WPC$ Yo3 Gg \\F#F Q@mQ!*D' !oIMaPc3KQM1>On:PQ7U<[J _ux U!`A})qsڀ.4j-|VB/RˊOHz4qB9XiF{} '7vg#ILZ, VuFb$ۖ m1x5)I:94<9FV2-Ru' J})8r!X%>kF` * &v̫ AQ[p [C^ DIp9>T %ORN` Mz3 MzY9%n^.JAFF< Z#UN % 0: ^ C wO 4S g v mx Z Z EC NE 0UG 0 0 0D 0 0 0o 0 0 0d 0) 0 0 0Z 0 0 0= 0 0_ 0! 0 0 0I 0 0 0# 0 0<?? 0{{ 0D$Nhjj B#Hewlett-Packard HP LaserJet P3010 Series0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,pJ;EJ3|xU8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE*+ (_2623  ..*G+G (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ../%` ` hp x /   *8+8 (_24  ," hp x ,23  ..," hp x ,  *5+5 (_23 ` ) hp x )23  ..) hp x ) ` *2+2 (_22  &hhp x &23  ..&hhp x &  */+/ (_21  #p x #23  ..#p x #  *,+, (_20 h  p x 23  .. p x h *)+) (_19  pp x 23  ..pp x   *&+& (_18   x 23  .. x   *AA (_17  5+ ` hp x 523  Ԁ5+ ` hp x 5  *GG (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ/%` ` hp x /   *88 (_15  ," hp x ,23  Ԁ," hp x ,  *55 (_14 ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ) hp x ) ` *22 (_13  &hhp x &23  Ԁ&hhp x &  *// (_12  #p x #23  Ԁ#p x #  *,, (_11 h  p x 23  Ԁ p x h *)) (_10  pp x 23  Ԁpp x   (&& &_9   x 23  Ԁ x   (AA &_8  5+ ` hp x 523  5+ ` hp x 5  (GG &_7   /%` ` hp x /23  /%` ` hp x /   (88 &_6  ," hp x ,23  ," hp x ,  (55 &_5 ` ) hp x )23  ) hp x ) ` (22 &_4  &hhp x &23  &hhp x &  (// &_3  #p x #23  #p x #  (,, &_2 h  p x 23   p x h ()) &_1  pp x 23  pp x   &&& $_   x 23   x   <:Default Para(Y(2$ !USUS.,  XX      0  (#$  0    -$USUS.,XX      1    _ [Applicant]hasnotfiledaFederaltaxreturnforincometaxeswiththeInternalRevenueService(IRS)since  sometimebetween1996and2000.Shehasnotfiledorpaidincometaxesduringthelastsevenyears(discrepant).Her t husband...decidedtonothaveFederaltaxeswithheldfromhispaycheck.Shefelloutofpayingtaxesandhasnotfiled 8 orpaidincometaxessince.GovernmentExhibit5,InterviewSummary,atp.2.  -$USUS.,XX      2    _EvenatthehearingApplicantwasnotclearastothefullextentofhertaxdelinquencies. [Q]:Whenyouwere  interviewed,youindicatedthatyouhadntfiledsincesometimebetween...1996and2000.[A]:No,Idontknowif t Isaiditlikethat.I!whatIsaidwasIhadnotfiled,andIwasntreallysure!IcantrememberverbatimwhatIsaid,but 8 IdoknowthatwhenIhadmyinterview...Ihadnotfiledinyears...Justliketoday...Icouldnttellhimexactlywhat L years.Tr.at63. d !USUS.,  _KEYWORD:GuidelineF  DIGEST:TheJudgedoesnotaddresstheextenttowhichApplicantsfinancialproblemsdonot  explainherfailuretohavefiledherreturnsatall.Difficultyinmeetingfinancialobligationsdo t noprovideaplausibleexcusetofailingtomeetanimportantlegalrequirement,suchasfiling ` returnswhendue.Indeed,theDirectivecitesfailuretofilereturnsasadisqualifyingconditionin L  andofitself,irrespectiveofwhethertheunderlyingtaxeshaveactuallybeenpaid.Favorable 8  decisionreversed. $ t _CASENO_:1503019.a1  L  DATE:07/05/2017 $  __________________________   `     h     DATE:July5,2017   .؉7r(#(#.AY) xdE[gA \ InRe: W      k ApplicantforSecurityClearance C AY) xdEgA  ) \ ) H ) 4 )  p )  \ ) H ) 4  )  !   " pX p _ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1503019  p%   \& .؉7r. \XXp &    APPEALBOARDDECISION ' APPEARANCES D!*  &%XX FORGOVERNMENT  #l, John_Bayard_Ԁ_Glendon_,Esq.,DeputyChiefDepartmentCounsel #D-  FORAPPLICANT  % /  Prose #XX%&# |&!0     TheDepartmentofDefense(DoD)declinedtograntApplicantasecurityclearance.On *)z$3 November12,2015,DoDissuedastatementofreasons(_SOR_)advisingApplicantofthebasisfor *f%4 thatdecision!securityconcernsraisedunderGuidelineF(FinancialConsiderations)ofDepartment +R&5 ofDefenseDirective5220.6(Jan.2,1992,asamended)(Directive).Applicantrequestedahearing. +>'6 OnMarch9,2017,afterthehearing,DefenseOfficeofHearingsandAppeals(DOHA) ,*(7 AdministrativeJudgeClaude_Heiny_ԀgrantedApplicantsrequestforasecurityclearance. -)8 DepartmentCounselappealedpursuanttoDirectiveE3.1.28andE3.1.30.    DepartmentCounselraisedthefollowingissuesonappeal:whethertheJudgesfavorable  decisionrancontrarytotheweightoftherecordevidenceandwhethertheJudgeswholeperson t analysiswaserroneous.Consistentwiththefollowing,wereverse. ` __  TheJudgesFindingsofFact  8    TheJudgemadethefollowingfindingspertinenttotheissuesraisedonappeal:Applicant  ` hasbeenemployedbyaDefensecontractorsincemid2012.Herannualsalaryisabout$80,000.  L  Applicantandherhusbandseparatedin2003butarestillmarried.In2004shewasfiredfromajob  8  duetoinappropriateconductwithanotheremployee.Afterthatsheexperiencedperiodsof $  unemploymentandattimeshelddowntwojobstoprovideforherfamily.     Inher2012securityclearanceapplication(_SCA_)Applicantstatedthatshehadnotfiled   Federalincometaxreturns.Inabackgroundinterview,sheadmittedthatshehadnotfiledthose   returnsfortaxyears2006through2011.Afterherhusbandleftin2003,shedidnothavesufficient p fundswithheldfromherpay.Thiswasinordertoaffordlivingexpenses.Shehiredatax \ professionaltoassistinfilingherreturns,althoughhefailedtodosoandisnolongerinbusiness. H Shediscoveredthatsomeonehadapparentlystolenheridentityandreceivedarefundcheck.She 4 hiredanotherfirmthatadvertisesontelevisionbutgotlittleresults.  p   In2012shehiredataxcompanythatfiledherreturnsfor2006through2011.Shemadean H agreementwiththeIRStopay$800amonthtowardsatisfyingherdebt.Sheenteredintoanother 4 installmentagreementin2016topay$500amonth.Thiswillresolve$35,000inpastduetaxesthat   includeobligationsfor2012through2014.Inaddition,Applicantowesabout$5,000resultingfrom   repossessionofavehicle.Shehasofferedtosettlethisdebt,althoughitisbeyondthestatuteof  limitations.Inaddition,shepaidoffan$8,200lienfortaxesowedin2002and2003.    Applicanthasbeenavictimoffinancialfraud,resultinginherhavingtoopenandclosefive l checkingaccounts.ThemostrecentincidentoccurredinJanuary2016,whensomeonewrotea X  checkfor$300onheraccount.Shehasreceivedfinancialcounselingandlivesafrugallife. D!   TheJudgesAnalysis  #l!   ThoughacknowledgingApplicantsdutytofileandpaytaxes,theJudgecitedtoevidence $D # thatApplicantsconductwasdonetoprovideforherchildren.Hecitedtoevidenceofherefforts %0!$ toresolvehertaxproblems,suchasherhavingresolvedataxlienandher2016paymentplanwith &"% theIRS.Inthewholepersonanalysis,theJudgenotedthatApplicantistryingtoresolvethedebt '#& resultingfromthevehiclerepossession.Hestatedthatsheisnotlivingbeyondhermeansandwants (#' toaddressherfinancialproblems. )$(   Discussion  h+&*   Thereisastrongpresumptionagainstthegrantormaintenanceofasecurityclearance.See @-(, _Dorfmont_Ԁv.Brown,913F.2d1399,1401(9thCir.1990),cert.denied,499U.S.905(1991).The  applicantisresponsibleforpresentingevidencetorebut,explain,extenuate,ormitigateadmittedor  provenfacts.Theapplicanthastheburdenofpersuasionastoobtainingafavorabledecision.  DirectiveE3.1.15.Thestandardapplicableinsecurityclearancedecisions isthataclearancemay t begrantedonlywhenclearlyconsistentwiththeinterestsofthenationalsecurity.Department ` oftheNavyv.Egan,484U.S.518,528(1988). Anydoubtconcerningpersonnelbeingconsidered L  foraccesstoclassifiedinformationwillberesolvedinfavorofthenationalsecurity.Directive, 8  Enclosure22(b). $ t   IndecidingwhethertheJudge'srulingsorconclusionsareerroneous,wewillreviewthe  L  decisiontodeterminewhether:itdoesnotexaminerelevantevidence;itfailstoarticulatea  8  satisfactoryexplanationforitsconclusions,includingarationalconnectionbetweenthefactsfound $  andthechoicemade;itdoesnotconsiderrelevantfactors;itreflectsaclearerrorofjudgment;itfails   toconsideranimportantaspectofthecase;itoffersanexplanationforthedecisionthatrunscontrary   totherecordevidence;oritissoimplausiblethatitcannotbeascribedtoameredifferenceof   opinion.See_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1402563at34(App.Bd.Aug.28,2015).     DepartmentCounselarguesthattheJudgesfavorableconclusionsarenotsupportedbya \ reasonableinterpretationoftheevidence.HestatesthattheJudgedidnotexamineApplicants H securitysignificantconductasacumulativewhole,therebyimpairinghisfavorableconclusions 4 aboutherjudgmentandreliability.  p   AsDepartmentCounselargues,theapplicationofMitigatingConditionsdoesnotturnon H findingsimplythatoneormoreapplytothefactsofacase.TheDirectiverequiresaJudgeto 4 considertheentirerecordinevaluatingtheextenttowhichanapplicanthasmethisorherburden   ofpersuasion.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1400321at23(App.Bd.Jun.5,2015).Evaluatingthe   totalityoftheevidenceinGuidelineFcases,eventhoseinwhichtheapplicanthasactuallypaidhis  orherdebts,requiresconsiderationofthecircumstancesunderlyingthedebtsforwhattheymay  revealabouttheapplicantsjudgmentandreliability.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1402394at34  (App.Bd.Aug.17,2015).Apersonwhofailsrepeatedlytofulfillhisorherlegalobligationsdoes l notdemonstratethehighdegreeofgoodjudgmentandreliabilityrequiredofthosegrantedaccess X  toclassifiedinformation.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCase1406808at2(App.Bd.Nov.23,2016). D!   WenotetheJudgesfindingsaboutApplicantspaymentplanwiththeIRS.Wealsonote #l! hisfindingsaboutApplicantsfinancialdifficulties,whichhadaneffectonhertaxproblems.These $X" weremattersthattheJudgewasrequiredtoconsider,alongwithalltheotherevidenceintherecord. $D # However,wearepersuadedbyDepartmentCounselsargumentthattheDecisiondoesnotdevote %0!$ reasonableattentiontoevidencethatcontravenesitsfavorableconclusion.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo. &"% 1502903at3(App.Bd.Mar.9,2017)(AJudgeisnotrequiredtodiscusseachandeverypieceof '#& recordevidenceinmakingadecision,buttheJudgecannotignore,disregard,orfailtodiscuss (#' significantrecordevidencethatareasonablepersoncouldexpecttobetakenintoaccountinreaching )$( afairandreasoneddecision).Forexample,DepartmentCounselcitestoApplicantsclearance |*%)  interview,inwhichshestatedthatshehadfailedtofiletaxreturnsforafewyearspriorto2000, h+&* whichpredatedherjoblossandmaritalseparation.1 /#  1      ׀Thisevidenceisnotconsistentwiththe   impressionthatunfortunateeventsintheearly2000sledtodebtproblemsthatrequiredApplicant  toprioritizeherspendinginordertomeettheneedsofherchildren,asshepresenteditatthehearing.  Moresignificantly,theJudgedoesnotaddresstheextenttowhichApplicantsfinancialproblems t donotexplainherfailuretohavefiledherreturnsatall.Whiledifficultyinmeetingfinancial ` obligationsmayforceanapplicanttochoosetheorderinwhichheorsheaddressesunpaiddebts, L  theydonotprovideaplausibleexcusetofailingtomeetanimportantlegalrequirement,suchas 8  filingreturnswhendue.Indeed,theDirectivecitesfailuretofilereturnsasadisqualifyingcondition $ t inandofitself,irrespectiveofwhethertheunderlyingtaxeshaveactuallybeenpaid,asthrough  ` withholding,etc.TheJudgesfailuretoaddressthiscircumstancesignificantlyimpairshisfavorable  L  analysis.Indeed,whendiscussingthisfailure,theJudgemerelycitesitasaresultofApplicants  8  financialproblemswithoutgivingdueconsiderationtothequestionofwhethersuchproblems $  actuallyexplainorextenuatethefailure.     AsDepartmentCounselnotes,theJudgemitigatedApplicantsconcernsthroughapplication   ofMitigatingCondition20(d).However,theJudgestreatmentofthiscondition,asitappliesto   Applicantstaxdelinquencies,is_conclusory_.HestatesthatApplicanthadmadeagoodfaitheffort p toresolvethetaxdebtbutdoesnotaddressthatApplicanthadbeenunabletomeetthetermsofan \ earlierpaymentplan,whichsheterminatedafteronlytwomonthsin2012duetodifficultyin H meetingthepayments.ItisnotclearwhytheJudgeconcludesthatApplicantwillbeabletomeet 4 thetermsofhercurrentplan,especiallyinlightofevidencethatApplicantenteredintoitafterthe  p hearingandinlightofapaucityofevidencethatshehasactuallymadepayments.Wehavestated  \ inthepastthatpromisestoresolvedebtsinthefuturearenotasubstituteforanactualtrackrecord H ofpaymentorresolution.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.1404565at2(App.Bd.Sep.18,2015).Given 4 thefactsofthiscase,theDecisiondoesnotexplainhowitisthatApplicantslatestpaymentplan   constitutesanythingmorethansuchapromiseoffutureaction.     Tosummarize,wenotetheJudgesfindingsandrecordevidencethatApplicanthasarather  extensivehistoryoffailingtofileand/orpayincometaxreturns.Herfailuresgobackpossiblyas  faras1996andareasrecentas2014.3 /#  2      ׀Therecorddoesnotshowthatherfailurestohavedoneso l wereduetounfortunatecircumstancesoutsidehercontrol.Rather,herfinancialproblemswere X  caused,insignificantpart,byherownactions,i.e.,herhavingbeenfiredfromajobdueto D! misconduct.Inanyevent,asstatedabove,financialproblemsdonotexplainherfailuretohavefiled 0"  herreturnsformanyyears,irrespectiveofherinabilitytopayhertaxes.Applicantenteredintoa #l! paymentplanwiththeIRSin2012thatshecouldnotcontinueafteronlyacoupleofmonthsof $X" payment.Tr.at65.Herlatestplancameaftershereceivedthe_SOR_Ԁandindeedafterthehearing  itself,withtheresultthatthereisnoevidenceofcomplianceintherecord.See,e.g.,_ISCR_ԀCaseNo.  1401243at3(App.Bd.Jun.18,2015)(Timingofdebtpaymentsisrelevantinevaluatingan  applicantscaseformitigation).TheJudgedidnotexplainhowthesefactsestablish goodfaith t underanyreasonableinterpretationoftheDirective.Neitherdothesefactssupportawholeperson ` assessmentofgoodjudgmentonApplicantspartsufficienttoovercometheconcernsraisedbyher L  manyyearsofdelinquenttaxfilings. 8    Afterconsideringtherecordasawhole,weconcludethattheJudgesfavorableanalysis  ` failedtoconsideranimportantaspectofthecase.Wealsoconcludethattheevidence,viewedas  L  awhole,isnotsufficienttomeetApplicantsburdenofpersuasionunderthestandardsetforthin  8  Egan,supra.Tothecontrary,theJudgesdecisionrunscontrarytotheweightoftherecord $  evidence,asDepartmentCounselargues,andisnotsustainable.   @( Order      TheDecisionis REVERSED . p    `     h   Signed:JamesE.Moody $t    `     h   JamesE.Moody `    `     h   AdministrativeJudge L    `     h   Member,AppealBoard 8    `     h   Signed:WilliamS.Fields     `     h   WilliamS.Fields     `     h   AdministrativeJudge p    `     h   Member,AppealBoard \     `     h   Signed:JamesF.Duffy  $\"    `     h   JamesF.Duffy $H #    `     h   AdministrativeJudge %4!$    `     h   Member,Appeal_Board___