CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-08045.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-08045.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-08045.h1

grantedDec 5, 2016· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

This security clearance decision involved an applicant facing concerns under Guideline F, Financial Considerations. The Statement of Reasons alleged that the applicant's first and second mortgage loans became delinquent, leading to the foreclosure of his home around 2015. However, there was no evidence indicating that creditors were currently seeking any deficiencies owed on these loans.

The applicant, representing himself, successfully demonstrated that these past financial difficulties stemmed from his wife's illness and subsequent job loss. The judge applied mitigating conditions, finding that the applicant's current financial situation is sound and stable.

Ultimately, the security clearance was GRANTED. The decision concluded that the previous financial issues did not reflect on the applicant's current reliability or trustworthiness, particularly given the absence of ongoing creditor actions and the stability of his present finances.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's current finances are sound and stable.
There is no evidence of creditors seeking deficiencies on the loans after foreclosure.
The applicant demonstrated that past financial issues do not reflect his current reliability and trustworthiness.

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 Taken Positive Steps to Resolve His Financial Issues.

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 12, 2016
Answer filedJun 10, 2016
Hearing heldNov 14, 2016
Decision dateDec 5, 2016

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Consideration of Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions
Impact of Personal Circumstances on Financial Reliability Assessments

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's financial issues, primarily stemming from his wife's medical bills and subsequent foreclosure, were mitigated. The applicant's current financial situation is sound, and the judge concluded that the financial concerns do not affect his reliability or trustworthiness.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant’s first and second mortgage loans became delinquent, and his house was eventually lost to foreclosure in about 2015.	For Applicant	Mortgage or Home Loan 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	—
1.b	There is no evidence that the creditors are seeking any deficiencies owed on the loans.	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	—

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. 15-08045 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

Appearances

For Government: Jeff A. Nagel, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

12/05/2016 ______________

Decision

______________

LOUGHRAN, Edward W., Administrative Judge:

On May 12, 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 June 10, 2016, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on August 9, 2016. The hearing was held as scheduled on November 14, 2016. On November 29, 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 wife became sick and incurred substantial medical bills. She also lost her job. Applicant’s first and second mortgage loans became delinquent, and his house was eventually lost to foreclosure in about 2015. There is no evidence that the creditors are seeking any deficiencies owed on the loans. Applicant’s current finances are sound. 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), and 20(c).

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.

________________________ Edward W. Loughran Administrative Judge