KEYWORD: Guideline F; Guideline E
DIGEST: Applicant has demonstrated that he submitted documentary evidence which was not
made part of the record.  Adverse decision remanded.
CASENO: 10-03693.a1
DATE: 05/21/2012
DATE: May 21, 2012
In Re:
---------
 
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 10-03693
APPEAL BOARD DECISION
APPEARANCES
FOR GOVERNMENT
 James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel
FOR APPLICANT
Alan V. Edmunds, Esq.
The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) declined to grant Applicant a security
clearance.  On April 11, 2011, 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 E (Personal Conduct) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as
2
amended) (Directive).  Applicant requested a hearing.  On February 29, 2012, after the hearing,
Administrative Judge Martin H. Mogul denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance.
Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶  E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.
Applicant was afforded an opportunity to supplement the hearing record.  By means of his
appeal brief, he has provided credible evidence that he submitted documentary evidence, which was
received by DOHA within the prescribed period of time.  See Directive ¶ E3.1.7.  However, these
documents were not made part of the record.  
In his reply brief, Department Counsel states that expedited remand is the most equitable
resolution of this case.  We concur.  Accordingly, the case is hereby remanded to the Judge for
further processing.  Nothing contained in this action shall prejudice the appeal rights of the parties.
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