CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 17-01669.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 17-01669.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-01669.h1

grantedFeb 8, 2018· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A pro se applicant was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons alleged three debts totaling approximately $15,000 in collection, along with a history of financial problems. These issues arose from her husband's unemployment and her unsuccessful law practice.

However, the applicant successfully mitigated these concerns. She settled the largest debt identified in the Statement of Reasons, and creditors for the two smaller debts issued IRS Forms 1099-C, forgiving those obligations. Furthermore, the applicant established and implemented a comprehensive plan to resolve her financial difficulties.

The judge determined that these actions effectively addressed the security concerns, applying mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(a), AG ¶ 20(b), and AG ¶ 20(d). Consequently, the applicant's security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant settled the largest debt alleged in the SOR.
Creditors issued IRS Forms 1099-C forgiving the two smaller debts.
Applicant established and implemented a plan to resolve her financial problems.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent and the Applicant Has Taken Positive Steps to Address the Financial Issues.
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Applicant Has Demonstrated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Her Debts.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Applicant Has Resolved the Debts and Is No Longer in Financial Distress.

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 2, 2017
Answer filedJun 27, 2017
Hearing heldJan 24, 2018
Decision dateFeb 8, 2018Proposed summary disposition in Applicant’s favor.

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Debts
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.

Standardized Decision Profile

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

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant's financial issues were primarily due to her husband's unemployment and her unsuccessful law practice. She successfully settled the debts listed in the Statement of Reasons, leading to a conclusion that the financial concerns were mitigated, resulting in a decision to grant her security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has three debts totaling approximately $15,000, which are in collection status. $15,000	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly (d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	—
1.b	The largest debt was settled, and the creditors for the two smaller debts issued IRS Forms 1099-C forgiving the debts.	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly (d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	—
1.c	Applicant has a history of financial problems.	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly (d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	—

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. 17-01669 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Alison O’Connell, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

02/08/2018 ______________

DECISION

______________

LOUGHRAN, Edward W., Administrative Judge:

On June 2, 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 June 27, 2017, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on December 14, 2017. The hearing was held as scheduled on January 24, 2018. On February 6, 2018, I proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant's financial problems were caused by her husband’s unemployment and her unsuccessful attempt to make a living through her private law practice. She paid, settled, or otherwise resolved a number of debts that were not alleged in the Statement of Reasons (SOR). Of the three debts alleged in the SOR, she settled the largest debt, and the creditors for the two smaller debts issued IRS Forms 1099-C (Cancellation of Debt) forgiving the debts. She established a plan to resolve her financial problems, and she took significant action to implement that plan. Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that the security concerns are mitigated under the following mitigating conditions: AG ¶¶ 20(a), 20(b), and 20(d).

The concerns over Applicant’s history of financial problems do not create doubt about her 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 she met her ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant her eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

________________________ Edward W. Loughran 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.