CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-04358.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-04358.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-04358.h1

grantedDec 7, 2016· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A pro se applicant was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons highlighted several financial difficulties, including the applicant's surgeries in 2014 and 2015, which led to her being out of work on disability. Additionally, her ex-husband failed to pay court-ordered child support, contributing to her financial strain.

However, the applicant successfully mitigated these concerns. She paid, settled, or established payment plans for most of the debts alleged in the Statement of Reasons. She also presented a clear plan to address her remaining financial problems, demonstrating a commitment to financial stability.

The judge applied mitigating conditions, finding that the applicant's financial issues did not negatively impact her reliability or trustworthiness. Ultimately, the applicant's proactive efforts to resolve her debts and her demonstrated plan for future financial management led to the favorable decision to grant her security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant resolved most debts alleged in the SOR.
She demonstrated a plan to address her financial problems.
The judge found that her financial issues did not affect her reliability or trustworthiness.

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 Behavior.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Person Has Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts.

Key Rule Quoted

“I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 2, 2016
Answer filedApr 15, 2016
Hearing heldSep 20, 2016
Decision dateDec 7, 2016

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions
Resolution of Debts as a Factor in 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 but took significant actions to resolve most of her debts. Ultimately, the judge concluded that the security concerns were mitigated and granted the applicant's security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant had surgeries in 2014 and 2015, and she was out of work on disability.	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.b	Her ex-husband does not pay his court-ordered child support.	For Applicant	Child Support Debt	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.c	Despite her difficulties, Applicant paid, settled, made payment plans for, or otherwise resolved most of the debts alleged in the SOR.	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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 15-04358 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

Appearances

For Government: Bryan J. Olmos, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

12/07/2016 ______________

Decision

______________

LOUGHRAN, Edward W., Administrative Judge:

On February 2, 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 April 15, 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 September 20, 2016. On November 28, 2016, I proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant’s husband at the time lost his full-time and part-time jobs in a short period. Their ensuing financial problems contributed to their separation in 2014 and divorce this year. Applicant had surgeries in 2014 and 2015, and she was out of work on disability. Her ex-husband does not pay his court-ordered child support. Despite her difficulties, Applicant paid, settled, made payment plans for, or otherwise resolved most of the debts alleged in the SOR. She has a plan to resolve her financial problems, and she has taken significant action to implement that plan. 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 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. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that she met her ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant her eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

________________________ Edward W. Loughran Administrative Judge