A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 19-01542.a1
Appeal BoardDecided Jun 1, 2020 · Administrative Judge Michael Y. Ra'anan · Appeal
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, representing himself, sought a security clearance under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) but was denied due to unresolved financial issues. The Appeal Board affirmed the denial, noting the applicant did not assert any harmful error by the original judge and presented no new evidence for consideration.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant's appeal brief did not assert harmful error by the Judge.
- The Appeal Board cannot consider new evidence not presented in the original hearing.
Conditions referenced
Disqualifying
- F1 Inability or unwillingness to satisfy debtsraised
Key rule quoted
“The Board does not review a case de novo.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- 2019-06-13
- Answer filed
- Hearing held
- 2020-02-06 Decision made on the written record.
- Decision date
- 2020-06-01
Cite for
- Affirmation of Denial Based on Lack of Harmful Error Assertion
- Limitations on New Evidence in Appeal
- Sustainability of Original Judge's Decision Without Harmful Error Claims
Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.
Appeal at a glance
The appeal was filed by the Applicant after the Administrative Judge denied his request for a security clearance based on financial considerations. The Applicant's appeal did not assert any harmful error by the Judge, leading the Board to affirm the decision.
Descriptive structured reading of this decided, public Appeal Board decision: what the case says, not a prediction or advice.
Full decision
Open original PDFThe complete official text, footnotes and signatures included, is in the original PDF.
Decision text, by section
Synopsis
KEYWORD: Guideline F DIGEST: Applicant’s appeal brief contains no assertion of harmful error on the part of the Judge. Rather, it contains documents that were already included in the record and proposals for prospective actions by the Applicant in part relying on documentation he himself has not received. The Appeal Board cannot consider new evidence. Directive ¶ E3.1.29. Adverse decision is affirmed. CASE NO: 19-01542.a1 DATE: 06/01/2020 DATE: June 1, 2020 ) In Re: ) ) ------------------------ ) ISCR Case No. 19-01542 ) ) Applicant for Security Clearance ) )
Appearances
FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Pro se The Department of Defense (DoD) declined to grant Applicant a security clearance. On June 13, 2019, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision—security concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a decision on the written record. On February 6, 2020 after considering the record, Administrative Judge LeRoy F. Foreman denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance. Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. Applicant’s appeal brief contains no assertion of harmful error on the part of the Judge. Rather, it contains documents that were already included in the record and proposals for prospective actions by the Applicant in part relying on documentation he himself has not received. The Appeal Board cannot consider new evidence. Directive ¶ E3.1.29.
The Board does not review a case de novo. The Appeal Board’s authority to review a case is limited to cases in which the appealing party has alleged the Judge committed harmful error. Applicant has not made an allegation of harmful error on the part of the Judge. Therefore, the decision of the Judge is sustainable.
Order
The Decision is AFFIRMED. Signed: Michael Ra’anan Michael Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairperson, Appeal Board Signed:: James E. Moody James E. Moody Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: James F. Duffy James F. Duffy Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board