CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 06-16663.a1 — CASE

ISCR Case 06-16663.a1denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 06-16663.a1

deniedSep 10, 2007· Hon. Michael Y. Ra'anan· appeal

Summary

An applicant, representing herself, was denied a trustworthiness designation due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The initial decision cited Disqualifying Conditions AG ¶ 20 and AG ¶ 14.

The applicant appealed this denial. However, the appeal was unsuccessful because the applicant did not assert that the judge made a harmful error in the initial decision. Additionally, the Board was unable to consider any new evidence presented during the appeal process.

Consequently, the security clearance was denied, upholding the original determination based on the established guidelines and the procedural limitations of the appeal.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant's appeal did not assert harmful error by the judge.
The Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 20raisedFinancial Considerations
AG ¶ 14raisedPersonal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“The Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 31, 2006
Answer filed—Applicant requested decision on written record.
Hearing heldMar 30, 2007Decision issued by Administrative Judge.
Decision dateSep 10, 2007Appeal affirmed.

Cite For

Limitations on Appeal Regarding New Evidence
Requirements for Asserting Harmful Error
Trustworthiness Concerns Under Guideline E and F

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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY When unredacted this document contains information EXEMPT FROM MANDATORY DISCLOSURE under the FOIA Exemption 6 applies KEYWORD: Guideline F; Guideline E DIGEST: The Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Adverse decision affirmed. CASENO: 06-16663.a1 DATE: 09/10/2007 DATE: September 10, 2007 In Re: ---------- Applicant for Trustworthiness Determination ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ADP Case No. 06-16663

APPEAL BOARD SUMMARY DISPOSITION

APPEARANCES

FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Pro Se The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) proposed to deny or revoke access to automated information systems in ADP-I/II/III sensitivity positions for Applicant. On August 31, 2006, DOHA issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision—trustworthiness concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested the case be decided on the written record. On March 30, 2007, after considering the record, Administrative Judge Thomas M. Crean denied Applicant’s request for a trustworthiness designation. Applicant timely 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, it contains a statement from the Applicant summarizing the evidence presented below and updating the status of her efforts to obtain a discharge in bankruptcy. The Board cannot consider this new evidence on appeal. See Directive ¶ E3.1.29. 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. See Directive ¶ E3.1.32. 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 trustworthiness designation 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