KEYWORD: Guideline F; Guideline J
DIGEST: Any error regarding by the Judge regarding Applicant’s child support payments is
harmless given the totality of the record evidence.  Adverse decision affirmed.
CASENO: 06-22871.a1
DATE: 01/24/2008
DATE: January 24, 2008
In Re:
---------
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 06-22871
APPEAL BOARD DECISION
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 January 30, 2007, DOHA issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of
the basis for that decision–security concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and
Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as
amended) (Directive).  Applicant requested a hearing.  On July 30, 2007, after the hearing,
Administrative Judge Marc E. Curry denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance.  Applicant
filed a timely appeal pursuant to Directive ¶¶  E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.
2
Applicant raises the following issues on appeal: whether certain of the Judge’s factual
findings are based upon substantial evidence; and whether the Judge’s application of the relevant
whole person factors is arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law.  Finding no error, we affirm.
The Judge made the following findings of fact:  Applicant was charged in 1994 with a felony
count of writing a bad check.  He entered a plea of guilty to a misdemeanor, receiving a sentence of
60 days confinement, with 55 days suspended.  Applicant was ordered to pay restitution, but he did
not do so until 2002.  In 1995 Applicant was divorced from his wife.  The following year she
obtained a court order for child support from Applicant.  Applicant did not begin paying until his
wages were garnished in 2002.  He stated at the hearing that he did not know about the child support
order until the garnishment action.  The Judge concluded that Applicant’s testimony on this point
was not credible.
The Board concludes that the Judge’s findings are based upon substantial record evidence.
See Directive  ¶  E3.1.32.1; Consolo v. Federal Maritime Comm’n, 383 U.S. 607, 620-21 (1966).
Any error in stating that Applicant’s child support payments have been made through garnishment
since 2002 is harmless, given the totality of the record evidence.  Furthermore, we have examined
the Judge’s whole person analysis and conclude that it is sustainable on the record.  To the extent
that Applicant’s brief contains new evidence, we cannot consider it.  See Directive ¶ E3.1.29.  See
also ISCR Case No. 06-17209 at 2 (App. Bd. Nov. 14, 2007).
Order 
The Judge’s adverse security clearance decision is AFFIRMED.
Signed; Jeffrey D. Billett 
Jeffrey D. Billett
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
Signed: Wiliam S. Fields     
 William S. Fields
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
Signed: James E. Moody       
James E. Moody
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board