CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 09-07254.a1 — CASE

ISCR Case 09-07254.a1denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-07254.a1

deniedOct 4, 2011· Hon. Michael Y. Ra'anan· appeal

Summary

This case involves an applicant who sought a trustworthiness designation under Guideline F, Financial Considerations, but was ultimately denied. The applicant represented herself throughout the process.

The denial stemmed from two primary issues. First, the applicant did not assert any harmful error on the part of the Administrative Judge in the initial decision. Second, the applicant submitted new evidence during the appeal process, which the Appeal Board was unable to consider.

Consequently, the Appeal Board upheld the Administrative Judge's original decision to deny the applicant's trustworthiness designation. The disqualifying condition raised was AG ¶ 20.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant did not assert harmful error on the part of the Judge.
The Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 20raisedFinancial Considerations

Key Rule Quoted

“The Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 4, 2010
Answer filed—Applicant requested decision on written record.
Hearing heldJul 29, 2011Administrative Judge denied request for trustworthiness designation.
Decision dateOct 4, 2011Appeal Board affirmed the adverse decision.

Cite For

Affirmation of Adverse Decision Due to Lack of Harmful Error Assertion
Limitations on New Evidence During Appeal
Trustworthiness Concerns 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.

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: Applicant has not made an assertion of harmful error. The Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Adverse decision affirmed. CASE NO: 09-07254.a1 DATE: 10/04/2011 DATE: October 4, 2011 In Re: ---------------- Applicant for Security Clearance ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ADP Case No. 09-07254

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) declined to grant Applicant a trustworthiness designation. On November 4, 2010, DOHA 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 that the case be decided on the written record. On July 29, 2011, after considering the record, Administrative Judge David M. White denied Applicant’s request for a trustworthiness designation. 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, it contains new evidence, in the form of a statement by the Applicant explaining a portion

FOOTNOTES

1 Applicant did not file a response to the government’s File of Relevant Material. of the history of her finances, a letter from an attorney, dated March 2, 2011 discussing an intent to file for bankruptcy later that month, a certificate of counseling, a cancelled check for $65 and a statement from a state tax authority that Applicant’s accounts are in balance.1 The Board cannot consider Applicant’s 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. Applicant has not made an allegation of harmful error on the part of the Judge. Therefore, the decision of the Judge denying Applicant a trustworthiness designation is AFFIRMED. Signed: Michael Y. Ra’anan Michael Y. Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairperson, Appeal Board Signed: Jean E. Smallin Jean E. Smallin Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: William S. Fields William S. Fields Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board