CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-00527 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-00527

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

Case Profile
Decision Date11/25/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Robert Robinson Gales
Government Counsel: Jeff Kent
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 31-year-old employee of a defense contractor who applied for a security clearance. The adjudicative guidelines at issue were primarily related to financial considerations, specifically Guideline F. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleged that the applicant had multiple delinquent accounts totaling approximately $40,642, which raised concerns about his financial stability and responsibility.
The applicant admitted to all allegations in the SOR, acknowledging issues such as vehicle repossessions and several unpaid debts. He attributed his financial difficulties to periods of inconsistent work and admitted to making unwise financial choices in his twenties. Although he claimed to have stabilized his financial situation and expressed a willingness to pay his debts, he did not provide evidence of any payments made or a concrete repayment plan. Additionally, he failed to respond to the Government's request for further information regarding his financial status.
The administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's eligibility for a security clearance, concluding that he had not sufficiently mitigated the security concerns related to his financial issues. The judge noted the applicant's lack of proactive measures to resolve his debts and the absence of any documentation supporting his claims of improved financial management. The decision emphasized that the applicant's admissions and failure to provide updated information contributed to the conclusion that granting a security clearance was not consistent with the national interest.
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. 24-00527

deniedNov 25, 2024· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 31-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to unresolved financial issues. The applicant admitted to having eight delinquent accounts totaling approximately $40,642, which were attributed to unwise financial choices rather than circumstances beyond his control.

Despite acknowledging his financial mismanagement and claiming a new approach to budgeting, the applicant failed to provide any evidence of a repayment plan or payments made to his creditors. This lack of action, coupled with the ongoing unpaid debts, raised significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness, indicating a continuing course of conduct.

The denial was based on the applicant's failure to mitigate security concerns related to his financial situation. His unstable financial status, substantial monthly remainder available, and lack of effort to resolve his debts led to the determination that he had not addressed the issues adequately.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to eight delinquent accounts totaling approximately $40,642, indicating a history of financial irresponsibility.
He did not provide evidence of a repayment plan or any payments made to creditors, raising significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant's financial difficulties were attributed to poor choices rather than circumstances beyond his control.

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)appliedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is denied.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 25, 2024
Answer filedMay 14, 2024Applicant elected to have his case decided on the written record.
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateNov 25, 2024

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Importance of Providing Evidence of Repayment Plans in Financial Cases
Impact of Financial Irresponsibility on Security Clearance Eligibility

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 against the applicant on all allegations under Guideline F, citing ongoing financial difficulties and a lack of action to resolve debts totaling approximately $40,642. Despite the applicant's claims of improved financial stability and willingness to pay, the judge determined that these assertions did not demonstrate sufficient corrective action or a viable repayment plan.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns regarding financial considerations. $40,642	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.b	Applicant has eight still-delinquent accounts totaling approximately $40,642. $40,642	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.c	Applicant's financial situation is unstable and he has not made payments to creditors. $40,642	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.d	Applicant's financial difficulties were caused by unwise financial choices. $40,642	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.e	Applicant has not provided evidence of a repayment plan or payments made to creditors. $40,642	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.f	Applicant's financial issues have not been resolved despite having a substantial monthly remainder available. $40,642	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.g	Applicant's lack of action regarding his debts raises concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness. $40,642	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.h	Applicant's ongoing unpaid debts indicate a continuing course of conduct. $40,642	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—

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.