1 
 
                                                              
                        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 
 
 
 
______________ 
 
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, 
 
2 
 
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