WPCz  F,mxr:wP>Jp;QuӺ*}ѩO'rHQl.=(_Gm8 MydNɄɆY\rߑ} hm:owlIfi_֦j0,J<7$ -a= {l6[<%!ލrZFp*3J$ߣQb{IMdkI;|Gt"_oxq# APPEARANCES &  &O%XX FORGOVERNMENT  ( JamesB.Norman,Esq.,ChiefDepartmentCounsel b )  FORAPPLICANT  "b+  Prose #XX%&O# ":,     TheDepartmentofDefense(DoD)declinedtograntApplicantasecurityclearance.On \(#2 March10,2016,DoDissuedastatementofreasons(SOR)advisingApplicantofthebasisforthat H)$3 decision"securityconcernsraisedunderGuidelineF(FinancialConsiderations)andGuidelineE 4*%4 (PersonalConduct)ofDepartmentofDefenseDirective5220.6(Jan.2,1992,asamended)  +p&5 (Directive).Applicantrequestedadecisiononthewrittenrecord.OnJune15,2017,after  ,\'6 consideringtherecord,DefenseOfficeofHearingsandAppeals(DOHA)AdministrativeJudge ,H(7 ThomasM.CreandeniedApplicantsrequestforasecurityclearance.Applicantappealedpursuant -4)8 toDirectiveE3.1.28andE3.1.30.     `   TheJudgefoundagainstApplicanton15delinquentdebtstotalingabout$30,000,noting  Applicantdidnotpresentanyevidenceofhiseffortstoresolvethedebts.TheJudgealsofound t Applicantfalsifiedhissecurityclearanceapplication(SCA)byfailingtodisclosehisdelinquent ` debts.NotingtheApplicantdidnotconsultacreditreportbeforecompletinghisSCA,theJudge L  concludedthatApplicantmusthaveknownhehaddelinquentdebtsandhisfailuretolistanyofthem 8  intheSCAwasdeliberate.   $ t   Inhisappealbrief,ApplicantcontendstheJudgeerredinfindingthathewashonorably  L  dischargedfromtheArmyasaspecialist,whenhewasdischargedasasergeant.WhiletheJudge  8  mayhaveerredinthatfinding,wefinditwasharmlesserrorbecauseitlikelyhadnoaffectonthe $  Judgesdecision.See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.1500535at3(App.Bd.Mar.13,2017).     ApplicantalsoarguesthattheGovernmentdidnothandletheSCArenewalprocessproperly,   thathewasrushedtoprovidedinformation,andthathedidnotpullhiscreditreporttoverify   information.ApplicantsargumentsarenotenoughtoshowthattheJudgeweighedtheevidence p inamannerthatwasarbitrary,capricious,andcontrarytolaw.See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.1508778 \ at2(App.Bd.Jul.24,2017).HerequeststheBoardgranthimaninterimclearance with H stipulationsthatneedtobemet.AppealBriefat1.TheAppealBoard,however,doesnothave 4 authoritytograntaninterim,conditional,orprobationaryclearance.See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.14  p 04289at2(App.Bd.Sep.9,2015).  \   ApplicanthasnotidentifiedanyharmfulerrorintheJudgesdecision.TheJudgeexamined 4 therelevantevidenceandarticulatedasatisfactoryexplanationforthedecision.Thedecisionis   sustainableonthisrecord. Thegeneralstandardisthataclearancemaybegrantedonlywhen   clearlyconsistentwiththeinterestsofthenationalsecurity.DepartmentoftheNavyv.Egan,484  U.S.518,528(1988).SeealsoDirective,Encl.2,App.A2(b): Anydoubtconcerningpersonnel  beingconsideredfornationalsecurityeligibilitywillberesolvedinfavorofthenationalsecurity.   @-(, Ї@( Order     TheDecisionis AFFIRMED . `    `     h   Signed:Michael_Raanan_Ԁ ( x    `     h   MichaelRaanan  d    `     h   AdministrativeJudge  P     `     h   Chairperson,AppealBoard  <     `     h   Signed:WilliamS.Fields      `     h   WilliamS.Fields      `     h   AdministrativeJudge      `     h   Member,AppealBoard t    `     h   Signed:JamesF.Duffy____________________________________________ 8    `     h   JamesF.Duffy $t    `     h   AdministrativeJudge `    `     h   Member,Appeal_Board___