KEYWORD: Guideline F
DIGEST: In her appeal brief, Applicant contends that she is making payments on the debt
management program which began after she submitted her response to the FORM and provided
proof of payments toward the debt management program. The proof of those payments constitute
new evidence that the Appeal Board may not consider.  She also indicated that maintaining a
security clearance is important to achieving her career goals.  The Directive does not allow us to
consider the impact of an unfavorable decision.  Adverse decision affirmed.
CASENO: 17-01492.a1
DATE: 04/30/2018
DATE: April 30, 2018
In Re:
---------------------------
 
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 17-01492
APPEAL BOARD DECISION
APPEARANCES
FOR GOVERNMENT
James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel
FOR APPLICANT
Pro se
The Department of Defense (DoD) declined to grant Applicant a security clearance.  On May
26, 2017, DoD 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 decision
on the written record.  On February 28, 2018, after considering the record, Defense Office of
Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) Administrative Judge Gregg A. Cervi denied Applicant’s request
for a security clearance.  Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.
The SOR alleged that Applicant had 19 delinquent debts totaling about $15,000.  These
included student loans, credit cards, and medical accounts.  With the exception of two debts that she
was unable to identify, Applicant admitted the SOR debts.  Periods of unemployment and medical
problems contributed to her financial delinquencies.  In responding to Department Counsel’s File
of Relevant Material (FORM), she provided proof of payments on two SOR debts.  In August 2017,
she initiated a debt management program, but provided no proof of payments towards that program. 
The Judge determined that there was insufficient evidence to establish that Applicant had the ability
to meet her current financial obligations or show that she took responsible action to resolve her
debts.  The Judge concluded no mitigating condition was fully applicable. 
In her appeal brief, Applicant contends that she is making payments on the debt management
program.   She noted that those payments did not begin until after she submitted her response to the
FORM and provided proof of payments toward the debt management program. The proof of those
payments constitute new evidence that the Appeal Board may not consider.  Directive ¶ E3.1.1.29.1 
She also indicated that maintaining a security clearance is important to achieving her career goals. 
The Directive does not allow us to consider the impact of an unfavorable decision.  See, e.g., ISCR
Case No. 14-04202 at 4 (App. Bd. Dec. 24, 2015).  Applicant’s appeal brief fails to establish the
Judge committed any harmful error.  
The Judge examined the relevant evidence and articulated a satisfactory explanation for the
decision.  The decision is sustainable on this record.  “The general standard is that a clearance may
be granted only when ‘clearly consistent with the interests of the national security.’”  Department
of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988).  See also Directive, Encl. 2, App. A ¶ 2(b):  “Any
doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in
favor of the national security.”
1 To the extent that Applicant contends that she was denied the opportunity to present evidence, our review of
the record shows that she was neither denied the opportunity to present evidence nor  misled about her chance to do so.
See, e.g., ISCR Case No. 16-02941 at 3 (App. Bd. Dec. 29, 2017).  
2
Order
The Decision is AFFIRMED.  
Signed: Michael Ra’anan      
Michael Ra’anan
Administrative Judge
Chairperson, Appeal Board
Signed: Charles C. Hale        
Charles C. Hale
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
Signed: James F. Duffy         
James F. Duffy
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
3