CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 14-02592.a1 — CASE

ISCR Case 14-02592.a1denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 14-02592.a1

deniedJul 24, 2015· Hon. Michael Y. Ra'anan· appeal

Summary

An applicant representing herself was denied eligibility for a public trust position due to trustworthiness concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Administrative Judge initially denied the application, citing Disqualifying Condition AG ¶ 20.

The applicant appealed this decision, but her appeal did not assert any harmful error by the Administrative Judge. The Appeal Board's review authority is strictly limited to cases where an allegation of harmful error has been made.

Consequently, the Appeal Board affirmed the denial of the applicant's eligibility. The Board's decision was based solely on the existing record, as no new evidence could be introduced during the appeal process without an assertion of harmful error.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant did not assert any harmful error by the Administrative Judge in her appeal.
The Appeal Board's authority is limited to cases with an allegation of harmful error.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 20raisedFinancial 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 issuedAug 11, 2014
Answer filed—
Hearing heldMay 29, 2015Decision made by Administrative Judge Wilford H. Ross.
Decision dateJul 24, 2015Appeal Board affirmed the denial.

Cite For

Limitations of the Appeal Board's Review Authority
Requirements for Asserting Harmful Error on Appeal
Affirmation of Denial Based on Existing Record Without New Evidence

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.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

APPEAL

SYNOPSIS

KEYWORD: Guideline F DIGEST: The Appeal Board’s authority is limited to cases with an allegation of harmful error. Adverse decision affirmed CASENO: 14-02592.a1 DATE: 07/24/2015 DATE: July 24, 2015 In Re: ------ Applicant for Public Trust Position ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ADP Case No. 14-02592

APPEAL BOARD SUMMARY DISPOSITION

APPEARANCES

FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Pro se The Department of Defense (DoD) declined to grant Applicant eligibility for a public trust position. On August 11, 2014, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision—trustworthiness concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a decision on the written record. On May 29, 2015, after considering the record, Administrative Judge Wilford H. Ross denied Applicant eligibility for a public trust position. 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, her submission is a narrative statement that she is continuing to work hard to pay off her debts. The Board cannot consider any new evidence on appeal. See Directive ¶ E3.1.29. The Board does not review a case de novo. 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. Applicant has not made an allegation of harmful error on the part of the Judge. Therefore, the decision of the Judge is AFFIRMED. Signed: Michael Ra’anan Michael Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairperson, Appeal Board Signed: James E. Moody James E. Moody Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: William S. Fields William S. Fields Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board