KEYWORD: Guideline F
DIGEST: The 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. Adverse decision
affirmed.
CASENO: 14-05477.a1
DATE: 11/6/2017
DATE: November 6, 2017
In Re:
----------------
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 14-05477
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
December 8, 2014, 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 that the case
be decided on the written record.  On August 11 2017, after considering the record, Defense Office
of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) Administrative Judge Robert E. Coacher 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 narrative statement in which Applicant seeks “to clarify [his] moral and legal
obligations.”  Appeal Brief at 1.  He asks that the Board ”accept not [his] financial faults, but [his]
moral obligation to protect and safeguard classified information and reconsider reinstating [his]
security clearance.” Id. at 2.
The Board cannot receive or consider any new evidence on appeal. See Directive ¶ E3.1.29. 
Additionally, the Board does not review a case de novo. The 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