CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-03764.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-03764.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-03764.h1

grantedMay 18, 2017· Hon. Nichole L. Noel· hearing

Summary

This security clearance decision involved an applicant facing concerns under Guideline F, Financial Considerations, due to approximately $27,000 in delinquent debt owed to five creditors. The debt became delinquent between 2007 and 2012, a period when the applicant experienced underemployment and could not afford to resolve the accounts. Disqualifying conditions related to indebtedness and an inability to meet financial obligations were raised.

However, the applicant demonstrated significant mitigating factors. After returning to full employment, the applicant received a 46% pay increase and obtained a debt-consolidation loan to resolve the delinquent accounts. The applicant's financial problems were largely attributed to circumstances beyond their control, and their finances were subsequently brought under control.

Based on these mitigating actions and the resolution of the financial issues, the applicant's security clearance was GRANTED. The decision highlighted the applicant's good-faith effort to resolve debts and their current financial stability.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant returned to full employment and received a significant pay increase.
The applicant obtained a debt-consolidation loan to resolve delinquent accounts.
The applicant's financial problems were largely due to circumstances beyond his control.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedFinancial Considerations
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedFinancial Considerations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedFinancial Considerations
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedFinancial Considerations
AG ¶ 20(c)appliedFinancial Considerations
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedFinancial Considerations

Key Rule Quoted

“The applicant's past financial problems do not create doubt about his current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 27, 2016
Answer filed—
Hearing heldApr 26, 2017
Decision dateMay 18, 2017

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline F
Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Financial Issues
Impact of Financial Stability on Security Clearance Eligibility

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 due to circumstances largely beyond his control, which were unlikely to recur. The applicant demonstrated a good-faith effort to resolve his debts and is now financially stable, leading to a decision in his favor regarding security clearance eligibility.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	indebted to five creditors for approximately $27,000 $27,000	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(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	—
1.b	debt became delinquent between 2007 and 2012 during a period of underemployment	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(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	—
1.c	could not afford to resolve his delinquent accounts	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(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	—
1.d	received a 46% increase in pay and obtained a debt-consolidation loan to resolve the delinquent accounts	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	—
1.e	Applicant's finances are under control	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	—

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. 15-03764 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Julie R. Mendez, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Gregory F. Greiner, Esq.

05/18/2017 ______________

DECISION

______________

NOEL, Nichole, Administrative Judge:

On April 27, 2016, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) detailing security concerns under the financial considerations guideline.1 DOD adjudicators were unable to find that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to continue Applicant’s security clearance and recommended that the case be submitted to an administrative judge for a determination whether to revoke her security clearance. Applicant timely responded to the SOR and requested a hearing.

The hearing was held on April 26, 2017. After the close of the record, I proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Neither party objected. The SOR alleged that Applicant was indebted to five creditors for approximately $27,000. The debt became delinquent between 2007 and 2012 during a period of underemployment. Although Applicant returned to full employment in 2012, he could not afford to resolve his delinquent accounts. In 2016, Applicant received a 46% increase in pay. He obtained a debt-consolidation loan to resolve the delinquent accounts alleged in the SOR. Applicant is financially stable, lives within his means, and is comfortably able to repay the debt consolidation loan.

The Government presented sufficient evidence to establish its prima facie case that Applicant exhibited a history of financial problems and an inability to repay his creditors. AG ¶¶ 19 (a) and (c) apply. However, Applicant presented sufficient evidence to explain, extenuate, or mitigate the financial concerns. Applicant’s financial problems were caused by events largely beyond his control, under a set of circumstances that are unlikely to recur. He made a good-faith effort to resolve his delinquent accounts as soon as he became financially able to do so. Applicant’s finances are under control. AG ¶¶ 20 (a) – (d) apply.

Applicant’s past 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 or vice versa. 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 eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

Nichole L. Noel Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This case is adjudicated under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Cassified Information within Industry, signed by President Eisenhower on February 20, 1960, as amended; as well as DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program, dated January 2, 1992, as amended (Directive). In addition, the Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Information (AG), effective within the Defense Department on September 1, 2006, apply to this case. The AG were published in the Federal Register and codified in 32 C.F.R. § 154, Appendix H (2006). The AG replace the guidelines in Enclosure 2 to the Directive.