WPC  ;][Yݶ19A50ږ<ôdžI %ŏ 2ājrkRbQ&*}vJˍ.n:q1T]ETd)UAo_ ډTYn D`=H52H,P#9gzŨa|OO%C(b:LJuf˅2~ ~I^j&Fl~%ؚ,"2H]O(帜ޑV_=F-HnNW"":vY?|06P]A?)<ƃ !5 mm?룃ܳDɫAukKw2 /G*Wiztοyk@!} k֞f_::I|T2l.R˱?sn۔r3ɐ<2KYO1wUX0$e"[!RRYDsQboimw~(ETz-W#UN % 0: ^  w% 4) = L mN Ze 0 bh Zl E 0D N    BHewlett-Packard HP LaserJet P3010 Series0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,JJpJ:i+003|xU8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE(Y(24$ !USUS.,  XX      0   8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE(#$  0     4$USUS.,XX      1    _ԀDirective,Enclosure220(a)states, thebehaviorhappenedsolongago,wassoinfrequent,oroccurredunder  circumstancesthatitisunlikelytorecuranddoesnotcasedoubtontheindividualscurrentliability,trustworthiness, t orgoodjudgment[.]  4$USUS.,XX      3    _ԀFromtherecord,theAppealBoardisunabletodiscernwhatinformationinItem4isincorrect.   4$USUS.,XX      2    _ԀAfootnoteintheFORMadvisedApplicantthatshecouldobjecttoItem4onthegroundthatitis  unauthenticatedbyaGovernmentwitnessandmaynotbeconsideredasevidence.Shewasalsoadvisedthat,ifshefailed t toraiseanobjectiontoItem4,theJudgemaydetermineshewaivedanyobjectiontoitsadmissibilityandconsiderit. d !USUS.,  _KEYWORD:GuidelineF  DIGEST:TheBoardhasnoauthoritytograntaninterim,conditionalorprobationaryclearance.  Adversedecisionaffirmed. t _CASENO_:1501807.a1 L  DATE:04/19/2017 $ t ___ 8dd8       `     h      p DATE:April19,2017 \ .؉7r(#(#.AV) xdE gA  \ InRe: W     ApplicantforSecurityClearance  AV) xdEzgA { )  \ ) H ) 4  )  ! )  " ) # ) $ ) %  l& pX p _ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1501807  ) .؉7r. \XXp D!)    APPEALBOARDDECISION 0"* APPEARANCES $D -  &%XX FORGOVERNMENT  &"/ JamesB.Norman,Esq.,ChiefDepartmentCounsel '"0  FORAPPLICANT  T)$2  Prose #XX%&# ,*|%3   ,*(6     TheDepartmentofDefense(DoD)declinedtograntApplicantasecurityclearance.On   October26,2015,DoDissuedastatementofreasons(_SOR_)advisingApplicantofthebasisforthat  decision!securityconcernsraisedunderGuidelineF(FinancialConsiderations)ofDepartmentof  DefenseDirective5220.6(Jan.2,1992,asamended)(Directive).Applicantrequestedadecision t onthewrittenrecord.OnJanuary25,2017,afterconsideringtherecord,DefenseOfficeofHearings ` andAppeals(DOHA)AdministrativeJudgeEricH._Borgstrom_ԀdeniedApplicantsrequestfora L  securityclearance.ApplicantappealedpursuanttoDirectiveE3.1.28andE3.1.30. 8    Applicantraisedthefollowingissueonappeal:whethertheJudgesadversedecisionwas  ` arbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.Consistentwiththefollowing,weaffirm  L  _  TheJudgesFindingsofFact      Fortysixyearsold,Applicanthasworkedforhercurrentemployer,aDoDcontractor,since   2014.Sheisdivorcedandhasexperiencedperiodsofunemployment.TheSORalleges13debts   totalingabout$83,000,includingapastduemortgage(SOR1.a).Sheprovidedproofofconsistent p paymentsforoverayearonthemortgage,plusproofofotherlargepayments.Sheestablishedthat \ acreditcardaccount(SOR1.d)wasnotherresponsibility.Shereferencedapendingcourthearing H onajudgmentagainstherforabout$28,000(SOR1.m)andamonthlypaymentagreement,but 4 providednodocumentationofapaymenthistoryorremainingbalance.Sheprovidednoevidence  p ofpaymentsorotherstepstakentoresolvetheremainingtendebts.Sheclaimedtwoofthosedebts  \ wereduplicates;however,creditreports,beyondbalances,donotlinkthetwoaccounts. H   TheJudgesAnalysis  h      TheJudgefoundforApplicantonthemortgagedebtandthedebtthatwasnother  responsibility.Hefoundagainstherontheremainingdebts.Herdivorceandperiodsof  unemploymentwerecircumstancesbeyondhercontrol,butthereisnoevidenceofdebtrepayment  beyondhermortgage.Sheprovidedinsufficientevidenceofareasonableplanfordebtrepayment l ortoestablishherfinancialproblemsarebeingresolved. X    Discussion   0"    MuchofApplicantsappealpresentationconsistsofmattersfromoutsidetherecord.For $X" example,sheprovideddocumentsshowingpaymentstowardsdebts.However,wecannotconsider $D # newevidenceonappeal.DirectiveE3.1.29. %0!$   Applicantarguesthatmitigatingcondition20(a) #  1      ׀appliestothemortgagedebtinSOR1.a. '#& SincetheJudgefoundinfavorofheronthemortgagedebt,weneednotaddressherargument  regardingthatdebt.      Item4ofDepartmentCounselsFileofRelevantMaterial(FORM)isthesummaryof t Applicantspersonalsubjectinterview(PSI)withanOfficeofPersonnelManagementinvestigator. ` TheJudgeadmittedItem4intoevidence.ApplicantsAppealBriefstates: L     `     h   8  InregardstoFORMItem4,thereweremanyresponsesthatIindicatedwere $ t incorrectlyreflected.TheinformationcontainedintheFORMfromtheinvestigation  ` containednumerousfactsthatwereincorrectandnotasreported. L    TheAppealBriefdoesnotidentifytheinformationthatsheclaimsisincorrect.Itisnotedthat $  ApplicantwasprovidedacopyoftheFORMandadvisedofheropportunitytosubmitobjections   ormaterialthatshewantedtheJudgetoconsider. #  2      ׀ShesubmittedaresponsetotheFORMinwhich   sheneitherobjectedtoItem4norindicatedthatitcontainedanyinformationthatwasincorrect. #  3      ׀   IntheabsenceofanyobjectiontoItem4orindicationthatitcontainedinaccurateinformation,the   Judgedidnoterrbyadmittingandconsideringthatdocument.See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.1406781 p at3(App.Bd.Dec.16,2016). h  \   IntheAppealBrief,Applicantdiscusses,amongothermatters,thecircumstancesunder 4 whichherdebtsaroseandhereffortstoresolvethem.Theseassertionsareneitherenoughtorebut  p thepresumptionthattheJudgeconsideredalloftheevidenceintherecordnorsufficienttoshowthat  \ theJudgeweighedtheevidenceinamannerthatwasarbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.See, H e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.1504856at23(App.Bd.Mar.9,2017). 4   Applicantrequeststhatwepostponeourdecisionforashortperiodtoallowherthe   opportunitytotakecorrectivestepstoprovesheisworthyofasecurityclearance.Wehaveno  authoritytograntaninterim,conditional,orprobationaryclearance.See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.14  04289at2(App.Bd.Sep.9,2015).Shealsopointsoutthatherjobisimportanttoherandher  family,implyingthatshemayloseherjob.TheDirectivedoesnotpermitustoconsidertheadverse l consequencesofanunfavorabledecision.Id. X  Ѐ   `  D!   Applicanthasnotidentifiedanyharmfulerrorlikelytochangetheoutcomeofthecase.The 0"  Judgeexaminedtherelevantevidenceandarticulatedasatisfactoryexplanationforthedecision. #l!  Thegeneralstandardisthataclearancemaybegrantedonlywhenclearlyconsistentwiththe $X" interestsofthenationalsecurity.DepartmentoftheNavyv.Egan,484U.S.518,528(1988).See $D #  alsoDirective,Enclosure22(b): Anydoubtconcerningpersonnelbeingconsideredforaccess %0!$ toclassifiedinformationwillberesolvedinfavorofthenationalsecurity.Thedecisionis  sustainableonthisrecord.      `       ` @( Order      TheDecisionis AFFIRMED .      `     h   Signed:JamesE.Moody L    `     h   JamesE.Moody 8    `     h   AdministrativeJudge $t    `     h   Member,AppealBoard `    `     h   Signed:WilliamS.Fields     `     h   WilliamS.Fields     `     h   AdministrativeJudge     `     h   Member,AppealBoard     `       `     h   Signed:JamesF.Duffy 4"     `     h   JamesF.Duffy  #p!    `     h   AdministrativeJudge  $\"    `     h   Member,AppealBoard