A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 09-03760.a1
Appeal BoardDecided Jul 16, 2010 · Administrative Judge Michael Y. Ra'anan · Appeal
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, represented by counsel, faced security clearance issues under Guideline F related to financial considerations. The DOHA Appeal Board remanded the adverse decision due to the absence of key government exhibits necessary for appellate review. The remand was ordered for record reconstruction before further processing of the appeal.
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- 2009-11-03
- Answer filed
- Hearing held
- 2010-05-18
- Decision date
- 2010-07-16
Cite for
- Remand Due to Absence of Key Government Exhibits
- Issues Regarding Judge's Consideration of Evidence
- Reconstruction of Record for Appellate Review
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 involved a denial of a security clearance based on financial considerations. The applicant argued that the judge failed to consider favorable evidence and mis-weighed the record. The Board remanded the case due to the absence of key government exhibits necessary for review.
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: The record does not contain government exhibits 1-7. Adverse decision remanded. CASENO: 09-03760.a1 DATE: 07/16/2010 DATE: July 16, 2010 In Re: ------
Applicant for Security Clearance ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 09-03760
Appearances
FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Barry W. Rorex, Esq. The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) declined to grant Applicant a security clearance. On November 3, 2009, DOHA 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 May 18, 2010, after the hearing, Administrative Judge Robert Robinson Gales denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance. Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. Applicant raised the following issues on appeal: whether the Judge failed to consider record evidence favorable to Applicant; whether the Judge mis-weighed the record; and whether the Judge erred in his conclusion that Applicant had not mitigated the security concerns in this case. Consistent with the following discussion, we remand the case. As a preliminary issue, we note that the record does not contain Government Exhibits 1-7, the documents submitted by Department Counsel and admitted at the hearing. Tr. at 13. Without a complete record we cannot perform appellate review. Accordingly, we remand the case to the Judge for the purpose of reconstructing the record in consultation with the parties. Upon completion of that task, the case file should be returned to the Board for processing of Applicant’s appeal in accordance with the Directive.
Order
The Judge’s adverse security clearance decision is REMANDED. Signed: Michael Y. Ra’anan Michael Y. Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairperson, Appeal Board Signed: William S. Fields William S. Fields Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: James E. Moody James E. Moody Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board