KEYWORD: Guideline F
DIGEST: Applicant’s brief does not raise an issue of harmful error. Rather, it includes new
evidence concerning his state tax obligations, his child support debt, etc. We cannot consider
new evidence on appeal. Adverse decision affirmed.
CASENO: 15-07119.a1
DATE: 09/12/2017
DATE: September 12, 2017
In Re:
----------------
 
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 15-07119
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
April 14, 2016, DoD 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 a decision
on the written record.  On June 12, 2017, after considering the record, Defense Office of Hearings
and Appeals (DOHA) Administrative Judge Robert J. Kilmartin denied Applicant’s request for a
security clearance.  Applicant appealed pursuant to Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.
Applicant’s brief does not raise an issue of harmful error.  Rather, it includes new evidence
concerning his state tax obligations, his child support debt, etc.  We cannot consider new evidence
on appeal.  Directive ¶ E3.1.29.  We do not review cases de novo.  Our scope of review is limited
to cases in which Applicants have raised an issue of harmful error.  Directive ¶ E3.1.32; See  ISCR
Case No. 15-01734 at 1-2 (App. Bd. Jan .19, 2017).  Accordingly, the Decision of the Judge denying
Applicant a security clearance is AFFIRMED.
Signed: Michael Y. Ra’anan         
Michael Y. 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