CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-00330 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-00330

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

Case Profile
Decision Date4/1/2025
Statusdenied
LevelAPPEAL
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionsSee the hearing decision (Case 24-00330) →See the hearing decision (Case 24-00330) →
Participants
Judge: Moira D. Modzelewski, Allison Marie, Jennifer I. Goldstein
Government Counsel: Andrea M. Corrales
Case Summary
The applicant in this case sought a security clearance but was denied by the Department of Defense (DoD) due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) indicated that the applicant had failed to file federal and state income tax returns for the years 2012 through 2020. During the adjudication process, the applicant admitted to these failures but claimed he was working with a tax professional to resolve the issues and had filed some returns.
The administrative judge found that the applicant's repeated failures to file tax returns raised significant concerns regarding his financial management. Although the applicant asserted that he had filed some returns and was in the process of addressing the outstanding ones, he did not provide sufficient documentation to support these claims. The judge concluded that the applicant's uncorroborated assertions were inadequate to mitigate the financial concerns raised by the government. Consequently, the judge ruled against the applicant, affirming that the applicant had not demonstrated the necessary reliability and good judgment required for national security eligibility. The decision was upheld on appeal, with the board finding no error in the judge's application of the relevant guidelines.
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. 24-00330

Apr 1, 2025· Hon. Moira D. Modzelewski· appeal

Summary

A security clearance applicant, represented by counsel, was denied under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to a failure to file federal and state income tax returns for the tax years 2012 through 2020. The applicant admitted to these allegations, which raised significant disqualifying conditions under AG ¶ 19(f).

While the applicant claimed to be working with a tax professional to resolve the issue, they did not provide sufficient documentation to corroborate these assertions. The judge found that these uncorroborated claims were inadequate to mitigate the government's concerns, despite the potential applicability of mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(a) and AG ¶ 20(g).

Ultimately, the appeal board affirmed the denial, concluding that the judge's findings were reasonable and supported by the evidence presented. The lack of verifiable documentation regarding the filing of the outstanding tax returns was central to the denial.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(f)raisedFailure to File Annual Federal, State, or Local Income Tax Returns

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)rejectedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Circumstances Making It Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's failure to file tax returns spanned nine years and was ongoing without independent documentation to support resolution.
AG ¶ 20(g)rejectedThe Individual Has Arranged with the Appropriate Tax Authority to File the Outstanding ReturnsThe judge noted the absence of documented evidence of the applicant's timely resolution of tax-filing failures.

Key Rule Quoted

“It is untenable for an applicant to refuse to accept his or her legal obligation to comply with the federal tax laws and then insist that the federal government must grant him or her the privilege of handling classified information.”
— ISCR Case No. 98-0810 at 3 (App. Bd. Jun. 8, 2000)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 23, 2024
Answer filedJun 10, 2024
Hearing heldJan 8, 2025
Decision dateApr 1, 2025Decision affirmed on appeal.

Cite For

Failure to File Tax Returns as a Disqualifying Condition Under Guideline F
Insufficient Documentation to Mitigate Financial Concerns
Application of the Whole-person Concept in Evaluating Security Clearance Cases

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 involved an applicant who was denied a security clearance due to failure to file federal and state income tax returns for multiple years. The applicant's counsel argued that the Judge did not properly apply mitigating conditions and the Whole-Person Concept. The Board affirmed the Judge's decision, finding no harmful error in the application of the law or the assessment of evidence.

Appealed bythe applicant

Applicant representationAttorney

Judge belowRoger C. Wesley — denied the clearance

Decided onthe written record

Guidelines belowGuideline F

What the Board reviewed

Decision arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law — raised by the applicantRejected
The Judge failed to properly apply the Whole-Person Concept and Guideline F mitigating conditions.

Why the Board ruled this way

The Judge examined the relevant evidence, weighed the disqualifying and mitigating evidence, and articulated a satisfactory explanation for the decision. The record supports that the Judge's findings and conclusions are sustainable.

Standard of review applied

Harmful-error gatekeeperSubstantial-evidence reviewArbitrary-and-capricious reviewProcedural complianceNo de-novo re-decisionNo new evidence on appealDeference to the judge’s credibility calls

Appeal Board panel

Moira Modzelewski — Chair
Allison Marie
Jennifer I. Goldstein

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.