Summary
The applicant, a 28-year-old defense contractor employee and single parent, faced security concerns under Guideline F due to significant delinquent debts totaling approximately $38,242. Despite some payments made, the applicant failed to provide sufficient documentation for many claims of debt resolution, leading to a denial of his security clearance application.
Under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.a is a delinquent phone provider debt for $414 (1.a). The debts alleged in SOR ¶¶ 1.b, 1.c, and 1.d are delinquent medical debts. He provided documentation showing payment of these debts (1.b). The debts alleged in SOR ¶¶ 1.b, 1.c, and 1.d are delinquent medical debts. He provided documentation showing payment of these debts (1.c). The debts alleged in SOR ¶¶ 1.b, 1.c, and 1.d are delinquent medical debts. He provided documentation showing payment of these debts (1.d). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.e is a collection for an unexpired lease for which he was responsible in the amount of $5,724 (1.e). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.f is a delinquent school loan debt for $7,845 (1.f). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.g is a collection for an unexpired lease for which he was responsible in the amount of $1,303 (1.g). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.h is a delinquent cable debt in the amount of $641 (1.h). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.i is a delinquent school loan debt in the amount of $8,304 (1.i). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.j is a delinquent phone provider debt in the amount of $113 (1.j). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.k is a delinquent school loan debt in the amount of $1,519 (1.k). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.l is a delinquent consumer account in the amount of $734 (1.l). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.m is a delinquent consumer account in the amount of $271 (1.m). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.n is a delinquent consumer account in the amount of $5,593 (1.n). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.o is a collection for an unexpired lease for which he was responsible in the amount of $4,216 (1.o). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.p is a delinquent consumer account in the amount of $58 (1.p). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.q is a delinquent consumer debt in the amount of $71 (1.q). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.u is a delinquent consumer debt in the amount of $286 (1.u). The debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.v is duplicative of the debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.l and will be resolved in favor of Applicant (1.v).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(c). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(a), AG ¶ 20(c), AG ¶ 20(d), AG ¶ 20(e). The decision turned on the following: The applicant has a history of delinquent debts totaling approximately $38,242, which he has not adequately resolved; The applicant failed to provide documentation supporting claims of debt payments, raising concerns about his financial responsibility; The applicant did not seek financial counseling or demonstrate a good-faith effort to resolve his debts despite having the financial means to do so.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant has a history of delinquent debts totaling approximately $38,242, which he has not adequately resolved.
- The applicant failed to provide documentation supporting claims of debt payments, raising concerns about his financial responsibility.
- The applicant did not seek financial counseling or demonstrate a good-faith effort to resolve his debts despite having the financial means to do so.
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 Largely Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant experienced unemployment and underemployment, but did not act responsibly to resolve his debts.
- AG ¶ 20(a)rejectedBehavior Happened Long Ago or Infrequently
- AG ¶ 20(c)rejectedReceived or Receiving Counseling
- AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Effort to Repay Debts
- AG ¶ 20(e)rejectedReasonable Basis to Dispute Debts
Key Rule Quoted
“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 3, 2011
- Answer filedJun 3, 2011
- Hearing heldDec 14, 2011Originally scheduled for October 24, 2011.
- Decision dateNot specified
Cite For
- Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unresolved Financial Obligations
- Insufficient Documentation of Debt Payments
- Impact of Financial Irresponsibility on Security Clearance Eligibility