CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 17-00086.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 17-00086.h1denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-00086.h1

deniedNov 1, 2017· Hon. Nichole L. Noel· hearing

Summary

A federal contractor, employed since 2014, was denied eligibility for a position of trust due to significant financial concerns under Guideline F. The applicant faced allegations of owing $13,400 across 19 delinquent accounts. These financial issues raised disqualifying conditions, specifically AG ¶ 19 (a) and AG ¶ 19 (c).

Despite acknowledging the existence of these debts, the applicant failed to provide any evidence of financial rehabilitation or a consistent track record of debt repayment. No documentation was submitted to corroborate her claims of making payments toward the outstanding balances.

Consequently, the applicant did not demonstrate sufficient mitigation of the financial concerns. The lack of documented efforts to resolve the delinquent accounts led to the denial of her eligibility.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Applicant did not demonstrate financial rehabilitation or a track record of debt repayment.
Applicant owed $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts, which she admitted to.
No documentation was provided to corroborate claims of making payments toward her debts.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19 (a)raisedFailure to Meet Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 19 (c)raisedInability to Pay Creditors

Key Rule Quoted

“Failure to live within one’s means, satisfy debts, and meet financial obligations may indicate poor self-control, lack of judgement, or unwillingness to abide by rules and regulations, all of which can raise questions about an individual’s reliability, trustworthiness, and ability to protect classified or sensitive information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 24, 2017
Answer filedApr 6, 2017Applicant requested a decision without a hearing.
Hearing held—No hearing was conducted.
Decision dateNov 1, 2017

Cite For

Denial of Eligibility Due to Financial Irresponsibility Under Guideline F
Lack of Evidence for Financial Rehabilitation
Significance of Debt Repayment History in Security Clearance Evaluations

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: denied

The judge found that the applicant has a history of financial problems, including delinquent accounts totaling $13,400, which she failed to demonstrate any rehabilitation or repayment track record for. Consequently, the judge ruled against the applicant on all financial allegations, concluding that none of the mitigating conditions applied.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.h	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.i	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.j	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.k	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.l	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.m	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.n	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.o	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.p	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.q	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.r	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.s	Applicant owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. $13,400	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—

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: ) ) ) ADP Case No. 17-00086 ) Applicant for Position of Trust )

For Government: Benjamin R. Dorsey, Esq. Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se 11/01/2017 ______________

STATEMENT OF CASE

______________

NOEL, Nichole L., Administrative Judge:

Applicant contests the Department of Defense’s (DOD) intent to deny her eligibility for a public trust position. Applicant failed to demonstrate financial rehabilitation or a track record of debt repayment. Eligibility is denied.

Statement of the Case

On February 24, 2017, the DOD issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) detailing eligibility concerns under the financial considerations guideline. DOD adjudicators were unable to find that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant Applicant’s access to sensitive information and recommended her case be submitted to an administrative judge for consideration.

Applicant answered the SOR and requested a decision without a hearing.1 The Government submitted its written case on April 6, 2017. A complete copy of the file of relevant material (FORM) and the Directive were provided to Applicant. She received the FORM on April 12, 2017. She did not respond. The documents appended to the FORM are admitted as Government’s Exhibits (GE) 1 through 5, without objection. On October 25, 2017, I opened the record to allow the parties to submit additional information about the financial issues alleged in the SOR. Neither party offered a submission.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Applicant has worked for a federal contactor since November 2014. Her position requires access to sensitive information. She completed an eligibility application in April 2016, indicating that she owed delinquent accounts for a payday loan, traffic tickets, and medical bills during a time she did not have medical insurance. The ensuing investigation determined that Applicant had additional delinquent accounts. The SOR alleges and Applicant admits she owes $13,400 on 19 delinquent accounts. Despite indicating on her eligibility application that she was making payments toward her delinquent accounts, she did not provide any documentation in response to the SOR or the FORM to corroborate those claims.

Law and Policy

This case is adjudicated under Department of Defense Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Review Program (Jan. 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the National Security Adjudicative Guidelines (AG), effective June 8, 2017.

ANALYSIS

Financial Considerations

Failure to live within one’s means, satisfy debts, and meet financial obligations may indicate poor self-control, lack of judgement, or unwillingness to abide by rules and regulations, all of which can raise questions about an individual’s reliability, trustworthiness, and ability to protect classified or sensitive information. . . . An individual who is financially overextended is at a greater risk of having to engage in illegal or otherwise questionable acts to generate funds.2

The record establishes the Government’s prima facie case has that Applicant has demonstrated a history of not meeting her financial obligations and having an inability to pay her creditors.3 Applicant receives some mitigation because some of the delinquent debt is for medical accounts she incurred during a time she did not have insurance. Generally, medical debt is not an indication of financially reckless or irresponsible behavior. However, Applicant did not present any information to demonstrate a track record of debt repayment or financial rehabilitation or reform. Accordingly, the eligibility concerns related to her history of financial problems remain. None of the financial considerations mitigating conditions apply. At this time, Applicant is not a good candidate for access to sensitive information because of her financial situation. In reaching this conclusion, I have also considered the whole-person factors at AG ¶ 2(d). This decision should not be construed as a determination that Applicant cannot or will not attain the type of financial stability necessary to justify the granting of a position of trust. The award of access to sensitive information is not a once in a lifetime occurrence, but is based on applying the factors, both disqualifying and mitigating, to the evidence presented. While Applicant’s eligibility to occupy a position of trust information is denied at this time, she may well demonstrate persuasive evidence to merit access to sensitive information in the future.

FORMAL FINDINGS

Formal findings for or against Applicant on the allegations set forth in the SOR, as required by section E3.1.25 of Enclosure 3 of the Directive, are:

Paragraph 1, Financial Considerations: AGAINST APPLICANT

Subparagraphs 1.a – 1.s: Against Applicant

CONCLUSION

In light of all of the circumstances, it is not clearly consistent with the interests of national security to grant Applicant access to sensitive information. Applicant’s eligibility to occupy a position of trust is denied.

________________________ Nichole L. Noel Administrative Judge