%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-06-24T10:50:07-04:00
2021-06-24T10:50:06-04:00
2021-06-24T10:50:07-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
02-06033.a1
uuid:4be28e04-63da-4eb3-b9bd-972d2c8f4e86
uuid:3f012009-40dd-47c3-9776-256715ab93b3
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
(02-06033.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(omputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archive\
d%20-%20HTML/02-06033.a1.html)Tj
49.073 0 Td
([6/24/2021 10:50:06 AM])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: January 6, 2005)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. 02-06033)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
-7.539 -2.2 Td
(Peregrine D. Russell-Hunter, Esq., Chief Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
8.317 -2.2 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-0.041 -2.2 Td
(James England, Esq.)Tj
12 0 0 12 16 419.25 Tm
(The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals \(DOHA\) issued to Applicant \
a Statement of Reasons \(SOR\), dated)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(October 15, 2003, which)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(stated the reasons why DOHA proposed to deny or revoke access to classif\
ied information for)Tj
T*
(Applicant. )Tj
4.443 0 Td
(The SOR was based on Guideline J)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(Criminal Conduct\). )Tj
22.774 0 Td
(Administrative Judge James A. Young issued an)Tj
-27.218 -1.125 Td
(unfavorable security clearance decision, dated August 16, 2004.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant appealed the Administrative Judge's unfavorable decision. )Tj
27.728 0 Td
(The Board has jurisdiction under Executive Order)Tj
-27.728 -1.125 Td
(10865 and)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 \(Directive\), dated January 2, 1\
992, as amended.)Tj
T*
(The following issues have been raised on appeal: \(1\) whether Board dec\
isions not available online constitute "secret)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(law" that cannot be cited)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
10.154 0 Td
(or relied in later Board decisions that are available online; and \(2\) \
whether the Administrative)Tj
-10.154 -1.125 Td
(Judge erred by declining to consider evidence)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.577 0 Td
(proffered to show Applicant can make affirmative contributions to the)Tj
-18.577 -1.125 Td
(national defense. )Tj
7.025 0 Td
(For the reasons that follow, the Board affirms the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
19.995 0 Td
(Administrative Judge's decision.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-6.335 -2.125 Td
(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)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
8.191 0 Td
(whether there is factual or legal error. )Tj
15.326 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)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.801 0 Td
(specificity and identify how the Administrative Judge committed factual \
or legal)Tj
-14.801 -1.125 Td
(error. )Tj
(Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
22.186 0 Td
(E3.1.32. )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
(See also)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No. 00-0050 \(July 23, 2001\) at pp.)Tj
-22.186 -1.125 Td
(2-3 \(discussing reasons why party must raise claims of error with)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
26.355 0 Td
(specificity\).)Tj
-26.355 -2.125 Td
(When the rulings or conclusions of an Administrative Judge are challenge\
d, the Board must consider whether they are:)Tj
T*
(\(1\) arbitrary or)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
6.191 0 Td
(capricious; or \(2\) contrary to law. )Tj
13.689 0 Td
(Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item E3.1.32.3. )Tj
24.104 0 Td
(In)Tj
-43.985 -1.125 Td
(deciding whether the Judge's rulings or)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.899 0 Td
(conclusions are arbitrary or capricious, the Board will review the Judge\
's)Tj
-15.899 -1.125 Td
(decision to determine whether: it does not examine relevant)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
24.131 0 Td
(evidence; it fails to articulate a satisfactory explanation for)Tj
-24.131 -1.125 Td
(its conclusions, including a rational connection between the facts found\
and the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
32.019 0 Td
(choice made; it does not consider)Tj
-32.019 -1.125 Td
(relevant factors; it reflects a clear error of judgment; it fails to con\
sider an important aspect of the case; it)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
42.316 0 Td
(offers an)Tj
-42.316 -1.125 Td
(explanation for the decision that runs contrary to the record evidence; \
or it is so implausible that it cannot be ascribed to)Tj
T*
(a mere)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
2.942 0 Td
(difference of opinion. )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
8.941 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 97-0435 \(July 14, 1998\) at p. 3 \(citing Supreme Court\
decision\).)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
29 0 obj
(Yȑ[=AF)
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
31 0 obj
<>
endobj
32 0 obj
<>
endobj
37 0 obj
<>
endobj
38 0 obj
<>stream
H\n0yCEK!n%4Vh0(o?;:i _|ĉXnѻln;x/xƺ|_QE\-ӌ}Ae>hs+}髨V:n=Yot[*Ru:
i벡n^֔ފڢUL#W{ڥߵWY
Mąp|>'4' s*2̒pnx'c:)1Rp}#1cĘ#2-c
38v0/f͜2s >``7`77`77`77`7ō&n=t==\otqaԔŏ` ֻ
endstream
endobj
39 0 obj
<>stream
H|TU}8(
ν5vłh$/1A,(#*;V,V`o˽ݫSK V2kgٳηf(X0;~YΫ*ir.-4<:,&ii ?6,<ȘB*.zثSS@O~oĬ׃eQrdmP/*zФ%/8t\t
,>Sf.aWʽfڈ~s8բp>f@D̚;t*9BSuQ"ߞ&UQTVjbq%chY,{