CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 17-04000.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 17-04000.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-04000.h1

grantedAug 24, 2018· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A 34-year-old defense contractor and medically retired military veteran was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). These concerns arose from financial difficulties attributed to a period of unemployment, two divorces, and a custody battle.

Specifically, the Statement of Reasons cited a $12,006 deficiency on an auto loan following vehicle repossession. However, the applicant demonstrated significant mitigation efforts. He successfully settled six of the seven debts listed in the Statement of Reasons and credibly testified to his intent to resolve the remaining debt if the creditor accepts payments.

The judge applied mitigating conditions, concluding that the applicant had established and implemented a plan to resolve his financial problems. Ultimately, the judge determined that the applicant's past financial issues did not raise doubts about his current reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the clearance being granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant established a plan to resolve his financial problems and took action to implement that plan.
He credibly testified about his intent to resolve the remaining debt if the creditor accepts payments.
The judge concluded that the applicant's financial issues do not create doubt about his current reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent.
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Problems Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Individual 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 issuedJan 29, 2018
Answer filedMar 6, 2018
Hearing heldJul 9, 2018
Decision dateAug 24, 2018Proposed summary disposition in favor of applicant on August 21, 2018.

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Debts
Impact of Personal Circumstances on Financial Reliability

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 due to an unresolved auto loan deficiency of $12,006 after repossession. However, the applicant demonstrated significant efforts to resolve his debts, leading to a conclusion that the financial issues were mitigated, resulting in a decision to grant the security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	$12,006 owed for the deficiency on an auto loan after the vehicle was repossessed. $12,006	For Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	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. 17-04000 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Jeff A. Nagel, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

08/24/2018 ______________

DECISION

______________

LOUGHRAN, Edward W., Administrative Judge:

On January 29, 2018, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline F, financial considerations.1 Applicant responded to the SOR on March 6, 2018, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on May 8, 2018. The hearing was held as scheduled on July 9, 2018. On August 21, 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 is a 34-year-old employee of a defense contractor. He served on active duty in the U.S. military from 2005 until he was medically retired with an honorable discharge in 2010. His financial problems were caused by periods of unemployment, two divorces, a costly custody battle over his child, and his custody of his child without the benefit of child support from his ex-wife. Applicant started resolving his financial problems after he was hired by his current employer in 2017. He paid several debts before the SOR was issued. He established a plan to resolve his financial problems, and he took action to implement that plan. He paid, settled, or otherwise resolved six of the seven debts in the SOR. The only unresolved debt is $12,006 owed for the deficiency on an auto loan after the vehicle was repossessed. He called the creditor but was told they no longer had a record of the debt. He credibly testified that he will resolve that debt if the creditor accepts payments. 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 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 him 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.