WPCf  5S nib@ /Ҳ^˄-po&b0!!ZΙ;". \ CBtVȧN; i_+w &KE$s:ƹiZ̦D5V3/N[d- 5TfmVD"s.2qYxK@ =d8g"?F0o9VVC18"Bٹt%Mp.7P間FI9߁1 Ι`Y,I_ƀ_JoQSkmBα uǪQR_NW<Z#UN % 0: ZC ^ w 4   m Z NC C NE EG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G BI Hewlett-Packard HP LaserJet P3010 Series0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUEݍJ;EJtFold3|xU8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE d !USUS.,  _KEYWORD:GuidelineF  DIGEST:TheJudgemadefindingsaboutApplicantsfavorablecharacterevidenceanddiscussed  itinhisanalysis.Giventherecordthatwasbeforehim,wecannotsaythattheJudgeweighedthe t evidenceinamannerthatwasarbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.Adversedecision ` affirmed. L  _CASENO_:1500729.a1 $ t DATE:06/13/2017  L  ________________________   `     h      p DATE:June13,2017 $  .؉7r(#(#.AY) xdEgA   InRe:       C ApplicantforSecurityClearance k AY) xdEgA C )   ) p ) \ ) H ) 4 )  p )  \ ) H  4  pX p _ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1500729 H#  4$ .؉7r. \XXp  $    APPEALBOARDDECISION % APPEARANCES l(  &%XX FORGOVERNMENT  D!* JamesB.Norman,Esq.,ChiefDepartmentCounsel "l+  FORAPPLICANT  #-  Prose #XDX%&# $.     TheDepartmentofDefense(DoD)declinedtograntApplicantasecurityclearance.On >(#2 August3,2015,DoDissuedastatementofreasons(_SOR_)advisingApplicantofthebasisforthat *)z$3 decision!securityconcernsraisedunderGuidelineF(FinancialConsiderations)ofDepartmentof *f%4 DefenseDirective5220.6(Jan.2,1992,asamended)(Directive).Applicantrequestedahearing. +R&5 OnMarch22,2017,afterthehearing,DefenseOfficeofHearingsandAppeals(DOHA) +>'6 AdministrativeJudgeJohnGrattanMetz,Jr.,deniedApplicantsrequestforasecurityclearance. ,*(7 ApplicantappealedpursuanttoDirectiveE3.1.28andE3.1.30. -)8 Ї  Applicantraisedthefollowingissueonappeal:whethertheJudgesadversedecisionwas  arbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.Consistentwiththefollowing,weaffirm.    TheJudgesFindingsofFact  t   Applicanthasworkedforhercurrentemployer,aDefensecontractor,since2013.Shehas L  heldaclearancesince2005.Shehasfourdelinquentdebtstotalingabout$92,000.Mostofthisis 8  foreducationloansshecosignedforherson.Oneallegationisacreditcardaccountthatsheco $ t signedforhim.Hersongraduatedfromcollegein2014andhasbeengainfullyemployedsince  ` 2015.  L    Applicantacknowledgedtheaccountsduringher2013clearanceinterviewbutstatedthatshe $  didnotknowthattheyweredelinquent.Hersonacknowledgedthattheeducationdebtswerehis   butstatedthathewasnotabletopaymorethan$35amonthforoneaccountand$75amonthfor   another.Applicantandherhusbandhavemadepaymentsfromtimetotimeontheeducationloans,   buttheyhavenotdonesoinaregularbasis.Herpositionisthathersonisresponsibleforhisdebts,   forwhichheistheprimary_obligor_. p   Applicantssupervisorandcolleaguescommendherhonestyandtrustworthinessand H recommendthatshereceiveaclearance.Applicanthasreceivednofinancialcounselinganddidnot 4 submitabudget.Shehada$2,300positivecashflowinJanuary2015,whichhasimprovedsince.  p   TheJudgesAnalysis  H   TheJudgecharacterizedApplicantsfinancialproblemsasmultipleandrecent.Hestated   that,givenhersonscheckeredhistoryofaddressinghisdebts,Applicantssecurityconcernscannot   bedescribedasunlikelytorecur.HestatedthatApplicantsfailuretopressforaresolutionofthese  debtsislackinginresponsibility.Shehasreceivednofinancialcounselingandhasnotdemonstrated  thatthedebtsarebeingresolved.Whateffortsshehasundertakenoccurredaftershereceivedthe  _SOR_.TheJudgestatedthatApplicantsfavorablecharacterevidencewasnotsufficienttooutweigh l theconcernsarisingfromherfinancialproblems. X    Discussion  0"    Applicantacknowledgesthatthedebtsinquestionhavebeenindefaultattimes.Sheargues $X" thatshehasbeenworkingtoresolvethesedebts.Shestatesthatshehasneverbeenneglectfulofher $D # dutiesorengagedinquestionablejudgment,asevidencedbyherunblemishedrecord.Applicants %0!$ argumentsarenotenoughtorebutthepresumptionthattheJudgeconsideredalloftheevidencein &"% therecord.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1300502at3(App.Bd.Mar.7,2017).TheJudgemade '#& findingsaboutApplicantsfavorablecharacterevidenceanddiscusseditinhisanalysis.Giventhe (#' recordthatwasbeforehim,wecannotsaythattheJudgeweighedtheevidenceinamannerthatwas )$( arbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1508842at3(App.Bd.Feb.14, |*%) 2017).TheDirectivecontemplatesthateventhosewithgoodpriorrecordscanencounter h+&* circumstancesinwhichtheirabilitytoprotectclassifiedinformationmightbecalledinquestion. T,'+ See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1402995at2(App.Bd.Apr.7,2016). @-(, Ї  TheJudgeexaminedtherelevantevidenceandarticulatedasatisfactoryexplanationforthe  decision.Thedecisionissustainableonthisrecord. Thegeneralstandardisthataclearancemay  begrantedonlywhenclearlyconsistentwiththeinterestsofthenationalsecurity.Department  oftheNavyv.Egan,484U.S.518,528(1988).SeealsoDirective,Enclosure22(b): Anydoubt t concerningpersonnelbeingconsideredforaccesstoclassifiedinformationwillberesolvedinfavor ` ofthenationalsecurity. L  @( Order  $ t   TheDecisionis AFFIRMED .  L     `     h   Signed:Michael_Raanan_Ԁ      `     h   Michael_Raanan_      `     h   AdministrativeJudge      `     h   Chairperson,AppealBoard t    `     h   Signed:JamesE.Moody $t    `     h   JamesE.Moody `    `     h   AdministrativeJudge L    `     h   Member,AppealBoard 8    `     h   Signed:WilliamS.Fields__________________________________________________________________________     `     h   WilliamS.Fields     `     h   AdministrativeJudge p    `     h   Member,Appeal_Board___