including settlements and payment arrangements.
- The applicant's omissions on her security application were found to be credible and not indicative of willful misconduct.
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 Beyond the Person's Control
- AG ¶ 20(d)appliedGood-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors
- AG ¶ 20(e)appliedReasonable Basis to Dispute Legitimacy of Debts
Key Rule Quoted
“The standard that must be met for . . . assignment to sensitive duties is that, based on all available information, the person’s loyalty, reliability, and trustworthiness are such that . . . assigning the person to sensitive duties is clearly consistent with the interests of national security.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedOct 17, 2008
- Answer filedNov 21, 2008
- Hearing heldApr 7, 2009
- Decision date—
Cite For
- Mitigation of Financial Difficulties Due to Unemployment and Personal Circumstances
- Credibility of Applicant's Explanations Regarding Omissions on Security Applications
- Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Delinquent Debts