CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 20-03154 — CASE

ISCR Case 20-03154denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 20-03154

deniedNov 4, 2021· Hon. Michael Y. Ra'anan· appeal

Summary

An applicant, representing herself, was denied a trustworthiness designation under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The denial was based on Disqualifying Condition F.1.

The applicant appealed the decision, claiming the Judge made a harmless error regarding her age. The Appeal Board reviewed the case and found no other harmful errors that would warrant overturning the initial denial. The Board also noted that the appeal did not introduce any new evidence for consideration.

Ultimately, the Appeal Board affirmed the original decision, and the applicant's trustworthiness designation was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant did not demonstrate harmful error by the Judge.
The appeal did not present new evidence for consideration.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

F.1raisedFinancial Considerations

Key Rule Quoted

“The Appeal Board does not review cases de novo.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 21, 2020
Answer filed—
Hearing heldAug 19, 2021Decision on the written record.
Decision dateNov 4, 2021

Cite For

Affirmation of Denial Based on Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
Limitations on the Appeal Board's Review Authority
Harmless Error Doctrine 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.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

APPEAL

SYNOPSIS

_______________________________________________ ) In the matter of: )

)

---------------------------- )

ADP Case No. 20-03154

)

) Applicant for Public Trust Position ) _______________________________________)

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: The Board does not review cases 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. Because Applicant has not alleged any harmful error, the decision of the Judge denying Applicant a trustworthiness designation is sustainable. Adverse Decision is Affirmed. CASE NO: 20-03154.a1 DATE: 11/04/2021 Date: November 4, 2021

APPEAL BOARD DECISION

APPEARANCES

FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Pro se The Department of Defense (DoD) declined to grant Applicant a trustworthiness designation. On December 21, 2020, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant

of the basis for that decision—trustworthiness concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) of DoD Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a decision on the written record. On August 19, 2021, after considering the record, Administrative Judge LeRoy F. Foreman denied Applicant’s request for a trustworthiness designation. Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. Applicant notes the Judge erred in finding that she was a year older than her actual age. This was a harmless error because it did not likely have an impact on the outcome of the case. See, e.g., ISCR Case No. 19-01220 at 3 (App. Bd. Jun. 1, 2020). Beside that error, Applicant’s appeal brief makes no other assertion of harmful error on the part of the Judge. It does contain documents and assertions that were not previously presented to the Judge for consideration. The Appeal Board is prohibited from considering new evidence on appeal. Directive ¶ E3.1.29. The Board does not review cases 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. Because Applicant has not alleged any harmful error, the decision of the Judge denying Applicant a trustworthiness designation 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