CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 17-03249.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 17-03249.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-03249.h1

grantedMay 30, 2018· Hon. Robert J. Tuider· hearing

Summary

A former U.S. Marine Corps member with 26 years of service was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons alleged that the applicant failed to file federal and state income tax returns for 2013 and 2014, raising Disqualifying Condition F.1.

The applicant attributed these financial issues to severe depression following personal tragedies and a difficult deployment in Iraq. However, the judge found that the applicant had since filed his delinquent tax returns and demonstrated responsible financial management.

Mitigating Conditions F.2, F.3, and F.7 were applied, acknowledging the applicant's efforts to resolve his financial difficulties and his history of honorable service. Ultimately, the judge determined that the applicant had successfully mitigated the security concerns, leading to the clearance being granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant provided evidence of mitigating circumstances related to his financial issues.
He successfully filed his back taxes and demonstrated responsible financial management after a period of personal difficulties.
The applicant's long history of honorable service and excellent reputation contributed to the favorable outcome.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F.1raisedFailure to File Annual Income Tax Returns

Mitigating

F.2appliedThe Conditions That Resulted in the Financial Problems Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control
F.3appliedThe Person Has Received Counseling for the Conditions That Contributed to the Financial Problems
F.7appliedThe Individual Has Taken Significant Steps to Reduce or Eliminate Financial Problems

Key Rule Quoted

“The financial considerations security concerns are resolved in whole or in part under the mitigating conditions AG ¶¶ 20(a), (b), and (g).”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 20, 2017
Answer filed—Applicant requested a hearing.
Hearing heldMay 11, 2018
Decision dateMay 30, 2018Case was appropriate for summary disposition in Applicant’s favor.

Cite For

Mitigating Circumstances Related to Financial Issues Under Guideline F
Consideration of Personal Hardships Affecting Financial Stability
Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Determinations

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 Federal and state income tax returns for 2013 and 2014, but he successfully mitigated these financial concerns by demonstrating that he had regained control of his finances and filed his back taxes. Ultimately, the judge concluded that the applicant's financial issues did not raise doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness, leading to a decision in his favor.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	failed to file his Federal and state income tax returns for 2013 and 2014	For Applicant	Tax Filing Failure	Admitted	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly (g) arrangements made with the tax authority; in compliance	Claimed Financial Counseling Claimed Debt Paid in Full
1.b	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—

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

APPEARANCES

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 17-03249 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Chris Morin, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

05/30/2018 ______________

DECISION

______________

TUIDER, Robert, Administrative Judge:

On February 29, 2016, Applicant submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (SF-86). On December 20, 2017, after reviewing the application and information gathered during a background investigation, the Department of Defense (DOD) Consolidated Adjudications Facility, Fort Meade, Maryland, sent Applicant a statement of reasons (SOR), explaining it was unable to find that it was clearly consistent with the national interest to grant him eligibility for access to classified information.1 The SOR detailed the factual reasons for the action under the security guideline known as Guideline F for financial considerations. Applicant timely answered the SOR and requested a hearing. On March 22, 2018, the case was assigned to me. On May 11, 2018, the hearing was held as scheduled. After reviewing Applicant’s hearing transcript, evidence, and post-hearing evidence, I emailed the parties indicating that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Applicant did not object. Department Counsel had 10 days to consider the matter and provided written notice that Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant’s SOR listed two allegations under Guideline F for failing to file his Federal and state income tax returns for 2013 and 2014. Applicant submitted evidence that he suffered from debilitating depression after a series of significant personal tragedies after returning from a “bad deployment” in Iraq. Among the many challenges facing him, he discovered his former wife failed to file their tax joint returns while he was deployed. Applicant has since regained control of his personal and professional life, filed his back taxes, and is managing his finances in a responsible manner.

Applicant successfully held a security clearance for approximately 26 years that includes 20 years of honorable service in the U.S. Marine Corps. He has an excellent reputation for trustworthiness. 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. I also conclude that Applicant presented sufficient evidence to explain, extenuate, or mitigate the facts admitted by Applicant or proven by Department Counsel. In particular, I conclude that the financial considerations security concerns are resolved in whole or in part under the mitigating conditions AG ¶¶ 20(a), (b), and (g).

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 or vice versa. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, Applicant met his ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant his eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

Robert Tuider Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This case is adjudicated 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), which became effective on June 8, 2017.