ISCR Case 15-01103.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-01103.h1

grantedAug 11, 2016· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 34-year-old claims processor for a defense contractor was granted a public trust position despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant's financial difficulties stemmed from personal circumstances, including medical issues and family responsibilities.

The Statement of Reasons detailed several financial allegations, including two defaulted Sallie Mae student loans with varying reported balances, two department store charge accounts with past-due balances that were subsequently placed for collection, and three medical accounts. One medical account was settled for $141, with payments completed by January 2016. Another medical account was resolved, and a third was confirmed by the medical center to have been paid by Medicare.

The applicant admitted to the financial difficulties but demonstrated significant mitigating efforts. She sought assistance from a financial coach, established a budget, and implemented repayment plans for her debts. Her work performance also improved, with supervisors noting her accountability and ethical behavior. These proactive steps and commitment to financial stability led to the decision to grant her eligibility.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant admitted to financial difficulties but took proactive steps to address them, including seeking assistance from a financial coach.
She established a budget and repayment plans for her debts, demonstrating a commitment to financial stability.
The applicant's work performance improved over time, with supervisors noting her accountability and ethical behavior.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent and the Individual Has Received Counseling or Treatment for the Problem
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Individual Has a Reasonable Basis to Expect to Be Able to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 20(c)appliedThe Individual Has Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts

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.”
— Regulation ¶ C6.1.1.1.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 5, 2015
Answer filedSep 1, 2015Applicant requested a hearing on January 27, 2016.
Hearing heldFeb 2, 2016
Decision dateAug 11, 2016

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
Proactive Steps Taken to Resolve Financial Issues
Importance of Work Performance in Security Clearance Decisions

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	These are two student loans that were issued by Sallie Mae and transferred to a servicing agent, before they went into default. They were returned with claims for reimbursement to Sallie Mae. The amounts of both loans were unclear because they appear in the credit reports with different balances, depending on the listed creditor and the listed reporting agency. The January 2015 credit report lists the loan attributed to SOR ¶ 1.a. as having a high credit of $10,770 and a past-due amount of $14,246, while the September 2015 credit report lists the account with a high credit of $10,770 and a past-due balance of $11,646. $14,246	For Applicant	Student Loan Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	These are two student loans that were issued by Sallie Mae and transferred to a servicing agent, before they went into default. They were returned with claims for reimbursement to Sallie Mae. The January 2015 credit report lists the loan attributed to SOR ¶ 1.b. as having a high credit of $6,141 and a past-due amount of $8,123, while the September 2015 credit report lists the account with a high credit of $6,141 and a past-due balance of $6,640. $8,123	For Applicant	Student Loan Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	This is a department store charge account with a credit limit of $300 and past-due and unpaid balance of $554 that was placed for collection and charged off. The account was eventually transferred or sold to another entity. Applicant contacted the current holder of the account and agreed to a repayment arrangement under which she makes monthly payments of $15, commencing in September 2015. $554	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	This is a department store charge account with a $200 credit limit, an unpaid balance of $352, and a past-due balance of $79. In early 2015, $446 was charged off, and the account was sold to a debt purchaser. Applicant contacted the debt purchaser and agreed to a repayment arrangement under which, since September 2015, she has had automatic monthly withdrawals from her account in the amount of $26.36. $352	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	This is a medical account with an unpaid balance of $215 that was placed for collection during a period when Applicant’s son’s medical services were covered by Medicare. For some reason, Medicare either did not receive the bill or failed to pay it. By the time Applicant learned of the situation, the filing time had elapsed, and, although the school indicated they would take care of the bill, Medicare had no further responsibility. Applicant contacted the current holder of the account and agreed to a settlement of $141 and a repayment arrangement under which she made an initial payment of $30 in November 2015, and a final payment of $111 in January 2016. $215	For Applicant	Medical Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	This is a medical account with an unpaid balance of $222 that was placed for collection in 2009 during a period when Applicant’s son’s medical services were covered by Medicare. An account under that collection agency’s name or in the same amount does not appear in subsequent credit reports. Applicant contends that in speaking with a representative of the current holder of the account identified in SOR ¶ 1.e., it was determined that the two accounts are actually one medical account stemming from services provided in 2007 to Applicant’s son when he fractured his wrist. The account was purchased by the current holder in December 2013. While Applicant identified the individual she spoke with, and his telephone number, she failed to submit any documentation to support her contention. Nevertheless, in spite of the missing documentation, under the circumstances presented, it appears that the two allegations are “snapshots” along the timeline of the same account. The account has been resolved. $222	For Applicant	Medical Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	This is a medical account with an unpaid balance of $104 that was placed for collection during a period when Applicant’s son’s medical services (when he broke a collar bone) were covered by Medicare. For some reason, Medicare either did not receive the bill or failed to pay it. An account under that collection agency’s name or in the same amount does not appear in subsequent credit reports. Applicant contends that in speaking with a representative of the current holder of the account, it was determined that the initial collection agency had been bought out by the current collection agency and they had no record of the account. Applicant also spoke with the medical billing department of the medical center where the service was provided, and they confirmed to her that the bill had, in fact, been paid by Medicare. While Applicant identified the individuals she spoke with, and their telephone numbers, she failed to submit any documentation to support her contention. Nevertheless, in spite of the missing documentation, under the circumstances presented, it appears that the account has been resolved. $104	For Applicant	Medical Debt	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

These are two student loans that were issued by Sallie Mae and transferred to a servicing agent, before they went into default. They were returned with claims for reimbursement to Sallie Mae. The amounts of both loans were unclear because they appear in the credit reports with different balances, depending on the listed creditor and the listed reporting agency. The January 2015 credit report lists the loan attributed to SOR ¶ 1.a. as having a high credit of $10,770 and a past-due amount of $14,246, while the September 2015 credit report lists the account with a high credit of $10,770 and a past-due balance of $11,646.

$14,246

For Applicant

Student Loan Debt

Admitted

—

1.b

These are two student loans that were issued by Sallie Mae and transferred to a servicing agent, before they went into default. They were returned with claims for reimbursement to Sallie Mae. The January 2015 credit report lists the loan attributed to SOR ¶ 1.b. as having a high credit of $6,141 and a past-due amount of $8,123, while the September 2015 credit report lists the account with a high credit of $6,141 and a past-due balance of $6,640.

$8,123

For Applicant

Student Loan Debt

Admitted

—

1.c

This is a department store charge account with a credit limit of $300 and past-due and unpaid balance of $554 that was placed for collection and charged off. The account was eventually transferred or sold to another entity. Applicant contacted the current holder of the account and agreed to a repayment arrangement under which she makes monthly payments of $15, commencing in September 2015.

$554

For Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Admitted

—

1.d

This is a department store charge account with a $200 credit limit, an unpaid balance of $352, and a past-due balance of $79. In early 2015, $446 was charged off, and the account was sold to a debt purchaser. Applicant contacted the debt purchaser and agreed to a repayment arrangement under which, since September 2015, she has had automatic monthly withdrawals from her account in the amount of $26.36.

$352

For Applicant

Credit Card Debt

Admitted

—

1.e

This is a medical account with an unpaid balance of $215 that was placed for collection during a period when Applicant’s son’s medical services were covered by Medicare. For some reason, Medicare either did not receive the bill or failed to pay it. By the time Applicant learned of the situation, the filing time had elapsed, and, although the school indicated they would take care of the bill, Medicare had no further responsibility. Applicant contacted the current holder of the account and agreed to a settlement of $141 and a repayment arrangement under which she made an initial payment of $30 in November 2015, and a final payment of $111 in January 2016.

$215

For Applicant

Medical Debt

Admitted

—

1.f

This is a medical account with an unpaid balance of $222 that was placed for collection in 2009 during a period when Applicant’s son’s medical services were covered by Medicare. An account under that collection agency’s name or in the same amount does not appear in subsequent credit reports. Applicant contends that in speaking with a representative of the current holder of the account identified in SOR ¶ 1.e., it was determined that the two accounts are actually one medical account stemming from services provided in 2007 to Applicant’s son when he fractured his wrist. The account was purchased by the current holder in December 2013. While Applicant identified the individual she spoke with, and his telephone number, she failed to submit any documentation to support her contention. Nevertheless, in spite of the missing documentation, under the circumstances presented, it appears that the two allegations are “snapshots” along the timeline of the same account. The account has been resolved.

$222

For Applicant

Medical Debt

Admitted

—

1.g

This is a medical account with an unpaid balance of $104 that was placed for collection during a period when Applicant’s son’s medical services (when he broke a collar bone) were covered by Medicare. For some reason, Medicare either did not receive the bill or failed to pay it. An account under that collection agency’s name or in the same amount does not appear in subsequent credit reports. Applicant contends that in speaking with a representative of the current holder of the account, it was determined that the initial collection agency had been bought out by the current collection agency and they had no record of the account. Applicant also spoke with the medical billing department of the medical center where the service was provided, and they confirmed to her that the bill had, in fact, been paid by Medicare. While Applicant identified the individuals she spoke with, and their telephone numbers, she failed to submit any documentation to support her contention. Nevertheless, in spite of the missing documentation, under the circumstances presented, it appears that the account has been resolved.

$104

For Applicant

Medical Debt

Admitted

—

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