1
                                                             
                           DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
         DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS
          
            
In the matter of: )
)
---------------------- )       ISCR Case No. 07-17659
SSN: ----------- )
)
Applicant for Security Clearance )
Appearances
For Government: Eric Borgstrom,  Esquire, Department Counsel
For Applicant: Pro se
______________
Decision
______________
CURRY, Marc E., Administrative Judge:
On May 7, 2008, the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) issued to
Applicant a Statement of Reasons (SOR) detailing the security concern under Guideline
F. 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 revised adjudicative guidelines (AG)
promulgated by the President on December 29, 2005, and effective within the
Department of Defense for SORs issued after September 1, 2006. 
DOHA received Applicant’s answer, requesting a hearing, on May 15, 2008. I
received the case assignment on June 26, 2008. DOHA issued a notice of hearing on
July 24, 2008, and I convened the hearing as scheduled on August 12, 2008. During the
hearing, I received six government exhibits and Applicant’s testimony.
Applicant’s bankruptcy petition is unclear regarding the amount of delinquencies that she is seeking to be1
discharged. Schedule F lists $16,242. However, the schedule includes several creditors that Applicant and
her attorney have identified, but have not ascertained the respective amount of the delinquencies.
2
I received the transcript on August 25, 2008. Based upon a review of the case file,
pleadings, exhibits, and testimony, eligibility for access to classified information is
denied.
Findings of Fact
Applicant is a 50-year-old, married woman with two daughters, ages 30 and 16.
Since May 2008, she has been estranged from her husband (Tr. 20). She has a GED.
For the past 10 years, she has worked for a defense contractor that manufactures night
vision goggles (Tr. 38).
In the last five years, Applicant accrued eight delinquent debts in the approximate
amount of $32,000. They include the deficiencies from two repossessed cars (SOR
subparagraphs 1.a, and 1.e), two delinquent credit cards (SOR subparagraphs 1.b and
1.c), and delinquencies owed to a jewelry store (SOR subparagraph 1.d), a cell phone
company (SOR subparagraph 1.f), a department store (SOR subparagraph 1.g), and a
medical services provider (SOR subparagraph 1.h). 
Applicant also owes the IRS approximately $5,000 of delinquent income taxes
from either tax year 1996 or 1997 (Tr. 21). This was not alleged in the SOR.
Applicant and her husband earned $164,000 in gross income in 2006 (Exhibit 6
at 7). In October 2007, her husband was seriously injured in a car accident rendering
him unable to work (Tr. 17). Their joint, gross income for 2007 decreased to $140,000
(Id.). SOR subparagraphs 1.b, 1.c, 1.f, and 1.g were delinquent before her husband’s
car accident (Answer).
By March 2008, Applicant’s monthly expenses exceeded her income by
approximately $630 (Exhibit 6 at 40). She then filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection
(Exhibit 6).  All of the SOR delinquencies except subparagraphs 1.e and 1.h are1
scheduled to be discharged through the bankruptcy (Exhibit 6 at 25). Applicant
contends that she has satisfied the judgment listed in SOR subparagraph 1.e. She
provided no supporting documentation (Tr. 30). Since approximately April 2008, she has
been paying SOR subparagraph 1.h through a garnishment (Exhibit 5).
Under the bankruptcy plan, the trustee will sell Applicant’s house, use the capital
gain to satisfy some of the delinquencies, and discharge the remainder (Tr. 38).
Currently, the house is on the market (Tr. 36). 
Applicant previously filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in 1995 (Tr. 35).
She “cannot control [herself] with credit cards” (Tr. 35). She has received one hour of
financial counseling, by phone, as part of the bankruptcy filing process (Tr. 39).
3
Policies
When evaluating an applicant’s suitability for a security clearance, the
administrative judge must consider the revised adjudicative guidelines (AG). In addition
to brief introductory explanations for each guideline, the adjudicative guidelines list
potentially disqualifying conditions and mitigating conditions, which are useful in
evaluating an Applicant’s eligibility for access to classified information.
These guidelines are not inflexible rules of law. Instead, recognizing the
complexities of human behavior, these guidelines are applied in conjunction with the
factors listed in the adjudicative process. According to AG ¶ 2(c), the entire process is a
scrutiny of a number of variables known as the “whole person concept.” The
administrative judge must consider all available, reliable information about the person,
past and present, favorable and unfavorable, in making a decision.
The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration. AG ¶ 2(b)
requires that “[a]ny doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to
classified information will be resolved in favor of national security. Under Directive ¶
E3.1.14, the Government must present evidence to establish controverted facts alleged
in the SOR. Under Directive ¶ E3.1.15, the Applicant is responsible for presenting
“witnesses and other evidence to rebut, explain, extenuate, or mitigate facts admitted by
applicant or proven by Department Counsel. . . .” The Applicant has the ultimate burden
of persuasion as to obtaining a favorable security decision. 
Analysis
Financial Considerations
Under this guideline, “failure or inability to live within one=s means, satisfy debts,
and meet financial obligations may indicate poor self-control, lack of judgment, or
unwillingness to abide by rules and regulations, all of which can raise questions about
an individual=s reliability, trustworthiness and ability to protect classified information” (AG
¶ 18). Moreover, “an individual who is financially overextended is at risk of having to
engage in illegal acts to generate funds” (Id.).
Applicant’s ongoing financial problems trigger the application of AG ¶¶ 19(a),
“inability or unwillingness to satisfy debts,” 19( c), “a history of not meeting financial
obligations,” and 19(e), “consistent spending beyond one’s means, which may be
indicated by excessive indebtedness, significant negative cash flow, high debt-to-
income ratio, and/or other financial analysis.”
The ongoing nature of Applicant’s financial problems renders AG ¶ 20(a), “the
behavior happened so long ago, was so infrequent, or occurred under such
circumstances that it is unlikely to recur, and does not cast doubt on the individual’s
current reliability, trustworthiness, or good judgment,” inapplicable. Several of
Applicant’s debts were delinquent before her husband was disabled. In the two years
4
before his accident, their income ranged between $140,000 and $164,000 per year. AG
¶ 20(b), “the conditions that resulted in the financial problem were largely beyond the
person’s control (e.g., loss of employment, a business downturn, unexpected medical
emergency, or a death, divorce or separation), and the individual acted responsibly
under the circumstances,” does not apply.
Applicant’s participation in financial counseling, and her Chapter 7 bankruptcy
filing trigger the application of AG ¶¶ 20(c), the person has received counseling for the
problem . . .,” and 20(d), the individual initiated a good-faith effort to repay overdue
creditors or other wise resolve debts.” Her financial counseling, however, was limited to
one, one-hour phone consultation. Also, Applicant’s delinquencies have not yet been
discharged. Consequently, any positive inference that could be derived from the
bankruptcy filing is merely speculative.
Applicant contention that she has satisfied SOR subparagraph 1.e has little
probative value absent any supporting evidence. Although she is paying SOR
subparagraph 1.h through a garnishment; this does little to demonstrate financial
stability.
Applicant has not mitigated the financial considerations security concern.
Whole Person Concept
Under the whole person concept, the administrative judge must evaluate an
applicant’s eligibility for a security clearance by considering the totality of the applicant’s
conduct and all the circumstances. The administrative judge should consider the nine
adjudicative process factors listed at AG ¶ 2(a): “(1) the nature, extent, and seriousness
of the conduct; (2) the circumstances surrounding the conduct, to include
knowledgeable participation; (3) the frequency and recency of the conduct; (4) the
individual’s age and maturity at the time of the conduct; (5) the extent to which
participation is voluntary; (6) the presence or absence of rehabilitation and other
permanent behavioral changes; (7) the motivation for the conduct; (8) the potential for
pressure, coercion, exploitation, or duress; and (9) the likelihood of continuation or
recurrence.” Under AG ¶ 2(c), the ultimate determination of whether to grant eligibility
for a security clearance must be an overall commonsense judgment based upon careful
consideration of the guidelines and the whole person concept.
I have considered the whole person factors in the financial considerations section
of the Decision, above. I conclude that Applicant’s application for a security clearance
must be denied 
Formal Findings
Formal findings for or against Applicant on the allegations set forth in the SOR,
as required by Section E3.1.25 of Enclosure 3 of the Directive, are:
5
Paragraph 1, Guideline F: AGAINST APPLICANT
Subparagraphs 1.a - 1.h: Against Applicant
Conclusion
In light of all of the circumstances presented by the record in this case, it is not
clearly consistent with the national interest to grant Applicant eligibility for a security
clearance. Eligibility for access to classified information is denied.
                                             
_________________
MARC E. CURRY
Administrative Judge