Summary
A 25-year-old procurement technician for a defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline F (Financial Considerations), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant faced allegations of deliberately omitting a prior criminal charge from his SF 86 and lying to a DSS agent during his subject interview about any past arrests or law enforcement involvement. Additionally, he made false statements about his finances on his SF 86 and during the interview.
Financial concerns included a $939 debt to a credit card company, $1,519 owed to a jeweler, and an $11,168 deficiency balance after the repossession and resale of his car. The applicant's deliberate false statements to the government about matters within its jurisdiction also raised concerns under federal law (18 U.S.C. §1001).
The administrative judge concluded that the applicant had excessive delinquent debt and made deliberate false statements regarding both his criminal history and financial obligations. The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to mitigate these security concerns, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant had excessive delinquent debt, including credit card debts and a deficiency from a repossessed car.
- The applicant made deliberate false statements on his SF 86 and during a DSS interview regarding his criminal history and financial obligations.
- The applicant did not demonstrate sufficient evidence to mitigate the security concerns raised by the government.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A5.1.2.2appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
- E2.A10.1.2.1appliedAllegations or Admission of Criminal Conduct
- E2.A6.1.2.1appliedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- E2.A6.1.2.3appliedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- E2.A6.1.3.3rejectedConditions That Resulted in the Behavior Were Largely Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant's financial difficulties were not sufficiently mitigated by his past injury and lack of income.
Key Rule Quoted
“A security clearance decision is intended to resolve whether it is clearly consistent with the national interest for an Applicant to either receive or continue to have access to classified information.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedApr 20, 2004
- Answer filedNot specifiedApplicant denied all allegations.
- Hearing heldJan 28, 2005
- Decision dateAug 5, 2005
Cite For
- Deliberate Falsification of Information on Security Clearance Applications
- Financial Irresponsibility as a Disqualifying Factor
- Impact of Personal Conduct on Security Clearance Eligibility