͗28ckk8RRBO#]WI ]@ܵ
jF ɕ ?;wnmPށ\v*21QeTqJXN8M. з3h`x]bX2X٭-- ςgj 4w EAtH%5ч+]./ t:4I)h8=-Sg*8ZI˂PN F\!%ZDzd9ѷ'! Hn!DpD(u7$}diBM v̑cAٌy'8+BI;-Z:k AAer z?'](69)Ҩyz j}H(}b.w[t0(~o7:JmVa+N qH3ǜɆt_ٓ՜~f_syIn^V6] 3W. V$
!FZ
=<7
εS8. d6S)9klyAS۩݅_ Q*-߉"5TPpyG/ JNxu+ؙz?
8pUs^AQ]Ww/vy
,쮀-*JD5WcZň1NjNImjgjJNm1t8 mP*F3:#
sw Dgw?Ͻwι7fE`q+JoB ZZ9kcO:[sq GOWmEHĥE!3ؑ +" 4EK$\d Ga)R& ֖s~0w\%.uu%\;js+¹ÁHȍ3#-_ieL)Xj# 5E1gM}H{X!CcȽ _\
V^u*IrK: '6t>> f+,(0ҟUU +2뻕cdž.u;
J$<&xܚY+B1ES6B
/- TJi Րq?4"Ҝܙ[_;mS'6$璡SDh*`N e*JbYڽ ꪁ 42GcPiZ)D$PX9s |XױDvy?Ҙt _>5N3ρ0 ,fρ^Zf_Agȫ/`&B
E-ߘJRzJh{ƼhW -B-,;
RDy6C6wx
O߅[ g|ɀ}&qQ#OތA{l\ |z s-, &qmeut^7Z6= پH'_%𘨒gZ_QEjބ^hˠz@26: Q5x:5 2[ -Q0bϲuFuԈ>$6\4cAqVV\泷(ѯS5 Z2 "w+
ƲGɧM >}AbH)J[6>iƕF>]7 \Uuu9BAhFQJQ-T)3jڪ-Վ-L+:BiZb*Zڎ/j` _P g{ޙo}:oCMds3~XMs۩L el叕Mp#O>EeY
ͼ{ ါ~RV3Y P}LpsFr
>7+2
f{ 铽Fxè @D9ӟ8QxʧW I]G}Kzy53>엊h_ _NHX
GRp։;L}b+sOU9̉A~?FşH{HK$JϞXQVOa tkA,qߋ| zvr1䟏%Cl^zn}ܺ$Nwiءzyll&tŒBmg;?J {zѨdj09[ȩi郭 /pZȫ/R&Vab 5-9C]WE]mFh}L˖oF[ۊ2k D )_N]-o}ni2->/eT Q[q3p莝pX]íW%
X3 Ow g?qժ)UG͠U?ۚqLsjgկ1hWNuy# [S
]@uv{ʈ}P(Wh^ê|e'
v*'.!vӎt9Sі9 ;h9SIUԹHZvyQ(pԥ t@tnwIrBrϓ{J̓8wE6|Hyehj sQ専wKZ22y5{DϰR nV7Q0m/j?'s3K Lr-,tkwO~3sOЀ]ڱr\FX
*B\Z!ΟOX l4{si8\1 ʃ+
sjʃi{4h ,պ:yR+1.E^>9>E|a 1G =Ŀ +ى0[&'{sSD' v|,%҄=|CJ㥧W&jNtU?3m.k7'5GAeq]Oȥ`gO<6u.uO\
2}l"3c霚Qye隫5g`}sōŞۉ2ڄ_ǚՅuQk{H_.3`A&y?|g}Z|ani+j EWz` РwKkXj9=Po|9ȾQz@Lq>jCzA?-{KQwbҹ3s:O{۰2c} Ν X8.{^|#5] {W/1ml]O$#[렊Wб+d M5M^@FI_(⧶ȭ齰N~[QدZ )uA< U#7ϱ^0,0>?x sEuy?7ĨLIB_uIW[W&^$O.Gv(V?4 C [Ni<IBN87 & >^o;Pd s6~.shÝ7 EmmQ 7N
;ǢvL5Q fl5m6qE~Vaoڷ }鷭Ѓ/| 3p dvY ; #(%
d_.3}&7VdF gbzr"b~9iwJqmCM~|QKi?2d&3*W d0e]g
r05&oK~9}U] OȰI )lgn~Gӧ)wOqlv&驥9w J? ZjAsnێ]z#d -b(0f ' K}/<m3%C+ͣ_7{g]Ϻ.G;=gUxھJ!u7E0K_<|dyΠq w> AN.45,D$ώae_c W(`4}>4#^Gy]q9J kl)s2g9 zeQ&s[Q!w-+;r ~u ol
]kzfUq BBЂ%8|T:"$cL,( A]B !2d2Ƣl 0$q"C3CL{{νoyy-ٛss=_yOuhemnKFo pˈ=[6UO"Qb#$bo,%ދahA_}-X~RZ:&4F 3twu2"u+ X"X%:@yϳS) =PŞn
F]Yka)tp>payw
[ Kl'GDZq1j|
v09̺&TjW`Kn甔
rg5 Zߊ5PmiTDpW 54f3d1r"
/i?f^VF0Sr;Ç.˶ N}̖ɶd{4~g)\)n0 YbSw>UXM̷Z#
X- $SޫX dvo\#IÇ6ȸϘ2ZqΆkn]?
eY%X G;=^FQ=b- .SD+oAue>ػVܾΚuwTYBꮵ~ ZMԇ[g-ܣp
ѿZuT~|{hx:WOOV{?ì C'Z #6hnv yb}Q ;_C]p/kb L%U
0-Cñ|ouMظ4,:TQV-\AdZGZ():ڎ4aZ.מ>{RN Soթ3lf|[.k|{>zjm =Ƨd+ij*-Ѹ>?QNtC&Ku8MnyyC|/xd%RSm0>\ex*2Ty˥;,Ez}ę (Oo^dǶek=uw 6cJ{=[˻7OH[w{<$Rlz1&2VΪBYĜJG%&` fyg=.EnK |eaNv>iDnLj.y~K`:)v/a_ p:5/__عXeS^f{N辧cםsh=3wHr횵"^ATؾ{@|;/}"o*}#S紵gw{4{a;n/:O~w˼!vY>71F4{s1Ss6S2Wh_j~L{ʃD}{A.0
]ѳ JqO>g3gyTVe; 2@~ C f0
}b
Yp]Rӭpw֪kv2FJdCy/lĞ®4+j~ Խ&|^ht:W;M64FIxx2qTfr!ɗyPm<;҂ٯ}uҙX0 ߟ!KܻHYc%Ǽ"]G e|j53
K<~ر1xĭmRW #E. RmFJox'KOb`ݶ-l2 1y,ӸqLf"W"aR=IV)ҞMئϷl;hYMyNjW]$i r 9V\9ic9 c]8g?(;J_O^YW۹EԿM#Ο$;(>\j_G+o e~/©PQ/wkt_O|)@^o(ȁJd$j ~ ^V9 g;[w9dMLGkdF?%D <)"C9;ۺֺs2Mq} v!;:?s|hIJ,+Jr7`2>OIg0f;.|]6.>I֏ս /&m܍h32=tލs| m7ŽϾ0ы9Z3Ve<ޠ=TNT7Rwwh+/ |>(Nۨ xX_3Y[rUGn2v/3;"RM
Rz7y^CGQ07( P˲㉵YSҰ3Qumܼ;s&θ g,!5;]u罝Jm3s#O;Kk gb}P|}6F @^)Ʀ{`}sXWo"8xOa d:)md5>C;x鏄/=9PXz c!7)ʸQn湽F T?)c/G= vK_7R|.g9};h6 *?9'W@9h*}+e}=iP璉ke_M@S&b$~'nu6ڥ=7Pb 17a8xK籐]A\D?; }{bœoλb*{睌g-ޥv+("/PJד jlM ӷ3qݭm9\0w82~##oM!gp6@VBn&gky[
H'vX?}`F-w2f|ͩdwE8TXj} x+_cGynV2\u=|xV"fx/Æ2tnM_>M3|E`+u `f ¹ũ;>ڦ a,; _d\ AU{'
BP(
BP(
BP(
BP(
BP(
BP(
BP(
BP(
BP(Pئ`~74c% w0r
L+e7v2y8rlY [vR eSR[:YY4mفZ
[ڲ]-(e=GaZa1% z`1mC QB?ds lQÚFoe?YL-ߠlXj%R{㎏JK=&ƨ3 8E=bT9!ζ&s # vuTrɉ5 ;:O&X#Jw1'fԔ6 +rǾ YVAi9s ~Qiۥ%[XpLa55ey%~ \Oq!L
>Jz{-l __RX< 5uM_eŢT2WX
Ţ5fc8lvf;`bu%>=nE}O?֛2ñm)֛"Y\mv
;X.5[zI1'4÷%̦PW8M{DqP3M,&ݩ>2{A+a:P&fҲL+eV gJ͠ $Bq@9FJCdM{*_(b%[}?ڱwd)Ĝf*Zb뾷![|h6+cdŤF'w}g + ' job6wׇ\ˎ׆ʲb~#'N$RSN#}B8zwqU52 X9~Q{QƂCJd&[xь0\{1[?ϣ"k{1}7 UxhXjx^tQI.Yt;9SQmrya-129ߟ q"
'7y-#z6usqm̍M
ؾ1$0>ubg$
6Cu>LBCeDV~$Bk̇Fi9ih~S9Z?fy{9= m"¦49^p-E_.C$?g[ԏˡ "
BNjsP?[RE}r>Ʋ`Q'b u i ֝W
7aYiZ=RPlq;st< lqlqqq@jgaC 3ϐx_d7 e> 0 ]- pG &DXYdJ`nY `Mv leӖ{E
o E7|eAz5Vzȏ,W :NYʇa6.qi-VO]d!\6LFXx~` p`% }`R/!N- p%hyEԋQv/f'} k-E~ 444(_a>p hpsu|'y3E_+3fZUtUQӈlduVVGu5rvu]PX'
fe3ˀǁ?pp- 2xQ
%qYܳ`^̉̉#WgX%{Ӻ ϧ p4#20G<;Q %6ۃ 1> `{(\bS[Kh/[|BT^䓒+Q- (xiAӮĴV0$H4edU0#eP{>jA;Aon MY,#"yﹶk
\i+wE6iA1hm! Y?$!@eq,ڎt9;#T=K";v>I/aȨ ɻ+>MUU>9/2;#S=ns^^m)A`ŻNGVco
)ҦbI߈T< O?iD@ֱ։@`v]XlugwBzzoگ]=Ht %=] 7nw] +M
7%QZMlX $jM%N֔9%k%w6d{jEM
S< p[tӍK}[=9SꍖTM&&RIEao1}s:PL^WOe_q; {Sa 쌧8 0ogL8St}ʾIGnltDh8ZtIyWIGV~M)w˸m(}ư1j3FI!\v+t;dB}hh<4REb_ibY\tD\N7 şhfB0NwwtK0eZem,Je;7[M< 3)9zO}:TN_={L s*~ y:ip'%X (-7}N5= )qvŹؾtu) Sא Xt %?y|
ȉa5 +qj$\
yhׁv-hb{AX jW\:#. y
o+ ĬFF`K!y0X- Dk0jSR
LO@ڌPXD Pd6@ {
endstream
endobj
15 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 3/Type/Page>>
endobj
39 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(02-24227.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/02-24227.a1.html)Tj
49.073 0 Td
([6/24/2021 11:06:45 AM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 264.75 591.75 500.999 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
(the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(parties to present evidence concerning the facts and circumstances of th\
e termination of Applicant's security)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(clearance, and \(2\) make a ruling as to whether)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.713 0 Td
(Applicant's case should have been terminated, pursuant to Section 4.4 of\
)Tj
-18.713 -1.125 Td
(the Directive, without a security clearance decision being issued.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
21.767 -2.125 Td
(Conclusion)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-21.767 -2.125 Td
(Pursuant to Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item E3.1.33.2, t\
he Board remands the case to the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Administrative Judge for further processing)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
17.746 0 Td
(consistent with the Board's rulings and instructions.)Tj
-17.746 -2.125 Td
(Signed: Emilio Jaksetic)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 16 637.5 cm
0 0 m
113.32 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 612.75 Tm
(Emilio Jaksetic)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Chairman, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 535.5 cm
0 0 m
120.645 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 510.75 Tm
(Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
10.85 -2.125 Td
(Separate opinion of Administrative Judge Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-10.85 -2.125 Td
(Applicant and Department Counsel both appear to agree that the Departmen\
t of Defense knew or should have known)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(that Applicant had no need for a security)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.55 0 Td
(clearance months before the Administrative Judge's decision. )Tj
24.728 0 Td
(I believe that for)Tj
-41.278 -1.125 Td
(the sake of judicial economy the Judge's decision should be vacated.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Signed: Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 355.5 cm
0 0 m
134.795 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 330.75 Tm
(Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
14 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 2/Type/Page>>
endobj
40 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(02-24227.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/02-24227.a1.html)Tj
49.073 0 Td
([6/24/2021 11:06:45 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
(\(i\) Applicant's appeal brief contains some factual errors about when D\
OHA received notice that Applicant's security)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741 Tm
(clearance had been administratively)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.604 0 Td
(terminated;)Tj
-14.604 -2.125 Td
(\(ii\) there is no evidence that, before the case was assigned to the Ad\
ministrative Judge on January 3, 2003, anyone at)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(DOHA received notice that Applicant's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.98 0 Td
(security clearance had been administratively terminated;)Tj
-15.98 -2.125 Td
(\(iii\) under Directive, Section 4.4, actions taken pursuant to the Dire\
ctive shall cease upon termination of an applicant's)Tj
T*
(need for access to classified information;)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(iv\) Directive, Section 4.4.2 provides an exception to Section 4.4 whe\
n a security clearance decision has been issued;)Tj
T*
(\(v\) although it is not clear when DOHA first received notice that Appl\
icant's security clearance had been)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(administratively terminated, DISCO did receive such)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
21.522 0 Td
(notice in December 2002;)Tj
-21.522 -2.125 Td
(\(vi\) if the Board concludes that notice to DISCO is sufficient to trig\
ger Section 4.4, then the Administrative Judge's)Tj
T*
(decision should be vacated; and)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(vii\) if the Board concludes that notice to DISCO is not sufficient to\
trigger Section 4.4, then the Administrative Judge's)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(decision should be affirmed because)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.8 0 Td
(the Judge did not receive notice of administrative termination of Applic\
ant's)Tj
-14.8 -1.125 Td
(security clearance until after the Judge had issued his security clearan\
ce decision.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(For the reasons that follow, the Board concludes the case should be rema\
nded to the Administrative Judge for further)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(proceedings.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(The Board accepts Applicant's argument that the lack of subject matter j\
urisdiction can be raised at any time during)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(these proceedings, including for the first)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.412 0 Td
(time on appeal. )Tj
6.387 0 Td
(Lack of subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate a security)Tj
-22.799 -1.125 Td
(clearance case is not waivable, can be raised by either party at any tim\
e in these)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
32.125 0 Td
(proceedings, and can be raised )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
12.495 0 Td
(sua)Tj
-44.619 -1.125 Td
(sponte)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( by a Hearing Office Administrative Judge or the Board even if neither p\
arty raises the issue. )Tj
39.988 0 Td
(Of necessity, a)Tj
-39.988 -1.125 Td
(Hearing)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Office Judge and the Board have jurisdiction to consider and resolve the\
threshold issue of whether there is)Tj
T*
(subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate a particular)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.854 0 Td
(security clearance case under the Directive. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
17.629 0 Td
(Cf. Barnett v. Brown)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
8.305 0 Td
(, 83)Tj
-46.788 -1.125 Td
(F.3d 1380, 1383 \(Fed. Cir. 1996\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(To the extent that Applicant relies on decisions issued by Hearing Offic\
e Administrative Judges, the Board notes that)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(such decisions may be cited as persuasive)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.967 0 Td
(authority, but they are not legally binding precedent that the Board mus\
t)Tj
-16.967 -1.125 Td
(follow. )Tj
(Similarly, those decisions are not legally binding precedent on the Judg\
e in this)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
35.104 0 Td
(case. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No. 01-)Tj
-35.104 -1.125 Td
(22606 \(June 30, 2003\) at pp. 3-5 \(discussing precedential value of de\
cisions by Hearing Office Administrative Judges)Tj
T*
(and factors)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(that a party should consider before citing such decisions on appeal\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Department Counsel correctly notes that Directive, Section 4.4 provides \
for the termination of actions under the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Directive "upon termination of the applicant's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.527 0 Td
(need for access to classified information" with three specified exceptio\
ns.)Tj
-18.527 -2.125 Td
(The Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. )Tj
21.13 0 Td
(Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item E3.1.29.)Tj
-21.13 -1.125 Td
(Furthermore, the Board is not authorized to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
17.607 0 Td
(conduct evidentiary hearings to resolve factual disputes, including fact\
ual)Tj
-17.607 -1.125 Td
(disputes about procedural issues. )Tj
13.414 0 Td
(As a matter of judicial economy, in some appeals)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
19.994 0 Td
(where a claim of error would, at)Tj
-33.408 -1.125 Td
(most, show harmless error, the Board has assumed, solely for the sake of\
disposing of an appeal issue, that factual)Tj
T*
(assertions)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(that go beyond the record evidence are true. )Tj
21.991 0 Td
(Making such an assumption to resolve an appeal issue can save)Tj
-21.991 -1.125 Td
(valuable time and resources by avoiding a remand)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.326 0 Td
(that would not result in any significant or meaningful change in the)Tj
-20.326 -1.125 Td
(decision below. )Tj
6.526 0 Td
(The Board has not taken that approach when acceptance of the claim of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
28.849 0 Td
(error would lead to a conclusion)Tj
-35.375 -1.125 Td
(that harmful error occurred. )Tj
11.355 0 Td
(Accordingly, the Board declines to address the arguments made by both pa\
rties that are)Tj
-11.355 -1.125 Td
(based on)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(factual assertions which go beyond the record evidence that was before t\
he Administrative Judge.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant's appeal raises a serious legal issue that requires the develo\
pment of an evidentiary record concerning)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Applicant's claims about the facts and)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.398 0 Td
(circumstances surrounding the administrative termination of his security\
)Tj
-15.398 -1.125 Td
(clearance. )Tj
4.274 0 Td
(Under the Directive, the development of such an evidentiary record is th\
e)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
29.628 0 Td
(responsibility of the Administrative)Tj
-33.902 -1.125 Td
(Judge. )Tj
(Accordingly, the case is remanded to the Judge with instructions that th\
e Judge: \(1\) )Tj
36.408 0 Td
(reopen the record to allow)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 1/Type/Page>>
endobj
41 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(02-24227.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/02-24227.a1.html)Tj
49.073 0 Td
([6/24/2021 11:06:45 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 16 755.25 Tm
(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
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(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
5.507 -2.125 Td
(Appeal Issue)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-21.419 -2.125 Td
(Applicant contends the Administrative Judge lacked subject matter jurisd\
iction to issue his adverse security clearance)Tj
T*
(decision and asks the Board to vacate the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.717 0 Td
(Judge's decision. )Tj
(In support of that contention, Applicant argues:)Tj
-16.717 -2.125 Td
(\(a\) lack of subject matter jurisdiction can be raised at any time duri\
ng these proceedings, including for the first time on)Tj
T*
(appeal;)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(b\) DOHA's jurisdiction to adjudicate a security clearance case termin\
ates upon its receipt of notification that an)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(applicant's security clearance has been)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.645 0 Td
(administratively terminated;)Tj
-15.645 -2.125 Td
(\(c\) submission of a notice that an applicant's security clearance has \
been administratively terminated operates as)Tj
T*
(notification to DOHA;)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(d\) Applicant's security clearance was administratively terminated, an\
d notice of that action was submitted on December)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(10, 2002;)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(e\) upon submission of the notice that Applicant's security clearance \
had been administratively terminated, DOHA's)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(jurisdiction to adjudicate Applicant's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.955 0 Td
(security clearance case ceased;)Tj
-14.955 -2.125 Td
(\(f\) in view of the foregoing, the Administrative Judge lacked authorit\
y to issue a security clearance decision in)Tj
T*
(Applicant's case; and)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(g\) therefore, the Board should vacate the Administrative Judge's secu\
rity clearance decision.)Tj
T*
(In response, Department Counsel argues:)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
11 0 obj
<>
endobj
42 0 obj
<>
endobj
9 0 obj
<>
endobj
10 0 obj
<>
endobj
44 0 obj
(file:///usr.osd.mil/Home/OSD/OGC/JosephLM/_MyComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/02-24227.a1.html)
endobj
43 0 obj
<>
endobj
45 0 obj
<>
endobj
4 0 obj
<>
endobj
xref
0 46
0000000000 65535 f
0000000016 00000 n
0000000141 00000 n
0000003645 00000 n
0000141613 00000 n
0000003536 00000 n
0000003578 00000 n
0000003718 00000 n
0000003745 00000 n
0000141169 00000 n
0000141210 00000 n
0000140979 00000 n
0000004381 00000 n
0000134643 00000 n
0000126983 00000 n
0000124148 00000 n
0000003848 00000 n
0000003894 00000 n
0000003943 00000 n
0000004134 00000 n
0000004006 00000 n
0000004038 00000 n
0000004070 00000 n
0000004102 00000 n
0000004592 00000 n
0000010611 00000 n
0000010660 00000 n
0000010695 00000 n
0000011205 00000 n
0000011648 00000 n
0000070766 00000 n
0000071033 00000 n
0000036200 00000 n
0000036473 00000 n
0000012053 00000 n
0000012329 00000 n
0000012724 00000 n
0000036956 00000 n
0000071647 00000 n
0000124348 00000 n
0000127183 00000 n
0000134854 00000 n
0000141064 00000 n
0000141418 00000 n
0000141252 00000 n
0000141560 00000 n
trailer
<<183E15CE4EA7F34A84DD765F5582EBF0>]>>
startxref
141786
%%EOF