A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 20-03272
GrantedDecided Sep 21, 2021 · Administrative Judge Robert E. Coacher · Hearing
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, representing himself, sought security clearance under Guideline F due to financial concerns. He demonstrated significant progress in addressing his debts, which were largely due to circumstances beyond his control. The judge found that the applicant's financial issues did not affect his reliability or trustworthiness, leading to a favorable decision.
Why the applicant prevailed
- The applicant made significant progress in addressing debts listed in the SOR.
- Many debts were incurred due to circumstances beyond his control.
- The judge concluded that the applicant's financial issues do not affect his reliability or trustworthiness.
Conditions referenced
Mitigating
- 20(a) The behavior was not recent.applied
- 20(b) The conditions that resulted in the financial problems were beyond the applicant's control.applied
- 20(c) The applicant has received financial counseling.applied
- 20(d) The applicant has a good track record of paying debts.applied
- 20(e) The applicant has made significant progress in resolving debts.applied
Key rule quoted
“I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- 2020-12-16
- Answer filed
- 2021-01-13
- Hearing held
- 2021-08-24
- Decision date
- 2021-09-21
Cite for
- Significant Progress in Addressing Financial Debts Under Guideline F
- Mitigating Conditions Applicable to Financial Issues
- Whole-person Concept 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.
From the decision
Facts this decision states, each with the sentence it comes from. Descriptive of the record, not an assessment.
Allegations under Guideline F
Reading the 4 per allegation rows needs a free account.
4 rows in this decision.
It opens the per allegation record on every guideline: the amounts, the findings, and the sentence behind each row.
Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case. The verbatim source decision is below.
Full decision
Open original PDFThe complete official text, footnotes and signatures included, is in the original PDF.
Decision text, by section
______________ ______________ DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 20-03272 ) Applicant for Security Clearance ) Appearances For Government: Tara Karoian, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se 09/21/2021 Decision COACHER, Robert E., Administrative Judge: On December 16, 2020, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline F, financial considerations. The action was taken under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the adjudicative guidelines implemented by DOD on June 8, 2017 (AG). Applicant responded to the SOR on January 13, 2021, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on July 13, 2021. The hearing was held as scheduled on August 24, 2021. On August 25, 2021, I proposed that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object. This case involves financial concerns under Guideline F. Based upon his testimony and the documents submitted, Applicant has made significant progress toward paying the SOR-listed debts, many of which were incurred because of conditions
________________________ beyond his control. The evidence established that mitigating conditions 20(a)-20(e) substantially apply, thereby mitigating the Guideline F concerns. The concerns over Applicant’s history of financial problems do not create doubts about his current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information. In reaching this conclusion, I weighed the evidence as a whole and considered if the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that he met his ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant him eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant. Robert E. Coacher Administrative Judge