%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-06-24T10:58:36-04:00
2021-06-24T10:58:36-04:00
2021-06-24T10:58:36-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
02-16061.a1
uuid:ab8be3bb-b89f-495e-9ca4-7bd81ab43450
uuid:6f2eb71f-bdfb-404e-b5ee-229d1e6bea5e
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
17 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
18 0 obj
<>
endobj
19 0 obj
<>
endobj
21 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
23 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
20 0 obj
<><><><><><>]/P 18 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
25 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(02-16061.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/02-16061.a1.html)Tj
49.073 0 Td
([6/24/2021 10:58:36 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: February 17, 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. 02-16061)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
0.209 -2.2 Td
(Gary R. Long, 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
(November 17, 2003, which)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(stated the reasons why DOHA proposed to deny or revoke access to classif\
ied information)Tj
T*
(for Applicant. )Tj
5.859 0 Td
(The SOR was based on Guideline F)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.582 0 Td
(\(Financial Considerations\). )Tj
11.137 0 Td
(Administrative Judge Robert Robinson)Tj
-31.578 -1.125 Td
(Gales issued an unfavorable security clearance decision, dated October)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
28.654 0 Td
(14, 2004.)Tj
-28.654 -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
0 -2.125 TD
(The following issues have been raised on appeal: \(1\) whether the Admin\
istrative Judge abused his discretion in denying)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Applicant's request)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
7.9 0 Td
(for a continuance of his hearing; and \(2\) whether the Administrative J\
udge's unfavorable decision is)Tj
-7.9 -1.125 Td
(arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law. )Tj
16.188 0 Td
(For the reasons that follow, the Board affirms the Administrative Judge'\
s)Tj
-16.188 -1.125 Td
(decision.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
20.685 -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
(,)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
( )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ISCR Case No. 97-0435 \(July 14, 1998\) at p. 3 \(citing Supreme Court d\
ecision\).)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
27 0 obj
(\)=Ǖ{0_W )
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
29 0 obj
<>
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
35 0 obj
<>
endobj
36 0 obj
<>stream
H\n <"ZJ(ҔRв=@
ND!o?U'
cmYY`4V{\Wg
QK8p83)s ~'=q荽WoW~pB#=2aB)lin)/gԬqqB?2Yh@h4/E;{LVrQ!n3deb2\]]}}:s9k%Z┙>/*1UGZd)[&1U먮S SRbՌ{g쀢d ƿ
endstream
endobj
37 0 obj
<>stream
H| TnC*)=3D\Ę"**Q4Q1" 7Wp_f(.OC]Чw{Nuݺw A|ծcUb NHorW؛WDĎ]$@D N#&Ed@` x=H`>Njx2y9*&4@L&G:.bN T!<*q4%6f|\ uc7'x @@ $.-*~eB $2QE&CP^|=4bZM~* +H)'Ώϰ97wE B]ILT6
6mlgԤK-Z]eVx|ʳu{kߡw>]vף'zۯ~_~7~7?8,(8G9jtTر4ab?2e괄H9kvҜԹi/Xh˖ÊVgYn,}M)gmwܵ{O}.QNs]Ln"~`[y?KOK/K_K@[mumm@
[ɝi2%riʨٲ@8DsbX!J]qL粋ȁ8 X,ߐ˯4i5h9f:wua4!=t%SC psC(!\z>Iܞs Em9[Xh8W ?}{%jF_W|֚+p` aV? TUbQn];fosGss{s;6fOs+Yp\{ʳ˗֚R LYu;Φ 7M~F?cWi[hxb0
2
y|v̰n[u9&7/+:z2;YVp @l*c/9a}?;X!eUTT lԙ͡wQWafy_L{͛5mD)<%pfAJ9*̅/=U ^sx k!N@1l
%$SpsP
eF<\Hx0FH
c b`,8?AL`xg@i0w>\KQ@B"X3p.Og
\p5fT
6+Pٸ7f-a.n^%L܅q^l1ڡ=:M 6a<.
r6ǣX-%a1o6A5ExK3xR,sx/EǏzbkvA;i=G{i~:@eS?Yt
(1*tNR tFx"<9:O"]t5.T
@FA&*tnK>= 3=GTAwzBOszA/_h:J3ΤY4h:)\orŝGU UӟTC2cLdV̚ILlXw([֘1{^+xu4H]e]XW֍ug~>aXoևeX) uIݥ}dJ
DzJTTRV%樒U)T\Uj*
d 6}X 6J~R,P(sw/]Zw@p
ݵPܝ"8$@|FIn[VMn;NK{^OAyȹܖ+<*<)OQOgsr.;7/W]!ɿyyA^eyE^u]MW5tM]Kut]]O
tCH7MtSfU}jDjajFQjZqjBT$5Y)jusBԭtkFKJo[^w.[Q{>_P!uXQG1u\P'm)u}DEN$^╸!^7x/>D$>@I$YšTK1yPL@>(2belrPNE)M%E)/JS*H0@;{~NT)TJQi*CeW4&PD
I4i
Mi%Mzިz>D>O*Y;,eɊ=l8
[qz9g,?9;ss_L.v7]Fq~.F1n"nE99\KTtWqi.e]uqyW*\qu5:\q}n
bnM)7܂[rl܆r;n#w܅*nt7qTW܋{s?:IA<,1KM61&PyQ