A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 15-04358.h1
GrantedDecided Dec 7, 2016 · Administrative Judge Edward W. Loughran · Hearing
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, a pro se individual, faced security concerns under Guideline F due to financial issues stemming from her husband's job loss and her own medical disabilities. Despite these challenges, she successfully resolved most debts and demonstrated a plan for financial stability, leading to a favorable decision.
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) The behavior was not recent.applied
- AG ¶ 20(b) The conditions that resulted in the behavior were beyond the person's control.applied
- AG ¶ 20(c) The person has received counseling or treatment for the behavior.noted
- AG ¶ 20(d) The person has initiated a good-faith effort to repay overdue creditors or otherwise resolve debts.applied
Key rule quoted
“I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- 02/02/2016
- Answer filed
- 04/15/2016
- Hearing held
- 09/20/2016
- Decision date
- 12/07/2016
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.
From the decision
Facts this decision states, each with the sentence it comes from. Descriptive of the record, not an assessment.
- Payment Plan
- yes
- Bankruptcy
- none
Allegations under Guideline F
Reading the 3 per allegation rows needs a free account.
3 rows in this decision.
It opens the per allegation record on every guideline: the amounts, the findings, and the sentence behind each row.
Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case. The verbatim source decision is below.
Full decision
Open original PDFThe complete official text, footnotes and signatures included, is in the original PDF.
Decision text, by section
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