1 
 
                                                              
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS 
           
             
 
 
In the matter of: ) 
 ) 
 [Redacted]  )  ISCR Case No. 16-03628 
  ) 
Applicant for Security Clearance ) 
 
 
Appearances 
 
For Government: Robert B. Blazewick, Esq., Department Counsel 
For Applicant: Pro se.  
 
                      
            
______________ 
 
Decision 
______________ 
 
FOREMAN, LeRoy F., Administrative Judge: 
 
Applicant submitted a security clearance application on February 23, 2015. On 
January 27, 2017, the Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudications Facility (DOD 
CAF) sent him a statement of reasons (SOR) alleging security concerns under 
Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The DOD CAF acted under Executive Order 
(Exec. Or.) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 
1960), as amended; DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security 
Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the 
adjudicative guidelines (AG) implemented by the DOD on September 1, 2006.1 
Applicant timely answered the SOR and requested a hearing. 
 
The case was assigned to me on May 11, 2017, and I conducted the hearing as 
scheduled on June 9, 2017. On July 12, 2017, I notified Department Counsel that I 
intended to issue a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor, and he did not object.  
                                                          
1 Security Executive Agent Directive 4 (SEAD 4), was issued on December 10, 2016, revising the 2006 
adjudicative guidelines. The SEAD 4 guidelines apply to all adjudicative decisions issued on or after June 
8, 2017. My decision is based on the guidelines in SEAD 4, referred to in this decision as “AG.” The 
changes resulting from issuance of SEAD 4 did not affect my decision in this case. 
 
2 
 
After reviewing all the evidence, I conclude that the mitigating conditions in AG 
¶¶ 20(b), 20(d), and 20(e) are established. I am satisfied that Applicant has met his 
burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to 
grant him eligibility for access to classified information. Clearance is granted.  
 
 
 
 
LeRoy F. Foreman 
Administrative Judge