A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 11-14775.a1
Appeal BoardDecided Feb 14, 2014 · 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. The appeal was affirmed as the applicant did not assert any harmful error by the judge in the original decision.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant did not assert harmful error by the judge, leading to the affirmation of the adverse decision.
Conditions referenced
Disqualifying
- F.1 Financial Considerationsraised
Key rule quoted
“Our authority to review cases is limited to those in which the appealing party has raised an issue of harmful error.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- 2013-05-08
- Answer filed
- Hearing held
- 2013-12-09
- Decision date
- 2014-02-14
Cite for
- Affirmation of Adverse Decision Due to Lack of Harmful Error Assertion
- Limitations on Appeal Authority Regarding Harmful Error
- Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
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 denial of a security clearance based on financial considerations under Guideline F. The Board affirmed the Administrative Judge's decision as the Applicant did not assert any harmful error. The appeal was therefore denied.
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 DIGEST: Applicant has not asserted harmful error by the Judge. Adverse decision affirmed. CASENO: 11-14775.a1 DATE: 02/14/2014 DATE: February 14, 2014 In Re: -----------
Applicant for Security Clearance ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 11-14775
Appearances
FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Pro se The Department of Defense (DoD) declined to grant Applicant a security clearance. On May 8, 2013, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision–security concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a hearing. On December 9, 2013, after the hearing, Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) Administrative Judge John Grattan Metz, Jr., denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance. Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. Applicant’s appeal brief contains no assertion of harmful error by the Judge. Our authority to review cases is limited to those in which the appealing party has raised an issue of harmful error. Directive ¶ E3.1.32. See also ISCR Case No. 10-02819 (App. Bd. Feb. 4, 2013). Accordingly, the decision of the Judge is AFFIRMED. Signed: Michael Y. Ra’anan Michael Y. Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairperson, Appeal Board Signed: Jeffrey D, Billett Jeffrey D. Billett Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: James E. Moody James E. Moody Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board