CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-01864 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 23-01864

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

Case Profile
Decision Date1/13/2026
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Eric C. Price
Government Counsel: Lauren A. Shure
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 56-year-old former Army sergeant first class who had served honorably from 1992 to 2015 and had been employed as a field service technician for a federal contractor since 2016. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline F (financial considerations) and Guideline E (personal conduct). The SOR alleged that the applicant had 12 delinquent debts, failed to file federal income tax returns for tax years 2017 through 2025, and falsified material facts in his security clearance application.
The applicant admitted to all allegations in the SOR, attributing his financial difficulties to his spouse's unemployment, child custody litigation, and a reduction in income after returning to the U.S. He explained that he had attempted to address his debts through garnishments and had withdrawn funds from his retirement account to pay his mortgage. Although he had plans to file his delinquent tax returns and establish a payment plan with the IRS, he acknowledged that he had not filed the returns on time. The administrative judge found that the applicant's financial issues and failure to disclose pertinent information in his application were not sufficiently mitigated, leading to a denial of his eligibility for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- 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. 23-01864

deniedJan 13, 2026· Hon. Eric C. Price· hearing

Summary

A 56-year-old veteran and federal contractor was denied a security clearance under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct) and F (Financial Considerations). The denial stemmed from significant financial issues and concerns regarding his personal conduct, which the judge determined were not mitigated.

The applicant admitted to 12 delinquent debts totaling $65,516 and acknowledged failing to file federal income tax returns for the years 2017 through 2025. Additionally, he falsified material facts in his July 2022 security clearance application concerning both his debts and his tax filings.

These actions raised disqualifying conditions related to financial irresponsibility and a pattern of dishonesty. Despite the application of one mitigating condition, the judge concluded that the applicant's admitted delinquent debts, failure to file taxes, and falsification of information in his security clearance applications warranted the denial.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to 12 delinquent debts totaling $65,516, indicating a failure to meet financial obligations.
He failed to file federal income tax returns for tax years 2017 through 2025, demonstrating a lack of compliance with tax laws.
The applicant falsified information in his security clearance applications regarding debts and tax filings.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 19(e)raisedConsistent Spending Beyond One's Means
AG ¶ 19(f)raisedFailure to File or Fraudulently Filing Income Tax Returns
AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission or Falsification of Relevant Facts

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(d)appliedGood-faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant made regular payments that brought one account current.

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 28, 2023
Answer filedJul 31, 2024
Hearing heldJun 24, 2025via Microsoft Teams
Decision dateJan 13, 2026

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
Failure to Comply with Tax Laws Under Guideline F
Deliberate Falsification of Information in Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E

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 E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on allegations of falsifying material facts in his July 2022 Security Clearance Application (SCA) regarding debts and tax filings. The applicant admitted to the allegations but claimed a lack of awareness of his financial issues at the time of the application. The judge concluded that the applicant did not mitigate the personal conduct concerns.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Falsified material facts in his July 2022 SCA regarding debts.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	Falsified material facts in his July 2022 SCA regarding tax filings.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline E). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the financial allegations under Guideline F, citing significant delinquent debts totaling $65,516 and failure to file federal income tax returns for multiple years. Although the applicant admitted to the debts and the tax filing failures, the judge determined that the applicant's financial issues were not sufficiently mitigated to warrant a favorable decision.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Delinquent debts totaling $65,516. $65,516	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g–1.h	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (1 against, 1 for the applicant).	Mixed			—	—	—

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.