CASEClearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 16-02223.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 16-02223.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 16-02223.h1

grantedApr 28, 2017· Hon. Robert E. Coacher· hearing

Summary

A college student's security clearance eligibility was initially questioned under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) due to his failure to file federal and state tax returns for 2013. This concern was specifically detailed in Allegation 1.a of the Statement of Reasons.

However, the applicant successfully mitigated these financial concerns. He subsequently filed the missing 2013 federal and state tax returns and demonstrated that he has filed all tax returns for subsequent years, incurring no outstanding tax debt.

The judge determined that the applicant's current financial situation is stable and responsible, applying mitigating conditions AG ¶ 20(a), AG ¶ 20(c), and AG ¶ 20(d). Consequently, the applicant was granted eligibility for a security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant filed his 2013 federal and state tax returns after initially failing to do so.
He has filed all subsequent years' tax returns and does not owe any tax debt.
The applicant's current financial situation is stable and responsible.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent.
AG ¶ 20(c)appliedThe Individual Has Received Counseling or Treatment for the Problem.
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Individual Has Established a Good Track Record of Financial Responsibility.

Key Rule Quoted

“I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 23, 2016
Answer filedJan 3, 2017
Hearing heldApr 11, 2017
Decision dateApr 28, 2017Proposed summary disposition in favor of applicant.

Cite For

Mitigation of Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Importance of Filing Tax Returns for Security Clearance
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.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant had failed to file his 2013 federal and state tax returns but subsequently filed them and does not owe any tax debt. The judge concluded that the applicant's current financial situation is stable and that the financial concerns were mitigated, resulting in a decision to grant the security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	failed to file his 2013 federal and state tax returns	For Applicant	Tax Filing Failure	Admitted	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (c) received/receiving counseling; problem being resolved (d) good-faith effort to repay or otherwise resolve debts	Documented Tax Returns Filed Late

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 16-02333 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

Appearances

For Government: Mary Margaret Forman, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

04/28/2017 ______________

Decision

______________

COACHER, Robert E., Administrative Judge:

On November 23, 2016, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to Applicant detailing a security concern under Guideline F, financial considerations. The action was taken under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; 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 January 3, 2017, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on March 30, 2017. The hearing was held as scheduled on April 11, 2017. On April 27, 2017, I proposed that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant failed to file his 2013 federal and state tax returns. He explained that he was attending college during that year and got caught up in his school and neglected filing his tax returns. Since then, he has filed his 2013 federal and state tax returns. He also has filed all subsequent years’ returns. He does not owe tax debt to either the IRS or the state. The evidence established that Applicant’s current finances are in good order. Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that the security concerns are mitigated under the following mitigating conditions: AG ¶¶ 20(a), 20(c), and 20(d).

The concerns over Applicant’s history of financial problems do not create doubt about his current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified 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 he met his ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant him eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

________________________ Robert E. Coacher Administrative Judge