WPC 3-RʲQWc!Ve'/2J2R8bJJ˼FۓC _X|b4%yK@LI،`ClTI5X,FuA8-E){IfbaJhdp#mP'I:kg^/QҸ%^=9KP^s)~ ]*E!- _5kw%Q1T^x p| RVC.P,B; n#D]OGD- <4b*\=k)?߻= G2&/HZ%FI^=N;s+F[ܵ.uY Zg6r7͇ ^# >qO|Ze6\֒]4?XN$0&tdm'w 1L:ȧGEiceV(r8ްq;qE X[ ǻNt8 E*Ow?99Z#UN % 0: ^ C wO 4S g v mx Z Z NC C NE 0G E  0D BHewlett-Packard HP LaserJet P3010 Series0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,J;EJp}.bk43|xU8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE(Y(2,$ !USUS.,  XX      0    ,$USUS., XX      1    _ApplicantsubmittedanemailfromataxprepareradvisingthathisFederalandstatereturns areuptodate  through2014andthe2015taxreturnsareonextension.ThisexhibitincludedthreeIRSForm8326s,acknowledging t thatApplicanthadelectronicallyfiledhisFederalreturnsfor2012through2014,andtheemailstatedthattheonefor 8 2011hadbeenfiledbymail.Theexhibitdidnotexplicitlyaddressdelinquentreturnsfor2009and2010.(#$  0   d !USUS.,  _KEYWORD:GuidelineF  DIGEST:Applicantcitestorecordevidenceconcerninghisproblemswithhiswifeandthesteps  hehastakentopayhisdebtsandfiletaxreturns,specificallynotingtheemailfromhistax t preparer.HearguesthattheJudgeconsideredtheevidenceinafragmented,piecemealmanner. ` ApplicantsargumentisnotenoughtorebutthepresumptionthattheJudgeconsideredallofthe L  evidenceintherecord.Adversedecisionaffirmed 8  _CASENO_:1501772.a1  ` DATE:06/07/2017  8     `     h      p DATE:June7,2017   .؉7r(#(#.AY) xdEogA p InRe: k      / ApplicantforSecurityClearance W AY) xdEgA / ) p ) \ ) H ) 4 )  p )  \ ) H ) 4    ! pX p _ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1501772 4$   p% .؉7r. \XXp %    APPEALBOARDDECISION & APPEARANCES X )  &%XX FORGOVERNMENT  0"+ JamesB.Norman,Esq.,ChiefDepartmentCounsel #X,  FORAPPLICANT  $ . RyanC._Nerney_,Esq.#XX%&# % /     TheDepartmentofDefense(DoD)declinedtograntApplicantasecurityclearance.On @(#2 September22,2015,DoDissuedastatementofreasons(_SOR_)advisingApplicantofthebasisfor ,)|$3 thatdecision!securityconcernsraisedunderGuidelineF(FinancialConsiderations)ofDepartment *h%4 ofDefenseDirective5220.6(Jan.2,1992,asamended)(Directive).Applicantrequestedadecision +T&5 onthewrittenrecord.OnMarch16,2017,afterconsideringtherecord,DefenseOfficeofHearings +@'6 andAppeals(DOHA)AdministrativeJudgeJenniferI.GoldsteindeniedApplicantsrequestfora ,,(7 securityclearance.ApplicantappealedpursuanttoDirectiveE3.1.28andE3.1.30. -)8 Ї  Applicantraisedthefollowingissueonappeal:whethertheJudgesadversedecisionwas  arbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.Consistentwiththefollowing,weaffirm.  _  TheJudgesFindingsofFact  `   ApplicantfailedtofilehisFederalandstateincometaxreturnsinatimelyfashionfortax 8  years2009through2012.Healsobecamedelinquentinsevendebts,totalingover$24,000.He $ t attributedhisfinancialproblemstohiswifesaddictiontoprescriptionpainkillers.Shehidthebills  ` fromhimandfailedtopaythem.Applicantalsoowedheralimonyfollowingtheirseparation,which  L  impededtimelyresolutionofhisdebts.Heattributedhistaxdelinquenciestohishavingmisplaced  8  necessarypaperwork.Althoughheshowedthathehadfiledhisreturnsfrom2011forward,hedid $  notprovidedocumentationthatspecificallyshowedthathehadfiledthosefor2009and2010. #  1      ׀   Applicantdemonstratedthathehadresolved,orwasresolving,threeofthesevendelinquentdebts   allegedinthe_SOR_.     Applicantprovidednoevidenceoffinancialcounseling,hiscurrentincome,abudget,or p otherindiciaoffinancialresponsibility. \   TheJudgesAnalysis  4   Thoughnotingcircumstancesthatwereoutsidehiscontrolthataffectedhisfinancial  \ problems,theJudgeconcludedthatApplicanthadnotdemonstratedresponsibleactionregardinghis H annualtaxfilingobligations.Shealsonotedapaucityofevidenceconcerningresolutionoffourof 4 thedelinquentdebtsallegedagainsthim.     Discussion     Applicantcitestorecordevidenceconcerninghisproblemswithhiswifeandthestepshe  hastakentopayhisdebtsandfilehistaxreturns,specificallynotingtheemailfromhistaxpreparer. l HearguesthattheJudgeconsideredtheevidenceinafragmented,piecemealmanner.Applicants X  argumentisnotenoughtorebutthepresumptionthattheJudgeconsideredalloftheevidenceinthe D! record.NeitherisitenoughtoshowthattheJudgeweighedtheevidenceinamannerthatwas 0"  arbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1300502at3(App.Bd.Mar.7, #l! 2017).ApplicanthasreferencedaHearingOfficecaseinsupportofhisappeal.Wegivedue $X" considerationtothiscase.However,eachcasemustbedecideduponitsownmerits.Directive, $D # Enclosure22(b).HearingOfficedecisionsarebindingneitheronotherHearingOfficeJudgesnor %0!$ ontheBoard.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1501416at3(App.Bd.Feb.15,2017).Inanyevent,the &"% casethatApplicantciteshassignificantfactualdifferencesfromhisown.Thecaseprovidesno '#& reasontodisturbtheJudgesanalysis.Moreover,weconcludethattheJudgeswholeperson (#' analysiscomplieswiththerequirementsofDirective6.3,inthattheJudgeconsideredthetotality  oftheevidenceinreachingherdecision.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1406653at3(App.Bd.Nov.18,  2016).    TheJudgeexaminedtherelevantevidenceandarticulatedasatisfactoryexplanationforthe ` decision.Thedecisionissustainableonthisrecord. Thegeneralstandardisthataclearancemay L  begrantedonlywhenclearlyconsistentwiththeinterestsofthenationalsecurity.Department 8  oftheNavyv.Egan,484U.S.518,528(1988).SeealsoDirective,Enclosure22(b): Anydoubt $ t concerningpersonnelbeingconsideredforaccesstoclassifiedinformationwillberesolvedinfavor  ` ofthenationalsecurity.  L  @( Order  $    TheDecisionis AFFIRMED .      `     h   Signed:WilliamS.Fields `    `     h   WilliamS.Fields L    `     h   AdministrativeJudge 8    `     h   Member,AppealBoard $t    `     h   Signed:JamesE.Moody $    `     h   JamesE.Moody     `     h   AdministrativeJudge     `     h   Member,AppealBoard     `     h   Signed:JamesF.Duffy__ H!    `     h   JamesF.Duffy 4"     `     h   AdministrativeJudge  #p!    `     h   Member,Appeal_Board___