CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 20-03699 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 20-03699

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

Case Profile
Decision Date7/12/2021
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Elizabeth M. Matchinski
Government Counsel: Aubrey M. De Angelis
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 51-year-old individual who had served honorably in the U.S. military and held a Department of Defense (DOD) security clearance for over 23 years. The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) reviewed his eligibility for security clearance under Guideline F, which pertains to financial considerations. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) issued by the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) outlined concerns regarding the applicant's financial delinquencies, including past due amounts on loans and charged-off debts totaling over $40,000.
The applicant admitted to the delinquent debts and explained that he had stopped making payments on the advice of a debt-resolution company, which he believed would handle settlements on his behalf. He reported that he had entered a debt-relief program in February 2019 and had since settled three of the debts. Notably, he made a lump-sum payment of $17,892 in December 2020 to resolve one of the debts listed in the SOR. The applicant characterized his financial situation as improving and expressed a willingness to repay his past-due debts.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, granting him security clearance eligibility. The judge concluded that the applicant had taken significant steps to address his financial issues, including settling debts and maintaining timely payments on other accounts. The judge found that the applicant's actions demonstrated a commitment to financial responsibility, which mitigated the concerns raised in the SOR.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · For 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. 20-03699

grantedJul 12, 2021· Hon. Elizabeth M. Matchinski· hearing

Summary

A 51-year-old married U.S. military veteran was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons alleged the applicant had delinquent debts totaling over $20,000, specifically a past-due loan balance of $2,530 on a $9,678 loan, and charged-off debts of $20,337, $17,877, and $3,688. These allegations raised a disqualifying condition under AG ¶ 19(c).

However, the applicant successfully mitigated these concerns by demonstrating a commitment to resolving his financial issues. He enrolled in a debt-relief program and made significant payments toward his outstanding debts. This included a lump-sum payment of $17,892 to settle one of the charged-off debts.

The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(c) and AG ¶ 20(d), concluding that the applicant's financial situation no longer posed an unacceptable security risk. Consequently, the applicant's security clearance eligibility was GRANTED.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated a commitment to resolving his debts through a debt-relief program.
He made significant payments, including a lump-sum payment of $17,892 to settle one debt.
The judge found that the applicant's financial situation no longer presented an unacceptable security concern.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(c)appliedThe Individual Has Received or Is Receiving Financial Counseling for the Problem From a Legitimate and Credible SourceThe applicant's debts have been fully resolved.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Individual Initiated and Is Adhering to a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve DebtsThe applicant made significant payments to resolve his debts.

Key Rule Quoted

“A security clearance adjudication is not a proceeding aimed at collecting an applicant’s personal debts.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 25, 2021
Answer filedFeb 5, 2021Requested decision on the written record.
Hearing held—Pro se representation.
Decision dateJul 12, 2021

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Impact of Debt-relief Programs on Security Clearance Eligibility
Consideration of the Whole-person Concept in Financial Cases

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: granted

The judge found that the applicant had several delinquent debts but concluded that he had adequately mitigated the financial concerns. The applicant's participation in a debt-relief program and his documented payments contributed to the decision to grant his security clearance eligibility.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was past due $2,530 on a loan balance of $9,678 and owed charged-off debts of $20,337, $17,877, and $3,688. $2,530	For Applicant	Personal Loan Debt	Admitted	—	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly	Documented Debt Paid in Full
1.b	Applicant owed charged-off debts of $20,337. $20,337	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Debt Paid in Full
1.c	Applicant owed charged-off debts of $17,877. $17,877	For Applicant	Personal Loan Debt	Admitted	—	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly	Documented Debt Paid in Full
1.d	Applicant owed charged-off debts of $3,688. $3,688	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Debt Paid in Full

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.