<ĕ/1#X }.?_n><+x23o_6 y 5w }ؾ ԝd}/mw xf _b+}\ U{'Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4FhP b 8e+d 7k8_%{9Ñ|ٖ
L3^ea[vS>i ,2.ÕE.aԺڲ-,e.oڲ[|Ԣ (i+bW%˙KPU4"vmc*g1z'Ce`^Wڣ wlj 0K#g_zJVsPCm
p # v5uTp5I;:"wO@ eטW*(=
\'uoBUHYN|l?VsN:a/lHT SZ:~=B'Y" ugf$ԭζʒc
Y3Rsء#W[@,R}qK,%D EkDc$"ۺRIn%N+T#rr+ǭ_i zR"`,ޗ}T_[/eZ". c ,]늊PR
'EV=h
wD@D#Md'tz KDCVB:VEK8hE",auwXLY`" TcT I4Zym?m%Y@mC^U`PErJBVw C:nVh #iUfE- #/&E6p~~8ZɽOxL gQ?k̆fqqGqm=quȨ,kh,6~Wp19B>K)5841Ǎ C+W cZUyʊ3|ob.XpnpJ9;d ?*5fgqgs]oaxykMXfjhN Q .Yv;1S rya -1i 09ߟ:q!f|
'{7 y-UuϹǹ176)@HCR;rc_'6 @( RP0
Ui
F[XIPn)2 Q`_1Z6Nݲ h%LM}ss
ZEMis( E_.C$?g[ԏˡ "^ m9ȟ-C{)ݢx BUl c@Q'X]}*@=pvguŝMvXV6@u =a[z [ ;w ;w8z*xbV'!&;[o6nj -l}r/7"^ٞ{WW㥬Pbp5- 8X] vrER> ap>An"%X 1\*qd">ºė6c"g/YKz q&h;8-A >/^Dȴ @_1><#DXl)X=qlCKCKCKf6= 8W_w ?9SU2#jUK'jX-5X FF[fZnnqd[z[[Xc~~.gCB?-oh7*3Y<`@ b@+Jxfqg"|#ϰK5=O p6#20G;1 %6ۃ 1>} `{Q.rELmN.ūl) qQ5zAOJI6Kii٦t
'J
4zZrĵ+q55< MY"YL*y䈹8} h@N@[BSKg$op\õF5z:i\%B07% H6jy^!Rm!-yȿlI}dW%tC sLC @BACЏm
Ϣ! &ӭ2~߯H#?Bճ$"cG#zʎҎ !1C/I"$+~# n)tN+!
iIu&q[$ b+HHj)k$(eo`J>qC,zXn4Bvv$OCW wys [B?d ^^3.:F ?жbVLdo1P"m(f. ӭi:/R1Pq\k_|8q8;kuNҹ¹UJ] ] \.rq-3b'Duvs"$^
u)xzXJI7Q,ERp*i ,Wӳ",Oɮ4nQʚё+Д5MR]~Q;V`^Do*'Kceߜxu9((lΤڋ+2V؈!Dr$(l$Hs"m_l0X0}J
O`ajXmB`SH Z6_ l!^9w!PHHXfC0̆eziZ!!Y'D3O=5nGq =M:N=tXo {:+~~YhguWIXn;+=m$N3w&27j|Ry
E3)RVJԚ2d&jKϺHSy_Asg @io|F6_ gz"U R*E[L1Pq^(|/қOZyē~Aa`
;-2ّPq=`LP&;{C5V5Z:P&6P&::>G9mn
6Fqc()nol78
gHK_5߂lw" LB+b!]u}|nm%l2YX+˲|F
k fuÚ1τyxJ,uNS %~^56CSOc SǜJs| cz<%I = 0}N5= ) v%ؾLx0ܜI7)sځ[π >|Dձd+ x\چuyh灂-hr{Ax%7s9 ) į21
/bbmFQ]¨
d0NI6+0=j3bRb`R@E`bR
@ ) z
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
(03-04704.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/03-04704.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([6/24/2021 3:11:31 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 355.5 591.75 410.25 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
(Signed: Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
ET
Q
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 16 753.75 cm
0 0 m
120.645 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 729 Tm
(Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: Jean E. Smallin)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 651.75 cm
0 0 m
114.656 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 627 Tm
(Jean E. Smallin)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(1. )Tj
("Inability or unwillingness to satisfy debts.")Tj
T*
(2. )Tj
(The debt alleged in subparagraph 1.d. of the SOR.)Tj
T*
(3. )Tj
(The debt alleged in subparagraphs 1.b. and 1.c. of the SOR.)Tj
T*
(4. )Tj
(The debts alleged in subparagraphs 1.h. and 1.i. of the SOR.)Tj
T*
(5. )Tj
("The conditions that resulted in the behavior were largely beyond the pe\
rson's control \(e.g., loss of employment, a)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(business downturn, unexpected medical )Tj
16.19 0 Td
(emergency, or a death, divorce or separation\).")Tj
-16.19 -2.125 Td
(6. )Tj
("The person has received or is receiving counseling for the problem and \
there are clear indications that the problem is)Tj
T*
(being resolved or is under control\).")Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(7. )Tj
("The individual initiated a good-faith effort to repay overdue creditors\
or otherwise resolve debts.")Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
15 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 2/Type/Page>>
endobj
45 0 obj
[47 0 R 48 0 R 49 0 R]
endobj
46 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(03-04704.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/03-04704.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([6/24/2021 3:11:31 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
(because a debt is paid or otherwise )Tj
14.189 0 Td
(satisfied before the close of the record in a case does not mean that th\
e)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(Administrative Judge is obligated, as a matter of law, to make favorable\
findings and )Tj
34.269 0 Td
(conclusions regarding that debt)Tj
-34.269 -1.125 Td
(and is then obligated to enter a formal finding in favor of Applicant. )Tj
27.492 0 Td
(Many facts and circumstances surrounding the)Tj
-27.492 -1.125 Td
(debt, )Tj
(including the manner in which it was incurred, the circumstances under w\
hich it became delinquent, and the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(manner in which Applicant addressed the )Tj
16.828 0 Td
(delinquency are relevant factors for the Judge's consideration, notwiths\
tanding)Tj
-16.828 -1.125 Td
(the fact that the debt delinquency was eventually resolved. )Tj
23.658 0 Td
(In this case, the )Tj
6.47 0 Td
(Judge noted his concern that Applicant)Tj
-30.128 -1.125 Td
(began to address the bulk of his debts only after the issuance of the SO\
R in this case. )Tj
34.187 0 Td
(The manner in which Applicant)Tj
-34.187 -1.125 Td
(addressed his numerous debt delinquencies was thus a factor that the Jud\
ge specifically noted in his conclusions and his)Tj
T*
(concern about it reasonably supported )Tj
15.467 0 Td
(his adverse formal findings under subparagraphs 1.h. and 1.i. of the SOR\
.)Tj
-15.467 -2.125 Td
(Applicant asserts on appeal that the Administrative Judge erred by apply\
ing Financial Considerations Disqualifying)Tj
T*
(Condition 3 to the facts of this case. )Tj
14.636 0 Td
(When )Tj
(a party challenges an Administrative Judge's application of the Adjudica\
tive)Tj
-14.636 -1.125 Td
(Guidelines, the Board has to decide whether the party has shown the Judg\
e: \(i\) )Tj
31.686 0 Td
(reached conclusions not supported by)Tj
-31.686 -1.125 Td
(substantial record evidence; \(ii\) acted in a manner that is arbitrary \
or capricious; or \(iii\) acted contrary to law. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
44.038 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(,)Tj
-44.038 -1.125 Td
(ISCR Case No. 02-15339 \(April 29, 2004\) at p. 4. )Tj
(Applicant has failed to make such a showing. )Tj
38.633 0 Td
(His argument consists)Tj
-38.633 -1.125 Td
(essentially of a plea in support of an )Tj
14.718 0 Td
(alternative version or interpretation of the record evidence. )Tj
23.795 0 Td
(Such an argument is not)Tj
-38.513 -1.125 Td
(sufficient to establish error on the part of the Judge. )Tj
20.911 0 Td
(After a review of the )Tj
8.579 0 Td
(record evidence, the Board concludes that the)Tj
-29.49 -1.125 Td
(Judge had a reasonable basis for applying Financial Considerations Disqu\
alifying Condition 3 in this case.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant argues the Judge should have concluded his conduct was extenua\
ted or mitigated under Financial)Tj
0 -1.375 TD
(Considerations Mitigating Conditions 3,)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 209.3359 489.75 Tm
( \(5\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 209.3359 489 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 223.1421 485.25 Tm
( 4,)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 235.1421 489.75 Tm
( \(6\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 235.1421 489 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 248.9482 485.25 Tm
( and )Tj
(6.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 281.2744 489.75 Tm
( \(7\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 281.2744 489 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 295.0806 485.25 Tm
( )Tj
(Although there is record evidence which supports the)Tj
-23.257 -1.125 Td
(application of Financial Considerations Mitigating Condition 3 to a port\
ion of Applicant's history of )Tj
40.286 0 Td
(financial)Tj
-40.286 -1.125 Td
(delinquency, considering the record as a whole, the Board concludes the \
record evidence does not support the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(application of Financial Considerations )Tj
15.997 0 Td
(itigating Condition 3 to fully mitigate the government's case, and the J\
udge was)Tj
-15.997 -1.125 Td
(not required to do so. )Tj
8.776 0 Td
(Additionally, considering the record as a whole, it was )Tj
22.078 0 Td
(not arbitrary or capricious for the)Tj
-30.854 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Judge to conclude the record evidence did not warrant app\
lication of Financial Considerations)Tj
T*
(Mitigating )Tj
4.472 0 Td
(Conditions 4 and 6. )Tj
8.084 0 Td
(Applicant's ability to argue for an alternate interpretation of the reco\
rd evidence is not)Tj
-12.556 -1.125 Td
(sufficient to demonstrate the Judge erred by )Tj
17.8 0 Td
(deciding that application of these two mitigating conditions was not)Tj
-17.8 -1.125 Td
(warranted in light of the record evidence in this case.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant notes that at his hearing \(August 31, 2004\) he was informed \
that he should receive the decision in his case in)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(about six to eight weeks. )Tj
10.165 0 Td
(He claims that )Tj
6.026 0 Td
(he made several calls to the Department Counsel, monthly starting in Dec\
ember)Tj
-16.191 -1.125 Td
(2004 and much more frequently by late March 2005, inquiring as to the st\
atus )Tj
31.41 0 Td
(of his decision. )Tj
6.333 0 Td
(In the last calls, Applicant)Tj
-37.742 -1.125 Td
(claims he was reporting that he might lose his job due to the lack of a \
decision. )Tj
31.826 0 Td
(Applicant's decision was issued )Tj
12.9 0 Td
(with the)Tj
-44.726 -1.125 Td
(date March 28, 2005. )Tj
8.775 0 Td
(Applicant alleges that the Administrative Judge issued the decision in h\
aste with resultant errors.)Tj
-8.775 -1.125 Td
(Applicant's claim of error fails )Tj
12.481 0 Td
(for the following reasons:\(1\) Applicant does not specify what findings\
were in error as a)Tj
-12.481 -1.125 Td
(result of the alleged haste; \(2\) Applicant does not include any proffe\
r )Tj
27.879 0 Td
(establishing that the Judge acted in haste; and \(3\))Tj
-27.879 -1.125 Td
(In any case there is a rebuttable presumption that agency officials carr\
y out their duties in good faith and a )Tj
42.763 0 Td
(party seeking)Tj
-42.763 -1.125 Td
(to rebut or overcome that presumption has the burden of presenting clear\
evidence to the contrary. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
39.514 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(National)Tj
-39.514 -1.125 Td
(Archives and Records )Tj
9.025 0 Td
(Administration v)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
6.694 0 Td
(. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Favish)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, 541 U.S. 157, 174 \(2004\), and ISCR Case No. 02-19136 \(June 2, 2005\)\
)Tj
-15.72 -1.125 Td
(at p. 4. )Tj
(The Board does not have supervisory jurisdiction )Tj
22.94 0 Td
(over the Administrative Judge.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
-1.173 -2.125 Td
(Conclusion)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-21.767 -2.125 Td
(Applicant has not demonstrated error below requiring remand or reversal.\
)Tj
29.74 0 Td
(Accordingly, the Board affirms the)Tj
-29.74 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Judge's decision.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Signed: Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
ET
0 G
q 1 0 0 1 16 126 cm
0 0 m
134.795 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 101.25 Tm
(Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
47 0 obj
<>/BS<