CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 16-01415.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 16-01415.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 16-01415.h1

grantedFeb 28, 2017· Hon. Jennifer I. Goldstein· hearing

Summary

This case involved a pro se applicant whose eligibility for access to sensitive information was initially questioned under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to a history of financial issues, specifically tax liens. The Statement of Reasons alleged two state tax liens totaling $8,985 and a federal tax lien from 2011 for $11,023.

However, the applicant successfully demonstrated that all state and federal tax liens had been fully resolved before the hearing. He provided sufficient documentation to support his claims of improved financial stability.

Consequently, the judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(a), AG ¶ 20(b), AG ¶ 20(c), and AG ¶ 20(d). The judge concluded that the applicant's past financial history no longer raised doubts about his current reliability and trustworthiness, leading to a GRANTED outcome for access to sensitive information.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

All state and Federal tax liens were fully resolved prior to the hearing.
The applicant presented sufficient documentation to support his claims regarding financial stability.
The judge concluded that the applicant's financial history did not create doubt about 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 Largely Beyond the Person's Control.
AG ¶ 20(c)notedThe Person Has Received or Is Receiving Counseling for the Problem.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Person Has Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts.

Key Rule Quoted

“Summary Disposition is appropriate in cases where the undisputed evidence justifies a favorable decision of the case, with no potential appellate issues.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 21, 2016
Answer filedAug 29, 2016
Hearing heldFeb 7, 2017
Decision dateFeb 21, 2017Decision issued after proposed summary disposition.

Cite For

Resolution of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Application of Mitigating Conditions AG ¶ 20(a), 20(b), and 20(d)
Summary Disposition in Cases with Undisputed Evidence Leading to a Favorable Outcome.

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 issues, including tax liens totaling $19,008. However, the applicant successfully resolved these tax liens, leading the judge to conclude that the financial concerns were mitigated. Ultimately, the applicant was granted eligibility for access to sensitive information.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Owes a state government for two tax liens totaling $8,985. $8,985	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	—	(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	—
1.b	Owes the Federal government on a 2011 tax lien totaling $11,023. $11,023	For Applicant	Tax Unpaid	Admitted	—	(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	—

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: ) ) ADP1 Case No. 16-01415 ) ) Applicant for a Public Trust Position )

For Government: Adrienne Driskill, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

February 28, 2017

______________

DECISION

______________

Goldstein, Jennifer I., Administrative Judge:

Applicant submitted an Electronic Questionnaire for Investigations Processing (e- QIP) on August 20, 2015. On August 21, 2016, after reviewing the application and information gathered during a background investigation, the Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudications Facility issued a statement of reasons (SOR) detailing the trustworthiness concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) concerning Applicant. The action was taken under Executive Order 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) effective within the Department of Defense on September 1, 2006.

Applicant answered the SOR in writing on August 29, 2016, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on December 5, 2016. The hearing was held as scheduled on February 7, 2017. The Government offered Government Exhibits 1 through 5, which were admitted without objection. Applicant testified on his own behalf and submitted Applicant Exhibits A through D, which were also admitted without objection. The record was left open for receipt of additional documentation. On February 21, 2017, Applicant presented AE E, which was admitted without objection.

After reviewing the record, I proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor.2 Applicant did not object. Department Counsel provided written notice on February 21, 2017, that Department Counsel did not object. (Hearing Exhibit I.)

Applicant filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy in December 2013. All of his listed debts but his tax liens were discharged in 2014. He remained indebted to a state government for two tax liens totaling $8,985, and to the Federal government on a 2011 tax lien totaling $11,023. However, he presented documentation that shows all state and Federal tax liens have been fully resolved. Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that Department Counsel presented sufficient evidence to establish the facts alleged in the SOR under Guideline F. In particular, I conclude that the security concerns are resolved 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 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 whether the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence or vice versa. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept.

Accordingly, I conclude that Applicant met his ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant him eligibility for access to sensitive information. This case is decided for Applicant. Eligibility for access to sensitive information is granted.

Jennifer I. Goldstein Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 The SOR was amended at hearing to reflect that this was an ADP case and not an ISCR case. 2 Summary Disposition is appropriate in cases where the undisputed evidence justifies a favorable decision of the case, with no potential appellate issues. This decision is issued in accordance with instructions from the Director, DOHA, contained in an email dated November 12, 2016.