Skip to content
CASE
← Back to results

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.

ISCR Case No. 07-04843.a1

Appeal Board

Decided Mar 30, 2009 · 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 Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), and J (Criminal Conduct). The denial was affirmed on appeal as the applicant introduced new evidence that could not be considered, and did not assert any harmful error by the Administrative Judge.

Why the applicant was denied

  • The applicant's appeal included new evidence that was not considered by the Board.
  • The applicant did not allege any harmful error by the Administrative Judge.

Conditions referenced

Disqualifying

  • AG ¶ 20 Financial Considerationsraised
  • AG ¶ 15 Personal Conductraised
  • AG ¶ 31 Criminal Conductraised

Key rule quoted

“The Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal.”

Procedural posture

SOR issued
2008-07-16
Answer filed
Hearing held
2009-01-28
Decision date
2009-03-30

Cite for

  • Limitations on Introducing New Evidence During Appeal
  • Affirmation of Denial Based on Lack of Harmful Error Assertion
  • Application of Multiple Guidelines in Security Clearance Decisions

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 security concerns under multiple guidelines. The Board affirmed the decision, noting that the Applicant did not assert any harmful error and instead presented new evidence that was not permissible for consideration on appeal.

Descriptive structured reading of this decided, public Appeal Board decision: what the case says, not a prediction or advice.

Full decision

Open original PDF

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

Decision text, by section

Synopsis

KEYWORD: Guideline F; Guideline E; Guideline J DIGEST: Applicant’s appeal brief relies on new evidence. The Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Adverse decision affirmed. CASENO: 07-04843.a1 DATE: 03/30/2009 DATE: March 30, 2009 In Re: ---- Applicant for Security Clearance ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 07-04843

Appearances

FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Pro Se The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) declined to grant Applicant a security clearance. On July 16, 2008, DOHA issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision—security concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a hearing. On January 28, 2009, after the hearing, Administrative Judge Roger C. Wesley denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance. Applicant appealed pursuant to the 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 new evidence, in the form of an statement in which Applicant asserts that he has received a substantial inheritance after the close of the record which he anticipates will permit him to resolve his financial problems. The Board cannot consider Applicant’s new evidence on appeal. See Directive ¶ E3.1.29. 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. It does not review cases de novo. Applicant has not made an allegation of harmful error. Therefore, the decision of the Judge denying Applicant a security clearance is AFFIRMED. Signed: Michael Y. Ra’anan Michael Y. Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairman, Appeal Board Signed: Jean E. Smallin Jean E. Smallin Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: James E. Moody James E. Moody Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board