%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:40:06-04:00
2021-07-02T15:40:05-04:00
2021-07-02T15:40:06-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
04-12331.a1
uuid:b9c8b01f-ad58-4982-9c1f-cb0d724b2b72
uuid:cef16bd0-743f-4806-a6cc-0998388710da
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
(04-12331.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/04-12331.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:40:05 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: November 17, 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
(ADP Case No. 04-12331)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 \(DOHA\) proposed to deny or \
revoke access to automated information)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(systems in ADP-I and ADP-II sensitivity)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(positions for Applicant. )Tj
26.387 0 Td
(On July 28, 2005, DOHA issued a statement of)Tj
-26.387 -1.125 Td
(reasons \(SOR\) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision--secur\
ity concerns)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
33.13 0 Td
(raised under Guideline B \(Foreign)Tj
-33.13 -1.125 Td
(Influence\) of Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 \(Jan. 2, 1992, as\
amended\) \(Directive\). )Tj
37.818 0 Td
(Applicant requested)Tj
-37.818 -1.125 Td
(hearing. )Tj
3.499 0 Td
(On April 20, 2006, after the hearing, )Tj
14.885 0 Td
(Administrative Judge Joan Caton Anthony denied Applicant's request for)Tj
-18.383 -1.125 Td
(a security clearance. )Tj
8.383 0 Td
(Applicant timely appealed)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
10.802 0 Td
(pursuant to the Directive \266\266 E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.)Tj
-19.185 -2.125 Td
(Applicant raised the following issue on appeal: whether the Administrati\
ve Judge's unfavorable trustworthiness)Tj
T*
(determination under Guideline B is arbitrary,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.3 0 Td
(capricious, or contrary to law.)Tj
-18.3 -2.125 Td
(\(1\) Applicant contends that the Administrative Judge's adverse determi\
nation should be reversed because the)Tj
T*
(government did a more extensive background)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.55 0 Td
(investigation than was necessary for his position \(ADP II\). )Tj
23.718 0 Td
(Specifically,)Tj
-42.268 -1.125 Td
(Applicant argues that a full background investigation was not required f\
or the level of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
34.601 0 Td
(trust being sought--only a)Tj
-34.601 -1.125 Td
(National Agency Check and a Credit Check was required. )Tj
23.437 0 Td
(In support of his contention, Applicant presents new evidence)Tj
-23.437 -1.125 Td
(in the form)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
4.693 0 Td
(of a Standard Form 85P, Questionnaire for Public Trust Positions, includ\
ing instructions. )Tj
35.858 0 Td
(Applicant's)Tj
-40.552 -1.125 Td
(argument in this regard lacks merit.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant did not raise this argument below, and the Board may not consi\
der new evidence on appeal. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
41.127 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( Directive \266)Tj
-41.127 -1.125 Td
(E3.1.29. )Tj
(Accordingly, we may not)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.025 0 Td
(consider Applicant's additional explanations and evidence, and they do n\
ot)Tj
-14.025 -1.125 Td
(demonstrate error on the part of the Administrative Judge.)Tj
T*
(Under the Directive, there is no jurisdiction or authority to adjudicate\
, in DOHA proceedings, the adequacy of a)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(background investigation. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
10.637 0 Td
(See, e.g., )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.832 0 Td
(ISCR Case)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(No. 02-07191 at 3 \(App. Bd. Mar. 25, 2004\). )Tj
(The scope and methods of)Tj
-14.468 -1.125 Td
(such investigations are outside the scope of review of the Appeal Board.\
)Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
29.186 0 Td
(See, e.g.,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
/Span<>> BDC
3.582 0 Td
( )Tj
EMC
(ISCR Case No. 02-14772 at 4 \(App.)Tj
-32.768 -1.125 Td
(Bd. July 16, 2004\). )Tj
(A favorable clearance determination cannot be made unless there is an af\
firmative finding that it is)Tj
T*
(clearly consistent with the national interest to grant access to a parti\
cular applicant. )Tj
33.488 0 Td
(The actions or inactions of the)Tj
-33.488 -1.125 Td
(investigating agency are not probative of an)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
17.799 0 Td
(applicant's judgment, reliability, or trustworthiness. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
20.843 0 Td
(See, e.g., )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.832 0 Td
(02-05854 at 4)Tj
-42.474 -1.125 Td
(\(App. Bd. Apr. 15, 2004\). )Tj
(Additionally, an applicant is not entitled to a favorable)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
32.715 0 Td
(clearance determination based on a)Tj
-32.715 -1.125 Td
(claim of equitable estoppel. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
11.302 0 Td
(See, e.g.,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.582 0 Td
( ISCR Case No. 02-00305 at 3 \(App. Bd. Feb. 12, 2003\). )Tj
(Therefore, the level of)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
<>
endobj
24 0 obj
(oe<9&0Tsow)
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
35 0 obj
<>
endobj
36 0 obj
<>stream
H\j >wIJB[ȡhHt
qylOg>?y?ZyΈ=JK:04J.b-$ٰAͻLxdItJ/p#j=dж q^F:O#q@7Yhy2_e,Gǚ"g.qB\>D*L8WL\ׁωuqA[W:9w_9$~C"4
0 ;
"
endstream
endobj
37 0 obj
<>stream
H|XTgv΅HS݅5؈h /yD@FTEh,XaEذ]XDKE/97wfΙ3w ԁ$
E&yI|%<2>"!su@ p9*Q#]jp\00wXX ƍqZ$Hy舨L||¹k8p'6>qL*K7,2n1 @V(^;w' L?ؾ0":aC=u j5! \{Q(PP($vm0bV%W G-
,(B/i mS
gϝpezhn.VwUGphSh}țBh4MTI+buXBNlPx:*Qԓ+ϤzJ.J H:/KZI,h*SilB砫s5I:_]3]O].[⭕AVȵeC>rs$Ir"ϔ+69_''3U>HGcCÚOb6
/`Zݬ!*d)@UL>J(sHTJ̙
-B0C%J
pq"UI,sKH=w¤$iT,]KϥWh5,adm{Cp]T
p}!CΒss(psiR
Xݭ*k;!ڣZc`͟D=~;^sITyՔWa~*:Qur#e-[ZX,,----,&E, eeͫi u2Ops )h
0|M:S# OF}X`<`ZcwccgQg71f~fFU+U{tqbL'ųZx8 B01K@/Ͻbow 8Ler2GYpai]9N3&?No3WJa,{0
!
zX.!MyP`,(}),x%paHȀ((h8
4p
C3P
a <9pyP3`0!q0`#gHQ0,0X&xȃ0 &n9#q* VL\K7ysDlr\Y脵6
*q
uhl\97&܌[06"bp7Ag܃X]Dwa} A<^r6X1PG7pnԢ1<%xO)<2Y<G})܁xri+mv.ʣݴi/tut
0*tS tJDN>PJgt.eBW隢Bdd2A7ݦ;t}zHzJzI+J+Mv*MB3xIv^d*ƀ!S0b ́92)j2ܘ;KxUFdmY;֞u`YubάʺۋĎbx_ćbH|,>*(SӔӕ)Terr2]9[>g_/Y/֛}BX(A'l3 (;wg0K ;w!xZꆻS KQnUnSWyйܔK<"c:e~Yd"MsB\/+ZDx/>@Q|)"UOSCi#$)bHtY}I)eLY,URSI(7塼/M?sӾ_e(K"T~w:Y=TJRTR9*O(X
P
pHh2EJsN3RRVS>O*E`b%+fXtl3pFę9gl98'ܜr>f,wnƹn\np1\Kr\].sor9.Ujw"W\r55&\r=
!72 7fܜ[pKnŭJp[nwNܙpW=\ѓ{qo}<!f61&ęxx8