ISCR Case 09-00686.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-00686.h1

deniedApr 28, 2010· Hon. Marc E. Curry· hearing

Summary

A 26-year-old single mother with a high school education was denied a security clearance due to financial considerations under Guideline F, stemming from approximately $34,000 in delinquent debts. These debts primarily originated from rental payments and automobile repossessions.

Specific allegations included a $3,705 judgment from a 2003 rental agreement, which was satisfied by November 2009 through wage garnishment. However, other significant outstanding debts remained, such as a $12,768 deficiency from a 2003 car repossession and a $9,395 deficiency from a 2006 car repossession, for which she had no settlement plans. She also owed $1,620 for another rental delinquency, incurred after signing a lease for her father. Additionally, approximately $1,200 in disputed medical bills were not resolved in her favor, and a student loan of about $1,858 became outstanding after its deferment lapsed. Other delinquencies included a department store account of $911 and four phone bills. One debt allegation was resolved in her favor after her mother’s testimony confirmed it was not hers.

Despite some progress in managing certain debts, the judge found that approximately $25,000 in outstanding delinquent debt, coupled with a lack of concrete resolution plans and a pattern of financial irresponsibility, posed an unacceptable security risk. Consequently, her security clearance application was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has approximately $25,000 in outstanding delinquent debt with no concrete plan to resolve it.
The applicant's financial irresponsibility, including opening accounts for others who defaulted, contributed to her financial issues.
The applicant's disputes regarding several debts were not sufficient to mitigate the overall financial concerns.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

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

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions Largely Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant's financial problems were attributed to her own irresponsibility.
AG ¶ 20(e)appliedReasonable Basis to Dispute Debts
AG ¶ 29(c)appliedReceived Counseling for the Problem

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 27, 2009
Answer filedAug 24, 2009
Hearing heldJan 12, 2010Applicant moved to keep the record open for additional documents.
Decision dateApr 28, 2010

Cite For

Financial Irresponsibility Leading to Security Concerns Under Guideline F
Impact of Unresolved Debts on Security Clearance Eligibility
The Importance of a Concrete Plan to Address Financial Delinquencies

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	Applicant accrued the debt listed in SOR subparagraph 1.a in 2003 after she put her name on the lease with [a friend] to help him get an apartment, and the friend failed to pay the rent. Subsequently, the court entered a judgment against Applicant for $3,705. By November 2009, Applicant had satisfied it through a wage garnishment. $3,705	For Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.b	The disputed medical accounts total approximately $1,200. Applicant contends that she never accrued these bills, and that they may have been accrued by her mother. After an investigation, the credit reporting agency rejected Applicant’s dispute of SOR subparagraph 1.b.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.c	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant’s first car repossession, as listed in SOR subparagraph 1.d, occurred in 2003 after she lost her job and could not make the monthly car payments. She owes a deficiency of $12,768. She has not yet made plans to settle this account. $12,768	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.e	Applicant accrued the other rental delinquency, as listed in SOR subparagraph 1.e, under similar circumstances as she accrued the rental delinquency as listed in SOR subparagraph 1.a. Specifically, she signed a lease for her father to help him qualify for an apartment, and he subsequently failed to make the monthly rental payments. She owes the landlord $1,620. $1,620	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.f	Approximately $4,400 of Applicant’s delinquencies consist of a department store account (SOR subparagraph 1.f), four phone bills (SOR subparagraphs 1.m, 1.r, 1.s, and 1.z), and a student loan. Applicant accrued the department store account, in the amount of $911, before she lost her job in 2003. $911	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.g–1.n	8 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (2 against, 6 for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed			—	—	—
1.o	Applicant’s second car repossession, as listed in SOR subparagraph 1.o, occurred in 2006. Applicant owes a $9,395 deficiency. Currently, she has no plans to satisfy this deficiency. $9,395	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.p	Applicant obtained the student loan listed in SOR subparagraph 1.p, when she first enrolled in college in 2005. While enrolled, the loan was in deferment. After relocating to another state and transferring schools, the loan’s deferment status lapsed, and became due. Currently, approximately $1,858 is outstanding. $1,858	Against Applicant	Student Loan Debt	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.q–1.t	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (rulings shown). (low confidence)	Mixed			—	—	—
1.u	Applicant established that the debt listed in SOR subparagraph 1.u was not hers, through her mother’s testimony. I resolve SOR subparagraph 1.u in Applicant’s favor. (low confidence)	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
1.v–1.z	5 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (3 against, 2 for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant accrued the debt listed in SOR subparagraph 1.a in 2003 after she put her name on the lease with [a friend] to help him get an apartment, and the friend failed to pay the rent. Subsequently, the court entered a judgment against Applicant for $3,705. By November 2009, Applicant had satisfied it through a wage garnishment.

$3,705

For Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.b

The disputed medical accounts total approximately $1,200. Applicant contends that she never accrued these bills, and that they may have been accrued by her mother. After an investigation, the credit reporting agency rejected Applicant’s dispute of SOR subparagraph 1.b.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.c

specific text not stated in this decision

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

1.d

Applicant’s first car repossession, as listed in SOR subparagraph 1.d, occurred in 2003 after she lost her job and could not make the monthly car payments. She owes a deficiency of $12,768. She has not yet made plans to settle this account.

$12,768

Against Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.e

Applicant accrued the other rental delinquency, as listed in SOR subparagraph 1.e, under similar circumstances as she accrued the rental delinquency as listed in SOR subparagraph 1.a. Specifically, she signed a lease for her father to help him qualify for an apartment, and he subsequently failed to make the monthly rental payments. She owes the landlord $1,620.

$1,620

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.f

Approximately $4,400 of Applicant’s delinquencies consist of a department store account (SOR subparagraph 1.f), four phone bills (SOR subparagraphs 1.m, 1.r, 1.s, and 1.z), and a student loan. Applicant accrued the department store account, in the amount of $911, before she lost her job in 2003.

$911

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.g–1.n

8 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (2 against, 6 for the applicant). (low confidence)

Mixed

—

1.o

Applicant’s second car repossession, as listed in SOR subparagraph 1.o, occurred in 2006. Applicant owes a $9,395 deficiency. Currently, she has no plans to satisfy this deficiency.

$9,395

Against Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Unknown

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.p

Applicant obtained the student loan listed in SOR subparagraph 1.p, when she first enrolled in college in 2005. While enrolled, the loan was in deferment. After relocating to another state and transferring schools, the loan’s deferment status lapsed, and became due. Currently, approximately $1,858 is outstanding.

$1,858

Against Applicant

Student Loan Debt

Unknown

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

1.q–1.t

4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (rulings shown). (low confidence)

Mixed

—

1.u

Applicant established that the debt listed in SOR subparagraph 1.u was not hers, through her mother’s testimony. I resolve SOR subparagraph 1.u in Applicant’s favor. (low confidence)

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

1.v–1.z

5 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (3 against, 2 for the applicant). (low confidence)

Mixed

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

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