KEYWORD: Guideline G; Guideline J
DIGEST: Under the facts of this case we conclude that the best resolution is to remand the case
to the Judge to consider the documents that Applicant has attached to his appeal brief. Adverse
decision remanded.
CASENO: 15-06018.a1
DATE: 08/09/2017
DATE: August 9, 2017
In Re:
----------------
 
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 15-06018
APPEAL BOARD DECISION
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
March 19, 2016, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that
decision–security concerns raised under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline J
(Criminal Conduct) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended)
(Directive).  Applicant requested a decision on the written record.  On May 17, 2017, after
considering the record, Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) Administrative Judge
Shari Dam denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance.  Applicant appealed pursuant to
Directive ¶¶  E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.
Applicant has raised an issue of due process.  He notes a statement in the Decision that he
had not responded to the File of Relevant Material (FORM).  He argues that he had provided a
response within the time specified but that it did not make it into the record.  In presenting his
arguments, Applicant asserts matters from outside the record, which we generally cannot consider. 
Directive ¶ E3.1.29.  However, in the past we have considered new evidence insofar as it bears upon
threshold issues such as due process.  See, e.g., ISCR Case No.14-00812 at 2 (App. Bd. Jul. 8, 2015).
Applicant has submitted documents that he represents to be the ones he provided.  One of
the documents is a letter that, among other things, draws attention to an error in the FORM.1  Others
address the legal consequences of Applicant’s security-significance conduct.  Under the facts of this
case we conclude that the best resolution is to remand the case to the Judge to consider the
documents that Applicant has attached to his appeal brief.  Other issues that Applicant has raised
in his brief are not ripe for consideration at this time.  
Order
The Decision is REMANDED.    
Signed: Michael Ra’anan            
Michael Ra’anan
Administrative Judge
Chairperson, Appeal Board
Signed: James E. Moody               
James E. Moody
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
Signed: James F. Duffy                 
James F. Duffy
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
1Applicant notes that the introductory paragraph of the FORM cites a name other than Applicant’s as the subject
of this adjudication.  Applicant speculates that his own response might have been placed in another person’s file by
mistake.