Summary
The applicant, a 31-year-old Military Tactical Advisor, sought a security clearance despite allegations of financial irresponsibility and personal conduct issues. The judge found that the applicant's financial difficulties were largely due to circumstances beyond his control and that he had made significant efforts to resolve his debts. Additionally, the applicant's failure to disclose certain debts was deemed unintentional and not deceitful. Ultimately, the applicant was granted a security clearance under both Guideline E and Guideline F.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for a security clearance because he intentionally falsified material aspects of his personal background during the security clearance process (2.a). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $302.00 (1.a). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $1,368.00 (1.b). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $997.00 (1.c). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $2,543.00 (1.d). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $1,511.00 (1.e). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $1,383.00 (1.f). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $12,060.00 (1.g). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $544.00 (1.j). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $120.00 (1.k). A debt owed to a creditor in the amount of $325.00 is in the process of being removed from his credit report (1.l).
The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions 19(a), 19(c). The judge applied mitigating conditions 20(b), 20(c), 20(d). The decision turned on the following: The applicant demonstrated a good faith effort to resolve his financial issues, having paid off or made arrangements for most of his debts; The applicant's financial difficulties were largely due to circumstances beyond his control, including underemployment after military service; The applicant's failure to disclose debts was found to be unintentional and not indicative of deceit.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated a good faith effort to resolve his financial issues, having paid off or made arrangements for most of his debts.
- The applicant's financial difficulties were largely due to circumstances beyond his control, including underemployment after military service.
- The applicant's failure to disclose debts was found to be unintentional and not indicative of deceit.
Conditions Referenced
- 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- 20(b)appliedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s Control
- 20(c)appliedThe Person Has Received or Is Receiving Counseling for the Problem And/or There Are Clear Indications That the Problem Is Being Resolved or Is Under Control
- 20(d)appliedThe 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 issuedMar 17, 2011
- Answer filedApr 8, 2011
- Hearing heldJul 20, 2011
- Decision dateSep 6, 2011
Cite For
- Mitigating Conditions for Financial Difficulties Under Guideline F
- Unintentional Failure to Disclose Debts Under Guideline E
- Whole-person Assessment in Security Clearance Decisions