%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-06-24T15:12:47-04:00
2021-06-24T15:12:46-04:00
2021-06-24T15:12:47-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
03-06016.a1
uuid:7d29c88d-2cf0-4fe1-aa4d-9206e6003b7b
uuid:c822a470-3def-4aff-b160-51e75a6c3870
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
15 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
16 0 obj
<>
endobj
17 0 obj
<>
endobj
19 0 obj
[18 0 R 18 0 R]
endobj
20 0 obj
[18 0 R 18 0 R]
endobj
21 0 obj
[18 0 R 18 0 R]
endobj
18 0 obj
<><><><>]/P 16 0 R/Pg 12 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
12 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
22 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(03-06016.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/03-06016.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([6/24/2021 3:12:47 PM])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: January 11, 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. 03-06016)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
-0.625 -2.2 Td
(Alan V. Edmunds, 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 April)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(1, 2004, which stated)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
8.776 0 Td
(the reasons why DOHA proposed to deny or revoke access to classified inf\
ormation for Applicant.)Tj
-8.776 -1.125 Td
(The SOR was based on Guideline E)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.636 0 Td
(\(Personal Conduct\) and Guideline J \(Criminal Conduct\). )Tj
22.885 0 Td
(Administrative Judge)Tj
-37.521 -1.125 Td
(Joseph Testan issued an unfavorable security clearance)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
22.296 0 Td
(decision, dated October 15, 2004.)Tj
-22.296 -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 issue has been raised on appeal: whether the Administrativ\
e Judge erred by not concluding that)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Applicant's falsification of a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
11.565 0 Td
(security clearance questionnaire was mitigated. )Tj
19.159 0 Td
(For the reasons that follow, the Board)Tj
-30.724 -1.125 Td
(affirms the Administrative Judge's 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
(, ISCR Case No. 97-0435 \(July 14, 1998\) at p. 3 \(citing Supreme Court\
decision\).)Tj
-15.215 -1.125 Td
(In deciding whether the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
9.719 0 Td
(Judge's rulings or conclusions are contrary to law, the Board will consi\
der whether they are)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
<>
endobj
24 0 obj
(\)Nn~)
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
32 0 obj
<>
endobj
33 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0~
CIi9u{V'='Yl%ٲ94!y9]lipk6ۛ>3^%|^u*KH>9aճ/V[zwW}^CryR*QֿB6%?/S|.!lƌ'*S'BgT.n*3)Zf>
md2ĢY{LFZ45Zu\υs.{fɯ9>e?Ot"!-nu-cC'
£<^s5wwx ~@Q_ oG
endstream
endobj
34 0 obj
<>stream
H|XTgv΅HS݅
kL%1F)E#* v4IJرXPDTlˮUbyb}gѧ}K͝3̝w $ApWU5K+&naqk` ˖ U Qqc|
( IQwHGGE