CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-06184.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-06184.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-06184.h1

grantedJan 23, 2017· Hon. Stephanie C. Hess· hearing

Summary

A pro se applicant was granted a security clearance under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) despite past financial issues. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) detailed that the applicant's first wife was financially irresponsible, accumulating significant debt and failing to contribute to household obligations. After their separation, she remained in the marital home but did not pay the mortgage, a fact she withheld from the applicant.

Upon discovering the mortgage arrears after his wife abandoned the home, the applicant took reasonable steps to address the situation. He successfully modified the mortgage, though he could not modify the equity line of credit due to his ex-wife's refusal to sign necessary documents. The applicant has since satisfied, successfully disputed, or otherwise resolved all debts listed in the SOR, with the exception of a single $201 debt.

The decision to grant the clearance was based on several mitigating factors. The judge found that the applicant's financial problems were primarily due to circumstances beyond his control. He demonstrated proactive and reasonable actions to resolve his financial issues, and has not incurred substantial delinquent debt since 2011, indicating a significant improvement in his financial situation.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant's financial problems were primarily due to circumstances beyond his control.
He took reasonable actions to address his financial issues, including modifying the mortgage and resolving most debts.
Applicant has not incurred substantial delinquent debt since 2011 and has improved his financial situation significantly.

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 Problem.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Person Has Established a Good Track Record of Financial Responsibility.
AG ¶ 20(e)appliedThe Person Has a Reasonable Plan for Financial Stability.

Key Rule Quoted

“I conclude that Applicant presented sufficient evidence to explain, extenuate, or mitigate the facts admitted by Applicant or proven by Department Counsel.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 19, 2016
Answer filed—
Hearing heldSep 14, 2016
Decision dateJan 23, 2017

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline F
Financial Issues Attributable to Circumstances Beyond Control
Evidence of Financial Responsibility and Improvement

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 primarily due to circumstances beyond his control, including issues related to a former spouse. Despite these past issues, the applicant has resolved most debts and taken significant steps to improve his financial situation, leading to a decision in his favor under Guideline F.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant’s first wife was financially irresponsible, incurred significant debt, and contributed little to the couple’s financial obligations.	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 (e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	—
1.b	Upon separating, Applicant’s wife remained in the marital home but failed to pay the mortgage, and did not disclose this to Applicant.	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 (e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	—
1.c	Applicant discovered the mortgage arrears after his wife abandoned the home. He took all reasonable actions to and was able to modify the mortgage, but not the equity line of credit because his wife refused to sign the required documents.	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 (e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	—
1.d	He has satisfied, successfully disputed, or otherwise resolved all the SOR debts, except the $201 debt listed in SOR ¶ 1.d. $201	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 (e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	—

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: ) ) [REDACTED] ) ISCR Case No. 15-06184 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Braden M. Murphy, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

01/23/2017 ______________

DECISION

______________

HESS, Stephanie C., Administrative Judge:

On February 19, 2016, the Department of Defense (DOD) Consolidated Adjudications Facility (CAF) sent Applicant a Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleging concerns under the financial considerations guideline.1 Applicant answered the SOR and requested a hearing to establish his eligibility for access to classified information.

On September 14, 2016, I convened a hearing. After I received the transcript, I reviewed the record in its entirety. I then provided written notice to the parties of my intent to resolve the case through a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel indicated that the Government had no objections. (See Appellate Exhibit I.) Applicant’s past financial problems were primarily attributable to matters beyond his control. Specifically, Applicant’s first wife was financially irresponsible, incurred significant debt, and contributed little to the couple’s financial obligations. Upon separating, Applicant’s wife remained in the marital home but failed to pay the mortgage, and did not disclose this to Applicant. Applicant discovered the mortgage arrears after his wife abandoned the home. He took all reasonable actions to and was able to modify the mortgage, but not the equity line of credit because his wife refused to sign the required documents. Due to other financial obligations including child support, he ultimately lost the home to foreclosure in 2011. The deficiency balance on the home equity loan was charged off, is not in active collection, and does not appear on his September 2016 credit report. The mortgage lender for Applicant’s current mortgage loan determined that he was not obligated on the line of credit. Applicant has not incurred any substantial delinquent debt since 2011. He has satisfied, successfully disputed, or otherwise resolved all the SOR debts, except the $201 debt listed in SOR ¶ 1.d. He has contacted this creditor for verification of the amount due. He has taken significant steps to improve his financial situation, including moving to another state to reduce his cost of living, implementing and maintaining a written budget, and living within his means. He regularly contributes to his 401(k) account and a savings account.

Department Counsel presented sufficient evidence to establish the facts alleged in the SOR under Guideline F. I conclude that Applicant presented sufficient evidence to explain, extenuate, or mitigate the facts admitted by Applicant or proven by Department Counsel. In particular, I conclude that the security concerns are resolved under mitigating conditions AG ¶¶ 20(a) through 20(e).

Applicant’s history of financial problems does 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, including Applicant’s honorable military service. Accordingly, I conclude that Applicant met his burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant his eligibility for access to classified information. Applicant’s request for a security clearance is granted.

Stephanie C. Hess Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This action was taken under Executive Order (E.O.) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; Department of Defense Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the Adjudicative Guidelines (AG) implemented by the Department of Defense on September 1, 2006.