A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 17-02677.a1
Appeal BoardDecided Aug 14, 2018 · Administrative Judge Michael Y. Ra'anan · Appeal
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, representing herself, sought a security clearance under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) but was denied due to unresolved financial issues. The appeal was denied as the applicant did not allege any error by the judge and submitted new evidence that could not be considered.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant did not raise any allegations of error by the Judge in the appeal.
- New evidence submitted post-dated the close of the record and was not considered by the Appeal Board.
Conditions referenced
Disqualifying
- AG ¶ 19 Financial Considerationsraised
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 issued
- 2017-09-06
- Answer filed
- Hearing held
- 2018-04-26
- Decision date
- 2018-08-14
Cite for
- Limitations on the Appeal Board's Review Authority
- Requirements for Alleging Harmful Error in Appeals
- Consideration of New Evidence in Appeals
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 Administrative Judge denied her request for a security clearance based on financial considerations. The Applicant's appeal did not raise any allegations of error, and the Board affirmed the denial of the security clearance.
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’s appeal brief raises no allegation of error on the part of the Judge. Rather, it contains a number of documents that post-date the close of the record or the Judge’s decision. Those documents constitute new evidence that the Appeal Board cannot consider. Adverse decision affirmed. CASENO: 17-02677.a1 DATE: 08/14/2018 DATE: August 14, 2018 In Re: ----------------------- Applicant for Security Clearance ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 17-02677
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 September 6, 2017, 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 April 26, 2018, after considering the record, Administrative Judge LeRoy F. Foreman denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance. Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. Applicant’s appeal brief raises no allegation of error on the part of the Judge. Rather, it contains a number of documents that post-date the close of the record or the Judge’s decision. Those documents constitute new evidence that the Appeal Board cannot consider. Directive ¶ E3.1.29. Applicant also mentions that she provided a document (an email) to the Judge about placing her home for sale on the real estate market. The email is part of the record of the proceeding (Applicant’s Exhibit (AX) G), and Judge made findings of fact about the information contained in that email. Applicant’s appeal brief raises no allegation of error on the part of the Judge. The Board does not review cases 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. Because Applicant has not made such an allegation of error, the decision of the Judge denying Applicant a security clearance is AFFIRMED. Signed: Michael Ra’anan Michael Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairperson, Appeal Board Signed: Charles C. Hale Charles C. Hale Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: James F. Duffy James F. Duffy Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board