CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-02826.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-02826.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-02826.h1

grantedNov 22, 2016· Hon. Francisco Mendez· hearing

Summary

A pro se applicant was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). These concerns primarily arose from past financial difficulties, which were partly attributed to her husband's unemployment.

The applicant successfully mitigated these issues by providing substantial evidence of her efforts to resolve delinquent debts. This included documentation showing that she had addressed, paid, settled, or was actively paying the debts listed in the Statement of Reasons. For any disputed debts, she provided a reasonable basis for her challenge. Furthermore, she demonstrated a consistent track record of payments toward her remaining obligations.

Crucially, the applicant also showed that she had taken fiscally prudent steps to manage her finances moving forward, including downsizing her home. These actions collectively demonstrated her commitment to fiscal responsibility, leading to the favorable decision to grant her security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant mitigated security concerns related to financial problems attributable to circumstances beyond her control.
She provided substantial evidence of addressing, paying, and settling delinquent debts listed on the SOR.
Applicant demonstrated a track record of debt payments and prudent financial management going forward.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent.
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Behavior Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control.
AG ¶ 20(c)notedThe Person Has Received or Is Receiving Counseling for the Problem.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Person Has Established a Good Track Record of Debt Payment.
AG ¶ 20(e)appliedThe Person Has a Reasonable Basis for Disputing the Validity of the Debt.

Key Rule Quoted

“I find that the mitigating conditions listed at AG ¶¶ 20(a) – 20(e) apply.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 27, 2015
Answer filed—Applicant requested a decision on the written record.
Hearing heldAug 11, 2016Case assigned for summary disposition.
Decision dateNov 22, 2016

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Consideration of Circumstances Beyond Control in Financial Cases
Demonstration of Fiscal Responsibility as a Mitigating Factor

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 mitigated security concerns related to her past financial problems, which were partly due to circumstances beyond her control. The applicant demonstrated efforts to address her debts and took prudent financial steps, leading to a decision to grant her security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant mitigated security concerns raised by her past financial problems, which were, in part, attributable to matters beyond her control (husband's unemployment).	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	(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	—
1.b	She presented substantial evidence, including documentation to substantiate her claims of having addressed, paid, settled, or currently paying the delinquent debts listed on the SOR (or, reasonable basis to dispute the accuracy of the debt).	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	(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	—
1.c	Additionally, Applicant presented documentation of a track record of debt payments towards satisfying the last remaining SOR debt.	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	(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	—
1.d	Applicant also demonstrated that she has taken fiscally prudent steps to manage her finances going forward, notably, downsizing to a smaller home.	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	(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	—

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. 15-02826 ) ) Applicant for Security Clearance

For Government: Rhett Petcher, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

11/22/2016 ______________

DECISION

______________

MENDEZ, Francisco, Administrative Judge:

On October 27, 2015, the Department of Defense (DOD) Consolidated Adjudications Facility (CAF) sent Applicant a Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleging that her circumstances raised security concerns under the financial considerations guideline.1 Applicant answered the SOR and requested a decision on the written record.

On December 9, 2015, Department Counsel prepared its written case, a file of relevant material (FORM), and sent it to Applicant. Applicant filed a response, including providing additional documentary evidence of her efforts to address and resolve the delinquent debts listed on the SOR.

On August 11, 2016, I received the case assignment and subsequently provided 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 did not object to my proposed resolution of the matter in this fashion. See Appellate Exhibit I. Applicant mitigated security concerns raised by her past financial problems, which were, in part, attributable to matters beyond her control (husband's unemployment). She presented substantial evidence, including documentation to substantiate her claims of having addressed, paid, settled, or currently paying the delinquent debts listed on the SOR (or, reasonable basis to dispute the accuracy of the debt). Additionally, Applicant presented documentation of a track record of debt payments towards satisfying the last remaining SOR debt. Applicant also demonstrated that she has taken fiscally prudent steps to manage her finances going forward, notably, downsizing to a smaller home. After a thorough review of the record evidence, I find that the mitigating conditions listed at AG ¶¶ 20(a) – 20(e) apply.

The security concerns over Applicant’s past 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 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.

____________________ Francisco Mendez 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.