A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 10-05281.a1
Appeal BoardDecided Jun 13, 2011 · Administrative Judge Michael Y. Ra'anan · Appeal
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, representing himself, sought a security clearance under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) but was denied due to unresolved financial issues. The Appeal Board affirmed the denial, noting that the applicant did not allege harmful error and submitted new evidence that could not be considered on appeal.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant did not allege harmful error on the part of the Judge.
- The Appeal Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal.
Conditions referenced
Disqualifying
- F.1 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
- 2010-09-22
- Answer filed
- Applicant requested a decision on the written record.
- Hearing held
- 2011-04-05 Decision made by Administrative Judge Martin H. Mogul.
- Decision date
- 2011-06-13 Appeal Board affirmed the denial.
Cite for
- Limitations of the Appeal Board's Authority Regarding New Evidence
- Requirements for Alleging Harmful Error in Appeals
- Financial Considerations 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.
Appeal at a glance
The appeal was filed by the Applicant after the Administrative Judge denied a security clearance based on financial considerations under Guideline F. The Applicant did not assert any harmful error in the appeal. The Board affirmed the decision as the appeal did not meet the necessary criteria 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 Appeal Board has no authority to consider new evidence on appeal. Applicant has not made an allegation of harmful error. However, the Appeal Board’s authority is limited to addressing allegations of harmful error. Adverse decision affirmed. CASE NO: 10-05281.a1 DATE: 06/13/2011 DATE: June 13, 2011 In Re: ---------------- Applicant for Security Clearance ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 10-05281
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 security clearance. On September 22, 2010, 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 that the case be decided on the written record. On April 5, 2011, after considering the record, Administrative Judge Martin H. Mogul denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance. Applicant appealed pursuant to the Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.
Footnotes
1 Applicant did not file a response to the government’s File of Relevant Material. 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 the current status of his debts, and legal documents that are dated subsequent to the close of the record in this case.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 security clearance is AFFIRMED. Signed: Michael Y. Ra’anan Michael Y. Ra’anan Administrative Judge Chairparson, 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