A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 20-00440
Appeal BoardDecided Nov 4, 2021 · Administrative Judge Michael Y. Ra'anan · Appeal
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, representing himself, sought a security clearance but was denied based on concerns under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The appeal was denied as the applicant did not assert any harmful error by the judge, leading to the affirmation of the adverse decision.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant did not assert harmful error by the judge, which is necessary for the appeal to succeed.
Conditions referenced
Disqualifying
- J Criminal Conductraised
- E Personal Conductraised
Key rule quoted
“The Appeal Board does not review cases de novo.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- 2020-09-21
- Answer filed
- Hearing held
- 2021-07-06
- Decision date
- 2021-11-04
Cite for
- Affirmation of Adverse Decisions When No Harmful Error Is Asserted
- Limitations of the Appeal Board's Review Authority
- Reliance on the Original Judge's Findings in the Absence of 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 their request for a security clearance based on security concerns under Guideline J and Guideline E. The Appeal Board affirmed the decision, noting that the Applicant did not assert any harmful error in their appeal brief.
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
Appearances
_______________________________________________ ) In the matter of: )
)
)
--------------------------- )
ISCR Case No. 20-00440
)
) Applicant for Security Clearance ) _______________________________________) DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS APPEAL BOARD POST OFFICE BOX 3656 ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22203 (703) 696-4759 KEYWORD: Guideline J; Guideline E DIGEST: Applicant’s appeal brief makes no assertion of harmful error on the part of the Judge. The Appeal Board does not review cases de novo. The Board’s authority to review a case is limited to cases in which the appealing party has alleged the Judge committed harmful error. Because Applicant has not made such an allegation of error, the decision of the Judge denying Applicant a security clearance is sustainable. Adverse Decision is Affirmed. CASE NO: 20-00440.a1 DATE: 11/04/2021 Date: November 4, 2021 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 September 21, 2020, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for
that decision—security concerns raised under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a hearing. On July 6, 2021, after the hearing, Administrative Judge Richard A. Cefola denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance. Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. Applicant’s appeal brief makes no assertion of harmful error on the part of the Judge. The Appeal Board does not review cases de novo. The Board’s authority to review a case is limited to cases in which the appealing party has alleged the Judge committed harmful error. Because Applicant has not made such an allegation of error, the decision of the Judge denying Applicant a security clearance 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