CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 19-02763 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 19-02763

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

Case Profile
Decision Date6/30/2020
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionSee the appeal decision (Case 19-02763.a1) →
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Elizabeth M. Matchinski
Government Counsel: Raashid S. Williams
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 32-year-old senior electrical technician employed by a defense contractor, seeking a security clearance. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guideline F (financial considerations) and Guideline E (personal conduct). The core allegations included the applicant's delinquent debts totaling $24,646 and his falsification of a security clearance application by denying any delinquent debts.
In his response to the SOR, the applicant admitted to the debts but characterized his negative responses on the application as a mistake, asserting he was not attempting to conceal information. He provided some evidence of debt repayment and explained that financial difficulties arose when his wife had to leave her job to care for their son. However, he did not establish a repayment plan for the largest debt, which was charged off for $17,614. The administrative judge found that the applicant did not present sufficient information to mitigate the security concerns, particularly regarding the unresolved charged-off loan and the falsification of his application. Consequently, the judge ruled to deny the applicant's security clearance eligibility, stating that the applicant's financial issues and lack of transparency raised significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- 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. 19-02763

deniedJun 30, 2020· Hon. Elizabeth M. Matchinski· hearing

Summary

A 32-year-old senior electrical technician was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The applicant had unresolved delinquent debts totaling $24,646, which included a charged-off loan of $17,614 that remained unpaid. This financial history raised significant questions about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Further compounding these issues, the applicant falsified his security clearance application by denying the existence of any delinquent debts. This misrepresentation directly impacted the assessment of his honesty and reliability.

Despite the application of some mitigating conditions, the judge determined that the unresolved financial obligations and the deliberate falsification of information on the security clearance application were disqualifying. Ultimately, granting the clearance was deemed inconsistent with national security interests, leading to the denial.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had unresolved delinquent debts totaling $24,646, including a charged-off loan of $17,614 that remained unpaid.
The applicant falsified his security clearance application by denying any delinquent debts, which raised concerns about his honesty and reliability.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Individual Initiated and Is Adhering to a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve DebtsThe applicant made some payments towards certain debts after being notified of the SOR.
AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s ControlWhile some financial issues were due to circumstances beyond his control, the applicant's overall financial management raised concerns.

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 13, 2019
Answer filedJan 17, 2020Requested a decision on the written record.
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateJun 30, 2020

Cite For

Falsification of Security Clearance Application Under Guideline E
Financial Considerations and Inability to Satisfy Debts Under Guideline F
Impact of Unresolved Debts 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.

Full decision

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