Summary
The applicant, a 25-year-old employee of a defense contractor, faced security clearance denial due to a 1996 Petit Larceny conviction and unresolved overdue debts. The applicant failed to disclose her criminal history and financial delinquencies on her Security Clearance Application, which the judge found to be materially incorrect and incomplete, leading to a determination that she did not demonstrate the required trustworthiness for clearance.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline F (Financial Considerations), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: In the last 7 years, have you been arrested for, charged with, or convicted of any offenses not listed in modules 21, 22, 23, 24, or 25? Applicant answered "no" to this question. The evidence shows, as discussed above, that Applicant was arrested on February 26, 1996, and plead guilty to the charge of Petit Larceny. Applicant should have answered "yes" to this question and included this arrest in the response to question #26 (1.a). Question #38 asks, "In the last 7 years, have you been over 180 days delinquent on any debt(s)?" Applicant answered "no" to this question. At the time she completed the SCA, Applicant was delinquent on all of the debts discussed above, and she should have answered "yes" to this question and included all of the debts listed in the SOR (1.b). Applicant has admitted owing four debts as of May 8, 2002, under Adjudicative Guideline F. These debts were all long overdue, most for several years. Debt 1 was in the amount of approximately $476. Debt 2 was in the amount of approximately $187. Debt 3 was in the amount of approximately $737, and debt 4 was in the amount of $1,378 (1.a). Applicant appears to have finally made an effort to resolve her indebtedness and has begun making payments to two of her creditors. However, since Applicant's other debts have not yet been addressed, I cannot conclude that Applicant's financial problems are resolved (1.b). Applicant was arrested in 1996, and plead guilty to the charge of Petit Larceny (3.a).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions E2.A5.1.2.2, E2.A6.1.2.1, E2.A10.1.2.1. The decision turned on the following: The applicant provided false material information on her Security Clearance Application regarding her criminal history and overdue debts; The applicant's financial difficulties were longstanding and unresolved at the time of the application; No mitigating conditions were applicable to the applicant's conduct under the relevant guidelines.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant provided false material information on her Security Clearance Application regarding her criminal history and overdue debts.
- The applicant's financial difficulties were longstanding and unresolved at the time of the application.
- No mitigating conditions were applicable to the applicant's conduct under the relevant guidelines.
Conditions referenced
- E2.A5.1.2.2appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, Falsification or Misrepresentation of Relevant and Material Facts
- E2.A6.1.2.1appliedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- E2.A10.1.2.1appliedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct
Key rule quoted
“"the clearly consistent standard indicates that security-clearance determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials."”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedJan 17, 2003
- Answer filedFeb 26, 2003Applicant requested decision on written record.
- Hearing held—No hearing; case decided on written record.
- Decision dateJan 20, 2004
Cite for
- Failure to Disclose Criminal History on Security Clearance Application Under Guideline E
- Longstanding Financial Difficulties Under Guideline F
- Criminal Conduct Related to False Statements Under Guideline J