1 
 
                                                              
                        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
         DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS 
           
             
 
 
In the matter of: ) 
 ) 
  )  ISCR Case No. 17-01657 
 ) 
Applicant for Security Clearance ) 
 
 
Appearances 
 
For Government: Jeff A. Nagel, Esq., Department Counsel 
For Applicant: Pro se 
 
 
 
______________ 
 
Decision 
______________ 
 
 
LOUGHRAN, Edward W., Administrative Judge: 
 
On July 11, 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of 
Reasons (SOR) to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline F, financial 
considerations.1 Applicant responded to the SOR on July 26, 2017, and requested a 
hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on November 9, 
2017. The hearing was held as scheduled on January 31, 2018. On May 14, 2018, I 
proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in 
Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.  
 
Applicant's financial problems were caused by periods of unemployment, his 
divorce, his ex-wife’s failure to pay her share of the marital debt, and his custody of his 
two children without the benefit of child support from his ex-wife. He paid several debts 
before the SOR was issued. He paid, settled, or otherwise resolved most of the debts 
alleged in the SOR. He established a plan to resolve his financial problems, and he took 
                                                          
1 This case is adjudicated under Executive Order (EO) 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, 
which became effective on June 8, 2017. 
 
2 
 
significant action to implement that plan. He credibly testified that he will resolve any 
remaining delinquent debts. Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that 
the security concerns are mitigated under the following mitigating conditions: AG ¶¶ 
20(a), 20(b), and 20(d).  
 
The concerns over Applicant’s history of 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. I also 
gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that he 
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.  
 
 
 
________________________ 
Edward W. Loughran 
Administrative Judge