Summary
A 53-year-old electronics technician with military service was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant had four delinquent debts totaling $13,853, which he failed to address responsibly. These debts included an account opened in January 2005, which resulted in a judgment filed in April 2011 and a garnishment order, though the applicant stated his pay had not been garnished. Other debts included a charged-off account opened in December 2006, a collection account opened in April 2010, and another charged-off account opened in January 2007. The applicant admitted to having accounts with all listed creditors.
A significant concern was the applicant's falsification of his e-QIP by failing to disclose three of these delinquent debts, demonstrating a lack of candor. Disqualifying conditions were raised under Adjudicative Guidelines (AG) ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(c), and AG ¶ 16(a).
While mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(d), and AG ¶ 20(e) were considered, the judge found that the applicant did not provide sufficient credible evidence to mitigate the concerns. Specifically, he failed to support claims of identity theft or to dispute the debts effectively. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant had four delinquent debts totaling $13,853, which he failed to address responsibly.
- He falsified his e-QIP by omitting relevant financial information, demonstrating a lack of candor.
- The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to support his claims of identity theft or to dispute the debts.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
- AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions Beyond the Person's ControlWhile the applicant's wife's unemployment and identity theft were beyond his control, he did not act responsibly to resolve his debts.
- AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant provided no evidence of payments or attempts to resolve the debts.
- AG ¶ 20(e)rejectedReasonable Basis to Dispute the Legitimacy of the DebtThe applicant did not provide documentation to substantiate his claims of identity theft or disputed debts.
Key Rule Quoted
“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 12, 2014
- Answer filedJul 16, 2014Applicant indicated he was not opposed to a hearing.
- Hearing heldOct 21, 2014Conducted via video teleconference.
- Decision dateNov 26, 2014
Cite For
- Failure to Mitigate Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
- Deliberate Falsification of E-qip Under Guideline E
- Lack of Credible Evidence to Support Claims of Identity Theft