CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-01521 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-01521

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

Case Profile
Decision Date12/29/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Pamela C. Benson
Government Counsel: Carroll J. Connelley
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 33-year-old machinist who had applied for a security clearance after being sponsored by a Department of Defense (DOD) contractor. The DOD issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guidelines F (financial considerations) and E (personal conduct), primarily focusing on the applicant's significant delinquent debt totaling $16,589. The applicant admitted to all debts listed in the SOR and acknowledged that his financial issues stemmed from a lack of financial literacy and poor management of credit.
During the proceedings, the applicant provided some context for his financial situation, including periods of unemployment and a recent part-time job. He admitted to making "dumb mistakes" with credit cards and failing to communicate with creditors. Although he settled one debt related to an auto finance account, he did not demonstrate a meaningful track record of repayment for the majority of his delinquent debts. The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he had not sufficiently mitigated the financial concerns raised by the government. The judge emphasized the applicant's failure to establish a responsible approach to his debts and ultimately denied the application for a security clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Withdrawn
- 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. 24-01521

deniedDec 29, 2025· Hon. Pamela C. Benson· hearing

Summary

A 33-year-old machinist was denied a security clearance primarily under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The denial stemmed from unresolved delinquent debts totaling $16,589 across multiple accounts. These included four credit card accounts placed for collection, ranging from approximately $592 to $3,109, and an additional credit card account with a collection agency for about $150.

Further debts involved six bank accounts charged off to profit and loss, with amounts ranging from approximately $157 to $1,373, and one bank account referred for collection for about $688. An auto finance account, charged off to profit and loss for approximately $1,370, also contributed to the financial concerns.

Despite acknowledging his financial mismanagement and admitting to all debts, the applicant failed to demonstrate a meaningful repayment plan or effective communication with his creditors. This lack of proactive measures and a track record of repayments led to the conclusion that the security concerns were not mitigated, resulting in the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to establish a meaningful track record of repayments for his delinquent debts.
He admitted to all debts but did not communicate with creditors to arrange payment plans.
The applicant's financial mismanagement and lack of proactive measures contributed to the denial.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

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

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions Largely Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant's loss of employment was due to being fired for tardiness, which does not support the claim of circumstances beyond his control.
AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant did not demonstrate a consistent effort to repay debts, with only one debt resolved out of thirteen.

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for access to classified information is denied.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 27, 2024
Answer filedNov 21, 2024
Hearing heldAug 13, 2025via online video teleconferencing
Decision dateDec 29, 2025Decision delayed due to federal government shutdown.

Cite For

Failure to Establish a Meaningful Repayment Track Record Under Guideline F
Lack of Communication with Creditors as a Factor in Security Clearance Denial
Financial Mismanagement Leading to Security Concerns

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, with the majority of debts being unresolved credit card accounts and charged-off bank accounts. Ultimately, the judge ruled against the applicant on most allegations, citing a lack of effort to resolve the debts, while finding in favor of two specific debts.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant is indebted for a credit card account placed for collection by the creditor in the approximate amount of $3,109. $3,109	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant is indebted for a credit card account placed for collection by the creditor in the approximate amount of $2,554. $2,554	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant is indebted for a credit card account placed for collection by the creditor in the approximate amount of $2,338. $2,338	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant is indebted for a credit card account placed for collection by the creditor in the approximate amount of $2,031. $2,031	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	Applicant is indebted to a bank creditor for an account that has been charged off to profit and loss in the approximate amount of $1,373. $1,373	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant is indebted to an auto finance creditor for an account that has been charged off to profit and loss in the approximate amount of $1,370. $1,370	For Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	Applicant is indebted to a bank creditor for an account that has been charged off to profit and loss in the approximate amount of $805. $805	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.h	Applicant is indebted to a bank creditor for an account that has been charged off to profit and loss in the approximate amount of $755. $755	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.i	Applicant is indebted to a bank creditor for an account that has been referred for collection in the approximate amount of $688. $688	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.j	Applicant is indebted to a bank creditor for an account that has been charged off to profit and loss in the approximate amount of $667. $667	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.k	Applicant is indebted for a credit card account placed for collection by the creditor in the approximate amount of $592. $592	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.l	Applicant is indebted to a bank creditor for an account that has been charged off to profit and loss in the approximate amount of $157. $157	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.m	Applicant is indebted to a collection agency for a credit card account placed for collection by an insurance company creditor in the approximate amount of $150. $150	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—

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.