%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:31:24-04:00
2021-07-02T15:31:24-04:00
2021-07-02T15:31:24-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
04-06248.a1
uuid:11649566-6a96-49b7-9442-d81969422b40
uuid:f6d54624-eccf-4250-8d60-ae8c91ad18cb
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
18 0 obj
<><>]/P 16 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
21 0 obj
[29 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(04-06248.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archi\
ved%20-%20HTML/04-06248.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:31:24 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: August 25, 2006)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. 04-06248)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
-3.373 -2.2 Td
(Richard A. Stevens, Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
4.151 -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 \(DOHA\) declined to grant Ap\
plicant a security clearance. )Tj
41.649 0 Td
(On May 17,)Tj
-41.649 -1.125 Td
(2005, DOHA issued a statement of reasons)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(SOR\) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision--security conc\
erns)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(raised under Guideline E \(Personal Conduct\) of Department of Defense D\
irective)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
32.85 0 Td
(5220.6 \(Jan. 2, 1992, as amended\))Tj
-32.85 -1.125 Td
(\(Directive\). )Tj
4.886 0 Td
(Applicant requested the case be decided on the written record. )Tj
25.128 0 Td
(On March 15, 2006, after considering the)Tj
-30.015 -1.375 Td
(record,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Chief Administrative Judge Robert Robinson Gales )Tj
23.94 0 Td
(denied Applicant's request for a security clearance.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 547.6621 366.75 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 547.6621 366 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 348.75 Tm
(Applicant timely appealed pursuant to the Directive)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.965 0 Td
(\266\266 E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.)Tj
9.75 0 0 9.75 16 324.75 Tm
(Applicant raised the following issue on appeal: whether the Administrati\
ve Judge's adverse clearance decision under Guidelines E is arbitrary,)Tj
0 -1.231 TD
(capricious or)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
5.442 0 Td
(contrary to law.)Tj
-5.442 -2.462 Td
(Applicant argues that the Administrative Judge's adverse clearance decis\
ion should be reversed because it is based upon erroneous findings deriv\
ed)Tj
T*
(from a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(neglectful investigation that did not throughly and completely acquire p\
roper information regarding her employment history. )Tj
53.041 0 Td
(Applicant also)Tj
-53.041 -1.231 Td
(argues she did not)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
7.499 0 Td
(deliberately or intentionally make false statements on her security clea\
rance application. )Tj
35.541 0 Td
(The Board does not find Applicant's)Tj
-43.04 -1.231 Td
(arguments persuasive.)Tj
0 -2.462 TD
(The methods and scope of Defense Security Service investigations are out\
side the scope of review of the Appeal Board. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
48.207 0 Td
(See e.g. )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(ISCR Case No. 99-)Tj
-51.539 -1.231 Td
(0293 at 4)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(App. Bd. May 5, 2000\). )Tj
(The Administrative Judge is not responsible for gathering evidence for t\
he benefit of either party. )Tj
53.32 0 Td
(DOHA)Tj
-53.32 -1.231 Td
(proceedings are adversarial)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
11.188 0 Td
(in nature and each party is responsible for gathering and presenting evi\
dence for the Judge to consider. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
41.319 0 Td
(See, e.g.,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-52.508 -1.231 Td
(Directive \266\266 E3.1.14 and E3.1.15. )Tj
13.792 0 Td
(The Judge)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(has the responsibility to exercise reasonable control over the developme\
nt of the record evidence by)Tj
-13.792 -1.231 Td
(the parties to ensure that a case proceeds in a fair, timely,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
23.157 0 Td
(and orderly manner. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
8.33 0 Td
(See, e.g., )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ISCR Case No. 00-0628 at 3-4 \(Apr. 26, 2002\). )Tj
(A review of)Tj
-31.487 -1.231 Td
(the proceedings below persuades the Board that Applicant was)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
25.354 0 Td
(placed on reasonable notice that she was responsible for presenting evid\
ence on her)Tj
-25.354 -1.231 Td
(behalf, and that the Judge would base his decision on record evidence)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
28.13 0 Td
(presented by the parties for his consideration. )Tj
18.439 0 Td
(Applicant did not file a timely)Tj
-46.569 -1.231 Td
(response to the government's file of relevant material. )Tj
21.756 0 Td
(She cannot fairly claim)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
9.552 0 Td
(that the Judge was obligated to consider information that had not been)Tj
-31.308 -1.231 Td
(presented to him. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
7.165 0 Td
(See, e.g., )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.832 0 Td
(ISCR Case No. 02-09209 at 3-4 \(App. Bd. June 9, 2004\).)Tj
-10.997 -2.462 Td
(The findings which Applicant challenges are permissible characterization\
s by the Administrative Judge of the evidence that was before him.)Tj
0 -1.231 TD
(Applicant has not)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
7.304 0 Td
(met her burden of demonstrating that the Judge's material findings with \
respect Applicant's conduct of security concern do not)Tj
-7.304 -1.231 Td
(reflect a reasonable or plausible)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
12.966 0 Td
(interpretation of the record evidence. )Tj
15.048 0 Td
(The Board does not review a case )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
13.745 0 Td
(de novo)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(. )Tj
(Considering the record evidence as)Tj
-41.759 -1.231 Td
(a whole, the Judge's material findings of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.398 0 Td
(security concern are sustainable.)Tj
-16.398 -2.462 Td
(Applicant's statements about her intent and state of mind when she execu\
ted her security clearance application were relevant evidence, but they)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
<>
endobj
24 0 obj
(ވbA;qYQӷE)
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
36 0 obj
<>
endobj
37 0 obj
<>stream
H\j >wId/(.?4$:Iƈ1}G]0~}n";0j$6,/@ioU[Iǹ5 AջOjS贙tGfhwP:OfpDכ (jWQyd({Dg%&qB\>DDq|N|UVdFȔ`^9=>w9L
.H` ,
endstream
endobj
38 0 obj
<>stream
H|XTgv΅HSwwnXPlh$ȋ/1"*(*QԨQ`cVQbwX,}s朹s ԅ$ uyI|-,".<>s? 8op1د}@d Cc'D^ Esb#N^<^?/8u q&}b3^q@Gs쨈p80 j=ą'ƻ-b +3xzdx\B7e<'Ǐ`u;x m?~LT&%iD1D,VP$0AI8Y!qbzLmkWhk ]>s~|ٽ/b+PrwMbtXש{
5n⥒i-Zmݦm;;vܥk@٫w/}?o~~iphX83lظG&NeI~R4P$$MvKE =^I5HhuzP]I,l*vzZWm}m#mm
Fy+52
QveO#r$')yF"X>-t@]O].BroOF?KMnz;`nam V[g&K
6HɜC:2bN,Dh+
\aP&TzUUU*KBR?)=P)I+HWu:s M&YPz!LYAB>pȐJ9kCt90_{}js,n/K'!ҷFm`˯D}~:pJ9W!vavv~.>U}Ţ
y;;;mm̭ͭ--M:7o,_bZbZkJ0ev=LMYV+ׁ @h D
#O
8ǿj[<3aqea=9z}}gEΔG8Z_*:H'LH4X `=8C*4B%<Rg
r%W (0" "8p
NxpAl% !Ă0F@HȂQ0a!x0C"L 0 &/k`*Lr<'RT !C,Po'pGW*\Yu:x
U7`6q#n܌[p+n혋;p'7pS1
w܋y|肮pn, A