CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 19-02231 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 19-02231

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date4/15/2020
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Noreen A. Lynch
Government Counsel: Tovah A. Minster
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 38-year-old single individual with two children, who had previously served in the United States Marine Corps but was discharged due to medical conditions. He sought a security clearance to work for a federal contractor. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), alleging that the applicant had three delinquent debts, including significant child support arrears totaling approximately $82,000 and a telecommunications collection account of $836.
The applicant admitted to the debts outlined in the SOR and attributed his financial difficulties to insufficient income since 2006. He reported that his wages had been garnished since 2013 but provided no evidence of voluntary payments or current efforts to address his debts. The applicant did not submit any additional information in response to the government's File of Relevant Material and failed to demonstrate any financial counseling or good-faith efforts to resolve his financial issues.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he did not mitigate the financial security concerns. The judge noted the lack of evidence regarding the applicant's financial management and the absence of any documented efforts to address his debts. Ultimately, the judge determined that granting the applicant eligibility for access to classified information was not clearly consistent with national security interests, leading to a denial of the security clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Against Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 19-02231

deniedApr 15, 2020· Hon. Noreen A. Lynch· hearing

Summary

A 38-year-old single male with two children was denied a security clearance under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to significant delinquent debts. The applicant admitted to approximately $82,000 in child support arrears and an $836 telecommunications collection account, as confirmed by his 2019 credit report.

The Statement of Reasons cited these three delinquent debts and the applicant's admission of them. Disqualifying conditions under Adjudicative Guideline Paragraphs 19(a) and 19(c) were raised.

The denial was based on the applicant's failure to provide evidence of good-faith efforts to resolve his debts, their current status, or a track record of payments. He also did not demonstrate that his financial situation was under control, leading to the denial of his security clearance application.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to significant delinquent debts totaling approximately $82,000 in child support arrears and an additional $836 telecommunications collection account.
The applicant did not provide evidence of good-faith efforts to resolve his debts or any current status of the debts.
The applicant failed to demonstrate a track record of payments or that his financial situation was under control.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Key Rule Quoted

“Failure to live within one's means, satisfy debts, and meet financial obligations may indicate poor self-control, lack of judgment, or unwillingness to abide by rules and regulations, all of which can raise questions about an individual's reliability, trustworthiness, and ability to protect classified or sensitive information.”
— AG ¶ 18

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 30, 2019
Answer filed—Applicant requested a review based on the written record.
Hearing held—Case assigned to judge on April 7, 2020.
Decision dateApr 15, 2020

Cite For

Insufficient Evidence of Mitigation Under Guideline F
Failure to Demonstrate Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Financial Issues
Impact of Financial Irresponsibility on Security Clearance Eligibility

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant has significant financial concerns, including child support arrears totaling approximately $82,000 and a telecommunications collection account of $836. The applicant admitted to these debts but failed to provide sufficient evidence of mitigation or good-faith efforts to resolve them, leading to a decision against the applicant.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has three delinquent debts, including child support arrears totaling approximately $82,000 and a telecommunications collection account of $836. $82,000	Against Applicant	Child Support Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	Claimed Other
1.b	Applicant admits the alleged delinquent debts as confirmed by his 2019 credit report. $836	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.c	Applicant's financial situation is described as 'fair' with no evidence of mitigation or good-faith efforts to resolve debts.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline F). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.