1 
 
 
                                                              
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS 
           
             
 
 
In the matter of: ) 
 ) 
  )  ISCR Case No. 15-03764 
 ) 
Applicant for Security Clearance ) 
 
 
Appearances 
 
For Government: Julie R. Mendez, Esq., Department Counsel 
For Applicant: Gregory F. Greiner, Esq. 
 
 
______________ 
 
Decision 
______________ 
 
 
NOEL, Nichole, Administrative Judge: 
 
On April 27, 2016, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of 
Reasons (SOR) detailing security concerns under the financial considerations 
guideline.1 DOD adjudicators were unable to find that it is clearly consistent with the 
national interest to continue Applicant’s security clearance and recommended that the 
case be submitted to an administrative judge for a determination whether to revoke her 
security clearance. Applicant timely responded to the SOR and requested a hearing. 
 
The hearing was held on April 26, 2017. After the close of the record, I proposed 
to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s 
favor. Neither party objected.  
 
                                                          
1 This case is adjudicated under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Cassified Information within 
Industry, signed by President Eisenhower on February 20, 1960, as amended; as well as DOD Directive 
5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program, dated January 2, 1992, as 
amended (Directive). In addition, the Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to 
Classified Information (AG), effective within the Defense Department on September 1, 2006, apply to this 
case. The AG were published in the Federal Register and codified in 32 C.F.R. § 154, Appendix H (2006). 
The AG replace the guidelines in Enclosure 2 to the Directive.    
 
2 
 
 
The SOR alleged that Applicant was indebted to five creditors for approximately 
$27,000. The debt became delinquent between 2007 and 2012 during a period of 
underemployment. Although Applicant returned to full employment in 2012, he could not 
afford to resolve his delinquent accounts. In 2016, Applicant received a 46% increase in 
pay. He obtained a debt-consolidation loan to resolve the delinquent accounts alleged in 
the SOR. Applicant is financially stable, lives within his means, and is comfortably able 
to repay the debt consolidation loan.  
 
The Government presented sufficient evidence to establish its prima facie case 
that Applicant exhibited a history of financial problems and an inability to repay his 
creditors. AG ¶¶ 19 (a) and (c) apply. However, Applicant presented sufficient evidence 
to explain, extenuate, or mitigate the financial concerns. Applicant’s financial problems 
were caused by events largely beyond his control, under a set of circumstances that are 
unlikely to recur. He made a good-faith effort to resolve his delinquent accounts as soon 
as he became financially able to do so. Applicant’s finances are under control. AG ¶¶ 20 
(a) – (d) apply. 
 
Applicant’s past 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 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 
his ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national 
interest to grant him eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided 
for Applicant.  
 
 
 Nichole L. Noel 
Administrative Judge