B .FɱwQO#:&ǙQT<}Bg}+2ef^C^Ccagy:^=k酒#΄}'+7xw\rqOksӀTd4 xTS\5?{F" (ѕ U3>QE:ݎR/h嬅lO_:nF_ ӉAg_ sɘA'AM~q{LMR]"AKhBc:1
o 肺F ""L@:sP` 0.g6&~AbcbcFbFc H1QK30 I)i ,g)fcb b0 C,D,$" KcVbVc
b c6b6c bf v`'va{ pP<Y;{~ $8OS%ʉU9!1_t j6flfnvfmvbK油b}f9`vigvO/? ޠԑ:ы 2u?QWzQwA=UE)RR_Gi
4Di0eJh8u̐CP9L4ޣ4M4& (t+͠i&͢4h.ͣrǴ'65p GxAG`GG: QG >9~9ֿM
=$Q
#Ao6Oi-lZٴrhjZCZʣ ZGqmb)mʹhm ])n
6wP}xS! t:J8Q1 :I4r:KTIUtj[T7 t.x 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 ͮ9T`}>ީqnzF`}82
ݏ}`2h+Q
v#`xF8wձJ3ZV * }JuZ5ڦ=68Vr6ZuyWbv.w) a}6dc6aLI:C>4Wy;=- EQɤeW)WW\ Ϸ"٭d>T | `EZli.oTyQ'on-lv תتK7O_B+t -rDX IFXdk'E%]b"A`uA+{ 0 +
endstream
endobj
16 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 3/Type/Page>>
endobj
44 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(02-33169.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(Computer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archiv\
ed%20-%20HTML/02-33169.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([6/24/2021 3:06:04 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 267 591.75 498.749 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 745.5 Tm
(Applicant has failed to demonstrate error below. )Tj
19.604 0 Td
(Accordingly, the Board affirms the Administrative Judge's security)Tj
-19.604 -1.125 Td
(clearance decision. )Tj
7.856 0 Td
(Because the Board's affirmance)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
12.896 0 Td
(of the Administrative Judge's decision is not based solely on the)Tj
-20.753 -1.125 Td
(application of 10 U.S.C. \247986, the Board does not make a recommendati\
on as to whether Applicant's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
40.671 0 Td
(case should be)Tj
-40.671 -1.125 Td
(considered further for a waiver under that statute.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Signed: Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 16 678.75 cm
0 0 m
134.795 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 654 Tm
(Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: Jean E. Smallin)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 576.75 cm
0 0 m
114.656 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 552 Tm
(Jean E. Smallin)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: William S. Fields)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 474.75 cm
0 0 m
124.002 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 450 Tm
(William S. Fields)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(1. )Tj
(The Administrative Judge found in favor of the Applicant with respect to\
the allegations under Guidelines F, G and)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(H. )Tj
(Those favorable findings are not at issue on)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.939 0 Td
(appeal.)Tj
-18.939 -2.125 Td
(2. )Tj
(Under 10 U.S.C. \247 986, the Department of Defense may not grant or ren\
ew a security clearance for a defense)Tj
T*
(contractor official or employee that falls under any of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
21.686 0 Td
(four statutory categories [10 U.S.C. \247986\(c\)\(1\) through \(c\)\(4\)\
].)Tj
-21.686 -1.125 Td
(Convictions which result in a sentence of imprisonment for more than one\
year fall under 10 U.S.C.)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
40.213 0 Td
(\247986\(c\)\(1\).)Tj
-40.213 -2.125 Td
(3. )Tj
(Transcript at p.23.)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
15 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 2/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
(02-33169.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(Computer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archiv\
ed%20-%20HTML/02-33169.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([6/24/2021 3:06:04 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
(security clearance cases.)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 729.75 Tm
(To implement the June 7, 2001 memorandum, the Director, DOHA issued an o\
perating instruction \(dated July 10, 2001\))Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(which states 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
(\(Operating Instruction, paragraph 2.e.\))Tj
0 -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
0 -1.125 TD
(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 whether to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.55 0 Td
(recommend to the Deputy General Counsel \(Legal Counsel\) that 10)Tj
-18.55 -1.125 Td
(U.S.C. 986 should be waived by the Secretary of Defense." )Tj
23.958 0 Td
(\(Operating Instruction, paragraph 2.g.\))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 without)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
17.47 0 Td
(explanation either the statement 'I recommend further consideration of t\
his)Tj
-17.47 -1.125 Td
(case for a waiver of 10 U.S.C. 986' or 'I do not recommend further consi\
deration of this case)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
37.21 0 Td
(for a waiver of 10 U.S.C.)Tj
-37.21 -1.125 Td
(986.'")Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(Operating Instruction, paragraph 3.e.\))Tj
T*
("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 either the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.245 0 Td
(statement 'The Appeal Board recommends consideration of this case)Tj
-20.245 -1.125 Td
(for a waiver of 10 U.S.C. 986' or 'The Appeal Board does not recommend c\
onsideration of this)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
38.185 0 Td
(case for a waiver of 10)Tj
-38.185 -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 Director)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
22.716 0 Td
(shall within his sole discretion determine whether or not to)Tj
-22.716 -1.125 Td
(forward the case to the Deputy General Counsel \(Legal Counsel\) for fur\
ther consideration of a possible waiver)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
44.513 0 Td
(of 10)Tj
-44.513 -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 \(Legal Counsel\)." )Tj
10.906 0 Td
(\(Operating)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
4.582 0 Td
(Instruction, paragraph 3.g.\))Tj
-15.488 -2.125 Td
(In this case, the Judge did not deny or revoke Applicant's clearance sol\
ely as a result of 10 U.S.C. \247986. )Tj
41.809 0 Td
(Rather, the)Tj
-41.809 -1.125 Td
(Judge's denial of Applicant's clearance was also)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
19.381 0 Td
(based upon his adverse findings and conclusions with respect the)Tj
-19.381 -1.125 Td
(Guideline E allegations. )Tj
9.886 0 Td
(The Applicant did not appeal the Judge's findings and conclusions with r\
espect)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
31.84 0 Td
(to the Guideline)Tj
-41.726 -1.125 Td
(E allegations. )Tj
5.693 0 Td
(Therefore, pursuant to Operating Instruction paragraph 3.e, cited above,\
the Judge was not required to)Tj
-5.693 -1.125 Td
(make a recommendation)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
10.079 0 Td
(concerning waiver, and his failure to do so was not error.)Tj
-10.079 -2.125 Td
(2. )Tj
(Whether the Administrative Judge was biased)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 28 243 cm
0 0 m
220.271 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 248.2715 243.75 Tm
(. )Tj
(Applicant also asserts that the Administrative Judge's decision was)Tj
-19.356 -1.375 Td
(biased because the Judge stated during the hearing)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.437 0 Td
(that "[he was] not aware of any waiver ever being granted. . . .")Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 565.2578 231.75 Tm
( \(3\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 565.2578 231 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 213.75 Tm
(This claim of bias lacks merit.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(There is a rebuttable presumption that a Judge is impartial and unbiased\
, and a party seeking to rebut that presumption)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(has a heavy burden of persuasion on appeal. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
17.911 0 Td
(See,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(e.g.,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No. 02-08032 \(May 14, 2004\) at p. 4. )Tj
(The issue is not)Tj
-17.911 -1.125 Td
(whether Applicant personally believes that the Judge was biased or preju\
diced against)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
34.656 0 Td
(Applicant. )Tj
4.443 0 Td
(Rather, the issue is)Tj
-39.099 -1.125 Td
(whether the record of the proceedings below contains any indication that\
the Judge acted in a manner that would lead a)Tj
T*
(reasonable person)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
7.441 0 Td
(to question the fairness and impartiality of the Judge. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
21.495 0 Td
(See, e.g., )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ISCR Case No. 01-04713 \(March 27,)Tj
-28.937 -1.125 Td
(2003\) at p.3. )Tj
(Bias is not demonstrated merely because the Judge)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
25.91 0 Td
(made adverse findings or reached unfavorable)Tj
-25.91 -1.125 Td
(conclusions in a case. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
8.914 0 Td
(See, e.g., )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ISCR Case No. 94-0954 \(October 16, 1995\) at p. 4. )Tj
24.662 0 Td
(Moreover, even if an appealing)Tj
-33.576 -1.125 Td
(party demonstrates error by the Judge, proof of such error standing alon\
e does not demonstrate the Judge was biased.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(See, e.g., )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.832 0 Td
(ISCR Case No. 98-0515 \(March 23,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(1999\) at p. 5. )Tj
(In this case, nothing in the record below or the Judge's)Tj
-3.832 -1.125 Td
(decision supports Applicant's claim of bias.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
21.767 -2.125 Td
(Conclusion)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
47 0 obj
<>/BS<;},ì}F)!Nlv;j7ۛX^< K DhvZ«ˬXHDĊµߓ B%/`bv> qgeF2L^{9IH沵e!WxV{F| `j;3@zq& 7Qff
Q+VD XdN f~FDXl6X,xNzTTTn* a9`
hx~tȔ9鹟sGn2/eDu=Nw1(77wxdpH#J$Jb*g2uǀ; # \TaL9n
h: (`Ή̉+gX
M :1ES;U8xVƛqml#=i@5D rƽ[@LlvE]P.0[]Kq.xrEx*}] J\ήWի?WZFA)oJOI.r/>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[565.0 229.0 579.0 240.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
14 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 1/Type/Page>>
endobj
48 0 obj
[50 0 R 51 0 R]
endobj
49 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(02-33169.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(Computer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archiv\
ed%20-%20HTML/02-33169.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([6/24/2021 3:06:04 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
(a mere difference of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
8.328 0 Td
(opinion. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
6.887 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 97-0435 \(July 14, 1998\) at p. 3 \(citing Supreme Court\
decision\).)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(In deciding whether the Judge's rulings or conclusions are contrary)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
27.006 0 Td
(to law, the Board will consider whether they are)Tj
-27.006 -1.125 Td
(contrary to provisions of Executive Order 10865, the Directive, or other\
applicable federal law. )Tj
38.347 0 Td
(Compliance with state)Tj
-38.347 -1.125 Td
(or local law is not required because security clearance adjudications ar\
e conducted by the Department of Defense)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(pursuant to federal law. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
9.691 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( U.S. Constitution, Article)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
12.138 0 Td
(VI, clause 2 \(Supremacy Clause\). )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.69 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, 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 by such)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
24.758 0 Td
(relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as)Tj
-24.758 -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 making this review,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
9.248 0 Td
(the)Tj
-44.764 -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 Guidance, Item E3.1.32.1. )Tj
15.356 0 Td
(The)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Board must consider not only whether there is record evidence supporting\
a)Tj
-15.356 -1.125 Td
(Judge's findings, but also whether there is evidence that fairly detract\
s from the weight of the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
37.475 0 Td
(evidence supporting those)Tj
-37.475 -1.125 Td
(findings, and whether the Judge's findings reflect a reasonable interpre\
tation of the record evidence as a whole.)Tj
T*
(Although a Judge's credibility)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
12.234 0 Td
(determination is not immune from review, the party challenging a Judge's\
credibility)Tj
-12.234 -1.125 Td
(determination has a heavy burden on appeal.)Tj
0 -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 \(citing federal)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.883 0 Td
(cases\).)Tj
-18.883 -2.125 Td
(If an appealing party demonstrates factual or legal error, then the Boar\
d must consider the following questions:)Tj
T*
(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 Case No.)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(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
(\(Directive,)Tj
-40.333 -1.125 Td
(Additional Procedural Guidance, Items E3.1.33.2 and)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
21.717 0 Td
(E3.1.33.3\).)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-1.067 -2.375 Td
(Appeal Issues)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
/TT0 1 Tf
9.75 0 0 9.75 334.1487 348.75 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 334.1487 348 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 318.75 Tm
(1. )Tj
(Whether the Administrative Judge's decision is arbitrary, capricious, or\
contrary to law because it fails to recommend)Tj
ET
0 G
q 1 0 0 1 28 318 cm
0 0 m
563.314 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 305.25 Tm
(Applicant's case for further consideration for)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 304.5 cm
0 0 m
218.08 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 234.0801 305.25 Tm
(waiver under 10 U.S.C. \247986\(d\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 234.0801 304.5 cm
0 0 m
154.307 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 388.3867 305.25 Tm
(. )Tj
(The SOR alleged under Guideline J that)Tj
-31.032 -1.125 Td
(between 1979 and 1990, Applicant had engaged in a history or pattern of \
criminal activity. )Tj
36.517 0 Td
(The Administrative Judge)Tj
-36.517 -1.125 Td
(concluded that Applicant's 1980 conviction for arson fell under 10 U.S.C\
. \247986 because Applicant was sentenced to six)Tj
0 -1.375 TD
(years confinement, of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
8.941 0 Td
(which he served four years.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 255.5723 266.25 Tm
( \(2\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 255.5723 265.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 236.25 Tm
(The Judge's decision contained no recommendation, either favorable or un\
favorable, as to whether Applicant's case)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(should be considered)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
8.692 0 Td
(further for a waiver under 10 U.S.C. \247986\(d\). )Tj
18.439 0 Td
(The SOR also alleged under Guideline E that)Tj
-27.132 -1.125 Td
(Applicant had deliberately provided false information on a Security)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
27.297 0 Td
(Clearance Application and a signed statement to the)Tj
-27.297 -1.125 Td
(Defense Security Service. )Tj
10.607 0 Td
(The Judge found against Applicant with respect to those allegations. )Tj
27.577 0 Td
(On appeal,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Applicant)Tj
-38.184 -1.125 Td
(does not challenge the applicability of 10 U.S.C. \247986 to his 1980 co\
nviction, or the Judge's adverse findings and)Tj
T*
(conclusions with respect to the Guideline E)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
17.635 0 Td
(allegations. )Tj
4.832 0 Td
(Rather, Applicant contends that the Judge erred by not making a)Tj
-22.467 -1.125 Td
(favorable recommendation concerning waiver with respect to the Guideline\
J allegations,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
35.932 0 Td
(based upon Applicant's "work)Tj
-35.932 -1.125 Td
(history and performances." )Tj
11.071 0 Td
(Applicant's contention in that regard is without merit.)Tj
-11.071 -2.125 Td
(In a June 7, 2001 memorandum implementing the provisions of 10 U.S.C.\247\
986, the Deputy Secretary of Defense stated:)Tj
T*
("The decision as to whether a particular case)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.123 0 Td
(involves a meritorious case that would justify pursuing a request for wa\
iver)Tj
-18.123 -1.125 Td
(shall be the province of the DoD Component concerned \(i.e. all Componen\
ts authorized to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
36.435 0 Td
(grant, deny or revoke access)Tj
-36.435 -1.125 Td
(to classified information\) beginning with the Director of the Component\
Central Adjudication Facility \(CAF\), the)Tj
T*
(Component appellate)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
8.775 0 Td
(authority or other appropriate senior Component official." )Tj
23.457 0 Td
(For purposes of the June 7, 2001)Tj
-32.232 -1.125 Td
(memorandum, the Director, DOHA is the Director of the Component's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
28.507 0 Td
(Central Adjudication Facility for industrial)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
50 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[334.0 346.0 348.0 357.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
51 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[255.0 264.0 269.0 275.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
12 0 obj
<>
endobj
52 0 obj
<>
endobj
9 0 obj
<>
endobj
10 0 obj
<>
endobj
11 0 obj
<>
endobj
57 0 obj
(file:///usr.osd.mil/Home/OSD/OGC/JosephLM/_MyComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/02-33169.a1.html)
endobj
56 0 obj
<>
endobj
58 0 obj
<>
endobj
53 0 obj
[16 0 R/XYZ 0 383.0 null]
endobj
54 0 obj
[16 0 R/XYZ 0 344.0 null]
endobj
55 0 obj
[16 0 R/XYZ 0 292.0 null]
endobj
4 0 obj
<>
endobj
xref
0 59
0000000000 65535 f
0000000016 00000 n
0000000141 00000 n
0000003658 00000 n
0000158705 00000 n
0000003536 00000 n
0000003591 00000 n
0000003731 00000 n
0000003758 00000 n
0000158022 00000 n
0000158134 00000 n
0000158176 00000 n
0000157832 00000 n
0000004394 00000 n
0000148449 00000 n
0000140591 00000 n
0000137709 00000 n
0000003861 00000 n
0000003907 00000 n
0000003956 00000 n
0000004147 00000 n
0000004019 00000 n
0000004051 00000 n
0000004083 00000 n
0000004115 00000 n
0000004616 00000 n
0000010481 00000 n
0000010530 00000 n
0000010565 00000 n
0000011167 00000 n
0000011590 00000 n
0000011959 00000 n
0000083737 00000 n
0000084004 00000 n
0000052271 00000 n
0000052544 00000 n
0000033515 00000 n
0000033796 00000 n
0000012346 00000 n
0000012622 00000 n
0000012982 00000 n
0000034122 00000 n
0000052983 00000 n
0000084621 00000 n
0000137898 00000 n
0000140816 00000 n
0000140841 00000 n
0000148125 00000 n
0000148674 00000 n
0000148706 00000 n
0000157184 00000 n
0000157508 00000 n
0000157917 00000 n
0000158579 00000 n
0000158621 00000 n
0000158663 00000 n
0000158384 00000 n
0000158218 00000 n
0000158526 00000 n
trailer
<