Summary
The applicant, a 49-year-old production planner for a defense contractor, faced security concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct) and F (Financial Considerations) due to multiple delinquent debts. The judge found that the applicant mitigated the financial concerns and refuted the personal conduct allegations, resulting in a granted security clearance.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: judgment for unpaid rent, entered in November 2007 ($1,350) (1.a). debt to credit union, referred for collection in September 2009 ($275) (1.b). delinquent utility bills, referred for collection in December 2010 ($78) (1.c). delinquent utility bills, referred for collection in September 2008 ($50) (1.d). delinquent student loans totaling $16,305 (1.e). delinquent student loans totaling $16,305 (1.f). delinquent student loans totaling $16,305 (1.g). delinquent student loans totaling $16,305 (1.h). cell phone bill, referred for collection in November 2012 ($944) (1.i). cell phone bill, referred for collection in November 2012 ($939) (1.j). medical bills referred for collection in October ($37) (1.k). medical bills referred for collection in November 2013 ($27) (1.l). cell phone bill referred for collection in August 2013 ($161) (1.m). medical bill, referred for collection in October 2013 ($125) (1.n). checking account debt, referred for collection in August 2013 ($91) (1.o). medical debt, referred for collection in April 2009 ($312) (1.p). delinquent student loans totaling $44,904 (1.q). delinquent student loans totaling $44,904 (1.r). delinquent student loans totaling $44,904 (1.s). delinquent student loans totaling $44,904 (1.t). delinquent student loans totaling $44,904 (1.u). delinquent student loans totaling $44,904 (1.v). delinquent student loans totaling $44,904 (1.w). delinquent student loans totaling $44,904 (1.x).
The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(c). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(d), AG ¶ 20(e). The decision turned on the following: The applicant demonstrated a credible plan to resolve her financial issues, including completing a loan rehabilitation program; She provided evidence of financial responsibility by satisfying previous judgments not alleged in the SOR; The applicant's financial problems were largely due to circumstances beyond her control, such as marital issues and her children's financial difficulties.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated a credible plan to resolve her financial issues, including completing a loan rehabilitation program.
- She provided evidence of financial responsibility by satisfying previous judgments not alleged in the SOR.
- The applicant's financial problems were largely due to circumstances beyond her control, such as marital issues and her children's financial difficulties.
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 That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control
- AG ¶ 20(d)appliedIndividual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
- AG ¶ 20(e)appliedIndividual Has a Reasonable Basis to Dispute the Legitimacy of the Past-due Debt
Key Rule Quoted
“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the AG.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedApr 22, 2014
- Answer filedMay 22, 2014
- Hearing heldSep 10, 2014
- Decision dateNov 12, 2014
Cite For
- Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F Due to Circumstances Beyond Control
- Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Debts Can Mitigate Security Concerns
- Disputing the Legitimacy of Debts as a Mitigating Factor Under Guideline F