CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-00850 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-00850

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

Case Profile
Decision Date6/25/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Robert E. Coacher
Government Counsel: Andrew H. Henderson
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 39-year-old individual who sought a security clearance but faced allegations under Guideline F (financial considerations), Guideline H (drug involvement), and Guideline J (criminal conduct). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) outlined significant financial issues, including three bankruptcy filings and numerous delinquent debts totaling approximately $36,900. Additionally, the applicant had a history of criminal conduct, including a 2014 conviction for embezzlement and a 2006 conviction for passing insufficient funds checks. The applicant admitted to most allegations but denied selling marijuana during a specified timeframe, asserting that her marijuana-related activities were legal under state law.
Key findings revealed that the applicant had experienced financial difficulties due to her ex-husband's inconsistent income and her own incarceration. She admitted to the bankruptcy filings and the criminal convictions, providing explanations for her actions, including a lack of financial education. While she presented evidence of some debts being resolved and character references from coworkers, the administrative judge found that the applicant failed to sufficiently mitigate the security concerns related to her financial history and criminal conduct. Ultimately, the judge ruled against granting the security clearance, emphasizing the importance of trust and reliability in safeguarding classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Against Applicant
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · For 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. 23-00850

deniedJun 25, 2024· Hon. Robert E. Coacher· hearing

Summary

A 39-year-old divorced mother of four was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), Guideline H (Drug Involvement), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleged three bankruptcy filings in 2007, 2011, and 2015, along with 12 delinquent debts totaling approximately $36,900.

Under Guideline H, the SOR alleged the applicant sold marijuana from January 2022 to at least February 2023, and picked and sold marijuana leaves from August 2021 to at least December 2021. Guideline J concerns stemmed from a 2014 conviction for embezzlement and a 2006 conviction for passing insufficient funds checks.

The applicant failed to mitigate the financial concerns, citing a history of multiple bankruptcies and significant delinquent debts. Her criminal history, including embezzlement of over $150,000, raised serious doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness. Despite some positive character references, the judge concluded that granting clearance was not consistent with national interest, resulting in a denial.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to mitigate financial concerns due to a history of multiple bankruptcies and significant delinquent debts.
The applicant's criminal history included embezzlement of over $150,000, which raised serious doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(b)raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 19(d)raisedDeceptive or Illegal Financial Practices
AG ¶ 31(b)raisedEvidence of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant's restitution payments were court-ordered and did not demonstrate a good-faith effort.
AG ¶ 26(a)appliedBehavior Unlikely to Recur

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 9, 2023
Answer filedJun 14, 2023
Hearing heldFeb 14, 2024
Decision dateJun 25, 2024

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Criminal Conduct Raising Doubts About Reliability Under Guideline J
Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H Due to State Law Compliance

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 multiple financial concerns under Guideline F, including three bankruptcy filings and numerous delinquent debts totaling approximately $36,900. The applicant's financial irresponsibility and ongoing debts led to a ruling against her on the allegations, despite some debts being resolved and a recent bankruptcy filing.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	the SOR alleged three bankruptcy filings in 2007, 2011, and 2015; and 12 delinquent debts totaling approximately $36,900. $36,900	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.j	specific text not stated in this decision	For 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 H (Drug Involvement) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant mitigated concerns under Guideline H regarding drug involvement and substance misuse. However, the overall decision was denied due to unresolved financial issues and other concerns under different guidelines.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
2.a	Under Guideline H, the SOR alleged that Applicant sold marijuana from January 2022 to at least February 2023.	For Applicant	Drug Distribution or Dealing	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	It also alleged that she picked marijuana leaves and sold marijuana from August 2021 to at least December 2021.	For Applicant	Drug Distribution or Dealing	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline H). 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: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the criminal conduct allegations, specifically regarding her conviction for embezzlement in 2014 and passing insufficient funds checks in 2006. The applicant's history of criminal conduct was deemed disqualifying, leading to the denial of her security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant was arrested, charged, and convicted of embezzlement in 2014.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.b	It also alleged she was convicted of passing insufficient funds checks in 2006.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Convicted	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.