CASEClearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-04332.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-04332.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-04332.h1

grantedDec 6, 2016· Hon. Robert E. Coacher· hearing

Summary

A pro se applicant was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons alleged the applicant incurred tax liabilities from two states and the federal government, in addition to five other debts totaling $3,672.

However, the applicant successfully demonstrated that all financial issues had been resolved. Evidence was provided showing payment for all state and federal tax liabilities. Furthermore, the applicant resolved all five other alleged debts, totaling $3,672.

The judge applied mitigating conditions, finding that the applicant's current financial situation is stable and in good order. Based on the resolution of all outstanding debts and tax liabilities, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant resolved all alleged debts totaling $3,672.
Applicant provided evidence of payment for all state and federal tax liabilities.
The judge found that the applicant's current finances are in good order.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent.
AG ¶ 20(b)appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Problems Were Beyond the Applicant's Control.
AG ¶ 20(c)appliedThe Applicant Has Received Financial Counseling.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Applicant Has Established a Good Track Record of Financial Responsibility.

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 issuedFeb 29, 2016
Answer filedMar 22, 2016
Hearing heldAug 25, 2016
Decision dateDec 6, 2016

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Resolution of Debts as a Factor in Security Clearance Decisions
Importance of Current Financial Stability in Assessing Eligibility for Clearance

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 resolved all financial debts, including tax liabilities, and established that his current finances are in good order. The security concerns related to financial considerations were mitigated, leading to a decision in favor of the applicant.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant incurred tax liability from two different states and the federal government.	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	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	Documented Debt Paid in Full
1.b	five other debts totaling $3,672. $3,672	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	Documented Debt Paid in Full

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 15-04332 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

Appearances

For Government: Robert J. Kilmartin, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

12/06/2016 ______________

Decision

______________

COACHER, Robert E., Administrative Judge:

On February 29, 2016, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline F, financial considerations. The action was taken 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 (AG) implemented by the DOD on September 1, 2006.

Applicant responded to the SOR on March 22, 2016, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on May 24, 2016. The hearing was held as scheduled on August 25, 2016. On November 30, 2016, I proposed that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant worked in a combat zone overseas for two years. He hired a CPA to handle his taxes, but they were done incorrectly and Applicant incurred tax liability from two different states and the federal government. He presented documentary evidence showing that he paid all his state and federal tax liability. The SOR also alleged five other debts totaling $3,672. Applicant provided documentation showing that these debts have all been resolved. The evidence established that Applicant’s current finances are in good order. 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), 20(c), 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.

________________________ Robert E. Coacher Administrative Judge