*q$r0 ^A TuU)W- "Vj뚩-7Ѵv93}HrK|cl[L|~g7~j =C@VDB齨>uБb Um[ *؋{aM Oѿ*z).I]fI$u2URzPZ'ܝٍ Cm;Oy
z ˜ȼKg2lf^Bhs3_,q'* Vﳾޡo ~|@&aƢza%F\ݮ![ Cjkr\m`VQYw^TeK6lxJq8ap 1g);3*? }tP
%HT# $?,SNtM; b8 tK ʤ)
#촚WY(8HPXuS|l %}>ۉ;}g'S q
d) ZDDSEI\
5@iLk0BLdӨuSQ5iLbiB%n#qK)~w,~9߄ͯ ?8ܝFD!p s--Ǘjznq<S ʮҚDn4˖ɭ;xp[du Lv%R,dW{jk^_=oOZ
P{ ^wGjjg4<N#{Gb]@&يwfym}|Y.Z?)z/%;6xre6 uDj7)e5 t ,Q ~oTEHK:w*VUޛ֛$@90MzD Ȅs 3'̫&g x`bL!t vs >ݰK>r-">e>R]òX%PgliCWTTs"B.I:qYͣݽu *Di" `*
tP ?> ڼq~jmhbhＧ=F6CVQ+eict7_n:treW8y\?zFyձǻV qIE*I\3:*eF5 8HI\Qdn 7i B<_V vTض ΜKi[ &hoMTrZff:cP.Z;̎c
+
xò3Cq]F숪MaYe״Ơ̧Sofuy_?s/GI0+;`PN?.~u.z(z*{sb;ۯscXŚE/{e,z7\`fp2ž!à fg8r8k?UW4bu.ÀT
fC1,Zw5磤fZCj8Qyh
k#UE B"0VBh0rIri֨daA[RNt 0Q2DlJKSD~r_i?#L W)UF
Lk hpmTaCx gV>?9G L.p+¯ ӱo cu|Dm`g5Je ~q^n'8q F/b1W8ٲ>^ڭlnl
Îac2%{^`!X$vg,P$Je a!P..(,(./MhXi_%L4ac9 .+|++k}54
rJmttr ޯ g_ɍd'_6&:nuxf',wó ps=e{H"r(t1HG|2dd67pټiN^^R,3GżQ oq!"ŕ)2*]f3tr!a8?G⧷IsTIU C/ }m}c ϹٗKA "be$-D @C >2i: c !RV*4UcAcQ*Ӳj&Ц[wlU
Q"B lU!V6EHH Al
=8(C?'l?/>Wu $$ DņkPZM\r5-vB 8?bP>=7[bM?X|3Ih&~dYohT'fXUT#di'~ū=NeA 0:vxi9:#6NXoJ9'l#7|sh6택 }-(.,r9DQC!m F#gju{)*Ȭ)[4yy:%F9czߗyLHfAӔ9 s.ǜ7'!;Mk'4ZDY27_@`.V'sɲL ^UXM S - 56
]PQy4ӓ`¨N&| YAET 2ΰ2f(Asl9 @Qdz~ҹ}WL"rXa:3+ Np: b,elzXA(V-HR;)
NXB{1D> zV@2} F
pW $c>b ^+|r号܊'+ԪjK*~$A, ӷʍ7}4TPk1;ʎU;/\
rmLRo#RKQǜFY+&)DU%[z}v % NN+$KI&+*lMu*g|y%(߬ jtipN2T7dw d=[L@R%=%z '{_%&:zQF"ap ]ܺ7~yQ [ED
2k+ ҜYM1ru]"rL-
wӽчbz)E-_ρٚ v:.O.mOv1ı~T(J %p
[5uf}Ю)
A0 "I pޏ pc _W glk%[jKW/ an08H8v#Hevw {C{ӻձWW2pT>|#z}9ōxz:3=iOIbp:}s+|[5lorݗyC ն_i7M0 {VMk5NqCBDZČbfJ <_@FuʪRԊ 7=mR~@.$*ZMg2 " < 1DZ] t&pו%Ӳ$SgFꝪѥ qO֤$=f "r( AX=fJ1U604=)љqȰEf!̜)I䀚Wa۷So <\mKﳹO7{oWi + cDve
-o8|P;s"ٲ
HޱX9D Xx!±¨( dphc s\c$Gq;L w!`۪@ݷ+K `X aCiQ`A [ F@rg;}if.h 3X-=cQ#mk
CȈi[7ɉʢ%*Ik%칉`BG'Ů3l[{<)["T~zv_ryd=a bvŠn̂)n.D7VtNwʭ8X9J;{F// i"Uw)fXѷʯׇY~GM&f)goӺ=xT}Ms$Pr#y
TFe1-JiboK)SUNft9,j; ӎjD;T0E (v|2bܑ3Q)$|GH>ZIXFf,&k&)T$7+2>`t`զuaX(
"E|r[ *+QޔPg
NBV3+]X5MM32F
U5oH\}Oow/EGFH>%uZ_tp(ϥ}בq*)>ŇkCp|qt˯Yf.<|A%8QAbq6*uR`b7k=:`s5-fޒKi >f im
5ЊЊi(he1Y`?gi,.e8=JHD) fMv'Rɞ m4TǺk=n ֟=v5 0D6ҽnmǞ3Bb36wO"7?i1w]M?885-B}k 'ۂ_\97pv=cs{
Q ~X;.8
UAFZ
Me%
2eY ,54")J(1PU2wؑ~': \-k EL#Y^CW,GL-) 798jC_T"<!o
:zae.C >G/4XA7
Rρ_
2"ˊs9tE8M9T3YM2r_oC ˓jWkHBDg:n|Id&C~ޫ#J_:4rǎA@dqat{Ơz9_i*B
%TP>a&\.JU?}÷' ~gwgΞݗJW?*13g66+֥MS6@}
xrABeH3/S2ogm։B7-ag( ?R} /Ӽb @f3+6Sa*ևt$Qǹ#]NVw O{ \M} {[
紜VV?Ʌ%+|Cwǂ~ k<٬Q'z1\:`e pA QwrF P 6(I1e7ycp nS 4m^5
%A_ SP Y($Bh t j>LeK]1^s`h*!Wod |v!oS/T*y;A,aXy Ž`V(Pv%h[2S46I;{Q*l{N4 Ft{1Q`eozY%#DNI*lbBֶUl%ټ}N?'[ޓ_
?k_E}_ZY`9м /H̢u
;TErBɂA݃ۚ;ַi-}{sx'f d ҞL>[i;gwFJOv?;ޟ~7~֏]F}_}?(C>> u{U`X16 l(C`Z5MrAD% h0r*+oШ6\ nOW.,Vɀ1N<6%J,2GxDA"9.Px)KHF`IQ/l0Sv@ /Ѱ*X!iQ:+gg1'E)D+&rywsK.(Ac_}i ,Yr;Iz$#g缿>\Wos0Fau/{IxƓTl /:
ȏsܤw20}E~Yswq7ݷ>i`D7F-ݻiش9"o >5
:UׇCƬ!F\ZRsީ 9鉐%3{L|eYV )b):Rti&H_zWǨ`+Y E5N]*9B t q2ڼq0Ǎe
l<"5N(%f(k`ZY9k5lEj | \ 2aXAK3P܈a4fF4*Rt~u^OE&C!1`G:~≣ƕ~|_|i(C
o}{
1&:eam! (m *ӌ6M!Ī"bIic N[d0TDJ2pSjGy< E e
UZX\VkW %-k p yCp o0 `,,`ӸfXv_gSw)ҦaykƘi.3CiqJI6Umy(Ʌ$e!" /DHlbh
q?NX67(
QNqw 7'+XMXhq7P'?;V#ަoklLդ $F_
ŷ^є <7-6ءGV_/Аz۷c]͑ލO^ݾ(Ϻ?@f zW5δ(͡fE%6l:8Z O zx{bL_E8X/_]~ZZ*,,UmGKפb{!L=V @ rʲ듥8; .{qz>wZۥ
3q>^'
&' v .faH E\hCS1ECþ
l k6qwV;Ptf?0orA"e/GN ŏR,kygS,|uPʶ[<@VQ+ >\]b; N0M%p_b4QM,%B{£ *O[@8h%t
QCC.wL* Խ2 5
Ro[L7"&Y3\ؘyLjWy[瘅jm"sۃC2~3b_la;vbX,!PBX!e۪[K} %۪j+m%ؖHUU,+1K(njABϹwvsz|1Ѿcph~MD=
hGɂ:-?
C˨6 >?q{;G S,HZ, (,i& Y]H .Y^mS U 윝 DNf;owq~hvS^8_do;Kb3C܉jO|5E,76PPw?vlz t L]X`?{xm[iE=K{v.~ r6sձ gwW99g20'XKWڣvYYVk?)JdڧN3?S>s ;?aù@l6X $AL J (Ъ2Ap`҆TP*&z&Ktuv==g^,x b2 Yv$ tD #5k1.@6br.
ȓNR eƀ6tft625zCBeH,ቱ o)fffRXJQDgiua6묦AU< ӫx,6=VfQ/ݭɌ@n@ѥ|%o_Λ)OELyٕxPECNƃn! Cz<یT(Kd1r %8?YvTrI (\>,H)59O.&-KJt)I@kIKr~g*mMFk@\r< v_j#h
gB هen@p
] a fAfΡ nHZ M0!ìMnods-!92 s;~6okhw]Utq[|ޣ3~M ñ4I~x"98Ra?j>)A[Ru>5. ԅw9\QP5/g4 R!>\m~wc2: Y y̕cWrow pw@hjن:No "[qi1:>`dA~ /&|(iz̓0x{\&$g`e
2W 15xRmdMx+a2 ^ WU OMa doc2@'x+ tb-9NORn*(/XKYNV ZP0
e*
RȼTee]*+2kב1`
n &5æ c8wՀɞvF OL|udD/6y>A?xbx8(75:;lA_[DbxKԎ 4y]W /rg'ss8Yߦ ;z< bgA[ i .l]#v bx/Q9> CT;{ /%qz-
p/-қЭ]yGx/=JY]j)Zﶽ۵Ly
vYmj{bH,3) #kqJ qN{bm%A#2c!$4Ii x W*5xW*%(@7-p AJ` jHc遖Ϳ!MWm+$tNlp5#:c=X /tOu%)α ZҞ~{B~m&2}?:Cd8
k쇗"2 6LJ.RIӞXXaI1@ Z>%))x $"acp+Q. 8u[
rQ{t1*?,5i6M&][[CCеPP F1*wM,x[8/ ¯-9yN=%- `]5-9^oi)~dHsKrI)yT')!i-.I^픦af I3dF|(= ׅ]>mW CY"dK-2-Glӊbbˉ 83 lsh;$EC c vh{N5ɪ EӂP`֥ Vt -& ;dt6{R<ըHdgК]Z:ɞ{4 gz@ɻGW9W p29 ]q+?SfҀ2_Rf(kGra HiT&!Ր5&Fbz2$JQE%Z!KP"t־ˮ1Oeþq N @~n^J1MaΎݑpXbTa^2a3}ƫ 3=qvo7>e;|+C$^q17j+58ezƣO <-K,+#bl0fΰ{w&mGUsko69Ԩ4ШAgyIԆ0RƱ@@ Fs On z dECbqj,N i,X)`tLjqh0M$F(*S>q_sxdCtk>4&T}qޱ,38l2\67Ms| JHG s@#$|oNns-; ShZg[ u֠db%iȭ\I6{z1&RQ
Och@(IO)\B8d&s[4ңVCb/hTR]ZoG-6
j 5ZqV^ZKؖ˴
4@ Ux
U Ǟø08*RkTFֈZWi
Lɷ
k׀?z*ĽGe$K'O X͕cJ v@g5ܬ$ƦTia*$!<(a\_{~'g̽ 3DB Q-S؏X VWYfb!j)5 j+TtנF e} ?Z=BnV?z[{!?G(;K+#,>L8 G nD"qJwnm d$[U'SSG[Nyz4dn r+Wp2n`VduJsBvmLȂ4\=/fl+b05_=j-iXeUb>ZNUb>װ[l{-^koE6Dl{ZW| .B="j ǟ!So"al
6r6 fm426 b/|( QYNNF^Jr
Nj>C
agc07}駦< d07Kak3l#ߜY:nsZ8xlWiԙ9de7_Np5//jR+mSE7{J-.܋VSKsC=4a~<9 Af+tȚC!)].m;2 L*"Ȇӌv 7o B&i4-vCQa _ TDg8°hB*TOV~
Vc15{ZJM@u@upg!(;xB %c &ܩM⯯2ecE&
j2dl2 wVH453MN_d 8S=*;\@Vbl3Bnz4--mlGf))N]}oșIۓYgp65gq;\pd٘ m ex_|2P D2%0 T?!+3`
Ӓ́SEiT c/.i Q'P?! [zGK,#Vcތl_}E`+Z >XZ]lrض[4f"[E{ a QbJN@ף9hN46iX U}L30y ru g ~ C腩`|4ubH 2Hf0<_7ܝs>}ܝ?g8n>H;J#ikJZ]-X1 6bbiK:RldUM Sy1* m6 b 49'"sy|Ua aͳ\Z'$D]W\)ֻ \W"f:h@=sy4\HcLL.} /.m?=D҇4C_Xp z֭vFዪyB[eo>Q{NjtϷ6% yOYrE_)/ @}Ϧ fvM q0LHuwvF
ZXH]߿8~qߣOiSǮ=CM }nɯj7 |~/^"[77PQ"7b9]x'ÄNev-Sh'!kJ"3ʻ!\@Z| vv\#V|=gfsy>Cn}uZ02帮50;k~0xR"44
07
&,Գ3R=LL~ \z-! }0rܖNn^ܳy
WCk@q}PI3 .|g #gZR4"t"<s
|MsW&9ihb'b3K1Glh z \ඪPIXXlOyR|lN [tXAwZ!*8vF,9 M
3,2~zzw]|8vdQ¶emne*W}]
X-){&~u77t R ^e%!I⿻iǝoZ ThC^^82.y ,$
vP[e~|͑FY ^&F$ MIA[}ڲka$ UB?JD
0cܠ4+{(9hy0{nٝ"/ qH\@f`vhOs İ＃iZ6|ynbkj@iyY+eSɗQCㆡߕRhBAA"Xhd1iѲ(K騦 IB~IwC a\Oƪ6Buw `U0RSA9lc&siϴ.*]@K
70&s|.y'wU$Qjn7}ͦ0h+!ѹ.yp^3{ǿŚ >!
L;oc(L-l$1#HL oDq |܈y#͋>mc7Fuar$,~\EHM
RFRǪ<[a zcn:wyN\_W*ļUAfebr< ,VE;賓sKDyłnfx0bai՞y
~ 0+L
q9R[,w)vgs𓄃c4*kE[F D lb6G+|-scO&9AդRԢ'ZKrDM( `c8ɽz;1͆tnCDAdը'lS4G$F)l4R,_VVg#)HPt >$j*sg1ݝ>汻>f]:7XQwq^%$Db`qڨAFB$`~@H*RM4jV QHLeCA&k;va{;w～9wQ i;\ٶC5ZS+o*)،fuaJD)qNd6Q C/-5 t̙rf r yY .=@;3u =ZQcܭm#>@ H (g g6,DaL\nktӘARgŅ8dǒ@G(&!I*X'&Y`G {q1f(Hg7Qn2M\lΘ3?4C h L*J{%c {`.W]T] 6Żv;:V4
Iip2e$nFKu3^AXPݒzk)Z[(,潺(4e0 WW°O@dҨ'% aۃ:syr[PI` w6\"!E&≄W순CXށgwG9;3?zSv,ϟ;_}!YRBk?Q+=~|7 ws$Ĉ/Ozuʤ [*_.UW긬 !
b("J*H Rs*9 oT-K
v\RpU!LpqǶ-L@2GSDND("`"?5~ ,OJJLJ~Kvo7ҒtEN`0Qa8;&h~O6S謁'Bk 4`拈
liUbol|~d-+):E!*UJEuQU
ǒ:ijFJ:P]vR
&e_ f`S[feDPې>6˵&
캮!-22u#CDrxy {w`?);۞ rڟt=d_C/˜r-;u3vJV_Z5zbYh(IVhZL+M)lN G97
#˱0bǂ4ToT&x$Y/i`ʋ59q Eqp^Q*WCU[kF7^4=
エ۸TR8=ujڪqFx6g^rw]r9N.|c}͚UKYL'mUTQЖTEd&X۔6% BbP#H4"L!hR~9Z`=s/smEDZ^h%- 9{t^:/י6X 4(]e,=-LfYk#|$\Ӯrnh7[NStOX6XjJO
Oc!u.2'sYmVvUiFpZ {`I5C4 P(aUT*WT5Iߗr.[fҲLx%4ca Â2RReNKrV*d%)ˊY S9X%tMEH ⠋
B>_($DDt`Л>oge3Rx ^|8flmLAo(]]5 Ajא 6mhKH t",\|}Z'ugI
54S7h옅-DXU|uݺesՏ}3dVWMlR 20 8002X˵Gv]g"`<:c?f$@ SNbӱ1Ut!mc+ %I$k$O!..c B&b<=v]
Q5=],]lgsJ.xbh
AI{IC/Z>q'74 Ծ|eog3#Ruj {Уa$>2F&qXfi >`Y0AL@^#"thC S}OlЖ, p{x;'"mZM h<
<{4F!\X0 O/&yKn$x "4Ox{"z\IwCӔߛZL3Md \,Y-q_Cç_? dQNC
}p B/`,P #
Ǡȧ$
bm'7Rf ]0n
ʢwb)~bߞm:jm/o \yf1VUzWZ]9 /'<\#2Pf8a>,oq5m8Z
Cl8(L-' BD3;q=ν|%|x s;|3{r;N$c{ȶ+
mHiCtd2\v`@~8?R SaJVÿ5j%/7$)`]n# qm {
ٷ 0wjv(nSQt&VwC _j "zGtDO H4շ ep 9c)\:u^O5{)mӛ[n yU?NUŻ7Ef~͔Ye{wgrW"H.FعQG2 'N)*Dqe7>n7ޯ%J|-j%NŶƈgT(KI^A.u7dt?W{PT?~Euua *,V
XDm|ִI:6*63Mձ8qp*1d:i|a3jwK)igswS 7s2W_zqQT68εNY' F*1JNDόLk yЄ]՜J(g^7\KXQG:ϩ3hiPP~u(ŎcC8RJ 'IWI+r݈: 4:nGz4ld3|/(۸ߏ j|<3|74YE1 P!~I
:{?$<W{㓳K|]8ˤҁubhrD2/|)
>xJr۶ojvmMHMFsF33ff4kr
U@M R0*}[пG3p\݇ڍ7e gFZ9
c 9Cz/WO#D#-#Y47+U'WGZ^XIkв .3&v* 2+F4جeE)yo7P/|>6KUZ.*4EpM
j;
OU['N$|Pv6+Y70Ċ)1!SG @I=okg: ܆ʩN <gM IR
-tK'z [?:W"pp?ˬï|:xd˚SFgeSKNIև' r 7OWrny3ϿQSڹ燾I{v
[+7%7=(z~ޢ=Um=+
V%N_9}ƥV7-n?[-\Ѵfrq UWWʼnlDsZv wz/X^e7 p45h~ z؛@-=>hQm12b|qEIUӫ
G"u5l@}lO>u[̻г
2lW( lK3?8`y{B]
x e"*&(LM.|9k P
PQu8Fj82ocj9&{1]i87QX$^Gr~1O=rI=B|,-H@"@Ih;g07
Irq=9 C V #̾c33D?[Nʹ2|>KkWh:s6ז6Բ?OXҲSXMy-iŠүLm"-oBaJ TP_"G8K}^_Y~퓲_]?nԏGaCp(}:uk~V@D7M97gI^({V+fr7Z!*RK~Cy3.VI(}%q&~#R/6nG9y.IiH%O?K
>4qn,`u?"?x:2[ O^-ҟdC)p9ؿzn2_E_ 0Λsnl 1v@5O꣒X,Kr)~Q ͉3 Srx4#ߕD~>@E `>ܴFtk ~Hiq(@AwbAbD|}gct5Ԉ>$6\ɱ8++.wh
ӻZ}2 w#
Ʋ[S '<!{3xLcS)5 Ź)ЏsQE\zyG+XQ Qȗuȏ ReAx=@ } J7enMG1Z xnc'_~~o1Ag?kh;= I~ORAj5QQ dއ˼}5i8{2"+WRxz}WU]qx{=7Ah0P1FQBjGV1Ji״thԩEQZ; @~koNNMzgYw ZZ2Y]I0ϕ 4xFn2ȿ;drqY>$zrx;ru80nk1:
|=ڮc ku5]^)靴=_O=n`J /cS7H*x**jxneا
JzK
^uuuVG}Iə!: [66&tŒBmF]1y^J gzѨeJ09Kȩi郭 /嵐W[Pԭ®jZrԇ{_~Y2z h}N[-w ۊ2kY D 7Νn|v4V [߃0lKccj?ֺ{ ݱʶkʺDk ,4ZZ5hղǼ{[v g4vV9
jc).ock zCkwmĞ2b~
kX՟\n\r bl9X#?EN cXKsd..]Oˋxe 2FN 7(I]AtQJv .'t+'ΔJiBD
˞8ߒ=h=8iɫlU7 IMoPz\xY|^/rr2'ˋip;c=0A\!:Xfmo0irjoX'}qsq&v6bFQ{gɜH_.aV&z?)g]̓VGP)РH{Xj93Pg|9̹Qz@Ly!=u͠i
(w{ڙ5] Mh{>_;?s9kfe5bO'ޕċh}L`4`;kr+I-}ew { !O (92[̷5_FAz/_K, TR-JzMjµUqĠ]/slOt3כs>ZTs_Dj$U;* jk$ԫI(֮ $~1ظIĿI
?$ď PA_EľK ' nKv?p-kۭhC`n/G^.^F%= ooZ-{.g4}/%}a]4[߀նz;*-Qw46z?|f@>7`8Ѻކ]mqAvrwƊ&
G,W-!WywK?įvJH=/ji.b%gQDb#_x圁FMRd>>-'w
n/8gK6w7A 'NO)]+f_mVq@#=7R sk_hfRL/@ş/0V !+=m|-2de$ϧcT -|oG !Γ Ϊpks0b)rFToyƨBfٕ5NG4 }%zY{WHꨤ>&3z6Xa,Bf 3ѴT}F5i܉]z7h`).c^oiF&ʓ{$˛::?6tw#u:"}+dEg)~IyxGc؍A+v)v | ۀe-
L s > 5qWjʗb/>
|Λq>蓸W˰e˪psB*&; FyK~c6@ew4+epW bkiWdd e)| $6k_̕~¡˰}#2ٖGswҸ qR.6
yTa5Q$c wg2Wuk4Wcr(
2OpNki݊wa,\ٽ]8^V'Oф\c{ 4H-bA/9:6纻 wZE{.Au Zm p<87Vt _rྒ(Õ]hx >վ[QЉ~F'ƏZVӃwRN Soũ;l\SәZ7ᔮ9J#|C5nqNls(F'":w&U7 q7-Kq6I^
R˼ vc3 U-6 a?faiދ|JoT+qWә tFGO>repV e-`:g^Jৌׂ¹|+8Iݷe[ ryߗ+o>wrT<ÿJns5K3ӱ1k.{^h?=
ϗ`3@zĹ>.cfl=>{[CRl1&RVR<)Oed0K~3E[ [tlR~XrՇ?iDɔ/ݠ~#瀽?]SسHMx >LE9k
K#_0=ˮгMGsOw
C'8vY>+} pne K }ɵ~:w cSɎv;̎ogoF홆'< =|;X:Ƣ:v֎k,2/^bޕ s5sDnߙs|>SRUпX"^+w@62*Fmm?֮HON>'Ao
YnޕPxe<J@ %1
`X뛩 {Z~'=iZ#ACy3lƞ.7+~=Խ8/
htW7Mtj;Fw5qx)7oI91z o%HmW?{҂9O;}
қX0 3ğ#C) @NzJumvJf`x64*#aRgz͕'+]) %弳s7uJ97<6%cj_h) . #-8}<EAR
*pVL4S"kM.y)L lJID oHS { 2Ь <$wo6oNg4e}=I1e!m9E9 e_;<[(7JHܾ\^nAo#O-M%A
꣥N0
Ie^3&/_FPpeleLst~
o0<7z1 9X.LdYÙ'HB4cd, __=
} pl3NZMF;CpjO'uxFw}4q/p p?xF8]?lbV>x))!d_N2sh֢:k!Ea1U6ۅiӣX9l`|yOw~vx? ӽ>L/, vbw CX۸v{*"MqǷw| χcqPnk g#>w_Ye Ӌ<[x]9ZZ乔xrdxoK}6C@D|F";f k#p~ݶ`9U)9~i"skƙXL,p=žvsF@q%F/Rss-c_}XD&q>w_*H|y> Kb?u{sb$y~ $^rq gy((a S,
`6~p L%0;G֛s-O9`ĝ} XUW,u?4 <ȕ/yxx)/#֭8gէ ó>̳ m[8ϓ bs`ǧu >nZyaE)vz
*xs:#ͥ|h4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4(nw#
13&iZGVha54,qzJa^~M>( zIZ'%mja!1#W3o+Ty%~ \rQ
AJqG`+K+f)DDAbZosaZ=Hfw,:N%ӡl4ͱf3XVNZ]i_lJYڕˊX'djWZR}}X %#KP" `doBE2r`o4#b7NEK+
b m Td}Ť; J[/"+ױ>(ڢa+e +eE"VD"behJ.Ph,StjѸhw$D=x@D"9ȦC+ J;
GV/[sIo@'TJ 7_s!{QJOU awyIcQ]\j'+8 ksR#(˯!>v: E` X 0alD
Fv*fWQ@ duvN{еw_}m%_B{5͌x1Bid_F'X{# y֝w
c,z<خ!ۯk4|fMt[?
R- >a"nE.x -Mc9fu 8n#ɭfM{ [mkJjFsč˨Gxe;+ɵ%iH "R.DKm<9"f Vٰc8Q nVI ֎LDFX{^` p` }E }I`R/"N-/%hZ `2 3v@ey3E_S3qZtSGj `dyy^#.sLp%U"Nȸ^B9Q &w s $^ c= s ~u\SmZx仼+ߔ|FrXrפ=l~Ѥ}Iۈ T=/o#ڍ#F{
Y>k ~__[BS
% $o0\pk^N$\,~t;#H6yJ!RmD ]eȿl K?}h>U! gCH#)b =8-?EhK.~Q DKv[zd7D١3 ١cQ;(&x6|z*EIsW01t;$zEEMbwNZe9nr%DC#t1 Jͣ 9yl4FQo w?Ǿrۏi=KlR48,M6_\ḢR
g
3#.:F% oѶ]1
r +ޏt<7|g0E6
3s6|+ϥhcro*MTc9,*n1| /V' 0C~gsssss89 ].+ϕq\R\UZY2+B+Duvs"$^
u)xz/[Gj+b) 빊jZ,?e)OQ
[mU#giZ"Np/V'E [wFBxrU|(*.[^-[5|e1k^ߡ[ !zKoE_UN4qj4FJ/l"lI6Iik6ܯl 6O t$=V)J`V!)I TY/l1҃y>;X. 9' l0K((,Af2=$ӉqY'7Cƣ u&; jnzE֩No}YlC{gB;zw:G} ]OIwt %]
fav4 xrj>Zg ת ~`bzQk*tLD)Y+Zf].^(IŝǢ [!o;~+V^giHUF*#"TdREmߦW2)/z I+jzo___
p@ Y;w l hhc& 'S3h[-e- **XUV5:2>G 6FqcJ J"3U$͙xo6;h@+b!}]i{voleWg٭Y=l2Y `Y6C̝c ^p/,uA]Te5˧Vڪ)uLP1ur3vVwwRbMSrwN3%+NyPEjj;G8*1$nj.0+11+a y g fahx1o02Jd RTJ0m605 tpv6F@z1#?Ȱ H[@
1+RH ,f(fz)%@#(kk30(P6#j.f`,.e(.f . T-i+0
` ɥg
endstream
endobj
18 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 5/Type/Page>>
endobj
44 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(01-19823.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/01-19823.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 2:25:14 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 422.25 591.75 343.499 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(contractor official or employee that falls under)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.909 0 Td
(any of four statutory categories [10 U.S.C. \247986\(c\)\(1\) through \(\
c\)\(4\)]. )Tj
28.27 0 Td
(10)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(U.S.C. \247986\(c\)\(1\) reads as follows: "The person has been convicte\
d in any court of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
33.538 0 Td
(the United States of a crime and)Tj
-33.538 -1.125 Td
(sentenced to imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.")Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(3. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(See also )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ISCR Case No. 99-0481 \(November 29, 2000\) at p. 4 \(neither Hearing Of\
fice Administrative Judges nor the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Board has jurisdiction or authority to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.053 0 Td
(adjudicate the manner in which DOHA personnel decide to issue or not iss\
ue)Tj
-15.053 -1.125 Td
(SORs, to order DOHA personnel to issue or not issue SORs, or to dismiss \
an)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(SOR\); ISCR Case No. 98-0619)Tj
T*
(\(September 10, 1999\) at p. 3 \(Administrative Judge does not have auth\
ority to dismiss a case or an SOR\); DOHA Case)Tj
T*
(No. 94-0569 \(March 30, 1995\) at p. 4 \(Administrative Judge has no aut\
hority to strike or dismiss SOR allegations\). )Tj
46.355 0 Td
(If)Tj
-46.355 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Judges \(and the Board\) do not)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.524 0 Td
(have authority concerning the issuance of SORs and do not have authority\
)Tj
-18.524 -1.125 Td
(to strike or dismiss SOR allegations, then )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
16.833 0 Td
(a foritiori)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.917 0 Td
(, the Judges \(and the Board\) lack)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
13.385 0 Td
(authority to supervise or pass)Tj
-34.135 -1.125 Td
(judgment on interim decisions made by DOHA personnel responsible for dec\
iding whether or when to issue SORs.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(4. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Frank v. United Airlines, Inc.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
12.803 0 Td
(, 216 F.3d 845, 850 n.4 \(9th Cir. 2000\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert. denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
20.748 0 Td
(, 532 U.S. 914 \(2001\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Monahan v.)Tj
-33.551 -1.125 Td
(New York City Department of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
12.138 0 Td
(Corrections)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, 214 F.3d 275, 284-285 \(2d Cir. 2000\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert. denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
25.581 0 Td
(, 531 U.S. 1035 \(2000\).)Tj
-37.719 -2.125 Td
(5. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Frank v. United Airlines, Inc.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
12.803 0 Td
(, 216 F.3d 845, 850 n.4 \(9th Cir. 2000\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert. denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
20.748 0 Td
(, 532 U.S. 914 \(2001\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Spradling v.)Tj
-33.551 -1.125 Td
(City of Tulsa)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
5.167 0 Td
(, 198 F.3d 1219, 1222)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(10th Cir. 2000\).)Tj
-5.167 -2.125 Td
(6. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Monahan v. New York City Department of Corrections)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
22.943 0 Td
(, 214 F.3d 275, 290 \(2d Cir. 2000\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert. denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
18.97 0 Td
(, 531 U.S. 1035)Tj
-41.913 -1.125 Td
(\(2000\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Spradling v. City of Tulsa)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.5 0 Td
(, 198)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(F.3d 1219, 1223 \(10th Cir. 2000\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(In re Universal Life Church, Inc.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
29.248 0 Td
(, 128 F.3d)Tj
-42.748 -1.125 Td
(1294, 1299-1300 \(9th Cir. 1997\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert. denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
18.275 0 Td
(, 524 U.S. 952 \(1998\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Labelle)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
12.472 0 Td
(Processing Co. v. Swarrow)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, 72 F.3d 308,)Tj
-30.747 -1.125 Td
(313-314 \(3d Cir. 1995\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Copeland v. Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
25.191 0 Td
(, 47 F.3d 1415, 1422 \(5th Cir. 1995\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Barrow v. Falck)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
21.582 0 Td
(,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(11)Tj
-46.773 -1.125 Td
(F.3d 729, 731 \(7th Cir. 1993\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Federal Labor Relations Authority v. U.S. Department of Tresaury, Financ\
ial)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Management Service)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
8.413 0 Td
(, 884 F.2d 1446, 1456)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(D.C. Cir. 1989\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert. denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
20.859 0 Td
(, 493 U.S. 1055 \(1990\).)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
17 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 4/Type/Page>>
endobj
45 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(01-19823.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/01-19823.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 2:25:14 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(Having addressed Applicant's claims concerning the applicability of 10 U\
.S.C. \247986, all that remains for the Board to do)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(is consider Applicant's request that it)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.01 0 Td
(recommend further consideration of his case for a waiver under 10 U.S.C.\
\247986\(d\).)Tj
-15.01 -2.125 Td
(The Operating Instruction does not authorize the Board to review an Admi\
nistrative Judge's recommendation whether or)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(not a waiver should be considered. )Tj
14.135 0 Td
(Furthermore, under the Operating Instruction, the Board is not authorize\
d to give)Tj
-14.135 -1.125 Td
(reasons or an explanation for its decision to recommend or not recommend\
)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
30.213 0 Td
(that a waiver be considered, but only state)Tj
-30.213 -1.125 Td
(without explanation either: \(1\) "The Appeal Board recommends considera\
tion of this case for a waiver of 10 U.S.C.)Tj
T*
(986" or \(2\) "The Appeal Board does not recommend consideration of this\
case for a waiver of 10 U.S.C. 986." )Tj
44.436 0 Td
(Finally,)Tj
-44.436 -1.125 Td
(since the Board is asked to make a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.051 0 Td
(recommendation in its own capacity, the Board is not bound by the recomm\
endation)Tj
-14.051 -1.125 Td
(made by the Judge below and must review the record evidence as a whole)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
29.823 0 Td
(in order to fulfill its obligation to make a)Tj
-29.823 -1.125 Td
(meaningful decision whether to recommend or not that a waiver should be \
considered.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Because the Board is not authorized to review the Administrative Judge's\
recommendation concerning a waiver under)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(10 U.S.C. \247986\(d\), or give reasons or an)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(explanation for its own recommendation concerning a waiver under 10 U.S.\
C.)Tj
T*
(\247986\(d\), the Board declines to address the specific reasons Applica\
nt contends)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
31.713 0 Td
(should persuade the Board to make a)Tj
-31.713 -1.125 Td
(favorable waiver recommendation.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
21.572 -2.125 Td
(Conclusions)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-21.572 -2.125 Td
(Applicant's case falls under 10 U.S.C. \247986\(c\)\(1\): "The person ha\
s been convicted in any court of the United States of a)Tj
T*
(crime and sentenced to imprisonment)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.246 0 Td
(for a term exceeding one year." )Tj
12.818 0 Td
(Accordingly, the Board affirms the)Tj
-28.064 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Judge's conclusion that 10 U.S.C. \247986 precluded her f\
rom making a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
34.035 0 Td
(favorable security clearance)Tj
-34.035 -1.125 Td
(decision in Applicant's case.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Recognizing the limits of its authority under the Operating Instruction,\
the Board has reviewed the record evidence as a)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(whole and states the following: The)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.552 0 Td
(Appeal Board does not recommend consideration of this case for a waiver \
of 10)Tj
-14.552 -1.125 Td
(U.S.C. \247986.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Signed: Emilio Jaksetic)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 16 385.5 cm
0 0 m
113.32 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 360.75 Tm
(Emilio Jaksetic)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Chairman, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 283.5 cm
0 0 m
120.645 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 258.75 Tm
(Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: Michael D. Hipple)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 181.5 cm
0 0 m
129.311 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 156.75 Tm
(Michael D. Hipple)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(1. )Tj
(Department Counsel did not file a reply brief in this case. )Tj
24.216 0 Td
(Accordingly, the Board must address the issues raised by)Tj
-24.216 -1.125 Td
(Applicant on appeal \(some of which are)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.244 0 Td
(novel\) without the benefit of Department Counsel's views.)Tj
-16.244 -2.125 Td
(2. )Tj
(Under 10 U.S.C. \247986, the Department of Defense may not grant or rene\
w a security clearance for a defense)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
16 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 3/Type/Page>>
endobj
46 0 obj
[48 0 R]
endobj
47 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(01-19823.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/01-19823.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 2:25:14 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(whether Applicant's argument is)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
13.177 0 Td
(labeled as )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
4.22 0 Td
(res judicata)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
4.75 0 Td
(, collateral estoppel, or a combination of both.)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 729.75 Tm
(The doctrines of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
6.803 0 Td
(res judicata)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
4.75 0 Td
( and collateral estoppel preclude a subsequent litigation only if the co\
ntrolling facts and)Tj
-11.553 -1.125 Td
(relevant law remain unchanged; both doctrines are inapplicable when, bet\
ween the original judgment and the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(subsequent litigation, there has been an intervening change in the law o\
r a modification of significant facts creates new)Tj
0 -1.375 TD
(legal conditions.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 95.3184 690.75 Tm
( \(6\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 95.3184 690 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 109.1245 686.25 Tm
( )Tj
(In this case, the passage of 10 U.S.C. \247986 constitutes an intervenin\
g change in the law.)Tj
-7.76 -1.125 Td
(Accordingly, the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
6.97 0 Td
(prior favorable adjudication of Applicant's security eligibility by DOHA\
did not preclude the)Tj
-6.97 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Judge from applying 10 U.S.C. \247986 to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
22.249 0 Td
(Applicant's case.)Tj
-22.249 -2.125 Td
(\(c\) Applicant's third argument also fails to demonstrate the Administr\
ative Judge erred. )Tj
35.143 0 Td
(Because the passage of 10)Tj
-35.143 -1.125 Td
(U.S.C. \247986 constitutes an intervening)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.721 0 Td
(change in the law that justifies a new adjudication of Applicant's secur\
ity)Tj
-15.721 -1.125 Td
(eligibility, for purposes of deciding whether 10 U.S.C. \247986 applies \
it does not matter)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
34.605 0 Td
(whether there was any new)Tj
-34.605 -1.125 Td
(evidence concerning Applicant since the prior adjudication of his securi\
ty eligibility by DOHA.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(4. )Tj
(Whether the Board should recommend that Applicant's case be further cons\
idered for a waiver under 10 U.S.C.)Tj
ET
0 G
q 1 0 0 1 28 567 cm
0 0 m
534.322 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 554.25 Tm
(\247986\(d\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 553.5 cm
0 0 m
37.992 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 53.9922 554.25 Tm
(. )Tj
(Applicant argues, in the alternative,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.022 0 Td
(that the Board should recommend his case be further considered for a)Tj
-18.188 -1.125 Td
(waiver under 10 U.S.C. \247986\(d\) based on: \(a\) the prior favorable \
DOHA adjudication of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
35.629 0 Td
(Applicant's security clearance)Tj
-35.629 -1.125 Td
(case in 1986 and 1987; and \(b\) Administrative Judge Matchinski's recom\
mendation that his case be further considered)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(for a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(waiver under the statute.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(In the Implementing Memorandum, the Deputy Secretary of Defense indicate\
d: "The decision as to whether a particular)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(case involves a meritorious case that)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.884 0 Td
(would justify pursuing a request for waiver shall be the province of the\
DoD)Tj
-14.884 -1.125 Td
(Component concerned \(i.e. all Components authorized to grant, deny or r\
evoke)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
31.935 0 Td
(access to classified information\))Tj
-31.935 -1.125 Td
(beginning with the Director of the Component Central Adjudication Facili\
ty \(CAF\), the Component appellate authority)Tj
T*
(or)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(other appropriate senior Component official." )Tj
19.597 0 Td
(For purposes of the Implementing Memorandum, the Director, DOHA)Tj
-19.597 -1.125 Td
(is the Director of the Component Central)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.635 0 Td
(Adjudication Facility for industrial security clearance cases.)Tj
-16.635 -2.125 Td
(The Director, DOHA issued an operating instruction \(dated July 10, 2001\
\) which indicates the following:)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
("Administrative Judges are responsible for initial resolution as to whet\
her or not 10 U.S.C. 986 applies to the facts of)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(the case." )Tj
(\(Operating Instruction,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
13.515 0 Td
(paragraph 2.e.\))Tj
-13.515 -2.125 Td
("In the event of an appeal raising an issue as to the applicability of 1\
0 U.S.C. 986, the Appeal Board is responsible for)Tj
T*
(final resolution of the issue." )Tj
11.795 0 Td
(\(Operating)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
4.582 0 Td
(Instruction, paragraph 2.f.\))Tj
-16.376 -2.125 Td
("In the event of a final determination that 10 U.S.C. 986 applies to the\
facts of a case, the Director is solely responsible)Tj
T*
(for the discretionary decision as to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.051 0 Td
(whether to recommend to the Deputy General Counsel \(Legal Counsel\) tha\
t 10)Tj
-14.051 -1.125 Td
(U.S.C. 986 should be waived by the Secretary of Defense." )Tj
23.958 0 Td
(\(Operating)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Instruction, paragraph 2.g.\))Tj
-23.958 -2.125 Td
("If an Administrative Judge issues a decision denying or revoking a clea\
rance solely as a result of 10 U.S.C. 986, the)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge shall include)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.164 0 Td
(without explanation either the statement 'I recommend further considerat\
ion of this)Tj
-14.164 -1.125 Td
(case for a waiver of 10 U.S.C. 986' or 'I do not recommend further)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
26.825 0 Td
(consideration of this case for a waiver of 10 U.S.C.)Tj
-26.825 -1.125 Td
(986.'" )Tj
(\(Operating Instruction, paragraph 3.e.\))Tj
0 -2.125 TD
("If the Appeal Board issues a decision denying or revoking a clearance s\
olely as a result of 10 U.S.C. 986, the Appeal)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Board shall include without explanation)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.247 0 Td
(either the statement 'The Appeal Board recommends consideration of this \
case)Tj
-16.247 -1.125 Td
(for a waiver of 10 U.S.C. 986' or 'The Appeal Board does not recommend)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
29.77 0 Td
(consideration of this case for a waiver of 10)Tj
-29.77 -1.125 Td
(U.S.C. 986.'" \(Operating Instruction, paragraph 3.f.\))Tj
0 -2.125 TD
("In any case in which [the] Administrative Judge, or [the] Appeal Board \
in the event of an appeal, recommends)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(consideration of a waiver of 10 U.S.C. 986, the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
19.135 0 Td
(Director shall within his sole discretion determine whether or not to)Tj
-19.135 -1.125 Td
(forward the case to the Deputy General Counsel \(Legal Counsel\) for fur\
ther consideration)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
36.237 0 Td
(of a possible waiver of 10)Tj
-36.237 -1.125 Td
(U.S.C. 986 by the Secretary of Defense together with such rationale as m\
ay be requested by the Deputy General)Tj
T*
(Counsel \(Legal)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
6.387 0 Td
(Counsel\)." )Tj
(\(Operating Instruction, paragraph 3.g.\))Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
48 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[95.0 688.0 109.0 699.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
15 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 2/Type/Page>>
endobj
49 0 obj
[51 0 R 52 0 R 53 0 R]
endobj
50 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(01-19823.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/01-19823.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 2:25:14 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 752.25 Tm
(reviewing, or controlling the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
11.691 0 Td
(exercise of authority under Item E3.1.2.1.)Tj
ET
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 356.5645 756.75 Tm
( \(3\))Tj
ET
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 370.3706 752.25 Tm
( )Tj
(Furthermore, nothing in the Implementing)Tj
-29.531 -1.125 Td
(Memorandum gives Hearing Office Judges or the Board the jurisdiction)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
29.048 0 Td
(or authority to supervise security clearance)Tj
-29.048 -1.125 Td
(investigations, or to review or evaluate the necessity or sufficiency of\
such investigations.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Since the sufficiency of the investigation in Applicant's case was not a\
matter within the jurisdiction or authority of the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Administrative Judge, any statements or)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.33 0 Td
(rulings by the Judge concerning that matter were )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
19.771 0 Td
(ultra vires)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( and a legal nullity.)Tj
-36.102 -2.125 Td
(2. )Tj
(Whether Applicant was denied due process in the proceedings below)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 28 660 cm
0 0 m
330.891 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 358.8906 660.75 Tm
(. )Tj
(Applicant contends he was denied due process)Tj
-28.574 -1.125 Td
(in the proceedings below because the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.161 0 Td
(Administrative Judge erred by concluding that DoD had complied with the)Tj
-15.161 -1.125 Td
(provisions of the Implementing Memorandum which require a full investiga\
tion be)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
33.465 0 Td
(conducted.)Tj
-33.465 -2.125 Td
(As discussed in the Board's discussion and resolution of Applicant's fir\
st appeal issue, the Administrative Judge's)Tj
T*
(statements or rulings concerning the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.746 0 Td
(sufficiency of the investigation of Applicant's case were )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.672 0 Td
(ultra vires)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( and a legal)Tj
-37.418 -1.125 Td
(nullity. )Tj
3.111 0 Td
(Furthermore, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
27.661 0 Td
(U.S. Constitution does not create or confer)Tj
-30.772 -1.125 Td
(jurisdiction or authority on federal administrative tribunals. )Tj
23.994 0 Td
(Such jurisdiction is created or conferred by federal)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.547 0 Td
(statute,)Tj
-44.542 -1.125 Td
(Executive Order, or federal regulation. )Tj
15.743 0 Td
(Furthermore, the Due Process Clause does not create any right to a parti\
cular)Tj
-15.743 -1.125 Td
(procedure or remedy. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
8.829 0 Td
(See, e.g.,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(New York State National Organization for Women v. Pataki)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
27.803 0 Td
(, 261 F.3d 156, 163-164 \(2d)Tj
-36.632 -1.125 Td
(Cir. 2001\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Farmer v. Lane)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, 864 F.2d 473, 478 \(7th Cir. 1988\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(3. )Tj
(Whether the Administrative Judge erred by concluding that 10 U.S.C. \247\
986 applied to Applicant's case)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 28 501 cm
0 0 m
493.711 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 521.7109 501.75 Tm
(. )Tj
(Applicant)Tj
-42.143 -1.125 Td
(contends it was arbitrary, capricious, or)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.05 0 Td
(contrary to law for the Administrative Judge to conclude that 10 U.S.C. \
\247986)Tj
-16.05 -1.125 Td
(applies to this case because: \(a\) she erroneously concluded DoD had co\
nducted a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
32.683 0 Td
(sufficient investigation of Applicant's)Tj
-32.683 -1.125 Td
(case; \(b\) without any new evidence concerning Applicant's situation, t\
here "was no need to relitigate issues of fact and)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(law that had been previously determined in a [DOHA hearing in 1986] and \
by this Board in 1987"; and \(c\) "[o]ther than)Tj
T*
([10 U.S.C. \247986], there must be some)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.359 0 Td
(evidentiary basis for initiating this proceeding without unjustly and un\
fairly)Tj
-15.359 -1.125 Td
(depriving the Applicant of his security clearance as has occurred in thi\
s case.")Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(a\) For the reasons given earlier in this decision, Applicant's first \
argument lacks merit. )Tj
35.115 0 Td
(Furthermore, Applicant seeks)Tj
-35.115 -1.125 Td
(relief to which he would not be entitled)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.996 0 Td
(even if the Board were to accept \(solely for purposes of deciding this \
appeal\) his)Tj
-15.996 -1.125 Td
(theory concerning the sufficiency of the investigation of his case. )Tj
26.353 0 Td
(The)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(applicability of 10 U.S.C. \247986 does not turn on)Tj
-26.353 -1.125 Td
(whether Applicant is able to adjudicate the sufficiency of the investiga\
tion in his case. )Tj
34.684 0 Td
(Acceptance of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
5.996 0 Td
(Applicant's)Tj
-40.68 -1.125 Td
(argument would lead to the absurd result that an applicant could avoid t\
he application of 10 U.S.C. \247986 if the applicant)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(were able to identify some)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
10.857 0 Td
(procedural irregularity or failure by DoD in executing the Implementing \
Memorandum. )Tj
35.322 0 Td
(A)Tj
-46.18 -1.125 Td
(federal statute is not nullified or rendered inapplicable merely)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
24.962 0 Td
(because the federal department or agency implementing)Tj
-24.962 -1.125 Td
(that statute fails to properly execute its internal regulations or proce\
dures.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(b\) Applicant's second argument raises the questions of \(i\) whether \
the prior favorable adjudication of his case by)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(DOHA gives him a vested right or interest in)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.247 0 Td
(continued retention of a security clearance, or \(ii\) whether applicati\
on of)Tj
-18.247 -1.125 Td
(the doctrines of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
6.47 0 Td
(res judicata)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
4.75 0 Td
( or collateral estoppel preclude adjudication of his case)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
22.241 0 Td
(under 10 U.S.C. \247986.)Tj
-33.461 -2.125 Td
(\(b\)\(i\) There is no right to a security clearance. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
18.658 0 Td
(Department of Navy v. Egan)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.414 0 Td
(, 484 U.S. 518, 528 \(1988\). )Tj
(Nor does a prior)Tj
-30.072 -1.125 Td
(favorable security clearance decision)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.047 0 Td
(give rise to a vested right or interest in continued retention of a secu\
rity clearance.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-15.047 -1.125 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 01-21528 \(July 26, 2002\) at p. 3. )Tj
(To the extent)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
25.803 0 Td
(that Applicant's argument could be construed as)Tj
-29.134 -1.125 Td
(raising the question whether DoD is equitably estopped from denying or r\
evoking his security clearance, it is)Tj
T*
(unpersuasive because the federal government is not equitably estopped fr\
om denying or revoking access to classified)Tj
T*
(information. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
5.221 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, ISCR Case No. 96-0461 \(December 31, 1997\) at p. 4 \(citing prior Boa\
rd decisions\); DISCR Case)Tj
-5.221 -1.125 Td
(No. 88-1733 \(February 20, 1991\) at p. 3 \(citing federal cases\). )Tj
25.131 0 Td
(Therefore, the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
5.913 0 Td
(prior favorable adjudication of Applicant's)Tj
-31.044 -1.125 Td
(security eligibility by DOHA in 1986 and 1987 does not entitle Applicant\
to continued retention of a security)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
43.936 0 Td
(clearance.)Tj
-43.936 -2.125 Td
(\(b\)\(ii\) Under the doctrine of )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.468 0 Td
(res judicata)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
4.75 0 Td
(, a legal judgment precludes the parties from seeking to relitigate any \
claims)Tj
-16.217 -1.375 Td
(that were adjudicated or could have been)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.631 0 Td
(adjudicated in the earlier proceeding.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 393.8242 90.75 Tm
( \(4\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 393.8242 90 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 407.6304 86.25 Tm
( )Tj
(Under the doctrine of collateral)Tj
-32.636 -1.125 Td
(estoppel, a legal judgment forecloses relitigation of issues that were a\
ctually and)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
32.462 0 Td
(necessarily decided in the earlier)Tj
-32.462 -1.375 Td
(litigation.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 62.3301 60.75 Tm
( \(5\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 62.3301 60 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 76.1362 56.25 Tm
( )Tj
(There are technical differences between )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
16.434 0 Td
(res judicata)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
4.75 0 Td
( and collateral estoppel, but those differences are not)Tj
-26.195 -1.125 Td
(significant for purposes of deciding Applicant's argument in this appeal\
. )Tj
29.09 0 Td
(For purposes of this appeal, it does not matter)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
51 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[357.0 754.0 371.0 765.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
52 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[393.0 88.0 407.0 99.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
53 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[62.0 58.0 76.0 69.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
14 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 1/Type/Page>>
endobj
54 0 obj
[56 0 R 57 0 R]
endobj
55 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(01-19823.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/01-19823.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 2:25:14 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(explanation for the decision that runs contrary to the record evidence; \
or it is so)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
32.018 0 Td
(implausible that it cannot be ascribed to)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(a mere difference of opinion. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.883 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(,)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ISCR Case No. 97-0435 \(July 14, 1998\) at p. 3 \(citing Supreme Court)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
28.72 0 Td
(decision\).)Tj
-43.935 -1.125 Td
(In deciding whether the Judge's rulings or conclusions are contrary to l\
aw, the Board will consider whether they are)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(contrary to provisions of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
10.109 0 Td
(Executive Order 10865, the Directive, or other applicable federal law. )Tj
28.238 0 Td
(Compliance with state)Tj
-38.347 -1.125 Td
(or local law is not required because security clearance)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
21.851 0 Td
(adjudications are conducted by the Department of Defense)Tj
-21.851 -1.125 Td
(pursuant to federal law. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
9.691 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( U.S. Constitution, Article VI, clause 2 \(Supremacy Clause\). )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25.828 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(ISCR Case No. 00-)Tj
-35.519 -1.125 Td
(0423 \(June 8, 2001\) at p. 3 \(citing Supreme Court decisions\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(When an Administrative Judge's factual findings are challenged, the Boar\
d must determine whether "[t]he)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Administrative Judge's findings of fact are supported)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
21.425 0 Td
(by such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as)Tj
-21.425 -1.125 Td
(adequate to support a conclusion in light of all the contrary evidence i\
n the same record. )Tj
35.516 0 Td
(In)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(making this review, the)Tj
-35.516 -1.125 Td
(Appeal Board shall give deference to the credibility determinations of t\
he Administrative Judge." )Tj
39.174 0 Td
(Directive, Additional)Tj
-39.174 -1.125 Td
(Procedural)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
4.582 0 Td
(Guidance, Item E3.1.32.1. )Tj
10.775 0 Td
(The Board must consider not only whether there is record evidence suppor\
ting a)Tj
-15.356 -1.125 Td
(Judge's findings, but also whether there is evidence)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.758 0 Td
(that fairly detracts from the weight of the evidence supporting those)Tj
-20.758 -1.125 Td
(findings, and whether the Judge's findings reflect a reasonable interpre\
tation of the record)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
36.112 0 Td
(evidence as a whole.)Tj
-36.112 -1.125 Td
(Although a Judge's credibility determination is not immune from review, \
the party challenging a Judge's credibility)Tj
T*
(determination has a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
8.081 0 Td
(heavy burden on appeal.)Tj
-8.081 -2.125 Td
(When an appeal issue raises a question of law, the Board's scope of revi\
ew is plenary. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
34.558 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( DISCR Case No. 87-2107)Tj
-34.558 -1.125 Td
(\(September 29, 1992\) at pp. 4-5 \(citing)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.857 0 Td
(federal cases\).)Tj
-15.857 -2.125 Td
(If an appealing party demonstrates factual or legal error, then the Boar\
d must consider the following questions:)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Is the error harmful or harmless? )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.384 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 00-0250 \(July 11, 2001\) at p. 6 \(discussing harmless \
error)Tj
-16.715 -1.125 Td
(doctrine\);)Tj
T*
(Has the nonappealing party made a persuasive argument for how the Admini\
strative Judge's decision can be affirmed on)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(alternate grounds? )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
7.608 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Case No. 99-0454 \(October 17, 2000\) at p. 6 \(citing federal cases\); \
and)Tj
-10.939 -2.125 Td
(If the Administrative Judge's decision cannot be affirmed, should the ca\
se be reversed or remanded? )Tj
40.333 0 Td
(\(Directive,)Tj
-40.333 -1.125 Td
(Additional Procedural Guidance, Items)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.912 0 Td
(E3.1.33.2 and E3.1.33.3\))Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
4.737 -2.375 Td
(Appeal Issues)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
/TT0 1 Tf
9.75 0 0 9.75 334.1487 335.25 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 334.1487 334.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 305.25 Tm
(1. )Tj
(Whether the Administrative Judge erred by concluding that Applicant's ca\
se had been sufficiently investigated by the)Tj
ET
0 G
q 1 0 0 1 28 304.5 cm
0 0 m
562.986 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 291.75 Tm
(Department of Defense)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 291 cm
0 0 m
111.949 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 127.9492 291.75 Tm
(. )Tj
(The)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Administrative Judge concluded that Applicant's 1984 conviction \(for wh\
ich he was)Tj
-9.329 -1.375 Td
(sentenced to two years imprisonment\) falls under 10 U.S.C. \247986,)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 332.9453 279.75 Tm
( \(2\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 332.9453 279 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 346.7515 275.25 Tm
( and)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(that application of that statute precluded a)Tj
-27.563 -1.125 Td
(favorable security clearance decision.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(On appeal, Applicant cites to the June 7, 2001 memorandum by the Deputy \
Secretary of Defense which implements 10)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(U.S.C. \247986 \(hereinafter "Implementing)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.376 0 Td
(emorandum"\) and contends: "[t]he DoD failed to do a full investigation \
and)Tj
-16.376 -1.125 Td
(develop a complete record upon which to evaluate whether a waiver is)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
28.433 0 Td
(meritorious," as required by the Implementing)Tj
-28.433 -1.125 Td
(Memorandum. )Tj
6.166 0 Td
(Relying on that passage from the Implementing Memorandum, Applicant argu\
es the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
33.992 0 Td
(Administrative)Tj
-40.157 -1.125 Td
(Judge erred by concluding his case had been sufficiently investigated by\
the Department of Defense.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Under the Directive, an Administrative Judge has the jurisdiction and au\
thority to adjudicate security clearance cases.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -1.125 TD
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( Directive, Additional Procedural)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.967 0 Td
(Guidance, Items E3.1.7 through E3.1.26 and E3.1.35. )Tj
21.69 0 Td
(Nothing in the Directive)Tj
-36.657 -1.125 Td
(gives a Judge jurisdiction or authority to supervise security clearance)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
27.88 0 Td
(investigations or pass judgment on the necessity or)Tj
-27.88 -1.125 Td
(sufficiency of such investigations. )Tj
13.914 0 Td
(Indeed, the Board has held that neither Hearing Office Judges nor this)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
28.241 0 Td
(Board has)Tj
-42.155 -1.125 Td
(jurisdiction or authority over )Tj
11.775 0 Td
(security clearance investigations. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.495 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 01-03112 \(March 20, 2002\) at)Tj
-28.602 -1.125 Td
(p. 3 \(citing prior Board)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
9.498 0 Td
(decisions\). )Tj
(Although DOHA has the authority to "[d]irect further investigations" in \
connection)Tj
-9.498 -1.125 Td
(with deciding whether to issue an SOR \(Directive, Additional)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
24.939 0 Td
(Procedural Guidance, Item E3.1.2.1\), that authority is not)Tj
-24.939 -1.125 Td
(vested in Hearing Office Judges or the Board; and the jurisdiction and a\
uthority of Judges to make)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
39.629 0 Td
(security clearance)Tj
-39.629 -1.125 Td
(decisions \(and the jurisdiction and authority of the Board to review su\
ch decisions\) do not extend to supervising,)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
56 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[334.0 333.0 348.0 344.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
57 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[333.0 277.0 347.0 288.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
12 0 obj
<>
endobj
58 0 obj
<>
endobj
9 0 obj
<>
endobj
10 0 obj
<>
endobj
11 0 obj
<>
endobj
66 0 obj
(file:///usr.osd.mil/Home/OSD/OGC/JosephLM/_MyComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/01-19823.a1.html)
endobj
65 0 obj
<>
endobj
67 0 obj
<>
endobj
59 0 obj
[17 0 R/XYZ 0 90.0 null]
endobj
60 0 obj
[17 0 R/XYZ 0 51.0 null]
endobj
61 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 713.0 null]
endobj
62 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 593.0 null]
endobj
63 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 554.0 null]
endobj
64 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 515.0 null]
endobj
4 0 obj
<>
endobj
xref
0 68
0000000000 65535 f
0000000016 00000 n
0000000141 00000 n
0000003658 00000 n
0000171003 00000 n
0000003536 00000 n
0000003591 00000 n
0000003745 00000 n
0000003772 00000 n
0000170092 00000 n
0000170294 00000 n
0000170336 00000 n
0000169902 00000 n
0000004610 00000 n
0000160276 00000 n
0000149375 00000 n
0000140861 00000 n
0000135728 00000 n
0000130598 00000 n
0000003875 00000 n
0000003921 00000 n
0000003970 00000 n
0000004243 00000 n
0000004051 00000 n
0000004083 00000 n
0000004115 00000 n
0000004147 00000 n
0000004179 00000 n
0000004211 00000 n
0000004821 00000 n
0000010823 00000 n
0000010872 00000 n
0000010908 00000 n
0000011508 00000 n
0000011931 00000 n
0000077117 00000 n
0000077384 00000 n
0000045653 00000 n
0000045926 00000 n
0000012392 00000 n
0000012668 00000 n
0000013176 00000 n
0000046365 00000 n
0000077999 00000 n
0000130798 00000 n
0000135928 00000 n
0000141075 00000 n
0000141100 00000 n
0000149051 00000 n
0000149589 00000 n
0000149628 00000 n
0000159307 00000 n
0000159632 00000 n
0000159955 00000 n
0000160501 00000 n
0000160533 00000 n
0000169252 00000 n
0000169577 00000 n
0000169987 00000 n
0000170753 00000 n
0000170794 00000 n
0000170835 00000 n
0000170877 00000 n
0000170919 00000 n
0000170961 00000 n
0000170544 00000 n
0000170378 00000 n
0000170700 00000 n
trailer
<]>>
startxref
171176
%%EOF