%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-06-24T15:14:59-04:00
2021-06-24T15:14:58-04:00
2021-06-24T15:14:59-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
03-08525.a1
uuid:d4363e94-12a2-439c-883c-b30e3c22f6c9
uuid:a818db1b-e705-4152-9cad-13cd96c34a83
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
18 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
19 0 obj
<>
endobj
20 0 obj
<>
endobj
22 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
23 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
25 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
26 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
21 0 obj
<><><><><><><><>]/P 19 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(03-08525.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/03-08525.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([6/24/2021 3:14:59 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: September 22, 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. 03-08525)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
/TT2 1 Tf
2.722 -2.2 Td
(Pro Se)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
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 May)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(27, 2004, which stated the reasons why )Tj
15.969 0 Td
(DOHA proposed to deny or revoke access to classified information for)Tj
-15.969 -1.125 Td
(Applicant. )Tj
4.443 0 Td
(The SOR was based on Guideline C \(Foreign Preference\), Guideline B )Tj
28.604 0 Td
(\(Foreign Influence\), and Guideline E)Tj
-33.047 -1.125 Td
(\(Personal Conduct\). )Tj
8.249 0 Td
(Administrative Judge Philip S. Howe issued an unfavorable security clear\
ance decision, dated April)Tj
-8.249 -1.125 Td
(6, 2005.)Tj
0 -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 Department of Defense )Tj
14.023 0 Td
(Directive 5220.6 \(Directive\), dated January 2, 1992, as amended.)Tj
-14.023 -2.125 Td
(The following issues have been raised on appeal: \(1\) whether the Admin\
istrative Judge erred by not taking into account)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Applicant's claim that a female )Tj
12.647 0 Td
(coworker with a grudge against him was the source of some of the allegat\
ions against)Tj
-12.647 -1.125 Td
(him; \(2\) whether the Administrative Judge failed to give sufficient )Tj
26.826 0 Td
(consideration to Applicant's disclosures about his)Tj
-26.826 -1.125 Td
(past conduct; \(3\) whether some of the Administrative Judge's findings \
of fact are not supported by the record )Tj
43.835 0 Td
(evidence;)Tj
-43.835 -1.125 Td
(and \(4\) whether the Administrative Judge should have concluded Applica\
nt's conduct and circumstances were mitigated)Tj
T*
(sufficiently to warrant a )Tj
9.83 0 Td
(favorable security clearance decision. )Tj
15.297 0 Td
(For the reasons that follow, the Board affirms the)Tj
-25.127 -1.125 Td
(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
/TT3 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 whether there is factual )Tj
17.798 0 Td
(or legal error. )Tj
5.719 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 specificity and identify how the A\
dministrative )Tj
33.963 0 Td
(Judge committed factual or legal)Tj
-33.963 -1.125 Td
(error. )Tj
(Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item E3.1.32. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
25.797 0 Td
(See also)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No. 00-0050 \(July 23, 2001\) at pp.)Tj
-25.797 -1.125 Td
(2-3 )Tj
(\(discussing reasons why party must raise claims of error with specifici\
ty\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(When the rulings or conclusions of an Administrative Judge are challenge\
d, the Board must consider whether they are:)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(\(1\) arbitrary or capricious; or \(2\) )Tj
13.328 0 Td
(contrary to law. )Tj
6.553 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 conclusions are arbitrary or cap\
ricious, )Tj
31.726 0 Td
(the Board will review the Judge's)Tj
-31.726 -1.125 Td
(decision to determine whether: it does not examine relevant evidence; it\
fails to articulate a satisfactory explanation for)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
29 0 obj
(4ȁV9F)
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
31 0 obj
<>
endobj
32 0 obj
<>
endobj
33 0 obj
<>
endobj
40 0 obj
<>
endobj
41 0 obj
<>stream
H\n0ۤU}]?CF]lipk]7}fh}RrL3Ƥ( ixuwWX}UfBYŎ>v@HcڦtˆrG~'fhqк+&ŖV řVγL.nCRd,n)WID"S MΚSd
{=bbʅsfѫ |`ߥGf؛:SZ4ע3Y