A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 16-02215.h1
GrantedDecided May 1, 2017 · Administrative Judge Carol G. Ricciardello · Hearing
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, a married individual, faced trustworthiness concerns under Guideline F due to her husband's failure to file tax returns. She actively worked with a CPA to resolve the tax issues, ultimately filing all necessary returns and addressing a tax lien. The judge found that the applicant's diligent efforts mitigated the financial concerns, leading to a favorable decision.
Why the applicant prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated persistent efforts to resolve her husband's tax issues with the IRS.
- She worked with a CPA and followed his advice regarding tax filings.
- All tax returns were eventually filed, and she is addressing the tax lien.
Conditions referenced
Mitigating
- AG ¶ 20(a) The behavior was not recent and was addressed by the applicant.applied
- AG ¶ 20(b) The applicant has shown a good faith effort to repay overdue debts.applied
- AG ¶ 20(c) The applicant has resolved the issues that led to the financial problems.applied
- AG ¶ 20(d) The applicant has a reasonable plan to resolve her financial issues.applied
Key rule quoted
“I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- 11/01/2016
- Answer filed
- 11/14/2016
- Hearing held
- 04/20/2017
- Decision date
- 05/01/2017 Proposed summary disposition in favor of applicant on 04/24/2017.
Cite for
- Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F
- Good Faith Efforts to Resolve Tax Liabilities
- Whole-person Concept 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.
From the decision
Facts this decision states, each with the sentence it comes from. Descriptive of the record, not an assessment.
- Payment Plan
- yes
- Bankruptcy
- none
Allegations under Guideline F
Reading the 2 per allegation rows needs a free account.
2 rows in this decision.
It opens the per allegation record on every guideline: the amounts, the findings, and the sentence behind each row.
Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case. The verbatim source decision is below.
Full decision
Open original PDFThe complete official text, footnotes and signatures included, is in the original PDF.
Decision text, by section
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS
In the matter of: ) ) ) ADP Case No. 16-02215 ) ) Applicant for Public Trust Position
Appearances
For Government: Chris Morin, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se
05/01/2017 ______________
Decision
______________
RICCIARDELLO, Carol G., Administrative Judge:
On November 1, 2016, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to Applicant detailing trustworthiness concerns under Guideline F, financial considerations. The action was taken DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the adjudicative guidelines (AG) implemented by the DOD on September 1, 2006.
Applicant responded to the SOR on November 14, 2016, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on January 24, 2017. The hearing was held as scheduled on April 20, 2017. On April 24, 2017, I proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Neither party objected.
Applicant married in 2005 and learned her husband had failed to file his Federal and state tax returns for several years. She attempted to rectify the matter. She worked with a certified public accountant (CPA). Based on his advice, she proposed to resolve the matter with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with an offer in compromise. For years, the IRS delayed its response, repeatedly requested additional information, transferred her case to another office, and lost information that was provided, thereby requiring her to start the process over. Applicant was persistent in her attempt to resolve the matters. Her CPA testified that he advised her to delay filing her 2014 Federal and state tax returns because they were waiting for a response from the IRS on an offer in compromise at the time. All of Applicant’s Federal and state income tax returns are filed, and she is resolving the tax lien. Applicant has been diligent and acted responsibly in attempting to resolve the tax issues.
Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that Department Counsel presented sufficient evidence to establish the facts alleged in the SOR under Guideline F. Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that Applicant mitigated the financial considerations trustworthiness concerns under the following mitigating conditions: AG ¶¶ 20(a), 20(b), 20(c), and 20(d).
The concerns over Applicant’s financial problems no longer create doubt about her current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect sensitive information. In reaching this conclusion, I weighed the evidence as a whole and considered if the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that she met her ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant her eligibility for access to sensitive information. This case is decided for Applicant.
________________________ Carol G. Ricciardello Administrative Judge