A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 07-12181.a1
Appeal BoardDecided Jul 8, 2008 · Administrative Judge Michael Y. Ra'anan · Appeal
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, representing himself, sought a security clearance but was denied based on financial considerations under Guideline F and personal conduct under Guideline E. The appeal board affirmed the denial, noting that the applicant did not assert any harmful error in the judge's decision, and the favorable findings regarding Guideline E were not contested.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant's financial considerations under Guideline F were found to be a security concern.
- The applicant did not assert harmful error in the judge's decision during the appeal.
Conditions referenced
Disqualifying
- AG ¶ 20 Financial Considerationsraised
Mitigating
- AG ¶ 21 Personal Conductapplied
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- 2007-10-28
- Answer filed
- Hearing held
- 2008-04-15
- Decision date
- 2008-07-08
Cite for
- Affirmation of Denial Based on Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
- Lack of Harmful Error Assertion in Appeal Process
- Favorable Findings Under Guideline E Not Contested on Appeal
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 involved an applicant seeking a security clearance after being denied by the Administrative Judge due to concerns under Guideline F and Guideline E. The Board affirmed the denial as the applicant did not assert any harmful error in the appeal.
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
KEYWORD: Guideline F; Guideline E DIGEST: The Board does not review a case de novo. Adverse decision affirmed. CASENO: 07-12181.a1 DATE: 07/08/2008 DATE: July 8, 2008 In Re: --------- Applicant for Security Clearance ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 07-12181
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 October 28, 2007, DOHA issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision—security concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as The Judge found in favor of Applicant with respect to Guideline E and SOR paragraph 1.g. Those favorable findings are not at issue on appeal. Applicant asks only that his “request for a security clearance be reviewed again.” amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a hearing. On April 15, 2008, after the hearing, Administrative Judge Erin C. Hogan denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance. Applicant appealed pursuant to the Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.1 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; Michael Y. Ra’anan Michael Y. Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairman, Appeal Board Signed: Michael D. Hipple Michael D. Hipple Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: William S. Fields William S. Fields Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board