Summary
The applicant, a 66-year-old data technician with a history of financial instability, was denied a security clearance due to significant unpaid federal and state taxes and falsification of material facts on her security clearance application. The judge found that the applicant's financial problems and lack of candor raised serious security concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations).
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant deliberately failed to disclose in response to Question 36 on her SF-86 that she had a tax lien placed against her by her county treasurer and tax collector on March 18, 1997 for $285.31 (2.a.(1)). Applicant deliberately failed to disclose in response to Question 36 on her SF-86 that she had a tax lien placed against her by her county treasurer and tax collector on March 19, 1997 for $615.20 (2.a.(2)). Applicant deliberately failed to disclose in response to Question 36 on her SF-86 that she had a tax lien placed against her by her county treasurer and tax collector on December 2, 1997 for $515.83 (2.a.(3)). Applicant deliberately failed to disclose in response to Question 36 on her SF-86 that she had a tax lien placed against her by her county treasurer and tax collector on December 7, 1998 for $522.03 (2.a.(4)). Applicant deliberately failed to disclose in response to Question 36 on her SF-86 that she had a tax lien placed against her by her county treasurer and tax collector on October 20, 1999 for $509 (2.a.(5)). Applicant deliberately failed to disclose in response to Question 36 the federal tax liens alleged in subparagraphs 1.a. through 1.f. of the SOR (2.a.(6)). that she owed the Internal Revenue Service approximately $3,811.24 in taxes, penalties, and interest for tax year 1992, that a notice of federal tax lien was filed against her December 29, 1995, for non-payment of the federal tax debt, and, that, as of July 21, 2003, the debt had not been satisfied (1.a). that she owed the Internal Revenue Service approximately $5,088.72 in taxes, penalties, and interest for tax year 1993, that a notice of federal tax lien was filed against her on December 29, 1995, for non-payment of the federal tax debt, and that, as of July 21, 2003, the debt had not been satisfied (1.b). that she owed the Internal Revenue Service approximately $6,662.79 in taxes, penalties, and interest for tax year 1995, that a notice of federal tax lien had been filed against her on March 30, 2001, for non-payment of the federal tax debt, and that as of July 21, 2003, the debt had not been satisfied (1.c). that she owed the Internal Revenue Service approximately $1,022.01 in taxes, penalties and interest for tax year 1996, that a notice of federal tax lien had been filed against her March 30, 2001, and that, as of July 21, 2003, the debt had not been satisfied (1.d). that she owed the Internal Revenue Service approximately $238.38 in taxes, penalties, and interest for tax year 1997, that a notice of federal tax lien had been filed against her on March 30, 2001, and that, as of July 21, 2003, the debt had not been satisfied (1.e). that she owed the Internal Revenue Service approximately $859.82 in taxes, penalties, and interest for tax year 1998, that a notice of federal tax lien had been filed against her on March 30, 2001, and that, as of July 21, 2003, the debt had not been satisfied (1.f). that she owed the Internal Revenue Service approximately $3,201.12 in taxes, penalties, and interest for tax year 2000, and, as of July 21, 2003, the debt had not been satisfied (1.g). that she owed the Internal Revenue Service approximately $6,928.29 in taxes, penalties, and interest for tax year 2001, and, as of July 21, 2003, the debt had not been satisfied (1.h). that she owed her state tax board approximately $1,657.54 in taxes, penalties, and interest for tax years 1988, 1989, and 1990, and, as of July 21, 2003, the debt had not been satisfied (1.i).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions E2.A5.1.2.2, E2.A6.1.2.1, E2.A6.1.2.2, E2.A5.1.2.4. The judge applied mitigating conditions E2.A6.1.3.4, E2.A5.1.3.5. The decision turned on the following: The applicant admitted to a history of financial problems, including significant unpaid federal and state taxes; The applicant falsified material facts on her security clearance application regarding tax liens against her property; The applicant's financial instability and lack of candor raised serious security concerns.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant admitted to a history of financial problems, including significant unpaid federal and state taxes.
- The applicant falsified material facts on her security clearance application regarding tax liens against her property.
- The applicant's financial instability and lack of candor raised serious security concerns.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A5.1.2.2appliedDeliberately Providing False Information
- E2.A6.1.2.1appliedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- E2.A6.1.2.2appliedEvading Responsibility to Pay Taxes
- E2.A5.1.2.4appliedIncreased Vulnerability to Coercion
- E2.A6.1.3.4appliedSeeking Counseling for Financial Problems
- E2.A5.1.3.5appliedRecent Positive Steps to Resolve Issues
Key Rule Quoted
“"An applicant's responsibility to provide truthful and complete responses to questions on his or her SF-86 cannot be set aside or ignored."”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedDec 27, 2004
- Answer filedJan 28, 2005
- Hearing held—Applicant requested determination on the record.
- Decision dateMay 25, 2005
Cite For
- Denial Based on Financial Instability Under Guideline F
- Falsification of Information on Security Clearance Application Under Guideline E
- Importance of Candor in Security Clearance Applications