CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-02269 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-02269

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

Case Profile
Decision Date2/20/2026
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Roger C. Wesley
Government Counsel: Cynthia Ruckno
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 35-year-old employee of a defense contractor seeking a security clearance. The adjudicative guideline at issue was financial considerations, specifically concerning the applicant's accumulation of 24 delinquent consumer debts totaling over $34,000. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) issued by the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency highlighted the applicant's inability to satisfy these debts, raising concerns about his reliability and judgment.
In his response to the SOR, the applicant admitted to the allegations regarding his financial situation but did not provide any explanations or clarifications. He attributed his financial difficulties to a reduction in overtime work following the COVID-19 pandemic and acknowledged that he had considered filing for bankruptcy but never did so. During a personal subject interview, he indicated a willingness to address his debts only if necessary to retain his job, but he did not commit to resolving them in the near future.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he did not mitigate the financial considerations concerns. The judge found that the applicant's significant and unresolved debts raised serious questions about his trustworthiness and reliability. Although the applicant's financial issues were partly attributed to circumstances beyond his control, the judge determined that he had not acted responsibly in addressing his debts, and without evidence of any efforts to resolve them, the applicant failed to meet the burden of proof required for a security clearance.
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. 24-02269

deniedFeb 20, 2026· Hon. Roger C. Wesley· hearing

Summary

A 35-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance under Guideline F, Financial Considerations, due to significant unresolved financial issues. The Statement of Reasons alleged the applicant accumulated 24 delinquent consumer debts totaling over $34,000. These allegations raised disqualifying conditions under paragraphs 19(a), 19(b), and 19(c) of Guideline F.

While the applicant admitted to the allegations, no evidence was provided to demonstrate efforts to resolve the outstanding debts. The judge determined that the applicant's financial situation indicated poor self-control and a lack of judgment, which raised significant trustworthiness concerns.

Despite the potential applicability of mitigating conditions under paragraphs 20(a) and 20(b), the applicant's failure to provide evidence of mitigation efforts ultimately led to the denial of the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant accumulated 24 delinquent debts exceeding $34,000, which raised trustworthiness concerns.
The applicant admitted to the allegations but failed to provide evidence of efforts to resolve the debts.
The applicant's financial situation indicated poor self-control and lack of judgment.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

DC ¶ 19(a)appliedInability to Satisfy Debts
DC ¶ 19(b)appliedUnwillingness to Satisfy Debts Regardless of the Ability to Do So
DC ¶ 19(c)appliedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Mitigating

MC ¶ 20(a)rejectedBehavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to RecurThe nature and number of delinquent debts do not support this condition.
MC ¶ 20(b)appliedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person’s ControlThe applicant experienced a reduction in overtime due to the pandemic.

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for access to classified information may only be granted 'upon a finding that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to do so.'”
— Exec. Or. 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry § 2 (Feb. 20, 1960)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 7, 2025
Answer filedFeb 7, 2025Requested resolution on the written record without a hearing.
Hearing held—Case assigned on December 2, 2025.
Decision dateFeb 20, 2026

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unresolved Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Importance of Documented Evidence in Mitigating Financial Concerns
Consideration of the Whole Person in Security Clearance Decisions

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 applicant accumulated 24 delinquent consumer debts exceeding $34,000, which he admitted. The judge found that the financial considerations raised significant security concerns that were not mitigated, resulting in a denial of eligibility for access to classified information.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant allegedly accumulated 24 delinquent consumer debts exceeding $34,000. $34,000	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	—	Claimed Other

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.