CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-08785.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-08785.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-08785.h1

grantedDec 1, 2016· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A security clearance was granted to an applicant, a widow who lost her job in 2009, despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleged ten unpaid debts totaling approximately $15,470.

However, the applicant successfully mitigated these concerns by resolving most of the debts through payments, settlements, or established payment plans. She also presented a clear and proactive plan to address her remaining financial issues and demonstrated significant action in implementing this plan.

The judge applied mitigating conditions, concluding that the applicant's financial problems did not raise doubts about her reliability or trustworthiness. Consequently, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant resolved most of her unpaid debts through payments, settlements, or payment plans.
She demonstrated a proactive plan to address her financial problems.
The judge concluded that her financial issues did not raise doubts about her reliability or 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 Made a Good Faith Effort to Repay the Debts.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Applicant Has a Reasonable Plan to Resolve Her Financial Problems.
AG ¶ 20(e)appliedThe Applicant Has Demonstrated a Change in Circumstances.

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 22, 2016
Answer filedJun 9, 2016
Hearing heldNov 15, 2016
Decision dateDec 1, 2016

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions
Good Faith Efforts to Resolve Debts 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.

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 accrued ten unpaid debts totaling about $15,470, but she had taken significant action to resolve most of these debts. Ultimately, the judge concluded that the financial concerns were mitigated and granted the applicant's security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	accrued ten unpaid debts totaling about $15,470 $15,470	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	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 (e) reasonable, documented basis to dispute the debt	—
1.c	has a plan to resolve her financial problems	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	has taken significant action to implement that plan	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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 15-08785 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

Appearances

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

12/01/2016 ______________

Decision

______________

LOUGHRAN, Edward W., Administrative Judge:

On May 22, 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 9, 2016, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on August 12, 2016. The hearing was held as scheduled on November 15, 2016. On November 28, 2016, I proposed that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant’s husband passed away in 2008, and she lost her job in 2009. She accrued ten unpaid debts totaling about $15,470. She 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), 20(d), and 20(e).

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