WPCj  X/u\s|ʼnNLmi_ôksܾ~ZmpؽƅF yT@z:b{ӷengE?ܗct|rϧnl#D2d8a?l[A+},ub"Қt)[޶Z,O=c/HW[̩D:nvT_Xډ:|`eZ>?R>f!y 7EZ"'uR8uLw(qWī JQpT) x^:X[~8)-z1kjCS0Os(.~"A r hvFs7c* <ɥ*>@l_JGZ#UN % 0: ZC ^ w 4   m Z NC bE NI EK K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K BM Hewlett-Packard HP LaserJet P3010 Series0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUEJJpJx0vnx0vn3|xU8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE  d !USUS.,  _KEYWORD:GuidelineF  DIGEST:IfApplicantbelievedthattherewasmoreuptodateinformationthattheJudgeshould  consider,itwashisresponsibilitytohaveprovideditinresponsetotheFORM.Adverse t decisionaffirmed. ` _CASENO_:1502734.a1 8  DATE:04/19/2017  ` ___8 dd8       `     h      p DATE:April19,2017 H .؉7r(#(#.AY) xdEgA H InRe: C       ApplicantforSecurityClearance  AY) xdEf gA g  ) H ) 4  )  ! )  " ) # ) $ ) % ) l&  X ' pX p _ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1502734  *  + .؉7r. \XXp 0"+    APPEALBOARDDECISION #l, APPEARANCES %0!/  &K%XX FORGOVERNMENT  '#1 JamesB.Norman,Esq.,ChiefDepartmentCounsel (#2  FORAPPLICANT  @*%4  Prose #XlX%&K# +h&5   ,*(7     TheDepartmentofDefense(DoD)declinedtograntApplicantasecurityclearance.On   October22,2015,DoDissuedastatementofreasons(_SOR_)advisingApplicantofthebasisforthat  decision!securityconcernsraisedunderGuidelineF(FinancialConsiderations)ofDepartmentof  DefenseDirective5220.6(Jan.2,1992,asamended)(Directive).Applicantrequestedadecision t onthewrittenrecord.OnJanuary30,2017,afterconsideringtherecord,DefenseOfficeofHearings ` andAppeals(DOHA)AdministrativeJudgeRogerC.WesleydeniedApplicantsrequestfora L  securityclearance.ApplicantappealedpursuanttoDirectiveE3.1.28andE3.1.30. 8    Applicantraisedthefollowingissuesonappeal:whethertheJudgesfindingsaresupported  ` bysubstantialevidenceandwhethertheJudgesadversedecisionisarbitrary,capricious,orcontrary  L  tolaw.Consistentwiththefollowing,weaffirm.  8  _  TheJudgesFindingsofFact      Applicantacquiredasubstantialamountofdelinquentdebtfrom2010to2012.Duringthis   periodheengagedin intermittentparttimework.Decisionat2.Hisdebtsincludedastatetax   lienfortaxyears2008and2009,whichtheJudgefoundthathehadsatisfiedthroughwage p garnishmentandrefundsfromothertaxreturns.Applicantprovidednoevidencethathehad \ resolvedtheremainingdebts. H   TheJudgesAnalysis   p   TheJudgestatedthatApplicantsdebtsarefullydocumentedinthecreditreportsincluded H intherecord,resolvingthetaxlieninApplicantsfavorbutenteringadversefindingsforthe 4 remainderofthedebtsallegedintheSOR.HenotedApplicantslimitedemployment,whichwas   acircumstanceoutsidehiscontrolthataffectedhisfinancialcondition.However,theJudge   concludedthatApplicanthadnotshownresponsibleactioninregardtohisdebtsonceheattained  asuitablejob.InthewholepersonanalysistheJudgereiteratedthatApplicanthaddemonstrated  noeffortatdebtresolutionandobservedthatthetaxlienwaspaidthroughinvoluntarymeanssuch  asgarnishment. l   Discussion  D!   ApplicantcontendsthattheJudgeerredinfindingthathehadnotresolvedhisdebtsand #l! challengedthestatementtotheeffectthathisdebtsweredocumentedinhiscreditreports.Healso $X" arguesthattheJudgeerredinconcludingthathehaddemonstratednoeffortatresolvinghisdebts. $D # Applicantsbriefincludesinformationfromoutsidetherecord,whichwecannotconsider.Directive %0!$ E3.1.29. &"%   TheSORallegedsixteendebts,oneofwhich,thetaxlienthattheJudgeresolvedinhisfavor, (#' ApplicantdeniedinhisResponsetotheSOR.ApplicantsResponsealsostatedthathewasnot )$( awareofcertaindebtsorthatsomewereduplicatesofothers.However,Applicantadmittedtenof |*%) theSORdebts,includingtheirdelinquentstatus.Inadditiontotheseadmissions,thetwocredit h+&* reportsdescribeeachofthedebtsallegedagainstApplicant,alongwiththeirstatusas,e.g., T,'+ delinquent,incollection,etc.ApplicantsResponsetotheFileofRelevantMaterial(FORM)  includedseveraldocumentspertainingtohistaxliabilitiesandonefromacreditorofferingtosettle  oneofApplicantsdebts.Applicantprovidednoinformationaboutwhetherheacceptedthisoffer,  paidthedebt,etc.TheJudgeschallengedstatementsareconsistentwiththerecordevidence.If t ApplicantbelievedthattherewasmoreuptodateinformationthattheJudgeshouldconsider,itwas ` hisresponsibilitytohaveprovideditinResponsetotheFORM.SeeDirectiveE3.1.15,which L  assignstotheapplicantthedutytoprovideevidenceinrebuttal,explanation,mitigation,etc.The 8  Judgesmaterialfindingsaresupportedbysubstantialevidenceorconstitutereasonableinferences $ t fromtheevidence.See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.1501285at3(App.Bd.Dec.22,2016).  `   TheJudgeexaminedtherelevantevidenceandarticulatedasatisfactoryexplanationforthe  8  decision.Thedecisionissustainableonthisrecord. Thegeneralstandardisthataclearancemay $  begrantedonlywhenclearlyconsistentwiththeinterestsofthenationalsecurity.Department   oftheNavyv.Egan,484U.S.518,528(1988).SeealsoDirective,Enclosure22(b): Anydoubt   concerningpersonnelbeingconsideredforaccesstoclassifiedinformationwillberesolvedinfavor   ofthenationalsecurity.   @( Order  \   TheDecisionis AFFIRMED . 4    `     h   Signed:MichaelRaanan 8    `     h   MichaelRaanan $    `     h   AdministrativeJudge     `     h   Chairperson,AppealBoard     `     h   Signed:JamesE.Moody \     `     h   JamesE.Moody H!    `     h   AdministrativeJudge 4"     `     h   Member,AppealBoard  #p!    `     h   Signed:JamesF.Duffy & "%    `     h   JamesF.Duffy ' #&    `     h   AdministrativeJudge (#'    `     h   Member,AppealBoard