1 
 
 
                                                              
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS 
           
             
 
 
In the matter of: ) 
 ) 
 [REDACTED]  )  ISCR Case No. 15-01147 
 ) 
Applicant for Security Clearance ) 
 
 
Appearances 
 
For Government: Tara R. Karoian, Esq., Department Counsel 
For Applicant: Pro se 
 
 
______________ 
 
Decision 
______________ 
 
 
HESS, Stephanie C., Administrative Judge: 
 
On November 26, 2015, the Department of Defense (DOD) Consolidated 
Adjudications Facility (CAF) sent Applicant a Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleging 
concerns under the financial considerations guideline.1 Applicant answered the SOR 
and requested a hearing to establish her eligibility for access to classified information. 
 
 On July 28, 2016, I convened a hearing. After I received the transcript and the 
record closed, I reviewed the record in its entirety. I then provided written notice to the 
parties of my intent to resolve the case through a summary disposition in Applicant’s 
favor. Department Counsel indicated that the Government had no objections. (See 
Appellate Exhibit I.)  
                                                            
1 This action was taken under Executive Order (E.O.) 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) implemented by the Department of Defense on September 1, 2006. 
 
2 
 
 
 
 Applicant’s past financial problems were primarily attributable to matters beyond 
her control. Specifically, Applicant took out multiple student loans for college, but 
following graduation was only able to find temporary jobs. This underemployment 
resulted in her defaulting on her student loans and incurring several other delinquent 
debts. She has since paid off one large student loan, consolidated and become current 
on the other loans, successfully disputed several debts, and paid off or is resolving the 
remaining SOR debts. As of the close of the record, Applicant had satisfied or otherwise 
resolved all the SOR debts, except the debt listed in SOR ¶ 1.o. She has contacted this 
creditor to establish a repayment plan. She is current on her existing financial 
obligations, lives within her means, and regularly contributes to her 401 (k) account and 
a savings account. 
 
 Department Counsel presented sufficient evidence to establish the facts alleged 
in the SOR under Guideline F. I conclude that Applicant presented sufficient evidence to 
explain, extenuate, or mitigate the facts admitted by Applicant or proven by Department 
Counsel. In particular, I conclude that the security concerns are resolved under 
mitigating conditions AG ¶¶ 20(a) through 20(e).  
 
          Applicant’s history of financial problems does 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 or vice versa. I also gave due 
consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that Applicant met 
her burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to 
grant her eligibility for access to classified information. Applicant’s request for a security 
clearance is granted. 
 
 
 
 
Stephanie C. Hess 
Administrative Judge