WPCz  I4#YkfY/yDB]> mwp$z9ªJr(]W\L(4(E>YaRs p{TFrBELb21ĺdw"1TFˍ-p$llZRFOqh"cBbB8\4ozPbҐ^h[ibrk_D(`LζoVB ը&[7bsM;jtN~ OOz]jگf+{W;> ! R,JDq5t=7ɗ: x Ư{e3⫅+ؾ/gSY(h&Tcs!~ &- Q# APPEARANCES &  &7%XX FORGOVERNMENT  ( JamesB.Norman,Esq.,ChiefDepartmentCounsel b )  FORAPPLICANT  "b+  Prose #XX%&7# ":,       TheDepartmentofDefense(DoD)declinedtograntApplicantasecurityclearance.On p'"1 March21,2016,DoDissuedastatementofreasons(_SOR_)advisingApplicantofthebasisforthat \(#2 decision"securityconcernsraisedunderGuidelineF(FinancialConsiderations)ofDepartmentof H)$3 DefenseDirective5220.6(Jan.2,1992,asamended)(Directive).Applicantrequestedadecision 4*%4 onthewrittenrecord.OnSeptember12,2017,afterconsideringtherecord,DefenseOfficeof  +p&5 HearingsandAppeals(DOHA)AdministrativeJudgeRogerC.WesleydeniedApplicantsrequest  ,\'6 forasecurityclearance.ApplicantappealedpursuanttoDirectiveE3.1.28andE3.1.30. ,H(7  -4)8 _  TheJudgefoundagainstApplicantonasecondmortgagethatwaschargedoffintheamount  ofapproximately$147,000andonfourtimesharedebtstotalingover$8,000thatwereplacedfor  collection.InherAnswertotheSOR,Applicantadmittedeachofthedebtswithexplanations.      MuchofApplicantsappealbriefconsistsofmattersfromoutsidetherecord.Forexample, ` shesubmittedahomeownerstitleinsurancepolicy,employeeperformancereviews,andnarrative L  explanationsthatshedidnotpreviouslysubmittotheJudgeforconsideration.Suchinformation 8  constitutesnewevidencethattheAppealBoardcannotconsideronappeal.DirectiveE3.1.29. $ t     ApplicantassertsthattheJudgeandDepartmentCounselreachedadverseconclusionsbased  L  onlimitedinformation.Applicantisresponsibleforpresentingevidenceinmitigation,extenuation,  8  rebuttal,orexplanation.DirectiveE3.1.15.Applicanthadopportunitiestosubmitinformationin $  responsetotheSORandtheFileofRelevantMaterial.Shesubmittedevidenceinbothinstances.   TotheextentthatsheisarguingthatshewasdeniedthedueprocessaffordedbytheDirective,the   Boardconcludesotherwise.     ApplicantarguestheJudgeerredinreferringtothesecondmortgageasa homeequityline p ofcreditandinfinding: WhetherApplicantusedthe[secondmortgage]loanproceedstoupgrade \ theirhome,oninvestmentpropertypurchases,orforpropertyinvestmentsisunclear.AppealBrief H at1,citingDecisionat3and6.Wenoteonecreditreportintherecordreferstothesecondmortgage 4 asa JointCon[ventional]Mortgage(GovernmentExhibit(GE)4),whileanothercreditreport  p referstoitasa HomeEquityloan(GE5).TheJudgesfindingsregardingthesecondmortgage  \ arebasedonsubstantialevidenceorconstitutereasonableinferencesorconclusionsthatcouldbe H drawnfromtheevidence.See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.1203420at3(App.Bd.Jul.25,2014). 4 Moreover,eveniftheJudgescharacterizationofthesecondmortgagewasnotaccurate,suchan   errorwouldhavebeenharmlessbecauseitwouldnothaveaffectedtheoveralloutcomeofthecase.   See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.1200678at2(App.Bd.Jun.13,2014).ApplicantalsoclaimstheJudges  findingsregardingthesecondmortgageimpliedthatshewasattemptingtodefraudthelender;  however,wedonotagreewiththatinterpretationoftheJudgesdecision.    ApplicantalsoclaimstheJudgeerredinfindingthat shedidnotfurnishcharacter X  references.AppealBriefat23.Shenotesthatshelistedcharacterreferencesonhersecurity D! clearanceapplication.Fromourreadingoftherecord,itappearstheJudgemeanttosaythat 0"  Applicantdidnotpresentany characterreferenceletters.ThiserrorbytheJudgewasalso #l! harmless.See,e.g.,ISCR120340,supra.Inthisregard,wenotethattheDirectivedoesnotpermit $X" aJudgetoactasaninvestigatorforeitherparty.See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.1106659at5(App.Bd. $D # Oct.22,2012).Consequently,aJudgeisnotauthorizedtocontactindependentlyindividualslisted %0!$ ascharacterreferencestoobtaininformationfromthem. &"%   ThebalanceofApplicantsargumentsamounttoadisagreementwiththeJudgesweighing (#' oftheevidence.Herarguments,however,arenotsufficienttoshowthattheJudgeweighedthe )$( evidenceinamannerthatwasarbitrary,capricious,orcontrarytolaw.See,e.g.,ISCRCaseNo.15 |*%) 01652at2(App.Bd.Jul.7,2017)._ h+&* Ї  ApplicanthasnotidentifiedanyharmfulerrorintheJudgesdecision.TheJudgeexamined  therelevantevidenceandarticulatedasatisfactoryexplanationforthedecision.Thedecisionis  sustainableonthisrecord. Thegeneralstandardisthataclearancemaybegrantedonlywhen  clearlyconsistentwiththeinterestsofthenationalsecurity.DepartmentoftheNavyv.Egan,484 t U.S.518,528(1988).SeealsoDirective,Encl.2,App.A2(b): Anydoubtconcerningpersonnel ` beingconsideredfornationalsecurityeligibilitywillberesolvedinfavorofthenationalsecurity. L    @( Order  $ t   TheDecisionis AFFIRMED .  L     `     h   Signed:Michael_Raanan_Ԁ      `     h   Michael_Raanan_      `     h   AdministrativeJudge      `     h   Chairperson,AppealBoard t    `     h   Signed:WilliamS.Fields $t    `     h   WilliamS.Fields `    `     h   AdministrativeJudge L    `     h   Member,AppealBoard 8    `     h    `     h   Signed:JamesF.Duffy__     `     h   JamesF.Duffy     `     h   AdministrativeJudge p    `     h   Member,Appeal_Board___