Loading case…

ISCR Case 25-01224 · CASE

Case record

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

Decision Date5/22/2026
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeWRITTEN RECORD FORM
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Government Counsel: Cassie L. Ford, Esq.
Judge: Richard A. Cefola
Guidelines Evaluated
- EPersonal Conduct · Withdrawn
- FFinancial Considerations · Against Applicant
Questions about ISCR 25-01224, answered from its own record: what was alleged, what the judge found, where it says so. Descriptive only; never advice.

Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only, not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

ISCR Case 25-01224denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 25-01224

deniedMay 22, 2026· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Synopsis

The applicant, a 30-year-old senior phlebotomist for a DoD contractor, faced security clearance denial under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to significant unresolved debts exceeding $27,000. The applicant admitted to the debts and a false statement regarding their status but failed to provide evidence of any efforts to resolve them, leading to the conclusion that his financial issues raised concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has unresolved debts exceeding $27,000, indicating financial irresponsibility.
The applicant admitted to all debts and a false statement regarding their status without providing evidence of resolution efforts.
The applicant's claims of future payment plans were deemed unsubstantiated and insufficient to mitigate security concerns.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

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

Key Rule Quoted

“Failure to live within one’s means, satisfy debts, and meet financial obligations may indicate poor self-control, lack of judgment, or unwillingness to abide by rules and regulations, all of which can raise questions about an individual’s reliability, trustworthiness, and ability to protect classified or sensitive information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 30, 2025
Answer filedNov 14, 2025Applicant requested decision on written record.
Hearing held—No hearing; decision based on written record.
Decision dateMay 22, 2026

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unresolved Financial Obligations
Impact of Financial Irresponsibility on Security Clearance Eligibility
Failure to Provide Evidence of Debt Resolution as a Basis for Denial

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant did not mitigate the personal conduct concerns related to his financial issues. The applicant admitted to multiple debts but failed to demonstrate any good-faith efforts to resolve them, leading to a denial of his security clearance.

1.a Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —
1.b Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —
1.c Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —
1.d Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —
1.e Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —
1.f Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —
1.g Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —
1.h Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —
1.i Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —
1.j Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.b	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.c	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.d	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.e	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.f	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.g	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.h	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.i	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.j	Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant has multiple unresolved debts totaling over $27,000, which raised significant financial concerns under Guideline F. The applicant's failure to demonstrate any good-faith efforts to resolve these debts led to a decision against granting security clearance.

1.a Auto Loan ONE ($5,618): Applicant took out a $27,392 loan sometime prior to June 2021 to purchase a vehicle but ended up voluntarily surrendering the car after losing employment income. The vehicle was sold at auction, but the balance was never paid. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer averred to having “recently reached out to start payments.” There is no evidence of any payments in the record.
$5,618
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Auto Loan Debt
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —
1.b Apartment Rent ($4,657): Applicant rented an apartment with his cousin but ended up breaking the lease when his cousin lost his job. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by September 2023. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer averred to having a plan to address this debt in the future after first paying off smaller balances. There is no evidence of any payments in the record.
$4,657
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Unspecified Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —
1.c Auto Insurance ($1,390): When Applicant’s vehicle was repossessed, he stopped paying for insurance despite still owing on the contract. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by June 2023. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer averred to having a plan to address this debt in the future after first paying off smaller balances. There is no evidence of any payments in the record.
$1,390
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Unspecified Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —
1.d Medical Services ($645): Applicant went to the emergency room after cutting his hand but thought all of the medical care costs had been covered by his insurance. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by October 2024. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. His admission, however, referenced by name the debt listed below in SOR ¶ 1.e, and as such, is viewed as a denial of this allegation. Applicant stated that he would “look into the debt,” but there is no evidence of any payments in the record.
$645
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Unspecified Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —
1.e Cable Service ($582): Applicant stopped making payments for cable services when he broke the lease discussed above in SOR ¶ 1.b. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by September 2024. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer suggested he had a payment plan in place. There is no evidence of any payments in the record.
$582
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Unspecified Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —
1.f Internet Service ($174): Applicant initially indicated that he stopped paying for internet services when he left a previous residence. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by April 2024. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. In his Answer, however, he claimed his uncle, with whom he was staying at the time, was actually responsible for the debt. Nonetheless, he averred to having a plan to address this debt in the future after first paying off smaller balances. There is no evidence of any payments in the record.
$174
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Unspecified Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —
1.g Auto Loan ($12,771): Applicant took out a $20,449 loan in February 2023 to purchase a vehicle, but it was repossessed involuntarily after he lost employment income. The vehicle was sold at auction, but the balance was never paid. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He has no intention of making any payments on this debt.
$12,771
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Auto Loan Debt
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —
1.h Education Loan ONE ($409): Applicant took out a $4,000 education loan in October 2023 with payments of $45 per month due over 120 months. By July 2025, the principal had grown to $4,370 and Applicant was $409 behind in his payments. By March 2026, the past due amount had increased to $592. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He noted that he had “not started making payments… yet.” There is no evidence of any payments in the record.
$409
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Student Loan Debt
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —
1.i Education Loan TWO ($228): Applicant took out a $2,334 education loan in October 2023 with payments of $25 per month due over 120 months. By July 2025, the principal had grown to $2,445 and Applicant was $228 behind in his payments. By March 2026, the past due amount had increased to $330. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He noted that he had “not started making payments… yet.” There is no evidence of any payments in the record.
$228
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Student Loan Debt
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —
1.j Merchandise ($1,140): Applicant financed $2,497 for the purchase of furniture with a retailer that ultimately closed. Applicant then stopped making payments. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by April 2023. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He has no intention of making any payments on this debt.
$1,140
Finding: Against Applicant
Type: Unspecified Financial
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶19):
(a) inability to satisfy debts
(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations
Mitigating applied (¶20): —
Mitigation: —

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Auto Loan ONE ($5,618): Applicant took out a $27,392 loan sometime prior to June 2021 to purchase a vehicle but ended up voluntarily surrendering the car after losing employment income. The vehicle was sold at auction, but the balance was never paid. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer averred to having “recently reached out to start payments.” There is no evidence of any payments in the record. $5,618	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.b	Apartment Rent ($4,657): Applicant rented an apartment with his cousin but ended up breaking the lease when his cousin lost his job. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by September 2023. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer averred to having a plan to address this debt in the future after first paying off smaller balances. There is no evidence of any payments in the record. $4,657	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.c	Auto Insurance ($1,390): When Applicant’s vehicle was repossessed, he stopped paying for insurance despite still owing on the contract. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by June 2023. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer averred to having a plan to address this debt in the future after first paying off smaller balances. There is no evidence of any payments in the record. $1,390	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.d	Medical Services ($645): Applicant went to the emergency room after cutting his hand but thought all of the medical care costs had been covered by his insurance. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by October 2024. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. His admission, however, referenced by name the debt listed below in SOR ¶ 1.e, and as such, is viewed as a denial of this allegation. Applicant stated that he would “look into the debt,” but there is no evidence of any payments in the record. $645	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.e	Cable Service ($582): Applicant stopped making payments for cable services when he broke the lease discussed above in SOR ¶ 1.b. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by September 2024. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer suggested he had a payment plan in place. There is no evidence of any payments in the record. $582	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.f	Internet Service ($174): Applicant initially indicated that he stopped paying for internet services when he left a previous residence. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by April 2024. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. In his Answer, however, he claimed his uncle, with whom he was staying at the time, was actually responsible for the debt. Nonetheless, he averred to having a plan to address this debt in the future after first paying off smaller balances. There is no evidence of any payments in the record. $174	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.g	Auto Loan ($12,771): Applicant took out a $20,449 loan in February 2023 to purchase a vehicle, but it was repossessed involuntarily after he lost employment income. The vehicle was sold at auction, but the balance was never paid. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He has no intention of making any payments on this debt. $12,771	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.h	Education Loan ONE ($409): Applicant took out a $4,000 education loan in October 2023 with payments of $45 per month due over 120 months. By July 2025, the principal had grown to $4,370 and Applicant was $409 behind in his payments. By March 2026, the past due amount had increased to $592. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He noted that he had “not started making payments… yet.” There is no evidence of any payments in the record. $409	Against Applicant	Student Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.i	Education Loan TWO ($228): Applicant took out a $2,334 education loan in October 2023 with payments of $25 per month due over 120 months. By July 2025, the principal had grown to $2,445 and Applicant was $228 behind in his payments. By March 2026, the past due amount had increased to $330. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He noted that he had “not started making payments… yet.” There is no evidence of any payments in the record. $228	Against Applicant	Student Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.j	Merchandise ($1,140): Applicant financed $2,497 for the purchase of furniture with a retailer that ultimately closed. Applicant then stopped making payments. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by April 2023. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He has no intention of making any payments on this debt. $1,140	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (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.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

______________ ______________ DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS In the

DECISION

atter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 25-01224 ) ) Applicant for Security Clearance ) Appearances For Government: Cassie L. Ford, Esq., Department Co

STATEMENT OF CASE

nsel For Applicant: Pro se 05/22/2026 Decision CEFOLA, Richard A., Administrative Judge: Applicant did not mitigate the security concerns raised under the Financial Considerations adjudicative guideline. National security eligibility for access to classified information is denied. Statement of the Case Applicant submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions on October 31, 2024 (Questionnaire). On September 30, 2025, the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The action was taken under Executive Order 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information Within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the adjudicative guidelines (AG) effective within DoD after June 8, 2017.

FINDINGS OF FACT

In a written response dated November 14, 2025, Applicant responded to the SOR (Answer). He requested that this case be decided on the written record in lieu of a hearing. In his Answer, he admitted to all the debts alleged in the SOR. He also admitted to the false statement but qualified his response by indicating he “was aware of some of (the debts) being past due but not derogatory.” On March 5, 2026, Department Counsel submitted the Government’s written case in a File of Relevant Material (FORM). Therein, Department Counsel amended the SOR by deleting SOR ¶ 2 in its entirety. As such, it will not be addressed further. A complete copy of the FORM, consisting of Government’s Exhibits (GE) 1 to 9 and the Government’s arguments in support of the SOR, was received by Applicant on March 10, 2026. He was afforded an opportunity to file objections and submit material to refute, extenuate, or mitigate the security concerns, but did not respond within the specified 30-day period. The case was assigned to me on May 18, 2026, and all exhibits were admitted without objection. Findings of Fact Applicant is 30 years old and has worked for a DoD contractor as a senior phlebotomist since April 2024. He completed his first application for a security clearance in connection with his employment. Applicant has never married and has no children. He has completed some online college coursework. (GE 5 at 5, 8-9, 22, 29) SOR Paragraph 1, Guideline F (Financial Considerations) The Government alleged that Applicant is ineligible for a security clearance because he has delinquent and unresolved debts in excess of $27,000. I find the following facts regarding the history and status of the debts: 1.a. Auto Loan ONE ($5,618): Applicant took out a $27,392 loan sometime prior to June 2021 to purchase a vehicle but ended up voluntarily surrendering the car after losing employment income. The vehicle was sold at

auction, but the balance was never paid. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer averred to having “recently reached out to start payments.” There is no evidence of any payments in the record. (Answer; GE 5 at 30- 31; GE 6 at 8 -9; GE 7 at 3; GE 8 at 2) 1.b. Apartment Rent ($4,657): Applicant rented an apartment with his cousin but ended up breaking the lease when his cousin lost his job. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by September 2023. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer averred to having a plan to address this debt in the future after first paying off smaller balances. There is no evidence of any payments in the record. (Answer; GE 5 at 30-31; GE 6 at 9; GE 7 at 4; GE 8 at 2; GE 9 at 3) 2

1.c. Auto Insurance ($1,390): When Applicant’s vehicle was repossessed, he stopped paying for insurance despite still owing on the contract. The outstanding balance was purchased by

a collection agency by June 2023. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no inten

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

ion of making any payments, but in his Answer averred to having a plan to address this debt in the future after first paying off smaller balances. There is no evidence of any

POLICIES

payments in the record. (Answer; GE 5 at 30-31; GE 6 at 9; GE 7 at 4; GE 8 at 2-3; GE 9 at 3) 1.d. Medical Services ($645): Applicant went to the emergency room after cutting his hand but thought all of the medical care costs had been covered by his insurance. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by October 2024. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. His admission, however, referenced by name the debt listed below in SOR ¶ 1.e, and as such, is viewed as a denial of this allegation. Applicant stated that he would “look into the debt,” but there is no evidence of any payments in the record. (Answer; GE 5 at 30-31; GE 6 at 10; GE 7 at 5; GE 8 at 3) 1.e. Cable Service ($582): Applicant stopped making payments for cable services when he broke the lease discussed above in SOR ¶ 1.b. The outstanding balance was purchased by a c ollection agency by September 2024. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He initially indicated that he had no intention of making any payments, but in his Answer suggested he had a payment plan in place. There i sno evidence of

any payments in the record. (Answer; GE 5 at 30-31; GE 6 at 10; GE 7 at 4-5; GE 8 at 3; GE 9 at 4) 1.f. Internet Service ($174): Applicant initially indicated that he stopped paying for internet services when he left a previous residence. The outstanding balance was purchased by

a collection agency by April 2024. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. In his Answer, however, he claimed his uncle, with whom he was staying at the time, was actually responsible for the debt. Nonetheless, he averred to having a plan to address this debt in the future after first paying off smaller balances. There is no evidence of any payments in the record. (Answer; GE 5 at 30-31; GE 6 at 10; GE 7 at 5; GE 8 at 3; GE 9 at 3) 1.g. Auto Loan ($12,771): Applicant took out a $20,449 loan in February 2023 to purchase a vehicle, but it was repossessed involuntarily after he lost employment income. The vehicle was sold at auction, but the balance was never paid. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He has no intention of making any payments on this debt. (Answer; GE 5 at 30- 31; GE 6 at 8; GE 7 at 6; GE 8 at 4) 3

1.h. Education Loan ONE ($

ANALYSIS

09): Applicant took out a $4,000 education loan in October 2023 with payments of $45 per month due over 120 months. By July 2025, the principal had grown to $4,370 and Applicant was $409 behind in his payments. By March 2026, the past due amount had increased to $592. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He noted that he had “not started making payments… yet.” There is no evidence of any payments in the record. (Answer; GE 5 at 30-31; GE 7 at 6; GE 8 at 4; GE 9 at 3) 1.i. Education Loan TWO ($228): Applicant took out a $2,334 education loan in October 2023 with payments of $25 per month due over 120 months. By July 2025, the principal had grown to $2,445 and Applicant was $228 behind in his payments. By March 2026, the past due amount had increased to $330. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He noted that he had “not started making payments… yet.” There is no evidence of any payments in the record. (Answer; GE 5 at

30-31; GE 7 at 7; GE 8 at 4; 9 at 3) 1.j. Merchandise ($1,140): Applicant financed $2,497 for the purchase of furniture with a retailer that ultimately closed. Applicant then stopped making payments. The outstanding balance was purchased by a collection agency by April 2023. Applicant did not disclose the existence of this delinquent debt in the Questionnaire but admitted to it in his Answer. He has no intention of making any payments on this debt. (Answer; GE 5 at 30-31; GE 6 at 9; GE 7 at 4) Whole Person and Mitigating Evidence Applicant submitted no comments or explanations in his Answer as whole person evidence in mitigation of the security concerns alleged in the SOR. The comments and explanations Applicant included in both his Questionnaire and interrogatories, however, were reviewed in their entirety. Policies When evaluating an applicant’s suitability for national security eligibility, the administrative judge must consider the adjudicative guidelines. In addition to brief introductory explanations for each guideline, the adjudicative guidelines (AG) list potentially disqualifying conditions and mitigating conditions, which are to be used in evaluating an applicant’s national security eligibility. These guidelines are not inflexible rules of law. Instead, recognizing the complexities of human behavior, these guidelines are applied in conjunction with the factors listed in AG ¶ 2 describing the adjudicative process. The administrative judge’s overarching adjudicative goal is a fair, impartial, and commonsense decision. The entire process is a conscientious scrutiny of applicable guidelines in the context of a number of variables known as the whole-person concept. The administrative judge mus

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

consider all available, reliable information about the person, past and present, favorable and unfavorable, in making a decision. 4

The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration. AG ¶ 2(b) requires, “Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.” In reaching this decision, I have drawn only those conclusions that are reasonable, logical, and based on the evidence contained in the record. I have not drawn inferences based on mere speculation or conjecture. Directive ¶ E3.1.14, requires the Government to present evidence to establish controverted facts alleged in the SOR. Under Directive ¶ E3.1.15, “The applicant is responsible for presenting witnesses and other evidence to rebut, explain, extenuate, or mitigate facts admitted by the applicant or proven by Department Counsel, and has the ultimate burden of persuasion as to obtaining a favorable clearance decision.” A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence. This relationship transcends normal duty hours and endures throughout off-duty hours. The Government reposes a high degree of trust and confidence in individuals to whom it grants national security eligibility. Decisions include, by necessity, consideration of the possible risk the applicant may delibe

FORMAL FINDINGS

ately or inadvertently fail to protect or safeguard classified information. Such decisions entail a certain degree of legally permissible extrapolation as to potential, rather than actual, risk of compromise of classified or sensitive information. Finally, as emphasized in Section 7 of Executive Order 10865, “Any determination under this order adverse to an applicant shall be a determination in terms of the national interest and shall in no sense be a determination as to the loyalty of the applicant concerned.” See also Executive Order 12968, Section 3.1(b) (listing multiple pre

CONCLUSION

equisites for access to classified or sensitive information.) Analysis SOR Paragraph 1, Guideline F (Financial Considerations) The security concerns relating to the guideline for financial considerations are set out in AG ¶ 18, which reads in pertinent part: Failure to live within one’s means, satisfy debts, and meet financial obligations may indicate poor self-control, lac