KEYWORD: Guideline J; Guideline E
DIGEST: Applicant asserts no harmful error by the Judge. Adverse decision affirmed.
CASENO: 14-06917.a1
DATE: 04/13/2016
DATE: April 13, 2016
In Re:
---------
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 14-06917
APPEAL BOARD SUMMARY DISPOSITION
APPEARANCES
FOR GOVERNMENT
James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel
FOR APPLICANT
Pro se
The Department of Defense (DoD) declined to grant Applicant a security clearance.  On June
30, 2015, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that
decision—security concerns raised under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) and Guideline E (Personal
Conduct) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). 
Applicant requested a decision on the written record.  On February 4, 2016, after considering the
record, Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) Administrative Judge Jennifer I. Goldstein
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 new evidence in the form of a narrative statement about attending counseling, and
the names and telephone numbers of two character references.  The Board cannot consider
Applicant’s new evidence on appeal.  See Directive ¶ E3.1.29. 
The Board does not review a case de novo. 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 is AFFIRMED.
Signed: Michael Y. Ra’anan        
Michael Y. Ra’anan
Administrative Judge
Chairperson, Appeal Board
Signed: James F. Duffy             
James F. Duffy
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
Signed: William S. Fields     
William S. Fields
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board