Summary
A 31-year-old single man with two children was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline F (Financial Considerations), and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The applicant had intentionally omitted information about his drug involvement history from his 2004 and 2008 security clearance applications and during a 2008 interview with an investigative agent.
Additionally, the applicant had several delinquent debts, including a $452 cable television bill, approximately $13,200 in student loans, a $140 utility bill, and an unspecified amount owed to a credit card company. His drug history included marijuana use from 1995 to 2004 and a failed drug test in 2004, though he had not used marijuana since 2004.
The judge found that the applicant failed to mitigate the concerns related to personal conduct and financial issues. While the drug involvement concern was mitigated due to the infrequency of past marijuana use and a significant period of abstinence, the applicant's failure to disclose his marijuana use on two security clearance applications undermined his credibility. Furthermore, his approximately $14,000 in delinquent debt showed minimal progress in resolution, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant failed to disclose his marijuana use on two security clearance applications, undermining his credibility.
- The applicant has approximately $14,000 in delinquent debt and has made minimal progress in addressing it.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
- AG ¶ 16(b)raisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information
- AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- AG ¶ 26(a)appliedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Happened Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
- AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s ControlThe applicant did not establish a connection between his financial issues and his divorce.
- AG ¶ 20(c)rejectedClear Indications That the Problem Is Being Resolved or Is Under ControlThe applicant has made minimal progress toward satisfying his delinquencies.
- AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Efforts to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve DebtsThe applicant's claims of wage garnishments were not supported by documentation.
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 issuedMay 12, 2009
- Answer filedJun 1, 2009
- Hearing heldOct 14, 2009
- Decision dateDec 31, 2009
Cite For
- Failure to Mitigate Personal Conduct Concerns Due to Falsification of Security Clearance Applications
- Failure to Address Significant Delinquent Debt
- Mitigation of Drug Involvement Concerns Due to Abstinence and Infrequency of Use