%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T16:03:13-04:00
2021-07-02T16:03:12-04:00
2021-07-02T16:03:13-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
97-0595.a2
uuid:15965713-bbab-4807-aa10-3332d6e9faa2
uuid:437fac46-1099-4a20-b07e-d290359637c5
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
(97-0595.a2)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/97-0595.a2.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 4:03:12 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 19, 1999)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. 97-0595)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
12.114 -2.125 Td
(APPEAL BOARD DECISION AND REMAND ORDER)Tj
8.32 -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
12 0 0 12 247.375 518.25 Tm
(FOR GOVERNMENT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-7.539 -2.125 Td
(Peregrine D. Russell-Hunter, Esq., Chief Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
8.317 -2.125 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
2.722 -2.125 Td
(Pro Se)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-22.781 -2.125 Td
(Administrative Judge John R. Erck issued a remand decision, dated May 29\
, 1998, in which he concluded it is not)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(clearly)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security cl\
earance for Applicant. )Tj
39.485 0 Td
(Applicant appealed.)Tj
-39.485 -1.125 Td
(The)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Board remands the case to the Administrative Judge for further processin\
g consistent with the rulings and)Tj
T*
(instructions set)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(forth in this Decision and Order for Remand.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(This Board has jurisdiction on appeal under Executive Order 10865 and De\
partment of Defense Directive 5220.6, dated)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(January 2, 1992, as amended.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant's appeal presents the following issues: \(1\) whether the Admi\
nistrative Judge failed to comply with the Board's)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(ay 22, 1998 Decision and Remand Order; and \(2\) whether the Administrat\
ive Judge's Remand Decision is arbitrary,)Tj
T*
(capricious, or contrary to law.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -2.125 TD
(Procedural History)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals issued to Applicant a Stateme\
nt of Reasons \(SOR\), dated September 2,)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(1997. )Tj
(The SOR was based on Criterion H \(Drug Involvement\) and Criterion E \(\
Personal Conduct\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(A hearing was held on December 17, 1997. )Tj
17.606 0 Td
(The Administrative Judge subsequently issued a written decision in which\
)Tj
-17.606 -1.125 Td
(he)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(concluded it is not clearly consistent with the national interest to gra\
nt or continue a security clearance for Applicant.)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(That unfavorable decision was appealed by Applicant. )Tj
21.992 0 Td
(On May 22, 1998, the Board issued a Decision and Remand)Tj
-21.992 -1.125 Td
(Order)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(Remand Order\), in which it concluded the Administrative Judge made er\
rors that warranted remand.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(The Administrative Judge issued a Remand Decision, dated May 29, 1998. )Tj
30.216 0 Td
(The Remand Decision was sent to the)Tj
-30.216 -1.125 Td
(attorney who had represented Applicant at the hearing level, but who did\
not represent Applicant on appeal. )Tj
43.402 0 Td
(The)Tj
-43.402 -1.125 Td
(attorney)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(who represented Applicant on the first appeal did not get a copy of the \
Remand Decision until September 9,)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(1998.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(On September 24, 1998, the Board received a letter dated September 23, 1\
998. )Tj
31.74 0 Td
(The Board Chairman construed the)Tj
-31.74 -1.125 Td
(September 23, 1998 letter as a notice of appeal and accepted it late bec\
ause the Remand Decision had not been sent to)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
<>
endobj
24 0 obj
(?h, m_Mir{)
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
32 0 obj
<>
endobj
33 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0~
Cqb>Xpl%3,qC~]:OHvϝ5{p:֠eQ[3N~["Ν%6]p[`uFmAH^3ϲC)ov _gӸx0H;!YF2_\Tèe`NUEpTD|n2#L.s^c@ǂ@tد fz
endstream
endobj
34 0 obj
<>stream
H|Xϙsgw*wgwa,E5` /yQAD`X]
ž+v]؟%k\Ч}K{{7*_7o՞-($*8zIZ 1dXC;ThãD
P7@zHpsjF*3#C-p46?گz(y56x hgC#rwaTpLtM?X
#_4 >z䘱Κ-ߏ]f .O"H2Z(
(
4(U3W)n #oe[kĽ9^PW5,7Ώ7"<$&jRr\ר^v7ᩚ6jܤiOhʻuwɧsO}vޣgz_|gCBD6<2jQnja )S6}ĤYM7_-^t,_rUԴ5kYgl27oٺmvor/8zN_XmWK6U-h`2:0@DOi
%,ZM%b?1P)&sB7L7\wXWsW*NU+O%O)VcRf521,7I_&1U30ScSSSoS)Cp0
jeUuS
TOZQ#XuRՍ65[ݧ'ekf2#Mb̴dZ,
aѡqvu88:z8