CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 19-01213.a1 — CASE

ISCR Case 19-01213.a1denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 19-01213.a1

Feb 6, 2020· Hon. Michael Y. Ra'anan· appeal

Summary

A security clearance applicant, representing himself, was denied under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to a failure to file federal income tax returns for multiple years. Specifically, the applicant did not file returns for 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2018, which constituted a disqualifying condition under F.2.a.

The applicant's appeal was denied, with the board affirming the initial decision. The board found no harmful error in the judge's determination, despite the applicant's arguments concerning his tax obligations and job responsibilities.

The denial underscored the necessity of fulfilling legal financial obligations for security clearance eligibility. The applicant's explanations regarding potential tax refunds and the demands of his job were not sufficient to overturn the finding that he failed to meet the filing requirements.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F.2.araisedFailure to File or Pay Taxes

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who fails repeatedly to fulfill his or her legal obligations, such as filing tax returns when due, does not demonstrate the high degree of good judgment and reliability required of those granted access to classified information.”
— ISCR Case No. 15-08782 at 3 (App. Bd. Apr. 5, 2017)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 23, 2019
Answer filed—Applicant requested a decision on the written record.
Hearing heldNov 27, 2019Decision made by Administrative Judge Paul J. Mason.
Decision dateFeb 6, 2020Appeal board decision affirmed the denial.

Cite For

Failure to File Federal Income Tax Returns Under Guideline F
Importance of Fulfilling Legal Obligations for Security Clearance Eligibility
Relevance of Legal Obligations in Assessing Good Judgment and Reliability for Security Clearance

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Appeal at a glance· Full written decision

Affirmed

The appeal concerned the denial of a security clearance based on the applicant's failure to file Federal income tax returns for multiple years. The applicant raised two issues on appeal, but the Board found no harmful error in the Administrative Judge's decision. The Board affirmed the denial of the security clearance.

Appealed bythe applicant

Applicant representationPro se (self-represented)

Judge belowPaul J. Mason — denied the clearance

Decided onthe written record

Guidelines belowGuideline F

What the Board reviewed

No specific harmful error alleged — raised by the applicantRejected
Applicant argued that he owed no back taxes and that his remarks about working in a classified area were not considered.

Why the Board ruled this way

The Board found that the Administrative Judge's decision was supported by substantial evidence and that the applicant did not demonstrate any harmful error in the Judge's findings regarding his failure to file tax returns.

Standard of review applied

No de-novo re-decisionNo new evidence on appealSubstantial-evidence reviewArbitrary-and-capricious review

Appeal Board panel

Michael Ra’anan — Chair
James E. Moody
James F. Duffy

Descriptive structured reading of this decided, public Appeal Board decision — what the case says, not a prediction or advice.

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

APPEAL

SYNOPSIS

KEYWORD: Guideline F DIGEST: The SOR alleged that Applicant failed to file his Federal income tax returns for 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2018 as required. The Judge found against Applicant on that allegation. In his appeal brief, Applicant raises two issues that do not establish the Judge committed any harmful error. Adverse decision is affirmed. CASE NO: 19-01213.a1 DATE: 02/06/2020

DATE: February 6, 2020 ) In Re: ) ) ---------------------- ) ISCR Case No. 19-01213 ) ) Applicant for Security Clearance ) )

APPEAL BOARD DECISION

APPEARANCES

FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Pro se The Department of Defense (DoD) declined to grant Applicant a security clearance. On July 23, 2019, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision—security concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a decision on the written record. On November 27, 2019, after considering the record, Administrative Judge Paul J. Mason denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance. Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. The SOR alleged that Applicant failed to file his Federal income tax returns for 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2018 as required. The Judge found against Applicant on that allegation. In his appeal brief, Applicant raises two issues that do not establish the Judge committed any harmful error. First, he argues that he owed no back taxes. In the decision, the Judge neither stated nor implied that Applicant owed delinquent taxes. To the contrary, the Judge noted that Applicant had extra withholdings and itemized deductions so that he was always due a refund but concluded his explanations and rationalizations did not excuse his failure to file his Federal tax returns in a timely manner. Decision at 1. Second, Applicant also argues the Judge did not take into consideration his remarks that he worked in a classified area but did not work with classified information. This is not a relevant consideration in determining security clearance eligibility. We have no authority to consider the extent to which an applicant may or may not actually have access to classified information in the course of his or her job. See, e.g., ISCR Case No. 14-00508 at 2-3 (App. Bd. Jan. 23, 2015). The Judge examined the relevant evidence and articulated a satisfactory explanation for the decision. The decision is sustainable on this record. A person who fails repeatedly to fulfill his or her legal obligations, such as filing tax returns when due, does not demonstrate the high degree of good judgment and reliability required of those granted access to classified information. See, e.g., ISCR Case No. 15-08782 at 3 (App. Bd. Apr. 5, 2017). “The general standard is that a clearance may be granted only when ‘clearly consistent with the interests of the national security.’” Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988). See also Directive, Encl. 2, App. A ¶ 2(b): “Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”

ORDER

The Decision is AFFIRMED. Signed: Michael Ra’anan Michael Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairperson, Appeal Board Signed: James E. Moody James E. Moody Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: James F. Duffy James F. Duffy Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board