ISCR Case 14-01201.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 14-01201.h1

grantedAug 29, 2014· Hon. Jennifer I. Goldstein· hearing

Summary

A 33-year-old defense contractor and former Navy service member was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant faced allegations of approximately $16,757 in debts and failing to disclose these on his October 2, 2013 e-QIP.

Specifically, the applicant had a $2,825 judgment from March 2007 for a cleaning fee, which was satisfied in December 2012. He also had an $11,175 judgment from a credit union, incurred as a co-signer on a car loan, which he began paying in 2008 and satisfied in November 2012. A $303 medical debt, of which he was unaware, was satisfied in May 2014 after being brought to his attention. Finally, a $2,454 cell phone debt from 2009, incurred due to alleged over-billing during deployment, was contested and no longer appeared on his credit reports.

The judge found that the applicant had resolved all but the contested cell phone debt, demonstrating responsible financial behavior. The omissions on his e-QIP were determined to be unintentional. Based on these mitigating factors, the applicant was granted eligibility for a security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant resolved all but one of his debts, demonstrating responsible financial behavior.
The contested debt no longer appeared on his credit report, indicating proactive management of his finances.
The applicant's omissions on the e-QIP were found to be unintentional, supported by credible testimony.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F.1.araisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
F.1.craisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
E.2.araisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts

Mitigating

F.2.aappliedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
F.2.dappliedThe Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
E.2.aappliedThe Individual Did Not Intentionally Omit Relevant Information

Key Rule Quoted

“A security clearance adjudication is not a proceeding aimed at collecting an applicant’s personal debts. Rather, it is a proceeding aimed at evaluating an applicant’s judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.”
— ISCR Case No. 01-09691 at 3 (App. Bd. Mar. 27, 2003)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 1, 2014
Answer filedMay 29, 2014
Hearing heldAug 7, 2014
Decision dateAug 29, 2014

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Obligations Under Guideline F Due to Proactive Debt Resolution
Unintentional Omissions on E-qip Under Guideline E
Whole-person Analysis in Security Clearance Determinations

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 failed to disclose his judgments identified in subparagraphs 1.a and 1.b, and his failure to disclose debts over 120 days delinquent as identified in subparagraphs 1.a through 1.d, on his October 2, 2013 e-QIP.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Financial	Denied	—	(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted	Claimed Explanation of Omission Credible
2.b	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant failed to disclose his judgments identified in subparagraphs 1.a and 1.b, and his failure to disclose debts over 120 days delinquent as identified in subparagraphs 1.a through 1.d, on his October 2, 2013 e-QIP.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Financial

Denied

—

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

Claimed

Explanation of Omission Credible

2.b

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was indebted on a judgment filed against him in March 2007 in the amount of $2,825, as alleged in subparagraph 1.a. This debt was the result of a cleaning fee incurred when he moved out of the apartment he occupied with his wife, upon their separation. He provided an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment showing that this debt was satisfied in full on December 3, 2012. This debt is resolved. $2,825	For Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Denied	—	(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	—
1.b	Applicant was indebted on a judgment filed against him by a credit union in the amount of $11,175, as alleged in subparagraph 1.b. Applicant became liable on this debt as a co-signer when his wife defaulted on a car loan after their separation. The vehicle was repossessed and Applicant was held liable for the remainder due on the loan. Applicant began making $300 per month payments on this judgment in 2008. He satisfied this judgment in full on November 20, 2012. This debt is resolved. $11,175	For Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Denied	—	(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	—
1.c	Applicant was indebted on a medical debt in the approximate amount of $303 as alleged in subparagraph 1.c. He was unaware of this debt until the investigative agent who interviewed him regarding his security clearance application asked him about the delinquency. He contacted the creditor and satisfied the debt on May 27, 2014. He provided a receipt from the creditor to show this debt is resolved. $303	For Applicant	Medical Debt	Denied	—	(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	—
1.d	Applicant has been in ongoing communications with a cell phone company regarding his $2,454 debt stated in subparagraph 1.d. This debt was incurred when he was deployed in 2009. Prior to his deployment, he negotiated an international calling plan with his cellular company. When he returned, he discovered the cellular company had significantly over-billed him. He testified he hired a credit repair service to contest his debts on his behalf because he wanted to increase his credit score. This debt no longer appears on his two most recent credit reports, however he is willing to repay this debt. Applicant has acted responsibly with respect to this debt. $2,454	For Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant was indebted on a judgment filed against him in March 2007 in the amount of $2,825, as alleged in subparagraph 1.a. This debt was the result of a cleaning fee incurred when he moved out of the apartment he occupied with his wife, upon their separation. He provided an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment showing that this debt was satisfied in full on December 3, 2012. This debt is resolved.

$2,825

For Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Denied

—

(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts

—

1.b

Applicant was indebted on a judgment filed against him by a credit union in the amount of $11,175, as alleged in subparagraph 1.b. Applicant became liable on this debt as a co-signer when his wife defaulted on a car loan after their separation. The vehicle was repossessed and Applicant was held liable for the remainder due on the loan. Applicant began making $300 per month payments on this judgment in 2008. He satisfied this judgment in full on November 20, 2012. This debt is resolved.

$11,175

For Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Denied

—

(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts

—

1.c

Applicant was indebted on a medical debt in the approximate amount of $303 as alleged in subparagraph 1.c. He was unaware of this debt until the investigative agent who interviewed him regarding his security clearance application asked him about the delinquency. He contacted the creditor and satisfied the debt on May 27, 2014. He provided a receipt from the creditor to show this debt is resolved.

$303

For Applicant

Medical Debt

Denied

—

(d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts

—

1.d

Applicant has been in ongoing communications with a cell phone company regarding his $2,454 debt stated in subparagraph 1.d. This debt was incurred when he was deployed in 2009. Prior to his deployment, he negotiated an international calling plan with his cellular company. When he returned, he discovered the cellular company had significantly over-billed him. He testified he hired a credit repair service to contest his debts on his behalf because he wanted to increase his credit score. This debt no longer appears on his two most recent credit reports, however he is willing to repay this debt. Applicant has acted responsibly with respect to this debt.

$2,454

For Applicant

Utility or Phone 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