CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-01664 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 22-01664

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

Case Profile
Decision Date8/15/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: David M. White
Government Counsel: Andrew H. Henderson
Case Summary
The applicant in this case sought a security clearance but faced allegations under the Financial Considerations guideline, specifically concerning 11 delinquent consumer debts totaling $34,502. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) issued by the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency outlined these financial issues, which raised concerns about the applicant's reliability and trustworthiness.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to the validity of most debts listed in the SOR but denied some based on their absence from recent credit reports. He acknowledged that he had sufficient resources to repay the debts but expressed an unwillingness to do so, preferring to retain funds for his impending retirement. The applicant also had a history of two previous Chapter 7 bankruptcies, which he did not pursue again due to concerns about affecting his ability to sponsor his wife for immigration. He did not provide any evidence of financial counseling or efforts to resolve his debts.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he failed to mitigate the security concerns related to his financial delinquencies. The judge noted that the applicant's ongoing financial irresponsibility, lack of evidence for financial management efforts, and expressed intention to not repay debts indicated a significant risk to national security. The judge emphasized that the applicant's history of financial issues and current circumstances did not support a favorable decision for security clearance eligibility.
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. 22-01664

deniedAug 15, 2024· Hon. David M. White· hearing

Summary

A 64-year-old quality control inspector and Marine Corps veteran was denied a security clearance under Guideline F, Financial Considerations. The denial stemmed from 11 admitted delinquent consumer debts totaling $34,502. The applicant acknowledged the validity of these debts but expressed an unwillingness to repay them, stating a desire to save funds for retirement.

The judge noted the applicant's history of not meeting financial obligations, including two previous Chapter 7 bankruptcies. Furthermore, the applicant's current wife was reportedly unaware of his debts due to cultural differences. No evidence of financial counseling or concrete plans to resolve the outstanding debts was presented.

The judge concluded that the applicant's financial irresponsibility created an ongoing potential for financial coercion. Concerns were also raised that the applicant's plans to retire increased the risk of engaging in illegal acts to generate funds, ultimately leading to the denial of the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to 11 delinquent debts totaling $34,502 and expressed unwillingness to repay them.
He provided no evidence of financial counseling or plans to resolve his debts.
The judge found significant potential for coercion and risk of illegal acts due to his financial situation.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)appliedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(b)appliedUnwillingness to Satisfy Debts Regardless of the Ability to Do So
AG ¶ 19(c)appliedHistory 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 issuedSep 26, 2022
Answer filedJan 12, 2023
Hearing heldMar 24, 2023Department Counsel offered Government Exhibits into evidence.
Decision dateAug 15, 2024

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Financial Irresponsibility Under Guideline F
Impact of Unwillingness to Repay Debts on National Security Eligibility
Lack of Evidence for Financial Counseling as a Mitigating Factor

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: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant had multiple delinquent debts totaling $34,502 and a history of financial irresponsibility, including two previous bankruptcies. The applicant's claims of mitigating circumstances were not sufficient to overcome the financial concerns, leading to a denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns raised under the Financial Considerations guideline.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant has 11 delinquent consumer debts, totaling $34,502. $34,502	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant has a history of not meeting financial obligations.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant acknowledged the validity of all the alleged debts.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	Applicant has filed two previous Chapter 7 bankruptcies.	Against Applicant	Bankruptcy Filing	Denied	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant expressed unwillingness to repay debts to save funds for retirement.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—
1.g	Applicant's current wife is not aware of his debts due to cultural differences.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—
1.h	Applicant's delinquent debts remain outstanding.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.i	Applicant has no intention to repay his debts.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—
1.j	Applicant's financial irresponsibility creates ongoing potential for financial coercion.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—
1.k	Applicant's plans to retire increase the risk of engaging in illegal acts to generate funds.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—

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.