KEYWORD: Guideline F
DIGEST: In his appeal brief, Applicant states that he does not believe the Judge did anything
wrong, but that he is “basically throwing [himself] at the mercy of [the] Appeals Board to
reconsider the Judge’s decision.” Adverse decision affirmed.
CASENO: 15-07724.a1
DATE: 04/02/2018
DATE: April 2, 2018
In Re:
-------------------------
Applicant for Security Clearance
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ISCR Case No. 15-07724
APPEAL BOARD DECISION
APPEARANCES
FOR GOVERNMENT
James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel
FOR APPLICANT
Pro se
1
The Department of Defense (DoD) declined to grant Applicant a security clearance.  On June
8, 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 hearing. 
On December 29, 2017, after the hearings, Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA)
Administrative Judge Paul J. Mason denied Applicant’s request for a security clearance.  Applicant
appealed pursuant to the Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.
In his appeal brief, Applicant states that he does not believe the Judge did anything wrong,
but that he is ‘basically throwing [himself] at the mercy of [the] Appeals Board to reconsider the
Judge’s decision.”
The Board does not review a case de novo.  Its authority to review a case is limited to cases
in which the appealing party has alleged the Judge committed harmful error.  See, e.g., ISCR Case
No. 15-01845 at 2  (App. Bd. Feb. 12, 2018).  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 Ra’anan      
Michael 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
2