KEYWORD: Guideline E; Guideline F
DIGEST: 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: 18-00633.a1
DATE: 02/12/2019
DATE: February 12, 2019
In Re:
----------------------------
Applicant for Public Trust Position
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ADP Case No. 18-00633
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 trustworthiness designation. 
On March 30, 2018, DoD issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for
that decision—trustworthiness concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) 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 December 6, 2018,
after considering the record, Administrative Judge Caroline E. Heintzelman denied Applicant’s
request for a trustworthiness designation.  Applicant appealed pursuant to 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 document that post-dates the Judge’s decision.  The Appeal Board cannot
consider new evidence.  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 Ra’anan                   
Michael Ra’anan
Administrative Judge
Chairperson, Appeal Board
Signed: James F. Duffy                       
James F. Duffy
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
Signed: Charles C. Hale                      
Charles C. Hale
Administrative Judge
Member, Appeal Board
2