Summary
A 56-year-old medical coder was denied a security clearance for a Public Trust Position due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The denial stemmed from the applicant's deliberate falsification of her Public Trust Position Application, where she failed to disclose two judgments and outstanding debts exceeding $50,000.
Specifically, the applicant denied having any debts delinquent for more than 180 days and omitted information about two judgments. Her financial history included numerous collection accounts dating from 1999 to 2005, with individual amounts ranging from $75 to $3,767. Significant debts included $8,698 for a repossessed car and a $31,965 charged-off debt.
The administrative judge determined that the applicant deliberately falsified her application and demonstrated a long-standing pattern of not meeting financial obligations. Despite some mitigating conditions being considered, the applicant failed to establish sufficient mitigation for her financial issues or personal conduct, leading to the denial of her eligibility for a position of trust.
Why the applicant was denied
- Applicant deliberately falsified her Public Trust Position Application by failing to disclose two judgments and delinquent debts.
- Applicant has a history of not meeting financial obligations, totaling over $50,000 in delinquent debts.
- The applicant failed to establish any mitigating conditions for her financial issues or personal conduct.
Conditions referenced
- DC 1raisedFinancial ConsiderationsApplicant has a history of not meeting her financial obligations.
- DC 2raisedPersonal ConductDeliberate falsification or omission of relevant and material facts from any SCA is a security concern.
- DC 3raisedFinancial ConsiderationsApplicant is unable or unwilling to satisfy her debts.
- MC 3appliedFinancial ConsiderationsApplicant's financial difficulties were exacerbated by a fire that destroyed her home.
Key rule quoted
“The standard that must be met for . . . assignment to sensitive duties is that, based on all available information, the person's loyalty, reliability, and trustworthiness are such that . . . assigning the person to sensitive duties is clearly consistent with the interests of national security.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedJun 21, 2006
- Answer filedAug 30, 2006
- Hearing heldNov 15, 2006with consent of the parties
- Decision dateDec 27, 2006
Cite for
- Deliberate Falsification of Application Under Guideline E
- Financial Irresponsibility Under Guideline F
- Failure to Establish Mitigating Conditions for Financial Issues