e]n焸pv:''9̀A:'/%#2)d|}Y9 FvQ9 9ȇ5
#A $J4ʠ,ʡ0T@ETBeTAUTCu@MBmA]C4D#4F4E34G D+FQ m ]
[twa:Nb'z7/?肺."tq:sP` 0^w;4w= kPO@ ` PaQ1qpD R,L9ɈL4L ,vbb A,/#HB2RK˰ cVbVc
b cR[۰ݬ3; ]ו؇8x( m]ŝq@XQ݉5h#bE:Ԥflfnvfmvag 梹d}f9`gvk6.߸xG/)9^%^5
o w9d#溹an[9j;油bk~ x?Od?_/K2_Wk:O7|p8GG nrGYտڣ;AX QȮ]c.")m.Fy4 e@M>1xh<j|GMm ZXlP j-q4u`:뵆(@H2%4N [GӖϚt30
I ʞU<`xR:s 0GHe)B/INF)1 h Ƒ V qN/_8t(Z@9ic5Ď0F]e1/Azur$`68h),lpYYv
ʳfb̥QMpٶ"ZpSd[cgOĚl|L{>w=p5/+3ʍ*TAM TLkU]B_m۪&b-0G4jtSmMUmJn8y ZQ
!us$W*B{*B˪,'8ö2 vB4n cƦ=6cfG"i8ҡH#< R ߌzd&r=F- y=bҫ6hRW\(:~A{Ol`!|H)%te{7@ѵ !G!|ۖJb{HD~
u2,#sƸ> 5.oo~x2.26?0dۻ}&QJR"QE`6"q<@!U^$u1I~O!!_WtQ'"7 xd1C5Qf+F
c]C-
#~%ȸJ{7'!9~zKrcJy嘯.*1D0i ͛%5e"6pvnL
/DixwJ 08@:`AED< vkW
KoեXz:4#D04#c~x,2WO\YYu8AtK8]ku6>h#FFyoGhSޭַ;̧E}BD DnVEoމ_-!^# IFk[jAY` WJYDAd\ oh^fm-=5- TOjUaRMRP&6t
$U b%e± / eo1VhV,JájCA2H3_]V4`'+D kb.pM'-{.[=# j{. .R`vQXFD@7Q+geli:&ִdVFjk I-&M86C'3AI#N5ĎZ;wJw{ΥrɆn~tؾf3lJ-b[`Sl)M(T jx3k ~܂R2 X!J⼷$k60t]Zk-v!|6.G(B8͚NtJLQ7-k )+W Sjgt,?k\viHz[X%#''/> uLLI^:Oڜ1ZPx梺WO{G!(=$y5ɑ>91*Jh.\ݔ1ؓy*L?
ؠol c?y XrCNnݞ K4I3jBNj8C' J'IR^q:dqBEIӼNʿNcGӽ4~u/4HWCWI[v#pEҵ\_ާ ;.>/Rect[16.0 208.0 27.0 219.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
15 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 2/Type/Page>>
endobj
44 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(02-15383.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/02-15383.a1.html)Tj
49.073 0 Td
([6/24/2021 10:58:03 AM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 249.75 591.75 516 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 753.75 Tm
(Applicant also asserts the Administrative Judge failed to take into acco\
unt evidence that is mitigating of her conduct and)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 740.25 Tm
(circumstances. )Tj
6.164 0 Td
(There is a rebuttable)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
8.44 0 Td
(presumption that an Administrative Judge considered all the record evide\
nce unless)Tj
-14.604 -1.125 Td
(the Judge specifically states otherwise. )Tj
15.773 0 Td
(Applicant's strong disagreement)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
13.094 0 Td
(with the Judge's conclusions is not sufficient to)Tj
-28.867 -1.125 Td
(rebut that presumption.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
21.572 -2.125 Td
(Conclusions)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-21.572 -2.125 Td
(Applicant has failed to meet her burden on appeal of demonstrating error\
. )Tj
29.684 0 Td
(The Administrative Judge's February 25, 2003)Tj
-29.684 -1.125 Td
(decision is affirmed.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Signed: Emilio Jaksetic)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 16 622.5 cm
0 0 m
113.32 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 597.75 Tm
(Emilio Jaksetic)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Chairman, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 520.5 cm
0 0 m
134.795 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 495.75 Tm
(Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 418.5 cm
0 0 m
120.645 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 393.75 Tm
(Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(1. )Tj
(The Administrative Judge issued findings favorable to Applicant under SO\
R subparagraphs 1.d, 2.a, and 2.d. )Tj
44.797 0 Td
(Those)Tj
-44.797 -1.125 Td
(favorable findings are not at issue on)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.023 0 Td
(appeal.)Tj
-15.023 -2.125 Td
(2. )Tj
(The legal sufficiency of an Administrative Judge's factual findings coul\
d be placed into question by the cumulative)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(effect of numerous factual errors that might be deemed harmless when vie\
wed individually.)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
14 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 1/Type/Page>>
endobj
45 0 obj
[47 0 R]
endobj
46 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(02-15383.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/02-15383.a1.html)Tj
49.073 0 Td
([6/24/2021 10:58:03 AM])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 16 754.5 Tm
(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
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741 Tm
(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. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, ISCR Case No. 99-0205 \(October 19, 2000\) at p. 2.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(When a challenge to an Administrative Judge's rulings or conclusions rai\
ses a question of law, the Board's scope of)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(review is plenary. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
7.386 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( DISCR Case No.)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(87-2107 \(September 29, 1992\) at pp. 4-5 \(citing federal cases\).)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
13.839 -2.125 Td
(Appeal Issues)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-21.225 -2.125 Td
(1. )Tj
(Whether SOR subparagraphs 1.c and 2.c are erroneous)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 28 636.75 cm
0 0 m
262.904 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 290.9043 637.5 Tm
(. )Tj
(Applicant cites to that portion of the Administrative Judge's)Tj
-22.909 -1.125 Td
(decision which recites Department)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.106 0 Td
(Counsel's proposed amendments to the SOR and argues that SOR subparagrap\
hs 1.c)Tj
-14.106 -1.125 Td
(and 2.c are wrong. )Tj
(Applicant's claim of error fails to demonstrate the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
27.782 0 Td
(Judge erred.)Tj
-27.782 -2.125 Td
(An SOR is an administrative pleading that is not measured against the st\
rict requirements of a criminal indictment. )Tj
46.128 0 Td
(As)Tj
-46.128 -1.125 Td
(long as an SOR places an applicant on)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.607 0 Td
(reasonable notice of the allegations against him or her and there has be\
en no)Tj
-15.607 -1.125 Td
(showing that the wording of an SOR has prejudiced an applicant's ability\
to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
30.48 0 Td
(respond to the allegations and present)Tj
-30.48 -1.125 Td
(evidence on his or her behalf, a security clearance case should be adjud\
icated on the merits of the relevant issues and not)Tj
T*
(be concerned with pleading niceties. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
14.828 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 99-0710 )Tj
(\(March 19, 2001\) at p. 2. )Tj
20.72 0 Td
(In this case, Applicant)Tj
-38.879 -1.125 Td
(has not shown that the wording of the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.331 0 Td
(SOR prejudiced her in any discernable way. )Tj
17.883 0 Td
(Accordingly, Applicant's complaints)Tj
-33.214 -1.125 Td
(about the SOR need not be discussed any further.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(2. )Tj
(Whether the Administrative Judge's decision is based on harmful errors i\
n the findings of fact)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 28 477.75 cm
0 0 m
449.379 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 477.3789 478.5 Tm
(. )Tj
(Applicant presents)Tj
-38.448 -1.125 Td
(new evidence on appeal, which the Board)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.938 0 Td
(cannot consider. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
6.803 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item)Tj
-23.741 -1.125 Td
(E3.1.29. )Tj
(Accordingly, the Board will not consider or address arguments which rely\
on)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
34.742 0 Td
(new evidence. )Tj
5.969 0 Td
(Furthermore,)Tj
-40.711 -1.125 Td
(because the Directive prohibits the consideration of new evidence on app\
eal, the Board cannot accept Applicant's offer)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(to present)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
4.166 0 Td
(additional evidence for it to review in connection with this appeal. )Tj
26.77 0 Td
(The Board notes that Applicant had the)Tj
-30.935 -1.125 Td
(opportunity to present evidence for consideration by)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
21.188 0 Td
(the Administrative Judge and Applicant took advantage of that)Tj
-21.188 -1.125 Td
(opportunity to submit such evidence in response to the File of Relevant \
Material. )Tj
32.66 0 Td
(Applicant)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
4.193 0 Td
(cannot fairly challenge the)Tj
-36.853 -1.125 Td
(Judge's findings based on evidence that was not presented for the Judge'\
s consideration.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant correctly notes that the Administrative Judge erred by finding\
she is seeking a security clearance in)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(connection with her educational duties. )Tj
15.939 0 Td
(However,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(this error is harmless. )Tj
13.024 0 Td
(The particular reasons why an applicant needs a)Tj
-28.964 -1.125 Td
(security clearance usually are not relevant or material to an assessment\
of the applicant's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
35.61 0 Td
(security eligibility. )Tj
7.804 0 Td
(Although)Tj
-43.415 -1.125 Td
(factual errors about things not material to making a security clearance \
decision should not be treated lightly, they)Tj
T*
(generally do not)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
6.748 0 Td
(warrant remand or reversal. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.3 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 00-0250 \(July 11, 2001\) at p. 6 \(discussing)Tj
-21.379 -1.375 Td
(harmless error doctrine\).)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 134.2832 292.5 Tm
( \(2\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 134.2832 291.75 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 148.0894 288 Tm
( )Tj
(Here, a reading of the Judge's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
12.342 0 Td
(decision as a whole persuades the Board that this factual error)Tj
-23.35 -1.125 Td
(was not pivotal or otherwise crucial to the Judge's analysis of the case\
.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant challenges the Administrative Judge's finding that she has exe\
rcised dual citizenship. )Tj
38.42 0 Td
(The Judge's finding is)Tj
-38.42 -1.125 Td
(sustainable. )Tj
4.943 0 Td
(By obtaining and)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
7.138 0 Td
(possessing a Spanish passport, Applicant exercised the rights and privil\
eges of Spanish)Tj
-12.082 -1.125 Td
(citizenship.)Tj
T*
(3. )Tj
(Whether the Administrative Judge's adverse conclusions are arbitrary, ca\
pricious or contrary to law.)Tj
ET
0 G
q 1 0 0 1 28 195.75 cm
0 0 m
479.994 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 507.9941 196.5 Tm
( )Tj
(The)Tj
-41 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Judge's adverse conclusions may be)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.842 0 Td
(summed up as follows: Applicant obtained as an adult and still has a)Tj
-20.842 -1.125 Td
(foreign passport which precludes her from eligibility for a security cle\
arance under the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
34.903 0 Td
(August 16, 2000 memorandum)Tj
-34.903 -1.125 Td
(of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communicatio\
ns and Intelligence and Guideline C.)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Applicant is)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
5.11 0 Td
(potentially vulnerable to foreign influence under Guideline B because he\
r )Tj
29.711 0 Td
(brother resides outside the)Tj
-34.822 -1.125 Td
(United States and her boyfriend is a foreign citizen)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.632 0 Td
(residing outside the United States.)Tj
-20.632 -2.125 Td
(Considering the record evidence as a whole, the Administrative Judge's c\
onclusions are sustainable. )Tj
40.197 0 Td
(Applicant's ability)Tj
-40.197 -1.125 Td
(to argue for an alternative)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
10.578 0 Td
(interpretation of the evidence is not sufficient to demonstrate that the\
Administrative Judge)Tj
-10.578 -1.125 Td
(erred. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No. 01-21340 \(dated June 20, 2003\) at p. 4)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
26.3 0 Td
(\("The fact that the Judge did not view the evidence . . .)Tj
-26.3 -1.125 Td
(in the light preferred by Applicant and Applicant's ability to argue in \
support of a different interpretation)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
42.084 0 Td
(of the evidence)Tj
-42.084 -1.125 Td
(is not sufficient to establish error on the part of the Administrative J\
udge."\).)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
47 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[134.0 290.0 148.0 301.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
12 0 obj
<>
endobj
48 0 obj
<>
endobj
9 0 obj
<>
endobj
10 0 obj
<>
endobj
11 0 obj
<>
endobj
52 0 obj
(file:///usr.osd.mil/Home/OSD/OGC/JosephLM/_MyComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/02-15383.a1.html)
endobj
51 0 obj
<>
endobj
53 0 obj
<>
endobj
49 0 obj
[15 0 R/XYZ 0 327.0 null]
endobj
50 0 obj
[15 0 R/XYZ 0 288.0 null]
endobj
4 0 obj
<>
endobj
xref
0 54
0000000000 65535 f
0000000016 00000 n
0000000141 00000 n
0000003658 00000 n
0000150864 00000 n
0000003536 00000 n
0000003591 00000 n
0000003724 00000 n
0000003751 00000 n
0000150258 00000 n
0000150342 00000 n
0000150384 00000 n
0000150068 00000 n
0000004286 00000 n
0000140603 00000 n
0000137752 00000 n
0000003854 00000 n
0000003900 00000 n
0000003949 00000 n
0000004099 00000 n
0000004003 00000 n
0000004035 00000 n
0000004067 00000 n
0000004522 00000 n
0000004547 00000 n
0000010150 00000 n
0000010199 00000 n
0000010234 00000 n
0000010740 00000 n
0000011177 00000 n
0000011546 00000 n
0000137430 00000 n
0000084926 00000 n
0000085193 00000 n
0000051856 00000 n
0000052129 00000 n
0000033100 00000 n
0000033381 00000 n
0000011933 00000 n
0000012209 00000 n
0000012569 00000 n
0000033707 00000 n
0000052593 00000 n
0000085801 00000 n
0000137952 00000 n
0000140828 00000 n
0000140853 00000 n
0000149744 00000 n
0000150153 00000 n
0000150780 00000 n
0000150822 00000 n
0000150592 00000 n
0000150426 00000 n
0000150727 00000 n
trailer
<<81CE8EB5363D044AB6FA7CE1737295CC>]>>
startxref
151037
%%EOF
"?q}v2[{.Ca$g%H1( .J[ZlUJ
Ū>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<