Summary
The applicant, a 29-year-old data entry clerk for a defense contractor, faced trustworthiness concerns under Guidelines E and F due to significant financial delinquencies and a history of false statements on her e-QIP. The judge found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to mitigate these concerns, resulting in a denial of her eligibility for a public trust position.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: On March 13, 2014, when Applicant completed her e-QIP, she responded to questions pertaining to her financial record. Several of those questions in Section 26 – Financial Record – asked if, in the past seven years, she had any judgment entered against her; if possessions or property were voluntarily or involuntarily repossessed; if she had bills or debts turned over to a collection agency; or if she was currently over 120 days delinquent on any debt. Applicant answered “no” to those questions. She certified that the responses were “true, complete, and correct” to the best of her knowledge and belief, but the responses to those questions were, in fact, false for at that time Applicant had several accounts that fell within the stated parameters (2.a). In February 2012, Applicant and her boyfriend were engaged in a verbal and physical dispute at their shared-residence and he had ordered her out. She filed an incident report with the police. She subsequently changed her story, and told the police the incident had never occurred. That summer, Applicant was informed by the police that she was being charged with falsely summoning or giving false reports to law-enforcement officials. On August 6, 2012, she turned herself in to the police and was arrested. In September 2012, Applicant entered a plea of guilty. Although the SOR also alleged that Applicant had been sentenced to six months in jail (suspended) and a fine of $82, Applicant claimed she was released without fine or probation. There is no evidence to contradict Applicant’s position regarding the sentence (2.b). an electric utility account that was $300 past due (1.e). a telephone account that was $271 past due (1.f). a department store account that was charged off in the amount of $404 (1.g). a cable television/Internet account that was $150 past due (1.k). a cellular telephone account that was $202 past due (1.l). a medical account that was $64 past due (1.m). a medical account that was $21 past due (1.n). a medical account that was $46 past due (1.o). a medical account that was $22 past due (1.p). a student loan account that was $3,820 past due (1.q). an apartment lease account with a remaining unpaid balance of $1,866 (1.r). a bank checking account that was apparently overdrawn leaving $413 past due (1.s). a medical account that was $282 past due (1.t). a medical account that was $129 past due (1.u). a medical account with a remaining unpaid balance of $43 (1.v). a medical account with a remaining unpaid balance of $43 (1.w). a cable television/Internet account that was $186 past due (1.x). a medical account with a remaining unpaid balance of $244 (1.y). a cash advance account for which a judgment was entered in the amount of $456 (1.z).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions F.19.a, F.19.c, F.19.g. The decision turned on the following: The applicant admitted to numerous delinquent accounts totaling approximately $25,772, which were placed for collection, charged off, or resulted in repossession; The applicant failed to timely file her federal and state income tax returns for 2013, which raised trustworthiness concerns under AG ¶ 19(g); The applicant did not provide evidence of financial counseling or demonstrate that her financial issues were under control.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant admitted to numerous delinquent accounts totaling approximately $25,772, which were placed for collection, charged off, or resulted in repossession.
- The applicant failed to timely file her federal and state income tax returns for 2013, which raised trustworthiness concerns under AG ¶ 19(g).
- The applicant did not provide evidence of financial counseling or demonstrate that her financial issues were under control.
Conditions Referenced
- F.19.araisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- F.19.craisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- F.19.graisedFailure to File Annual Federal, State, or Local Income Tax Returns as Required
Key Rule Quoted
“Failure or inability 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 information.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 18, 2015
- Answer filedJun 12, 2015Applicant elected to have her case decided on the written record.
- Hearing held—No hearing was held; decision based on written record.
- Decision dateFeb 23, 2016
Cite For
- Trustworthiness Concerns Under Guideline F Due to Financial Delinquencies
- False Statements on E-qip Under Guideline E
- Failure to Mitigate Financial Issues Impacting Eligibility for Public Trust Positions