CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-01866 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 22-01866

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

Case Profile
Decision Date9/27/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Braden M. Murphy
Government Counsel: Erin P. Thompson
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 35-year-old individual who applied for a security clearance and faced allegations under Guideline F, concerning financial considerations. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) indicated that the applicant had several thousand dollars in ongoing, delinquent consumer debt, totaling approximately $34,000. The applicant admitted to the debts but did not provide sufficient documentation or evidence of efforts to resolve them, including details about her enrollment in a credit counseling program.
In her response to the SOR, the applicant acknowledged the debts and attributed them to various personal circumstances, such as job changes and health issues. However, she failed to provide specific details or documentation regarding her financial situation, including her income, expenses, or the status of her debt-relief program. The administrative judge noted that the applicant did not demonstrate a good-faith effort to address her debts, as she did not submit any evidence of payments or resolutions.
Ultimately, the administrative judge ruled against the applicant, denying her eligibility for access to classified information. The judge concluded that the applicant's ongoing financial issues raised significant concerns about her reliability and trustworthiness, which were not mitigated by her claims of being in a debt-relief program. The decision emphasized the importance of demonstrating financial responsibility and the potential risks associated with unresolved debts in the context of national security.
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. 22-01866

deniedSep 27, 2023· Hon. Braden M. Murphy· hearing

Summary

A 35-year-old marketing employee was denied a security clearance under Guideline F, Financial Considerations, due to approximately $34,000 in ongoing delinquent consumer debt. The Statement of Reasons cited several issues, including the existence of the delinquent debt, a lack of sufficient evidence to mitigate financial concerns, and the applicant's failure to disclose these debts on her Security Clearance Application (SCA), though she discussed them during her March 2022 background interview.

Disqualifying conditions under Guideline F were raised, specifically regarding a history of not meeting financial obligations and an inability or unwillingness to satisfy debts. While mitigating conditions related to the debt not being recent and the applicant seeking assistance were considered, they were ultimately not sufficient.

The denial was based on the applicant's failure to provide adequate evidence to mitigate the financial concerns. She did not document her claimed enrollment in a credit counseling program or any specific efforts to resolve her debts, leading to unresolved questions about her reliability and trustworthiness.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to provide adequate evidence to mitigate financial concerns.
She did not document her enrollment in a credit counseling program or her efforts to resolve her debts.
Her ongoing delinquent debts raised questions about her reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

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

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(c)rejectedReceiving Financial Counseling From a Legitimate SourceThe applicant did not provide sufficient information to establish that her debts are being resolved or are under control.
AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of a track record of steady payments towards her debts.

Key Rule Quoted

“The clearly consistent standard indicates that security determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 531 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 14, 2022
Answer filedJan 11, 2023
Hearing held—Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
Decision dateSep 27, 2023

Cite For

Insufficient Evidence to Mitigate Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Impact of Ongoing Delinquent Debts on Security Clearance Eligibility
Requirements for Demonstrating Financial Responsibility in Security Clearance 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: denied

The judge found that the applicant has several ongoing, delinquent consumer debts totaling approximately $34,000, which were not sufficiently mitigated. The applicant admitted to the debts but failed to provide adequate documentation or evidence of efforts to resolve them, leading to a decision against her.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has several thousand dollars in ongoing, delinquent consumer debt. $34,000	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	Claimed Other
1.b	Applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to mitigate financial considerations security concerns.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.c	Applicant did not disclose any delinquent debts on her SCA but discussed them in her March 2022 background interview.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.d	Applicant provided no documentation to detail her efforts to resolve her debts.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.e–1.l	8 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant).	Against Applicant			—	—	—

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.