KEYWORD: Guideline F
DIGEST: The Judge found that Applicant has substantial delinquent debts for child support and
cancellation of a lease.  The Judge’s conclusions in light of findings are sustainable.  Adverse
decision affirmed.
CASENO: 07-14738.a1
DATE: 10/28/2008
DATE: October 28, 2008
In Re:
---------
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 07-14738
APPEAL BOARD DECISION
APPEARANCES
FOR GOVERNMENT
James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel
FOR APPLICANT
Pro Se
The Judge’s favorable decision under SOR subparagraphs 1(a), 1(c-d), and 1(g-j) is not at issue in this appeal.1
Directive ¶ E2.19(a): “inability or unwillingness to satisfy debts;” Directive ¶ E2.19(c): “a history of not2
meeting financial obligations[.]”
Directive ¶ E2.20(a): “the behavior happened so long ago, was so infrequent, or occurred under such3
circumstances that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt on the individual’s current reliability, trustworthiness,
or good judgement;” Directive ¶ E2.20(b): “the conditions that resulted in the financial problem were largely beyond
the persons’s control . . . and the individual acted responsibly under the circumstances;” Directive ¶ E2.20(d): “the
individual has initiated a good-faith effort to repay overdue creditors or otherwise resolve debts[.]”
2
The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) declined to grant Applicant a security
clearance.  On January 30, 2008 DOHA issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of
the basis for that decision–security concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) of
Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive).  Applicant
requested a hearing.  On July 31, 2008, after the hearing, Administrative Judge Charles D. Ablard
denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance.  Applicant filed a timely appeal pursuant to
Directive ¶¶  E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.
Applicant raised the following issues on appeal: whether the Judge’s application of the
Guideline F mitigating conditions was erroneous and whether the Judge’s whole-person analysis was
erroneous.    Finding no error, we affirm.1
The Judge found that Applicant has a delinquent debt of $4,965 arising from his cancellation
of an apartment lease.  He also found that Applicant has delinquent debts for child support
obligations for two of his three children.  The combined amount of the delinquency for the two child
support debts is approximately $9,000.  The Judge properly concluded that Applicant’s case raised
security concerns under Guideline F.   The record demonstrates that he considered appropriate2
mitigating conditions.   However, the Judge concluded that Applicant had failed to meet his burden3
of persuasion as to the debts described above.  See Directive ¶ E3.1.15.  Viewed in light of the record
as a whole, this conclusion is sustainable.  The Board has also examined the Judge’s whole-person
analysis, in which he concluded that Applicant had not established a sufficient track record of fiscal
responsibility to justify the award of a security clearance.  This is also sustainable.  See ISCR Case
No. 03-22861 at 2-3 (App. Bd. Jun. 2, 2006).  See also Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n of the United
States v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 (1983)(quoting Burlington Truck Lines,
Inc. v. United States, 371 U.S. 156, 168 (1962)).  Viewed in light of the standard set forth in
Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988) (“The general standard is that a clearance
may be granted only when ‘clearly consistent with the interests of the national security’”), the
Judge’s decision is neither arbitrary, capricious, nor contrary to law.  In support of his appeal
Applicant has submitted new matters not contained in the record, which the Board cannot consider.
See Directive ¶ E3.1.29. (“No new evidence shall be received or considered by the Appeal Board.”)
3
Order
The Judge’s adverse security clearance decision is AFFIRMED.  
Signed: Jeffery D. Billett                 
Jeffrey D. Billett
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
Signed: William S. Fields              
William S. Fields
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
Signed: James E. Moody                
James E. Moody
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board