CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 17-00665.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 17-00665.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-00665.h1

grantedSep 10, 2018· Hon. Jennifer I. Goldstein· hearing

Summary

A 49-year-old defense contractor and retired Navy senior chief petty officer was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons cited a past-due mortgage debt of $97,137.

The applicant successfully demonstrated that the financial difficulties stemmed from circumstances beyond his control, specifically medical emergencies and a mold infestation. He maintained consistent communication with his creditor, which led to a successful modification of the mortgage loan and the account being brought current.

Furthermore, the applicant completed financial counseling, indicating a low likelihood of future financial issues. Based on these mitigating factors, the DOHA administrative judge applied mitigating conditions 20(a), 20(b), 20(c), and 20(d), resulting in the clearance being granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated that the financial issues were caused by circumstances beyond his control.
The applicant maintained constant communication with the creditor and successfully modified the mortgage loan.
The applicant completed financial counseling and showed a low likelihood of recurrence of financial issues.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent.
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Problems Were Beyond the Applicant's Control.
AG ¶ 20(c)appliedThe Applicant Has Made Good Faith Efforts to Repay the Debts.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Applicant Has Received Financial Counseling.

Key Rule Quoted

“I weighed the evidence as a whole and considered whether the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 14, 2017
Answer filedApr 29, 2017
Hearing heldMar 15, 2018
Decision dateSep 10, 2018Proposed summary disposition in favor of applicant.

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline F for Financial Considerations
Evidence of Good Faith Efforts in Resolving Financial Issues
Impact of Uncontrollable Circumstances on Financial Stability

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 a past due mortgage debt of $97,137, which was caused by circumstances beyond his control. The applicant successfully modified the loan and completed financial counseling, leading to a decision in his favor under Guideline F.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	indebted on a mortgage account that was past due in the amount of $97,137 $97,137	For Applicant	Mortgage or Home Loan 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 Documented Financial Counseling

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. 17-00665 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Adrienne Driskill, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: [Redacted], Personal Representative

09/10/2018 ______________

DECISION

______________

GOLDSTEIN, Jennifer I., Administrative Judge:

On April 14, 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline F, Financial Considerations.1 Applicant responded to the SOR on April 29, 2017, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on January 25, 2018. The hearing was held as scheduled on March 15, 2018. On September 7, 2018, after receiving supplemental post-hearing exhibits from Applicant, I proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.2 Applicant is a 49-year-old, employee of a defense contractor. He served 26 years on active duty in the Navy and retired at the rank of senior chief petty officer. He is married and has two children and two step-children. (GE 1, Tr. 121.)

The SOR alleged Applicant was indebted on a mortgage account that was past due in the amount of $97,137. Applicant documented that this debt was caused by a series of unfortunate events that were beyond his control, including multiple medical emergencies and a mold infestation of their family home due to water damage. (Tr. 130.) He has been in constant contact with the creditor since first becoming delinquent on the mortgage debt. In July 2018, the creditor finally approved his loan modification request and the account is now current. (Applicant Exhibit 1 though 53.) Applicant has completed financial counseling and there is little likelihood of recurrence.

Mitigating conditions set out in AG ¶¶ 20(a), 20(b), 20(c), and 20(d) have been established by the evidence. There is no doubt about Applicant’s current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information. In reaching this conclusion, I weighed the evidence as a whole and considered whether the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that Applicant met his ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant him national security eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

________________________ Jennifer Goldstein Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This case is adjudicated 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, which became effective on June 8, 2017.

2 Emails dated September 7, 2018, from both parties indicating there were no objections to summary disposition in this case are marked as Hearing Exhibit I and are contained in the file.