CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 20-01044 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 20-01044

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

Case Profile
Decision Date3/3/2022
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeADP POSITION
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Robert Robinson Gales
Government Counsel: Brian L. Farrell
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 43-year-old employee of a defense contractor seeking a public trust position. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The SOR detailed the applicant's financial issues, including multiple delinquent accounts totaling approximately $24,982, and a history of criminal violations related to vehicle and penal code offenses.
The applicant admitted to most of the allegations in the SOR, acknowledging her financial difficulties and criminal conduct. She reported being homeless and unable to make payments on her debts, which included a repossessed vehicle and various unpaid fines. Despite her admissions, she provided no documentation to demonstrate efforts to resolve her financial issues or to indicate any improvement in her situation since her employment began in April 2018. The applicant also mentioned past depression and marijuana use but did not offer any evidence of rehabilitation or counseling.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that she failed to mitigate the trustworthiness concerns related to her financial and criminal history. The judge noted the lack of evidence showing any resolution of the applicant's financial problems or a plan to address her debts, which raised doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness in a public trust position. Consequently, the applicant's eligibility for the position was denied.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Against Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · 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. 20-01044

deniedMar 3, 2022· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 43-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a public trust position due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant faced allegations of unresolved financial issues and a history of criminal conduct.

Specifically, the applicant had multiple delinquent accounts totaling approximately $24,982. These included an automobile loan with an $11,409 unpaid balance, another loan for $872, a department store charge account for $431, and a repossessed vehicle loan with a $5,707 unpaid balance. Additionally, the applicant had 11 unpaid vehicle and penal code violation fines and fees from 2006 to 2018, totaling approximately $6,563. The applicant also had a pattern of minor criminal offenses that, in combination, raised doubts about judgment and trustworthiness.

The judge found that the applicant admitted to financial difficulties but failed to provide evidence of efforts to mitigate these concerns, despite being employed since April 2018. The applicant's financial problems were deemed not under control, and the history of criminal conduct further raised doubts about reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the denial.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to provide evidence of efforts to mitigate financial issues despite being employed since April 2018.
The applicant's financial problems were deemed not under control, with multiple delinquent accounts totaling approximately $24,982.
The applicant's history of criminal conduct raised doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)appliedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)appliedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 31(a)appliedPattern of Minor Offenses
AG ¶ 31(c)appliedEvidence of Criminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“Trustworthiness decisions are aimed at evaluating an applicant’s judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness. They are not a debt-collection procedure.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 24, 2020
Answer filedMar 5, 2021Applicant elected to have her case decided on the written record.
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateMar 3, 2022

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Pattern of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Evaluation of Trustworthiness Based on Financial and Criminal History

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 multiple financial concerns under Guideline F, including unpaid automobile loans and a collection of fines. The applicant's financial issues were deemed unresolved, leading to a decision against the applicant.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	SOR ¶ 1.a. is an automobile loan with an unpaid balance of $11,409 that was placed for collection and charged off. $11,409	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	SOR ¶ 1.b. is an unspecified type of account that appears to be a loan with an unpaid balance of $872 that was placed for collection and sold to a debt purchaser. $872	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
1.c	SOR ¶ 1.c. is a department store charge-account account with an unpaid balance of $431 that was placed for collection and charged off. $431	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	SOR ¶ 1.d. is an automobile loan for a vehicle that was repossessed leaving an unpaid balance of $5,707 that were placed for collection. $5,707	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
1.e	SOR ¶ 1.e. is an unusual collection of 11 unpaid vehicle and penal code violation fines and fees generated over a multi-year period (2006 – 2018) that Applicant has ignored, totaling approximately $6,563. $6,563	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the criminal conduct allegations, determining that the applicant's pattern of minor offenses raised concerns about her judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness. The decision to deny the application was based on the applicant's history of criminal conduct, which included multiple traffic violations and a lack of effort to resolve outstanding fines and fees.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	SOR ¶ 2.a. is a pattern of minor offenses, any one of which on its own would be unlikely to affect a national security eligibility decision, but which in combination cast doubt on the individual's judgment, reliability, or trustworthiness.	Against Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—

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

Full decision

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