CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 17-00731.a1 — CASE

ISCR Case 17-00731.a1denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-00731.a1

deniedAug 21, 2018· Hon. Michael Y. Ra'anan· appeal

Summary

An applicant representing herself was denied a trustworthiness designation under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The denial was primarily based on her failure to file federal tax returns for 2013 and 2014, a disqualifying condition under F1. The applicant acknowledged having no excuse for these tax filing deficiencies.

While there were some favorable findings regarding other delinquent debts, these did not outweigh the unfiled tax returns. The applicant's claims of unfairness in the process were not substantiated by the evidence presented.

Ultimately, the appeal board upheld the denial, concluding that the decision was supported by the evidence and that the applicant's claims of unfairness were unsubstantiated.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to file her Federal tax returns for 2013 and 2014 as required.
The applicant acknowledged having no excuse for her tax filing deficiencies.
The applicant's claims of unfairness were not substantiated by the evidence.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F1raisedFailure to File or Pay Taxes

Key Rule Quoted

“such a determination 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)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 15, 2017
Answer filed—Applicant represented herself (pro se) in the proceedings.
Hearing heldJun 15, 2018
Decision dateAug 21, 2018Appeal board affirmed the decision.

Cite For

Failure to File Tax Returns as a Disqualifying Condition Under Guideline F
Unsubstantiated Claims of Unfairness in Trustworthiness Cases
Standard for Trustworthiness Determinations Consistent with National Security Interests

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

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: Applicant’s brief fails to establish the Judge committed any harmful error. Adverse decision affirmed. CASENO: 17-00731.a1 DATE: 08/21/2018 DATE: August 21, 2018 In Re: ------------------------ Applicant for Public Trust Position ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ADP Case No. 17-00731

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 trustworthiness designation. On June 15, 2017, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision–trustworthiness concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a hearing. On June 15, 2018, after the hearing, Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) Administrative Judge Juan J. Rivera denied Applicant’s request for a trustworthiness designation. Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. The SOR alleged that Applicant failed to file her Federal tax returns for 2013 and 2014 as required and that she had four delinquent debts. The Judge found against Applicant on the tax filing deficiencies and in her favor on the delinquent debts. At the hearing, “[w]hen asked whether she had filed her 2015 and 2016 income tax returns, Applicant stated: ‘I’m going to say yes. They should have been. I don’t know.’” Decision at 3. She acknowledged that she had no excuse for her tax filing deficiencies. The Judge noted that Applicant’s husband was diagnosed with a serious illness around the time she received the SOR and later passed away. The Judge left the record open after the hearing for Applicant to submit proof that she filed her 2013 through 2016 income tax returns. She submitted the second pages for two IRS Form 1040sthat were unsigned and undated. Based on Applicant’s statements, the Judge concluded she filed her 2014 and 2016 income taxes in April 2018 but still had not filed her 2013 and 2015 income tax returns. In her appeal brief, Applicant asks that the Judge’s decision be overturned. In claiming the decision is unfair, she discusses three of the alleged delinquent debts. These assignments of error warrant no relief because the Judge found in Applicant’s favor on those debts. In her brief, she also states: “Although I cannot enter into evidence, the 2013 and 2014 tax returns will be filed and paid by 31 July 2018.” Applicant’s brief fails to establish the Judge committed any harmful error. The Judge examined the relevant evidence and articulated a satisfactory explanation for the decision. The decision is sustainable on this record. The standard applicable to trustworthiness cases is that set forth in Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988) regarding security clearances: such a determination “. . . may be granted only when ‘clearly consistent with the interests of the national security.’” See, e.g., ADP Case No. 12-09387 at 2 (App. Bd. Apr. 26 2016). See also Kaplan v. Conyers, 733 F.3d 1148 (Fed. Cir. 2013), cert. denied.

ORDER

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