Summary
A 30-year-old human resources administrator was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant had over $60,000 in delinquent debt and inadvertently omitted a job termination from three years prior on her security clearance application.
While the judge noted the applicant was candid about a past shoplifting conviction and did not find intentional falsification regarding the job omission, the significant financial issues raised substantial doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness. Disqualifying conditions under Guideline E, specifically AG ¶ 19(a) and AG ¶ 19(c), were raised.
Despite the application of several mitigating conditions (AG ¶ 20(a), AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(c), AG ¶ 20(d), AG ¶ 20(e)), the applicant's failure to adequately resolve her substantial delinquent debt was the primary reason for the denial of her security clearance.
Why the applicant prevailed
- The applicant was found credible and did not intentionally falsify her security clearance application regarding her job termination.
Conditions referenced
- AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- AG ¶ 20(a)rejectedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's financial issues are ongoing and have not been resolved.
- AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s ControlWhile the applicant supports her family, her financial issues are not solely due to circumstances beyond her control.
- AG ¶ 20(c)rejectedThe Person Has Received or Is Receiving Counseling for the ProblemThe applicant has not sought financial counseling.
- AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedThe Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve DebtsThe applicant has not taken necessary steps to address her debts.
- AG ¶ 20(e)notedThe Individual Has a Reasonable Basis to Dispute the Legitimacy of the Past-due Debt
Key rule quoted
“A security clearance adjudication is not a proceeding aimed at collecting an applicant’s debts. Rather, it is a proceeding aimed at evaluating an applicant’s judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedAug 29, 2012
- Answer filedSep 28, 2012Received by DOHA.
- Hearing heldJan 16, 2013
- Decision dateFeb 28, 2013
Cite for
- Evaluation of Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
- Credibility Assessment in Personal Conduct Cases
- Impact of Ongoing Financial Issues on Security Clearance Eligibility