CASEClearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 07-06200.a1 — CASE

ISCR Case 07-06200.a1denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 07-06200.a1

Apr 11, 2008· Hon. Jeffrey D. Billett· appeal

Summary

An applicant, representing themselves, was denied a security clearance under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The denial stemmed from the applicant's failure to allege any harmful error by the Administrative Judge during the appeal process.

The appeal board's authority is specifically limited to reviewing cases where harmful error is asserted. Since no such error was alleged by the applicant, the board affirmed the Administrative Judge's decision.

Consequently, the security clearance was denied, as the appeal process found no basis to overturn the initial determination under Guideline F.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG FraisedFinancial Considerations

Key Rule Quoted

“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.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 10, 2007
Answer filed—
Hearing heldNov 28, 2007
Decision dateApr 11, 2008

Cite For

Affirmation of Denial Due to Lack of Harmful Error Allegations
Limitations of Appeal Board 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· Summary disposition

Affirmed

The appeal was filed by the Applicant seeking to overturn the denial of a security clearance based on financial considerations under Guideline F. The Board affirmed the Administrative Judge's decision as the Applicant's appeal brief did not allege any harmful error. The appeal was therefore denied.

Appealed bythe applicant

Applicant representationPro se (self-represented)

Judge belowJuan J. Rivera — denied the clearance

Decided ona hearing

Guidelines belowGuideline F

What the Board reviewed

No specific harmful error alleged — raised by the applicantRejected
Applicant's appeal brief does not allege harmful error by the Judge.

Why the Board ruled this way

The Board affirmed the decision because the Applicant did not allege any harmful error by the Administrative Judge, which is necessary for the Board to review the case.

Appeal Board panel

Jeffrey D. Billett
Jean E. Smallin
William S. Fields

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

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

KEYWORD: Guideline F DIGEST: Applicant’s appeal brief does not allege harmful error by the Judge. Adverse decision affirmed. CASENO: 07-06200.a1 DATE: 04/11/2008 DATE: April 11, 2008 In Re: -------- Applicant for Security Clearance ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 07-06200

APPEAL BOARD SUMMARY DISPOSITION

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 10, 2007, DOHA issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision—security concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) of Applicant’s brief only states: “I [Applicant] am appealing the Administrative Judge’s decision.” Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a hearing. On November 28, 2007, after the hearing, Administrative Judge Juan J. Rivera 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. 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: Jeffrey D. Billett Jeffrey D. Billett Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: Jean E. Smallin Jean E. Smallin Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: William S. Fields William S. Fields Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board