Summary
The applicant, a 51-year-old defense contractor and retired military member, faced security concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). Despite mitigating some financial issues, the applicant failed to adequately address personal conduct concerns related to falsifying information on his security clearance application. The judge denied the application for security clearance.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant intentionally falsified his SF 86 in 2008 when he failed to list his delinquent debts (2.e). Collection company/ cable company $122 (1.b). Medical debt $80 (1.c). Bank $622 (1.d). Finance company/ repossessed car loan $12,175 (1.e). Medical debt $204 (1.f). Medical debt $116 (1.g). Medical debt $78 (1.h). Collection company/ cellular telephone company $407 (1.i). Medical debt $78 (1.j). Medical debt $282 (1.k). Cellular telephone company $1,104 (1.l). Collection company/ supermarket $379 (1.m). Automobile finance company/ judgment $6,110 (1.n).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions F2, F3. The judge applied mitigating conditions F3, F4. The decision turned on the following: The applicant did not mitigate personal conduct concerns related to falsifying information on his security clearance application; The applicant intentionally falsified answers regarding his financial history on the SF 86, which raised questions about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant did not mitigate personal conduct concerns related to falsifying information on his security clearance application.
- The applicant intentionally falsified answers regarding his financial history on the SF 86, which raised questions about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Conditions Referenced
- F2raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- F3raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- F3appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s Control
- F4appliedThe Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
Key Rule Quoted
“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedJul 19, 2010
- Answer filedAug 6, 2010
- Hearing heldSep 15, 2010
- Decision dateNov 15, 2010
Cite For
- Failure to Mitigate Personal Conduct Concerns Under Guideline E
- Intentionally Falsifying Information on Security Clearance Applications
- Mitigating Financial Issues Under Guideline F Despite Ongoing Concerns