CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-02028 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-02028

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

Case Profile
Decision Date5/15/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Carol G. Ricciardello
Government Counsel: Sakeena Farhath
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 30-year-old single mother and military veteran who sought a security clearance but faced allegations under Guideline F (financial considerations) and Guideline G (alcohol consumption). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) indicated that the applicant had multiple delinquent debts, including charged-off accounts totaling over $25,000, and a history of alcohol-related legal issues, including a DUI arrest.
The applicant admitted to several debts but claimed they were the result of fraudulent activity. She provided limited explanations and did not submit any documentary evidence to support her claims of resolution or mitigation of her financial issues. Additionally, while she acknowledged her DUI and subsequent legal consequences, she did not provide evidence to demonstrate her current alcohol consumption status or any rehabilitation efforts. The applicant's failure to respond to the Government's evidence further weakened her case.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that she failed to mitigate the security concerns related to her financial instability and alcohol consumption. The judge emphasized the lack of evidence to support the applicant's claims and noted that her admissions did not sufficiently address the seriousness of the allegations. Ultimately, the judge determined that granting the applicant access to classified information was not clearly consistent with national security interests.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Against Applicant
- Guideline GAlcohol Consumption · 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. 23-02028

deniedMay 15, 2024· Hon. Carol G. Ricciardello· hearing

Summary

A 30-year-old single mother and military veteran was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption). The Statement of Reasons cited two delinquent, charged-off accounts: one for approximately $21,863.00 and another for approximately $427.00. These debts remained unresolved as of the Statement of Reasons.

Disqualifying conditions related to financial issues were raised, while mitigating conditions concerning financial difficulties were considered. However, the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of debt mitigation or resolution. She also did not respond to a formal request for information or submit documentary evidence to support her claims regarding her financial situation.

Additionally, the applicant's history of alcohol-related incidents raised further concerns about her reliability and trustworthiness. Ultimately, the judge found insufficient evidence to mitigate the financial and alcohol-related concerns, concluding that the applicant did not demonstrate the necessary reliability or trustworthiness for access to classified information, leading to the denial of her security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of mitigation or resolution of her debts.
The applicant did not respond to the FORM or provide documentary evidence to support her claims regarding her financial situation.
The applicant's history of alcohol-related incidents raised concerns about her reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(b)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant failed to provide evidence that her financial difficulties were due to fraud or criminal activity.
AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Effort to Resolve DebtsThe applicant's resolution of one debt occurred only after the SOR was issued, indicating it was not a proactive effort.

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 issuedOct 2, 2023
Answer filedOct 10, 2023Applicant elected to proceed without a hearing.
Decision dateMay 15, 2024

Cite For

Insufficient Evidence of Financial Mitigation Under Guideline F
Impact of Alcohol-related Incidents on Security Clearance Eligibility
Failure to Respond to FORM as Detrimental to Applicant's Case

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 charged-off debts totaling $22,290. The applicant admitted to some debts but failed to provide sufficient evidence of resolution or responsible financial management, leading to a decision against her eligibility for a security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.i	You are indebted to [creditor] on an account that has been charged off in the approximate amount of $21,863.00. As of the date of this Statement of Reasons, the account remains delinquent. $21,863	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
1.j	You are indebted to [creditor] on an account that has been charged off in the approximate amount of $427.00. As of the date of this Statement of Reasons, the account remains delinquent. $427	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Unknown	—	—	—

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.