KEYWORD: Guideline F
DIGEST: The Board cannot receive or consider new evidence on appeal.  The adverse impact an
unfavorable decision may have on an applicant is not relevant in evaluating his security
eligibility.  Applicant has not made an assertion of harmful error.  Adverse decision affirmed.  
CASE NO: 09-06545.a1
DATE: 05/17/2011
DATE: May 17, 2011
In Re:
----------------
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 09-06545
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 security
clearance.  On November 17, 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 February 28, 2010, after considering
the record, Administrative Judge Robert Robinson Gales denied Applicant’s request for a security
clearance.  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 a general assertion by the Applicant that he has made some progress in cleaning
up his debt, and a request that he be allowed to provide additional evidence in support of his appeal.
He also states that loss of his clearance will have an adverse impact on his employment situation.
The Board cannot receive or consider new evidence on appeal.  See Directive ¶ E3.1.29.
Moreover, the adverse impact an unfavorable decision may have on an applicant is not deemed a
relevant or material consideration in evaluating his security eligibility.  See ISCR Case No. 06-
24458 at 2 (App. Bd. Jan.14, 2008).
  The Appeal Board does not review cases de novo.  Its 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.  Therefore, the decision of the Judge denying Applicant a
security clearance is AFFIRMED.
Signed: Jeffrey D. Billett         
Jeffrey D. Billett
Administrative Judge
Member, 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