CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 08-03418.a1 — CASE

ISCR Case 08-03418.a1denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-03418.a1

deniedMay 13, 2009· Hon. Michael Y. Ra'anan· appeal

Summary

A service representative's security clearance was denied under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to significant financial delinquencies. The applicant had numerous delinquent debts totaling $30,964, which included a substantial student loan. These issues raised concerns under Disqualifying Condition F.3.

The judge determined that the applicant failed to provide adequate information regarding her financial circumstances in response to the Statement of Reasons. This lack of transparency prevented a thorough assessment of her financial trustworthiness.

Ultimately, the applicant's trustworthiness designation was denied. An appeal was also denied because new evidence submitted at that stage could not be considered in the review process.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had numerous delinquent debts totaling $30,964, including a significant student loan.
The applicant provided little or no information regarding her financial circumstances in response to the SOR.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F.3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts

Key Rule Quoted

“The Judge’s conclusion that Applicant failed to mitigate the Guideline F security concerns in her case is sustainable.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 24, 2008
Answer filed—Applicant requested a decision on the written record.
Hearing heldMar 10, 2009Decision made by Administrative Judge Robert J. Tuider.
Decision dateMay 13, 2009Appeal affirmed by the Board.

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
Limitations on New Evidence During Appeal
Sustainability of Adverse Trustworthiness Determinations Based on Financial Issues

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

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

APPEAL

SYNOPSIS

KEYWORD: Guideline F DIGEST: The Judge’s conclusion that Applicant failed to mitigate the Guideline F security concerns in her case is sustainable. Applicant submitted new matters on appeal, which the Board cannot consider. Adverse decision affirmed. CASENO: 08-03418.a1 DATE: 05/13/2009 DATE: May 13, 2009 In Re:

---------------- Applicant for Trustworthiness Designation ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ADP Case No. 08-03418

APPEAL BOARD DECISION

APPEARANCES

FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Pro Se The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) declined to grant Applicant a trustworthiness designation. On September 24, 2008, DOHA issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision–trustworthiness concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a decision on the written record. On March 10, 2009, after considering the record, Administrative Judge Robert J. Tuider denied Applicant’s request for a trustworthiness designation. Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. The Board construes Applicant’s appeal as contending that the Judge’s adverse decision is arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law. Finding no error, we affirm. The Judge made the following pertinent findings of fact: Applicant is a service representative. she has been separated from her husband for many years, currently receiving “intermittent” child support from him. Decision at 2. Applicant has numerous delinquent debts, including a $9,354 student loan that had been placed in collection in 1992. The total amount of the delinquent debts alleged in the SOR is $30,964. In ruling against her, the Judge noted that she provided little or no information in response to the File of Relevant Material regarding her indebtedness and financial circumstances. Applicant enjoys a good reputation for character, work ethic, and trustworthiness, as evidenced by letters of reference which she submitted in response to the SOR. In support of her appeal, Applicant has submitted new matters not contained in the record, which the Board cannot consider. See Directive ¶ E3.1.29. (“No new evidence shall be received or considered by the Appeal Board”). After reviewing the record, the Board concludes that the Judge examined the relevant data and articulated a satisfactory explanation for the decision, “including a ‘rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.’” Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n of the United States v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 (1983)(quoting Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States, 371 U.S. 156, 168 (1962)). In light of the entirety of the record evidence, the Judge’s adverse trustworthiness determination is sustainable.

ORDER

The Judge’s adverse trustworthiness determination is AFFIRMED. Signed: Michael Y. Ra’anan Michael Y. Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairman, Appeal Board Signed: Jean E. Smallin Jean E. Smallin Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: James E. Moody James E. Moody Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board