%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T14:11:34-04:00
2021-07-02T14:11:34-04:00
2021-07-02T14:11:34-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
00-0433.a1
uuid:4bbe68da-d342-433a-9b53-894529a763b3
uuid:600d7859-2ccf-4280-bf54-c6c901b155a3
Acrobat Web Capture 15.0
endstream
endobj
5 0 obj
<>
endobj
6 0 obj
<>
endobj
3 0 obj
<>
endobj
7 0 obj
<>
endobj
8 0 obj
<>
endobj
18 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
19 0 obj
<>
endobj
20 0 obj
<>
endobj
22 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
23 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
25 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
26 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
21 0 obj
<><><><><><><><>]/P 19 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(00-0433.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archi\
ved%20-%20HTML/00-0433.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 2:11:34 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 734.2497 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.75 l
579 -0.75 l
579.749 0 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.7499 733.5 cm
0 0 m
-0.75 -0.75 l
579 -0.75 l
578.25 0 l
h
f
Q
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 732.7503 cm
0 0 m
0.75 0.75 l
0 1.499 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 594.9999 733.5 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.75 l
0.75 0.75 l
h
f
Q
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 618.75 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.75 l
579 -0.75 l
579.749 0 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.7499 618.0003 cm
0 0 m
-0.75 -0.751 l
579 -0.751 l
578.25 0 l
h
f
Q
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 617.2497 cm
0 0 m
0.75 0.751 l
0 1.5 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 594.9999 618.0003 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.751 l
0.75 0.75 l
h
f
Q
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 749.25 Tm
(DATE: August 8, 2002)Tj
0 -3.25 TD
(In Re:)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(---------------------)Tj
T*
(SSN: -----------)Tj
T*
(Applicant for Security Clearance)Tj
0 -3.25 TD
(ISCR Case No. 00-0433)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
17.628 -2.125 Td
(APPEAL BOARD DECISION)Tj
2.806 -2.125 Td
(APPEARANCES)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 261.2061 543 cm
0 0 m
89.338 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
11.25 0 0 11.25 251.0312 519 Tm
(FOR GOVERNMENT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-5.359 -2.2 Td
(Kathryn A. Trowbridge, Esq., Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
6.137 -2.2 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0.32 -2.2 Td
(Jay L. Cohen, Esq.)Tj
12 0 0 12 16 419.25 Tm
(Administrative Judge Kathryn Moen Braeman issued a remand decision, date\
d November 16, 2001, in which she)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(concluded it is clearly consistent with the )Tj
16.801 0 Td
(national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for Applican\
t.)Tj
-16.801 -1.125 Td
(Department Counsel appealed. )Tj
12.551 0 Td
(For the reasons set forth below, the Board affirms the )Tj
21.633 0 Td
(Administrative Judge's remand)Tj
-34.185 -1.125 Td
(decision.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(This Board has jurisdiction on appeal under Executive Order 10865 and De\
partment of Defense Directive 5220.6)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(\(Directive\), dated January 2, 1992, as )Tj
15.245 0 Td
(amended.)Tj
-15.245 -2.125 Td
(Department Counsel's appeal presents the following issues: \(1\) whether\
the Administrative Judge erred by excluding)Tj
T*
(proposed Government Exhibit 4; \(2\) )Tj
14.803 0 Td
(whether the Administrative Judge erred by finding that Applicant did not\
falsify a)Tj
-14.803 -1.125 Td
(security questionnaire in May 2000; and \(3\) whether the Administrative\
)Tj
28.993 0 Td
(Judge's remand decision is arbitrary, capricious,)Tj
-28.993 -1.125 Td
(or contrary to law.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
20.032 -2.125 Td
(Procedural History)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-20.032 -2.125 Td
(The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals issued to Applicant a Stateme\
nt of Reasons \(SOR\) dated October 25,)Tj
T*
(2000. )Tj
(The SOR was based on Guideline E )Tj
17.136 0 Td
(\(Personal Conduct\) and Guideline J \(Criminal Conduct\).)Tj
-17.136 -2.125 Td
(A hearing was held on February 21, 2001. )Tj
17.107 0 Td
(The Administrative Judge issued a written decision, dated April 18, 2001\
)Tj
-17.107 -1.125 Td
(\("Initial Decision"\), in which she )Tj
13.48 0 Td
(concluded it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant o\
r continue a)Tj
-13.48 -1.125 Td
(security clearance for Applicant.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Department Counsel appealed the Administrative Judge's favorable decisio\
n. )Tj
31.032 0 Td
(On September 6, 2001, the Board issued a)Tj
-31.032 -1.125 Td
(Decision and Remand Order \("Remand )Tj
15.987 0 Td
(Order"\). )Tj
(In that Remand Order, the Board concluded: \(1\) the Judge erred by)Tj
-15.987 -1.125 Td
(excluding certain evidence proffered by Department Counsel; and \(2\) th\
e Judge )Tj
32.127 0 Td
(acted in an arbitrary and capricious)Tj
-32.127 -1.125 Td
(manner by drawing conclusions favorable to Applicant based on Department\
Counsel's failure to present certain)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(evidence, )Tj
4.053 0 Td
(when the absence of such evidence was due to the Judge's rulings against\
Department Counsel. )Tj
38.281 0 Td
(The Board)Tj
-42.334 -1.125 Td
(remanded the case to the Judge with instructions to )Tj
20.689 0 Td
(reopen the record to allow Department Counsel a reasonable)Tj
-20.689 -1.125 Td
(opportunity to present and develop the rebuttal evidence it was preclude\
d from presenting at the )Tj
38.626 0 Td
(February 21, 2001)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
29 0 obj
(Zi}T =)
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
31 0 obj
<>
endobj
34 0 obj
<>
endobj
35 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0E
-EqD3-#i!ז Ǟ^d8}u}K5:F33fov6Cd{;vKv6=S="'Nx]U-ot7~oxI.zweg~s}2_Liw6w.D_>LӷvRYVzYl/iCN*