%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:34:40-04:00
2021-07-02T15:34:39-04:00
2021-07-02T15:34:40-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
04-08867.a1
uuid:737831c1-5fd0-482e-9f7e-4aac00f54981
uuid:d016ce47-200f-4553-86d3-1c1cac91529f
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
[27 0 R 28 0 R 29 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(04-08867.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/04-08867.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:34:40 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: February 20, 2007)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. 04-08867)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
-5.429 -2.2 Td
(James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
6.207 -2.2 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-0.819 -2.2 Td
(Thomas R. Present, Esq.)Tj
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 20,)Tj
-41.649 -1.125 Td
(2005, DOHA issued a statement of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(reasons advising Applicant of the basis for that decision--security conc\
erns raised)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(under Guideline B \(Foreign Influence\), Guideline C \(Foreign Preferenc\
e\),)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
29.851 0 Td
(and Guideline E \(Personal Conduct\) of)Tj
-29.851 -1.125 Td
(Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 \(Jan. 2, 1992, as amended\) \(Di\
rective\). )Tj
32.377 0 Td
(Applicant requested a hearing. )Tj
12.467 0 Td
(On)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(ay)Tj
-44.844 -1.125 Td
(31, 2006, after the hearing, Administrative Judge Paul J. Mason denied A\
pplicant's request for a security clearance.)Tj
0 -1.375 TD
(Applicant timely appealed pursuant)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.496 0 Td
(to the Directive \266\266 E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 382.4453 353.25 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 382.4453 352.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 323.25 Tm
(Applicant raised the following issue on appeal: whether the Judge's unfa\
vorable clearance decision under Guideline E is)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.244 0 Td
(law.)Tj
-14.244 -2.125 Td
(In this case, the Judge made sustainable findings that Applicant had omi\
tted material information of security concern)Tj
T*
(relating to his possession of a Lebanese)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.08 0 Td
(passport from his response to question 15 of security clearance applicat\
ions)Tj
-16.08 -1.125 Td
(electronically submitted in January 2003, September 2003, and January 20\
04, and a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
33.741 0 Td
(security clearance application)Tj
-33.741 -1.125 Td
(executed in October 2004. )Tj
10.802 0 Td
(The Judge also made sustainable findings that Applicant had omitted mate\
rial information of)Tj
-10.802 -1.125 Td
(security)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
3.416 0 Td
(concern relating to his 1997 travel to Kuwait and Lebanon in response to\
question 16 of security clearance)Tj
-3.416 -1.125 Td
(applications electronically submitted in January)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
19.355 0 Td
(2003, September 2003, and January 2004. )Tj
17.08 0 Td
(The Judge concluded that)Tj
-36.436 -1.375 Td
(Applicant's omissions did not rise to the level of deliberate falsificat\
ions under)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
31.673 0 Td
(Disqualifying Condition 2,)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 525.0742 204.75 Tm
( \(2\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 525.0742 204 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 538.8804 200.25 Tm
( because)Tj
-43.573 -1.125 Td
(Applicant had relied in part on erroneous advice from his facility secur\
ity officer \(FSO\) that he did not need to disclose)Tj
T*
(the information concerning his Lebanese passport. )Tj
20.411 0 Td
(However, the Judge went on to conclude that Applicant had)Tj
-20.411 -1.125 Td
(exercised questionable judgement in relying on)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
19.161 0 Td
(the advice of his FSO, given the clear wording of question 15, and that)Tj
-19.161 -1.125 Td
(Applicant's multiple omissions constituted poor judgement under the gene\
ral security)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
34.396 0 Td
(concern for Guideline E. )Tj
10.135 0 Td
(In that)Tj
-44.53 -1.125 Td
(regard, the Judge's adverse conclusion was based upon an extensive analy\
sis of Applicant's conduct under the "whole)Tj
0 -1.375 TD
(person")Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(factors.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 91.5391 120.75 Tm
( \(3\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 91.5391 120 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 105.3452 116.25 Tm
( )Tj
(On appeal, Applicant contends the Judge's unfavorable clearance decision\
is arbitrary, capricious,)Tj
-7.445 -1.125 Td
(and contrary to law because Applicant's conduct)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
19.59 0 Td
(did not fall under any of the Guideline E Disqualifying Conditions. )Tj
27.107 0 Td
(The)Tj
-46.697 -1.125 Td
(Board does not find this argument persuasive.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Although a Judge must apply pertinent disqualifying and mitigating condi\
tions, the Judge is not required to do so in a)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(rigid, mechanical manner. )Tj
10.69 0 Td
(Furthermore,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
5.499 0 Td
(because the conditions do not exhaust the realm of human experience or t\
he)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
<>
endobj
24 0 obj
([%7Q$B42)
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
32 0 obj
<>
endobj
33 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0~
CI)i9e{V'='E},!')c 8'h;"-Z^;6N}TBMf->}h!ss/Pܻmׄ[ɗs;"` d
endstream
endobj
34 0 obj
<>stream
H|y\TG5o^p rxÛxDDj$^ј]ƍQ7A9xFH^x#㉷x ^(̈[UCh?~~ ^ȀȞlhl\a
MIm;a E #i7~Y
ԫ-S(pɣY0%xm1_a67zHBJڨclz{VCbc4e@PK8+x8lB?!?0u4g 7]aqB IBˋbVCƗdF/dY#i#yY܄WY#'9Rku 9Nmކ Qk~G/h\cYwsS?^
5n5͚/a-iݿi;t.]?ѽǧ=#z_?_W&JLJN<$ui_9jߌ1ۉ}?iYӦϘ=kr/XK.[bkk mܔymwU{}<#GK?Qz3e8{pbZu
ZLPTB1f,FJTi\*i=rJ?KeC)V*Xy8C
3KOYyƵ&M&_SI153mf1k}*TjPU#d5CT'9ruMݫ)L )4:464>4)tHaF$s^aY[}muZG#͑qָvSyh|)DHiT.=F}y<]%OwBpJ,t!(#(/ZinJ+NQJK)Q.*Wj4C!Op1ʘi~ͩSiN?SͩTp,8S\hfyyp v?{^Qӿ6_Gc#y>r?xy\\w9n5@MyGmcqmhlum6/nsllmMcȇExk9U9U+5.ϵUC^աuU55j6[bܳܶpEYJ,,E;jYmlbdh ,FKЭ17E.I+J4
}hF#DXHwD9x>yR"