Loading case…

ISCR 16-03901.h1: Guideline F security clearance hearing, granted (2017) · CASE

ISCR Case 16-03901.h1granted

Case headnote

ISCR Case No. 16-03901.h1

grantedJul 17, 2017· Hon. Robert E. Coacher· hearing

Summary

A security clearance was granted to a pro se applicant despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons cited a single delinquent debt of $20,587, for which the applicant was a cosigner.

However, mitigating conditions were applied. The principal borrower for the debt took responsibility and was in the process of establishing a payment plan. This demonstrated that the financial concerns were being actively addressed and resolved by the primary party.

Ultimately, the judge concluded that the applicant's reliability and trustworthiness were not in doubt. Given the principal borrower's actions to resolve the debt, the security concerns were deemed mitigated, leading to the granting of the security clearance.

Why the applicant prevailed

The principal borrower took responsibility for the delinquent debt.
A payment plan was being established by the principal borrower.
The applicant's reliability and trustworthiness were not in doubt.

Conditions referenced

Mitigating

20(d)appliedThe Individual Has Made Good Faith Efforts to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts.
20(e)appliedThe Individual Is in a Repayment Plan or Has Otherwise Resolved the Debt.

Key rule quoted

“I conclude that the security concerns are mitigated under the following mitigating conditions: AG ¶¶ 20(d) and 20(e).”

Procedural posture

SOR issuedJan 30, 2017
Answer filedFeb 21, 2017
Hearing heldJun 20, 2017
Decision dateJul 17, 2017Proposed summary disposition in Applicant’s favor on June 29, 2017.

Cite for

Mitigation of Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Good Faith Efforts to Resolve Debts
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.

From the decision

Facts this decision states, each with the exact sentence it comes from. Descriptive of the record, not an assessment.

Delinquent debt cited: $20,587 (on a payment plan): “The SOR alleged a single debt in the amount of $20,587.”

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 a single debt of $20,587 for which he had cosigned. The principal borrower was establishing a payment plan with the creditor, and the judge concluded that the financial concerns were mitigated, resulting in a decision favorable to the applicant.

The sub-allegation breakdown is part of the Professional plan. See what it includes.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case. 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. 16-03901 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Andrew Henderson, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

07/17/2017 ______________

DECISION

______________

COACHER, Robert E., Administrative Judge:

On January 30, 2017, 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 (AG).1

Applicant responded to the SOR on February 21, 2017, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on April 20, 2017. The hearing was held as scheduled on June 20, 2017. On June 29, 2017, I proposed that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.

The SOR alleged a single debt in the amount of $20,587. Applicant presented documentation showing that the principal borrower had taken responsibility for the delinquent debt for which Applicant had cosigned. The principal borrower was establishing a payment plan with the creditor. Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that the security concerns are mitigated under the following mitigating conditions: AG ¶¶ 20(d) and 20(e).

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. 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 his eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

________________________ Robert E. Coacher Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 I decided this case using the AG implemented by DOD on June 8, 2017. However, I also considered this case under the previous AG implemented on September 1, 2006, and my conclusions are the same using either set of AG.