CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 16-01979.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 16-01979.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 16-01979.h1

grantedJan 24, 2017· Hon. Robert J. Tuider· hearing

Summary

This security clearance decision involved an applicant, a former U.S. Navy service member, whose eligibility was initially questioned under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The primary concern stemmed from credit card debt incurred during a period of unemployment, which the applicant was unable to pay at that time.

However, the applicant subsequently obtained full-time employment and took proactive steps to address his financial situation. He successfully resolved all outstanding debts, demonstrating a commitment to regaining control of his finances.

The judge ultimately determined that the applicant had re-established financial stability and a reputation for trustworthiness. Applying mitigating conditions, the judge concluded that the past financial concerns no longer raised doubts about the applicant's reliability or judgment. Consequently, the security clearance was GRANTED.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant regained control of his finances after obtaining full-time employment.
He resolved all debts and demonstrated a reputation for trustworthiness.
The judge found that financial concerns did not create doubt about his reliability and judgment.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent.
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Behavior Were Beyond the Person's Control.
AG ¶ 20(c)notedThe Person Has Received Counseling for the Problem.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Person Has Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts.

Key Rule Quoted

“The concerns over Applicant’s history of financial problems do not create doubt about his current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 7, 2016
Answer filed—
Hearing heldNov 17, 2016
Decision dateJan 24, 2017

Cite For

Resolution of Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Mitigating Conditions Applicable to Financial Issues
Consideration of Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant had financial concerns primarily related to credit card debt, which arose due to unemployment. However, the applicant demonstrated that he has since regained control of his finances and resolved his debts, leading to a decision in his favor regarding his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	credit card debt that Applicant was unable to pay as a result of unemployment	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	(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 (d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	Documented Debt Paid in Full
1.b–1.d	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant			—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline F). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

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

HEARING

APPEARANCES

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 16-01979 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Robert Kilmartin, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

01/24/2017 ______________

DECISION

______________

TUIDER, Robert J., Administrative Judge:

On September 12, 2015, Applicant submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (SF-86). On July 7, 2016, after reviewing the application and information gathered during a background investigation, the Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudications Facility, Fort Meade, Maryland, sent Applicant a statement of reasons (SOR), explaining it was unable to find that it was clearly consistent with the national interest to grant him eligibility for access to classified information.1 The SOR detailed the factual reasons for the action under the security guideline known as Guideline F for financial considerations. Applicant timely answered the SOR and requested a hearing. On September 26, 2016, the case was assigned to me. On November 17, 2016, the hearing was held as scheduled. After reviewing Applicant’s hearing transcript, evidence, and post-hearing evidence, I e-mailed the parties indicating that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Applicant did not object. Department Counsel had 10 days to consider the matter and provided written notice that Department Counsel did not object.

The SOR allegations consist primarily of credit card debt that Applicant was unable to pay as a result of unemployment. Since obtaining full-time employment, he has regained control of his finances and is paying or has otherwise resolved all of his debts. Applicant successfully held a security clearance during his nine years of active duty in the U.S. Navy. Applicant has a reputation for trustworthiness. Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that Department Counsel presented sufficient evidence to establish the facts alleged in the SOR under Guideline F. I also conclude that Applicant presented sufficient evidence to explain, extenuate, or mitigate the facts admitted by Applicant or proven by Department Counsel. In particular, I conclude that the financial considerations security concerns are resolved in whole or in part under the mitigating conditions AG ¶¶ 20(a) through 20(d).

The concerns over Applicant’s history of financial problems do not create doubt 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 or vice versa. 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 J. Tuider Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This case is adjudicated under Executive Order 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry, signed by President Eisenhower on February 20, 1960, as amended, as well as Department of Defense Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program, dated January 2, 1992, as amended (Directive). In addition, the Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Information (AG), effective within the Defense Department on September 1, 2006, apply here. The AG were published in the Federal Register and codified in 32 C.F.R. § 154, Appendix H (2006). The AG replaced the guidelines found in Enclosure 2 to the Directive prior to September 1, 2006 and a copy of these guidelines was provided directly to the Applicant in this case.