ISCR Case 14-04737.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 14-04737.h1

grantedSep 15, 2015· Hon. Mark W. Harvey· hearing

Summary

A 41-year-old administrative assistant was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) related to two judgments totaling $25,475. The first judgment, for $8,023, stemmed from an unpaid credit card debt incurred with her husband. This debt was fully satisfied through wage garnishment by May 2014.

The second judgment, for $17,452, also resulted from an unpaid credit card debt with her husband. A judgment was obtained in July 2012, and after initial payments, a garnishment order began in January 2015, limited to ten percent of her salary. She has also made an additional payment of $100 in August 2015. The current balance owed is $16,121, with monthly payments of $319.

The judge determined that the applicant's financial issues were largely beyond her control, citing her spouse's health problems and financial strain from their bed and breakfast business. She demonstrated responsible actions by satisfying one judgment and consistently making payments on the other since June 2014. Additionally, she provided evidence of financial counseling and a budget, indicating her ability to manage her finances. Based on these mitigating factors, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant satisfied one judgment and has been making consistent payments on the other judgment since June 2014.
She provided evidence of financial counseling and a budget indicating her ability to manage expenses and debts.
The financial issues were largely due to circumstances beyond her control, including her spouse's health issues and the financial strain of their bed and breakfast business.

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 Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s Control
AG ¶ 20(c)appliedThe Person Has Received or Is Receiving Counseling for the Problem And/or There Are Clear Indications That the Problem Is Being Resolved or Is Under Control
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 5, 2015
Answer filedMar 23, 2015
Hearing heldAug 25, 2015
Decision dateSep 15, 2015

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline F for Financial Issues
Evidence of Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Debts
Impact of Circumstances Beyond Control on Financial Obligations

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	SOR ¶ 1.a alleges a judgment for $8,023. The debt resulted from Applicant and her husband’s failure to pay a credit card debt. In May 2011, the creditor obtained a garnishment order to address a judgment for $8,790 plus interest. Under state law, the garnishment is limited to ten percent of the debtor’s salary. Applicant’s judgment was satisfied through garnishment in May 2014. $8,023	For Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly (c) received/receiving counseling; problem being resolved	Documented Debt Paid in Full
1.b	SOR ¶ 1.b alleges a judgment for $17,452. The debt resulted when Applicant and her husband failed to pay a credit card debt. In July 2012, the creditor obtained a judgment for $18,023. The creditor’s court filing shows Applicant and her spouse paid $1,647 before December 2014. In December 2014, the creditor obtained a garnishment order to address a debt for $16,376 plus nine percent interest from October 2014. Under state law, the garnishment is limited to ten percent of the debtor’s salary of about $38,000. The garnishment began in January 2015. In addition to the garnishment, Applicant paid $100 in August 2015. The current balance owed is $16,121; her monthly payment is $319; and monthly principal reduction is $177 after paying fees and interest. $17,452	For Applicant	Judgment Against Applicant	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly (c) received/receiving counseling; problem being resolved	Documented Debt Paid in Full

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

SOR ¶ 1.a alleges a judgment for $8,023. The debt resulted from Applicant and her husband’s failure to pay a credit card debt. In May 2011, the creditor obtained a garnishment order to address a judgment for $8,790 plus interest. Under state law, the garnishment is limited to ten percent of the debtor’s salary. Applicant’s judgment was satisfied through garnishment in May 2014.

$8,023

For Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur

(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly

(c) received/receiving counseling; problem being resolved

Documented

Debt Paid in Full

1.b

SOR ¶ 1.b alleges a judgment for $17,452. The debt resulted when Applicant and her husband failed to pay a credit card debt. In July 2012, the creditor obtained a judgment for $18,023. The creditor’s court filing shows Applicant and her spouse paid $1,647 before December 2014. In December 2014, the creditor obtained a garnishment order to address a debt for $16,376 plus nine percent interest from October 2014. Under state law, the garnishment is limited to ten percent of the debtor’s salary of about $38,000. The garnishment began in January 2015. In addition to the garnishment, Applicant paid $100 in August 2015. The current balance owed is $16,121; her monthly payment is $319; and monthly principal reduction is $177 after paying fees and interest.

$17,452

For Applicant

Judgment Against Applicant

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur

(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly

(c) received/receiving counseling; problem being resolved

Documented

Debt Paid in Full

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

FOOTNOTES