WPCj  =ah-Pcݣ!֤KxLτ)`M j|~vnEuFS#[߀uofHSH!v\jr/M&)c/wi]?8g.hVZbCT#xd 1-Vy[P:&qޫڈO4L%9d 4/j5}o% Kx٠xܗ,rK,/0ysȏ4$b&OWQAd V Yv\mM:޳?PUi&zZW#<bC|݄:w?Oq\r\tP/Ui] D1'hαߙ|{06>et" *Zܦe^J{ФHqE,"}J]bCZ#UN % 0: ZC w 4  N ^  m Z NE NG NI I I EK K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K BM Hewlett-Packard HP LaserJet P3010 Series0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE;EJ3|xovKU8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE d !USUS.,  _KEYWORD:GuidelineF  DIGEST:AJudgemustconsidernotonlytheextenttowhichanapplicanthasactuallyresolved  hisdebtsbutalsothecircumstancesunderlyingthemforwhattheymayrevealabouthis t judgementandreliability.Adversedecisionaffirmed. ` _CASENO_:1503778.a1 8  DATE:08/04/2017  ` ________________________   `     h      p DATE:August4,2017  L  .؉7r(#(#.AY) xdEgA   InRe:       ApplicantforSecurityClearance C AY) xdEgA k )   )   )   ) p ) \ ) H ) 4 )  p   \ pX p _ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1503778 p!  \" .؉7r. \XXp 4"    APPEALBOARDDECISION  # APPEARANCES &  &%XX FORGOVERNMENT  l( JamesB.Norman,Esq.,ChiefDepartmentCounsel D )  FORAPPLICANT  !D+ RyanC._Nerney_,Esq.#X,X%&x# ",     TheDepartmentofDefense(DoD)declinedtograntApplicantasecurityclearance.On |% / December14,2015,DoDissuedastatementofreasons(_SOR_)advisingApplicantofthebasisfor h&!0 thatdecision!securityconcernsraisedunderGuidelineF(FinancialConsiderations)ofDepartment T'"1 ofDefenseDirective5220.6(Jan.2,1992,asamended)(Directive).Applicantrequestedadecision @(#2 onthewrittenrecord.OnMay30,2017,afterconsideringtherecord,DefenseOfficeofHearings ,)|$3 andAppeals(DOHA)AdministrativeJudgeCarolG._Ricciardello_ԀdeniedApplicantsrequestfor *h%4 asecurityclearance.ApplicantappealedpursuanttoDirectiveE3.1.28andE3.1.30. +T&5   Applicantraisedthefollowingissueonappeal:whethertheJudgesadversedecisionwas ,,(7 arbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.Consistentwiththefollowing,weaffirm. -)8 Ї  TheJudgesFindingsofFact     Applicants_SOR_Ԁlistsnumerousdelinquentdebts,forastudentloan,medicalexpenses,etc. t TheJudgeresolvedallbuttwooftheminApplicantsfavor.Thetwothatshefoundagainsthim ` werefor$937and$875respectively.Regardingthefirst,theJudgefoundthatApplicantmade L  inconsistentstatementsaboutthem.Inhisinterviewhestatedthathedisputedthedebt.Inhis 8  Answertothe_SOR_,hestatedthatheowedthedebtandwouldpayitoff.InhisresponsetotheFile $ t ofRelevantMaterial(FORM),Applicantacknowledgedthathehadadmittedthedebtearlierbutthat  ` henowdoesnotbelievetheamountallegedisaccurateand,accordingly,disputedit.Applicanthas  L  notprovidedproofofactionstoresolvethisdebt.  8    Asforthesecond,Applicantacknowledgedowingthedebtbutthathehadfallenbehindin   payingit,duetotheeconomy.InhisAnswertothe_SOR_,however,hedeniedthedebt,claimingthat   ithadbeenremovedfromhiscreditreport.However,a2016creditreportshowsthatthisaccount   wasopenedin2011andis seriouslypastdue.Decisionat3.Applicantprovidednoevidenceto   showthatthedebthadbeenremovedfromhiscreditreport,paid,orresolved.Heprovidedno p informationaboutaplantoresolvehisdelinquentdebts. \   TheJudgesAnalysis  4   TheJudgestatedthatthetwodebtsdescribedabovearenotresolved,despiteApplicant  \ havingbeenonnoticeofthemforseveralyears.Hisclaimthatthe$875debtisnolongeronhis H creditreportisnotaccurate.Thesedebtsareyearsoldandthereisinsufficientevidencethatthey 4 areunlikelytorecur.Heprovidednoevidencethathisoverallfinancialproblemsoriginatedfrom   circumstancesoutsidehiscontrol.Althoughheassertedthatthepooreconomycausedhimtofall   behindinpayinghisbills,hefailedtoexplainwhythiswasso.TheJudgeconcludedthatApplicant  hadnotdemonstratedresponsibleactioninregardtohisdebts,notingthateventhemedicaldebts,  whichsheresolvedinhisfavor,hadbeenpaidonlywellafterthereceiptofthe_SOR_.Shestatedthat  Applicantsfailuretopayhismedicaldebtsforyearsdetractedfromtheextenttowhichhisactions l showedgoodfaith.Applicanthashadnofinancialcounselingandshestatedthattherearenoclear X  indicationsthatApplicantsproblemsareundercontrol. D!   Discussion  #l!   ApplicantarguesthattheJudgedidnotperformasufficientwholepersonanalysis.Among $D # otherthings,henotesthattheJudgeresolvedalmostalloftheallegationsinhisfavor,andthetwo %0!$ thatshefoundagainsthimhadacombinedtotalofunder$2000.HecontendsthatiftheJudgehad &"% properlyweighedtheentiretyoftheevidence,shewouldhaveconcludedthathehadmethisburden '#& ofpersuasionastomitigation. (#'   Wehaveconsideredthisargumentinlightoftherecordasawhole.Admittedly,thetotal |*%) amountofdebtthatconstitutedthebasisoftheadverseformalfindingsisrelativelysmall.However, h+&* aJudgemustconsidernotonlytheextenttowhichanapplicanthasactuallyresolvedhisdebtsbut T,'+ _alsothecircumstancesunderlyingthemforwhattheymayrevealabouthisjudgmentandreliability. @-(, See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1402394at34(App.Bd.Aug.17,2015).    Inthecasebeforeus,theJudgefoundthatApplicantdidnotresolvehismedicaldebtsuntil  afterreceiptofthe_SOR_,whichsheconcludedevidencedalackofgoodfaith.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCase t No.1401243at3(App.Bd.Jun.18,2015)(Timingofdebtpaymentsisrelevantinevaluatingan ` applicantscaseformitigation).ShefoundthatApplicanthadnotpresentedevidenceinsupportof L  hisclaimednexusbetweenhisinabilitytopayhisdebtsandtherecentpooreconomy.See,e.g., 8  _ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1400280at2(App.Bd.Feb.13,2015),inwhichtheapplicantfailedtoestablish $ t aconnectionbetweenhisdelinquentdebtsandcircumstancesbeyondhiscontrolthatheclaimed  ` werethecause.ShefoundthatApplicanthadnotpresentedaplantoresolvehisdelinquentdebts.  L  See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1502903at3(App.Bd.Mar.9,2017)(Anapplicantmustdevelopa  8  reasonableplanforrepaymentofdelinquentdebts).Shealsocitedtoinconsistentstatementsthat $  Applicanthadmadeaboutthetwodebtsshefoundagainsthim.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1401056   at3(App.Bd.Aug.17,2015)forthepropositionthatinconsistentstatementscanunderminethe   credibilityinanapplicantscaseformitigation.     WhileitmightonitsfaceappearanomalousthattheJudgeenteredfavorablefindingsfor p medicaldebtsthatshefoundlackinginevidenceofgoodfaith,wedonotevaluateaJudgesdecision \ basedonindividualfindingsoronsentencesisolatedfromtheiroverallcontext.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ H CaseNo.1113664at5(App.Bd.Aug.15,2013).Tothecontrary,weexamineaJudgesdecision 4 inlightoftherecordasawhole.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1406653at3(App.Bd.Nov.18,2016).  p Applyingthatrequirementtothecaseathand,weconcludethattheJudgesanalysissupportsher  \ overalladversedecision,despiteanapparentinconsistencybetweenthatanalysisandsomeofher H formalfindings.GiventherecordthatwasbeforetheJudge,weconcludethatheradversedecision 4 wasnotarbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.   Ѐ  TheJudgeexaminedtherelevantevidenceandarticulatedasatisfactoryexplanationforthe  decision.Thedecisionissustainableonthisrecord. Thegeneralstandardisthataclearancemay  begrantedonlywhenclearlyconsistentwiththeinterestsofthenationalsecurity.Department  oftheNavyv.Egan,484U.S.518,528(1988).SeealsoDirective,Encl.,2,App.A2(b): Any l doubtconcerningpersonnelbeingconsideredfornationalsecurityeligibilitywillberesolvedinfavor X  ofthenationalsecurity.  D! @( Order     TheDecisionis AFFIRMED .     `     h   Signed:Michael_Raanan_Ԁ <     `     h   Michael_Raanan_ ( x    `     h   AdministrativeJudge  d    `     h   Chairperson,AppealBoard  P     `     h   Signed:JamesE.Moody      `     h   JamesE.Moody      `     h   AdministrativeJudge      `     h   Member,AppealBoard t    `     h   Signed:JamesF.Duffy__ $t    `     h   JamesF.Duffy `    `     h   AdministrativeJudge L    `     h   Member,Appeal_Board___ 8