A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 20-02429
Appeal BoardDecided Nov 29, 2021 · Administrative Judge Michael Y. Ra'anan · Appeal
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, representing himself, sought a security clearance under Guideline F concerning financial considerations. The Department of Defense denied the application due to unresolved financial issues, and the Appeal Board affirmed the denial, noting the applicant did not assert any harmful error by the initial judge and presented new evidence not considered in the original decision.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant did not assert harmful error by the Judge in the appeal.
- The Appeal Board is prohibited from considering new evidence on appeal.
Conditions referenced
Disqualifying
- F.1 Inability to satisfy debtsraised
Key rule quoted
“The Appeal Board does not review cases de novo.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- 2021-01-06
- Answer filed
- Hearing held
- Applicant requested a decision on the written record.
- Decision date
- 2021-11-29 Appeal affirmed.
Cite for
- Affirmation of Denial Based on Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
- Limitations on the Appeal Board's Review Authority
- Pro Se Representation in Security Clearance Cases
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 financial considerations. The Applicant's appeal did not assert any harmful error, leading the Board to affirm the original 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
_______________________________________________ ) In the matter of: )
)
)
-------------------------- )
ISCR Case No. 20-02429
)
) 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 F DIGEST: Applicant’s appeal brief makes no assertion of harmful error on the part of the Judge. It does contain documents that were not presented to the Judge for consideration. The Appeal Board is prohibited from considering new evidence on appeal. Directive E3.1.29. Adverse Decision is Affirmed. CASE NO: 20-02429.a1 DATE: 11/29/2021 Date: November 29, 2021
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 January 6, 2021, 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 September 14, 2021, after considering the record, Administrative Judge Gregg A. Cervi 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. It does contain documents that were not presented to the Judge for consideration. The Appeal Board is prohibited from considering new evidence on appeal. Directive E3.1.29. 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