Summary
Applicant is a 46-year-old desktop technician who has intermittently worked for the same defense contractor since July 1998. Due to periods of unemployment from July 2001 to July 2002 and from June 2003 to August 2003, he fell into arrears on his mortgage and three other debts. He initially failed to disclose two debts over 180 days delinquent on his security clearance application but successfully explained the circumstances surrounding his financial difficulties and has since mitigated concerns regarding his debts. Clearance is granted.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: When he filed his Application for Security Clearance, he neglected to note that two of his debts were over 180 days delinquent (2.a). Indebted for a mortgage that was placed in default in or around March 2004, in the approximate amount of $5,652 (1.a). Indebted to [a financial institution] on an account that was charged off in or around September 2001, in the approximate amount of $5,033 (1.b). Indebted to [a telephone company] on an account that was charged off in or around December 2003, in the approximate amount of $320 (1.c). Indebted for another telephone account balance from a different provider. This debt was placed into collection on or around February 2003, in the approximate amount of $456 (1.d). In or around April 2004, Applicant was notified by the mortgage company cited at 1.a, above, that his check had been returned as unpaid, causing his mortgage to go into default (1.e).
The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions E2.A6.1.2.1, E2.A6.1.2.3, E2.A5.1.2.2. The judge applied mitigating conditions E2.A6.1.3.3, E2.A6.1.3.6, E2.A5.1.3.5. The decision turned on the following: Applicant demonstrated that his financial difficulties were largely due to periods of unemployment; He provided evidence of repayment or resolution of most debts cited in the SOR; His explanations for the omissions on his security clearance application were deemed credible.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- Applicant demonstrated that his financial difficulties were largely due to periods of unemployment.
- He provided evidence of repayment or resolution of most debts cited in the SOR.
- His explanations for the omissions on his security clearance application were deemed credible.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A6.1.2.1raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- E2.A6.1.2.3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- E2.A5.1.2.2raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
- E2.A6.1.3.3appliedConditions That Resulted in the Behavior Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control
- E2.A6.1.3.6appliedIndividual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
- E2.A5.1.3.5appliedIndividual Has Taken Positive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
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 issuedFeb 9, 2005
- Answer filedMar 11, 2005Applicant admitted to allegations.
- Hearing held—Determination made without hearing.
- Decision dateJul 29, 2005
Cite For
- Mitigation of Financial Difficulties Due to Unemployment Under Guideline F
- Credibility of Applicant's Explanations for Financial Omissions Under Guideline E
- Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Debts as a Mitigating Factor in Security Clearance Cases