DATE: January 25, 2007

-------------

SSN: --------

Applicant for Trustworthiness Determination

APPEAL BOARD SUMMARY DISPOSITION

APPEARANCES

FOR GOVERNMENT

James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel

FOR APPLICANT

Pro Se

The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) proposed to deny or revoke access to automated information systems in ADP-I/II/III sensitivity positions for Applicant. On October 28, 2005, DOHA issued a statement of reasons (SOR) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision--security concerns raised under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), Guideline E (Personal Conduct) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Jan. 2, 1992, as amended) (Directive). Applicant requested a hearing. On June 30, 2006, after the

hearing, Administrative Judge Erin C. Hogan denied Applicant's request for a trustworthiness designation. Applicant timely appealed pursuant to the Directive ¶¶ E3.1.28 and E3.1.30. ⁽¹⁾

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's appeal brief contains no assertion of error on the part of the Judge. Therefore, the decision of the Judge denying Applicant access to automated information systems in ADP I/II/II sensitivity positions is AFFIRMED.

Signed: Michael Y. Ra'anan

Michael Y. Ra'anan

Administrative Judge

Chairman, Appeal Board

Signed: Jeffrey D. Billett

Jeffrey D. Billett

Administrative Judge

Member, Appeal Board

Signed: William S. Fields

William S. Fields

Administrative Judge

Member, Appeal Board

1. The Judge found in favor of Applicant under Guidelines J and E, and with respect to ¶ 1.x. Those favorable findings are not at issue on appeal.