A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 15-04488.h1
GrantedDecided Dec 7, 2016 · Administrative Judge Robert E. Coacher · Hearing
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, a pro se individual, faced security concerns under Guideline F due to financial issues. The applicant demonstrated that the debts in question were the responsibility of his ex-wife and provided evidence of good financial standing, leading to a favorable decision.
Why the applicant prevailed
- Applicant established that the debts were the responsibility of his ex-wife due to a court order.
- Applicant settled one of the debts, demonstrating proactive financial management.
- Evidence showed that the applicant is in good financial standing.
Conditions referenced
Mitigating
- AG ¶ 20(a) The behavior was not recent and the applicant has shown a change in circumstances.applied
- AG ¶ 20(c) The applicant has taken positive steps to address financial issues.applied
- AG ¶ 20(d) The applicant has demonstrated a good faith effort to repay debts.applied
- AG ¶ 20(e) The applicant has established a track record of financial responsibility.applied
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 issued
- 12/11/2015
- Answer filed
- 01/21/2016
- Hearing held
- 08/23/2016
- Decision date
- 11/30/2016 Proposed summary disposition in Applicant’s favor.
Cite for
- Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
- Responsibility of Debts Assigned to Ex-spouse
- Good Financial Standing 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.
From the decision
Facts this decision states, each with the sentence it comes from. Descriptive of the record, not an assessment.
- Delinquent Usd
- 23825
- Payment Plan
- no
- 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. 15-04488 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )
Appearances
For Government: Robert J. Kilmartin, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se
12/07/2016 ______________
Decision
______________
COACHER, Robert E., Administrative Judge:
On December 11, 2015, 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 January 21, 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 23, 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 established through documentation that the three SOR debts in the amount of $23,825 were the responsibility of his ex-wife pursuant to a court order entered in his divorce case in 2009. Despite the order, Applicant settled one of the debts with the creditor in August 2016. Applicant’s evidence established that he is in good financial standing. 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(c), 20(d), and 20(e).
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 his eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.
________________________ Robert E. Coacher Administrative Judge