CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 08-11526.a1 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 08-11526.a1

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

Case Profile
Decision Date2/15/2011
Statusunknown
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionsSee the hearing decision (Case 08-11526.h2) →See the hearing decision (Case 08-11526.h1) →
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Jeffrey D. Billett, Michael Y. Ra'anan, Jean E. Smallin
Government Counsel: James F. Duffy
Case Summary
The applicant in this case sought a security clearance but was denied by the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) issued on June 15, 2009, outlined the basis for the denial, prompting the applicant to request a hearing. Following the hearing on April 30, 2010, Administrative Judge Rita C. O’Brien upheld the denial, leading the applicant to appeal the decision.
During the appeal, the applicant contended that procedural due process may have been compromised, specifically regarding the opportunity to submit additional evidence that was not considered by the Judge. The applicant claimed to have made multiple attempts to fax documentation to Department Counsel but faced technical difficulties and did not receive a timely response from DOHA staff. Department Counsel argued that the applicant had a responsibility to ensure timely submission of documents and that the presumption of good faith in administrative proceedings should apply.
The Appeal Board ruled to remand the case, stating that it could not make factual findings but recognized the potential procedural issues raised by the applicant. The Board directed the Judge to reopen the record, allowing both parties to address the procedural concerns and ensuring that the applicant's rights to due process were upheld.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Unknown Outcome
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-11526.a1

unknownFeb 15, 2011· Hon. Jeffrey D. Billett· hearing

Summary

This case involves an applicant, representing himself, whose security clearance was challenged under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The core issue revolved around procedural due process, specifically concerning the submission of evidence during the clearance process.

The Board determined that the applicant's procedural due process rights were not adequately addressed. Consequently, the case was remanded for further processing to ensure proper procedural fairness in the administrative proceedings.

No final security clearance outcome has been reached at this stage, as the case has been sent back for re-evaluation of the evidence submission process.

Key Rule Quoted

“The Board does not have the authority to make factual findings.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 15, 2009
Answer filed—
Hearing heldApr 8, 2010Applicant represented himself.
Decision dateFeb 15, 2011Board remanded the case.

Cite For

Procedural Due Process Concerns in Security Clearance Cases
Importance of Allowing Evidence Submission in Administrative Hearings
Remand for Further Processing Due to Potential Procedural Impairments

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.