CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-01147.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-01147.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-01147.h1

grantedJan 3, 2017· Hon. Stephanie C. Hess· hearing

Summary

A recent college graduate was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant's financial difficulties stemmed from underemployment after taking out multiple student loans for college, which led to defaults on those loans and several other delinquent debts.

However, the applicant demonstrated significant mitigating actions. She paid off one large student loan, consolidated and became current on others, successfully disputed several debts, and paid off or is resolving the remaining debts listed in the Statement of Reasons. As of the close of the record, all but one debt had been satisfied or otherwise resolved, and the applicant had contacted the creditor for the remaining debt to establish a repayment plan.

The clearance was granted because the applicant's financial issues were primarily due to circumstances beyond her control. She has resolved or is in the process of resolving nearly all debts, is current on her financial obligations, and has established a repayment plan for the sole outstanding debt.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant's financial issues were primarily due to circumstances beyond her control.
She has resolved or is in the process of resolving all but one debt listed in the SOR.
Applicant is current on her financial obligations and has established a repayment plan for the remaining debt.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent.
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Behavior Were Beyond the Person's Control.
AG ¶ 20(c)notedThe Person Has Received Counseling or Treatment for the Problem.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Person Has Taken Positive Steps to Reduce or Eliminate the Vulnerability.
AG ¶ 20(e)appliedThe Person Has a Good Track Record of Financial Responsibility.

Key Rule Quoted

“I conclude that the security concerns are resolved under mitigating conditions AG ¶¶ 20(a) through 20(e).”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 26, 2015
Answer filed—
Hearing heldJul 28, 2016
Decision dateJan 3, 2017

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline F
Resolution of Financial Issues Leading to Security Clearance Approval
Consideration of Circumstances Beyond the Applicant's Control in Financial Matters

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 history of financial problems primarily due to circumstances beyond her control, including student loan defaults. However, the applicant successfully mitigated these concerns by resolving most debts and establishing a repayment plan for the remaining debt, leading to a decision in her favor.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant took out multiple student loans for college, but following graduation was only able to find temporary jobs. This underemployment resulted in her defaulting on her student loans and incurring several other delinquent debts.	For Applicant	Student 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 (e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	Documented Debt Paid in Full Claimed Payment Plan with Creditor
1.b	Applicant has since paid off one large student loan, consolidated and become current on the other loans, successfully disputed several debts, and paid off or is resolving the remaining SOR debts.	For Applicant	Student 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 (e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	Documented Debt Paid in Full Claimed Payment Plan with Creditor
1.c	As of the close of the record, Applicant had satisfied or otherwise resolved all the SOR debts, except the debt listed in SOR ¶ 1.o.	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	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 (e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	Claimed Payment Plan with Creditor
1.o	She has contacted this creditor to establish a repayment plan.	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	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 (e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	Claimed Payment Plan with Creditor

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: ) ) [REDACTED] ) ISCR Case No. 15-01147 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Tara R. Karoian, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

01/03/2017 ______________

DECISION

______________

HESS, Stephanie C., Administrative Judge:

On November 26, 2015, the Department of Defense (DOD) Consolidated Adjudications Facility (CAF) sent Applicant a Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleging concerns under the financial considerations guideline.1 Applicant answered the SOR and requested a hearing to establish her eligibility for access to classified information.

On July 28, 2016, I convened a hearing. After I received the transcript and the record closed, I reviewed the record in its entirety. I then provided written notice to the parties of my intent to resolve the case through a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel indicated that the Government had no objections. (See Appellate Exhibit I.) Applicant’s past financial problems were primarily attributable to matters beyond her control. Specifically, Applicant took out multiple student loans for college, but following graduation was only able to find temporary jobs. This underemployment resulted in her defaulting on her student loans and incurring several other delinquent debts. She has since paid off one large student loan, consolidated and become current on the other loans, successfully disputed several debts, and paid off or is resolving the remaining SOR debts. As of the close of the record, Applicant had satisfied or otherwise resolved all the SOR debts, except the debt listed in SOR ¶ 1.o. She has contacted this creditor to establish a repayment plan. She is current on her existing financial obligations, lives within her means, and regularly contributes to her 401 (k) account and a savings account.

Department Counsel presented sufficient evidence to establish the facts alleged in the SOR under Guideline F. I conclude that Applicant presented sufficient evidence to explain, extenuate, or mitigate the facts admitted by Applicant or proven by Department Counsel. In particular, I conclude that the security concerns are resolved under mitigating conditions AG ¶¶ 20(a) through 20(e).

Applicant’s history of financial problems does 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 or vice versa. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that Applicant met her burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant her eligibility for access to classified information. Applicant’s request for a security clearance is granted.

Stephanie C. Hess Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This action was taken under Executive Order (E.O.) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; Department of Defense Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the Adjudicative Guidelines (AG) implemented by the Department of Defense on September 1, 2006.