ISCR Case 18-01690

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 18-01690

grantedJan 8, 2019· Hon. Robert J. Kilmartin· hearing

Summary

This case concerns a 44-year-old single mother of three who sought a public trust position, addressing concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleged 11 delinquent debts, including repossessed automobile loans, five credit card debts used for living expenses, and two medical bills totaling $343 and $45. Additionally, the SOR claimed she omitted these delinquent debts from section 26 of her 2018 Security Clearance Application (SCA), though she denied one specific charged-off debt of $376, stating it was paid in full.

Disqualifying conditions under AG ¶ 19(a), AG ¶ 19(b), and AG ¶ 19(c) were raised. However, the applicant demonstrated significant mitigating efforts. She successfully entered a Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan to manage her delinquent debts and provided evidence of consistent payments to the bankruptcy trustee, showing good-faith efforts to resolve her financial issues.

The administrative judge found no intent to deceive regarding her financial disclosures on the security clearance application. Applying mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(c), and AG ¶ 20(d), the judge concluded that her actions were consistent with national security interests. Consequently, the applicant was GRANTED eligibility for the public trust position.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant successfully entered a Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan to address her delinquent debts.
She provided evidence of consistent payments to the bankruptcy trustee, demonstrating good-faith efforts to resolve her financial issues.
The judge found no intent to deceive regarding her financial disclosures on the security clearance application.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(b)raisedUnwillingness to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(b)appliedConditions Largely Beyond Control
AG ¶ 20(c)appliedReceived Financial Counseling
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedGood-faith Effort to Repay Debts

Key Rule Quoted

“The ultimate determination of whether to grant eligibility for a public trust position must be an overall commonsense judgment based upon careful consideration of the guidelines and the whole-person concept.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 29, 2018
Answer filedSep 24, 2018
Hearing heldDec 6, 2018
Decision dateJan 8, 2019

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Concerns Through Bankruptcy Under Guideline F
Consideration of Personal Circumstances in Trustworthiness Evaluations
No Intent to Deceive in Financial Disclosures on Security Clearance Applications

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant omitted her delinquent debts in section 26 of her 2018 SCA.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Financial	Denied	—	(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted	Claimed Corrected Falsification Promptly Claimed Other

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant omitted her delinquent debts in section 26 of her 2018 SCA.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Financial

Denied

—

(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted

Claimed

Corrected Falsification Promptly

Claimed

Other

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	SOR ¶¶ 1.a and 1.b are delinquent debts related to automobiles that were repossessed when Applicant could not keep up with payments on the automobile loans.	For Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
1.c	Five of the delinquent debts alleged in the SOR (SOR ¶¶ 1.c, 1.d, 1.j, 1.k, and 1.i) were for credit cards that Applicant used to pay living expenses while she struggled to raise three children as a single mother with a meager salary.	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d–1.e	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant			—	—	—
1.f	Applicant admitted the 11 delinquent debts alleged in the SOR, but she denied SOR ¶ 1.f, stating that the charged-off debt in the amount of $376 was paid in full. $376	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—
1.g	SOR ¶¶ 1.g and 1.l are for delinquent medical bills amounting to $343 and $45. (low confidence)	For Applicant	Medical Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
1.h–1.l	5 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

SOR ¶¶ 1.a and 1.b are delinquent debts related to automobiles that were repossessed when Applicant could not keep up with payments on the automobile loans.

For Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Admitted

—

1.b

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

1.c

Five of the delinquent debts alleged in the SOR (SOR ¶¶ 1.c, 1.d, 1.j, 1.k, and 1.i) were for credit cards that Applicant used to pay living expenses while she struggled to raise three children as a single mother with a meager salary.

For Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Admitted

—

1.d–1.e

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)

For Applicant

—

1.f

Applicant admitted the 11 delinquent debts alleged in the SOR, but she denied SOR ¶ 1.f, stating that the charged-off debt in the amount of $376 was paid in full.

$376

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

—

1.g

SOR ¶¶ 1.g and 1.l are for delinquent medical bills amounting to $343 and $45. (low confidence)

For Applicant

Medical Debt

Unknown

—

1.h–1.l

5 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)

For Applicant

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION