ISCR Case 14-04616.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 14-04616.h1

grantedJul 17, 2017· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 60-year-old defense contractor employee was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) detailed five specific financial allegations, including a bank-issued department store credit card with an unpaid balance of $21,611, an unspecified joint bank account with an unpaid balance of $7,935 charged off in January 2010, and an individual bank credit card with an unpaid balance of $5,331 charged off in June 2009. Additional allegations included a woman's clothing store charge account with an unpaid balance of $2,194 charged off in September 2012, and a department store charge account with an unpaid balance of $1,318.

The financial issues stemmed from identity theft perpetrated by his ex-wife and a period of unemployment. However, the applicant demonstrated significant proactive measures to address these problems. He engaged legal assistance to dispute fraudulent accounts and resolved most of the debts listed in the SOR, with some not being substantiated.

The judge found that the applicant had taken substantial steps to mitigate the financial concerns, including demonstrating improved financial stability and effective management of his current finances. Consequently, the security clearance was granted, as the applicant successfully showed that his financial situation was under control.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated proactive measures to address financial issues, including legal assistance for identity theft.
Most of the debts listed in the SOR were resolved or not substantiated, indicating improved financial stability.
The applicant's current financial status showed that he was managing his finances effectively.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F.3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts

Mitigating

F.2appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Difficulties Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control
F.3appliedThe Person Has Received or Is Receiving Counseling for the Financial Problem
F.4appliedThe Person Has Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 9, 2015
Answer filedMar 3, 2015Applicant elected to proceed without a hearing.
Hearing held—Written record decision.
Decision dateJul 17, 2017

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Identity Theft as a Mitigating Factor in Financial Considerations
Proactive Measures Taken to Resolve Debts as a Basis for Granting Clearance

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	This is a bank-issued department store credit card individual account in Applicant’s name with a $10,800 credit limit and unpaid balance of $21,611 that was placed for collection and charged-off. $21,611	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	This is an unspecified type of bank-issued joint account with a high credit of $8,133 and unpaid balance of $7,935 that was placed for collection and charged-off (in January 2010). $7,935	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	This is a bank credit card individual account in Applicant’s name with a $4,000 credit limit and an unpaid balance of $5,331 that was placed for collection and charged off in June 2009. $5,331	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Denied	—	—	—
1.d	This is a bank-issued individual charge account for a woman’s clothing store with a $1,930 credit limit and an unpaid balance of $2,194 that was placed for collection and charged off in September 2012. $2,194	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Denied	—	—	—
1.e	This is a bank-issued individual charge account for a department store with a past-due and unpaid balance of $1,318 that was placed for collection and charged off. $1,318	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

This is a bank-issued department store credit card individual account in Applicant’s name with a $10,800 credit limit and unpaid balance of $21,611 that was placed for collection and charged-off.

$21,611

For Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Denied

—

1.b

This is an unspecified type of bank-issued joint account with a high credit of $8,133 and unpaid balance of $7,935 that was placed for collection and charged-off (in January 2010).

$7,935

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

—

1.c

This is a bank credit card individual account in Applicant’s name with a $4,000 credit limit and an unpaid balance of $5,331 that was placed for collection and charged off in June 2009.

$5,331

For Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Denied

—

1.d

This is a bank-issued individual charge account for a woman’s clothing store with a $1,930 credit limit and an unpaid balance of $2,194 that was placed for collection and charged off in September 2012.

$2,194

For Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Denied

—

1.e

This is a bank-issued individual charge account for a department store with a past-due and unpaid balance of $1,318 that was placed for collection and charged off.

$1,318

For Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Denied

—

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES