%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T14:15:02-04:00
2021-07-02T14:15:02-04:00
2021-07-02T14:15:02-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
01-03683.a1
uuid:f7d556df-0701-4caa-b2ee-f6e6ea0738a9
uuid:7d4f7445-224e-4afc-b606-6aa25f7febcc
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
16 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
17 0 obj
<>
endobj
18 0 obj
<>
endobj
20 0 obj
[19 0 R 19 0 R]
endobj
21 0 obj
[19 0 R 19 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj
[19 0 R 19 0 R]
endobj
19 0 obj
<><><><>]/P 17 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
23 0 obj
[30 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(01-03683.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/01-03683.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 2:15:02 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 9, 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. 01-03683)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
-6.414 -2.2 Td
(Peregrine D. Russell-Hunter, Chief Department Counsel)Tj
3.208 -2.2 Td
(Jonathan A. Beyer, Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
3.984 -2.2 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
1.042 -2.2 Td
(Tobe Lev, Esq.)Tj
12 0 0 12 16 394.5 Tm
(Administrative Judge Paul J. Mason issued a decision dated February 22, \
2002, in which he concluded it is not clearly)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(consistent with the national interest to )Tj
15.441 0 Td
(grant or continue a security clearance for Applicant. )Tj
21.074 0 Td
(Applicant appealed. )Tj
8.247 0 Td
(For the)Tj
-44.762 -1.125 Td
(reasons set forth below, the Board affirms the Administrative Judge's )Tj
27.924 0 Td
(decision.)Tj
-27.924 -2.125 Td
(The Board has jurisdiction on appeal under Executive Order 10865 and Dep\
artment of Defense Directive 5220.6)Tj
T*
(\(Directive\), dated January 2, 1992, as )Tj
15.245 0 Td
(amended.)Tj
-15.245 -2.125 Td
(Applicant's appeal presents the following issues: 1\) Were the Administr\
ative Judge's findings that Applicant falsified his)Tj
T*
(drug use a reasonable interpretation of )Tj
15.605 0 Td
(the record evidence? and 2\) Was the Administrative Judge's decision not\
to grant)Tj
-15.605 -1.125 Td
(Applicant a continuance erroneous?)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 a Statement of Reasons\
\(SOR\) to Applicant dated July 5, 2001. )Tj
46.572 0 Td
(The)Tj
-46.572 -1.125 Td
(SOR was based on Guidelines E )Tj
(\(Personal Conduct\), H \(Drug Involvement\), and J \(Criminal Conduct\)\
. )Tj
41.66 0 Td
(Applicant)Tj
-41.66 -1.125 Td
(requested a hearing which was held on November 27, 2001.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(The Administrative Judge issued a written decision dated February 22, 20\
02 in which he found for Applicant with)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(regard to the allegations under Guideline H )Tj
17.578 0 Td
(and one allegation each under Guidelines E and J. )Tj
20.215 0 Td
(The remainder of the)Tj
-37.793 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Formal Findings were against Applicant. )Tj
22.857 0 Td
(The case is before Board on )Tj
11.44 0 Td
(Applicant's appeal from that)Tj
-34.297 -1.375 Td
(unfavorable decision.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 119.2949 133.5 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 119.2949 132.75 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
/TT1 1 Tf
12 0 0 12 264.2178 103.5 Tm
(Scope of Review)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-20.685 -2.125 Td
(On appeal, the Board does not review a case )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
17.993 0 Td
(de novo)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(. )Tj
(Rather, the Board addresses the material issues raised by the)Tj
-17.993 -1.125 Td
(parties to determine whether there is factual )Tj
17.798 0 Td
(or legal error. )Tj
5.719 0 Td
(There is no presumption of error below, and the appealing)Tj
-23.517 -1.125 Td
(party must raise claims of error with specificity and identify how the A\
dministrative )Tj
33.963 0 Td
(Judge committed factual or legal)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
(_Θ}9H@IN)
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
29 0 obj
<>
endobj
35 0 obj
<>
endobj
36 0 obj
<>stream
H\j >wId/(.?4$:Iƈ1}G]0~}n";0j$6,/@ioU[Iǹ5 AջOjS贙tGfhwP:OfpDכ (jWQyd({Dg%&qB\>DDq|N|UVdFȔ`^9=>w9L
.H` ,
endstream
endobj
37 0 obj
<>stream
H| TTWרȦ^Q74$IbLd(jT(qVpEEQq}m(.&FGgΜSn[y߹/@ @Mv%ذ̵u isx6w%~yT%ص3!j$ i//` z~|s(3y2 :cFU x86,!u!sX5#b#u>x N56z8@vk~ܘȸMMI<:b
_hrOYpAAH`Mp@ ^Z-E_{- ,x
@ȟw6fBa7 vҡNz]\4thԸISZhu^f[lڻOv;uԹKWn?
ѳW>}?_*(|3~054z1#Gō36q&L)S:=iYi͘7Ed.]W\zu
6l[nݾc{_p`EG;~gΖ.^|]7nW ?F=*4-IA4R*ͦt^z,Hh#|+B0W8&<^FJUVT*3Hw@i4Y%K$Tz)h"45BMvv6MHA\t
tu.Lt +亲&{Me/^cD9INgfy/)|M{C(VSݽ{dVC)Z,?%Zm֞,([ɋi"%q鴖5sdB[a&2JCXUu:K\4R?)=)Q#Hs4QxM&s