Summary
The applicant, a 45-year-old Senior Cyber Analyst with significant financial issues totaling over $66,000 in debts, sought a security clearance under Guideline F. Despite some efforts to resolve her debts, the judge found insufficient evidence of financial responsibility, leading to a denial of the security clearance.
Under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant is indebted to a bank for an account that has been charged off in the approximate amount of $2,733.00 (1.a). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for account #542418110010 placed for collection in the approximate amount of $16,065 (1.b). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for account #54218127303 placed for collection in the approximate amount of $6,928 (1.c). Applicant is indebted to a bank for account that was charged-off in the approximate amount of $14,109 (1.d). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for account #SYNCH-1919302700 that was placed for collection in the approximate amount of $809 (1.e). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for account #SYNCH-1918324719 that was placed for collection in the approximate amount of $5,607 (1.f). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was charged off in the approximate amount of $4,794 (1.g). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was charged off in the approximate amount of $8,628 (1.h). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for an account that was charged off in the approximate amount of $8,172 (1.i). Applicant is indebted to a creditor for a medical account placed for collection in the approximate amount of $5,066 (1.j).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(c), AG ¶ 19(e). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(d). The decision turned on the following: The applicant demonstrated a history of not addressing her debts and an inability to do so; Excessive spending on luxuries indicated poor judgment and financial irresponsibility; The applicant failed to show a consistent track record of payments or systematic efforts to resolve her debts.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant demonstrated a history of not addressing her debts and an inability to do so.
- Excessive spending on luxuries indicated poor judgment and financial irresponsibility.
- The applicant failed to show a consistent track record of payments or systematic efforts to resolve her debts.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 19(a)appliedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- AG ¶ 19(c)appliedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- AG ¶ 19(e)appliedConsistent Spending Beyond One’s Means
- AG ¶ 20(b)raisedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s Control
- AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood Faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant has not demonstrated a track record of payments or systematic monthly payments.
Key Rule Quoted
“Failure to live within one's means, satisfy debts, and meet financial obligations may indicate poor self-control, lack of judgment, or unwillingness to abide by rules and regulations, all of which can raise questions about an individual's reliability, trustworthiness, and ability to protect classified or sensitive information.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedSep 15, 2023
- Answer filedNov 18, 2023
- Hearing heldMar 6, 2024
- Decision dateJun 12, 2024
Cite For
- Insufficient Evidence of Financial Responsibility Under Guideline F
- Impact of Excessive Spending on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Importance of Demonstrating a Track Record of Debt Repayment Efforts in Clearance Cases