%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-06-24T15:11:21-04:00
2021-06-24T15:11:20-04:00
2021-06-24T15:11:21-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
03-04549.a1
uuid:a47db21e-e511-49a3-b427-18aeaba0589f
uuid:7c83e9f4-ac87-46cc-b37c-94f34943bc8e
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
(03-04549.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/03-04549.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([6/24/2021 3:11:20 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: May 16, 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. 03-04549)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
-4.498 -2.2 Td
(Richard A. Stevens, Esq., Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
5.276 -2.2 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-0.846 -2.2 Td
(Dale P. Kelberman, 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 September)Tj
-41.649 -1.125 Td
(21, 2004, DOHA issued a statement of )Tj
(reasons advising Applicant of the basis for that decision--security conc\
erns)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(raised under Guideline H \(Drug Involvement\) and Guideline E \(Personal\
Conduct\), )Tj
33.602 0 Td
(of Department of Defense Directive)Tj
-33.602 -1.125 Td
(5220.6 \(Jan. 2, 1992, as amended\)\(Directive\). )Tj
18.578 0 Td
(Applicant requested a hearing. )Tj
12.467 0 Td
(On November 15, 2005, after the hearing,)Tj
-31.045 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Judge Matthew E. Malone denied Applicant's request for a \
security clearance. )Tj
37.667 0 Td
(Applicant timely appealed)Tj
-37.667 -1.125 Td
(pursuant to the Directive \266\266 E3.1.28 )Tj
14.681 0 Td
(and E3.1.30.)Tj
-14.681 -2.125 Td
(Applicant raised the following issue on appeal: whether the Administrati\
ve Judge erred by concluding that the security)Tj
T*
(concerns raised under Guidelines H and )Tj
16.217 0 Td
(E had not been mitigated.)Tj
-16.217 -2.125 Td
(Applicant argues that the Administrative Judge should have concluded tha\
t the security concerns raised under Guideline)Tj
T*
(H had been mitigated, as a matter of )Tj
14.745 0 Td
(law, because Applicant's drug use was isolated, aberrational and not rec\
ent, and)Tj
-14.745 -1.125 Td
(Applicant has demonstrated that he would not use drugs in the future. )Tj
28.077 0 Td
(In )Tj
(support of his argument, Applicant cites to)Tj
-28.077 -1.125 Td
(several Hearing Office decisions in which applicants with ostensibly sim\
ilar cases were granted clearances. )Tj
43.179 0 Td
(Applicant)Tj
-43.179 -1.125 Td
(also argues that the Judge should have concluded that the security conce\
rns raised under Guideline E had been)Tj
T*
(mitigated, as a matter of law, because )Tj
15.299 0 Td
(Applicant's multiple falsifications were isolated incidents that were no\
t recent,)Tj
-15.299 -1.125 Td
(and they were due in part to inadequate advice by authorized personnel. \
)Tj
28.961 0 Td
(Applicant also argues that he subsequently)Tj
-28.961 -1.125 Td
(provided the correct information in a prompt, good-faith manner before b\
eing confronted with the facts. )Tj
41.792 0 Td
(The Board )Tj
4.499 0 Td
(does)Tj
-46.29 -1.125 Td
(not find Applicant's arguments on appeal persuasive.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(The application of disqualifying and mitigating conditions does not turn\
simply on a finding that one or more of them)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(applies to the particular facts of a case. )Tj
15.798 0 Td
(Rather, their application requires the exercise of sound discretion in l\
ight of the)Tj
-15.798 -1.125 Td
(record evidence as a whole. )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.328 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 01-14740 at 7 \(App. Bd. )Tj
(Jan.15, 2003\). )Tj
(Thus, the presence of)Tj
-14.659 -1.125 Td
(some mitigating evidence does not alone compel the Judge to make a favor\
able security clearance decision. )Tj
43.234 0 Td
(As the trier)Tj
-43.234 -1.125 Td
(of )Tj
(fact, the Judge has to weigh the evidence as a whole and decide whether \
the favorable evidence outweighs the)Tj
T*
(unfavorable evidence or )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
9.912 0 Td
(vice versa)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
4.025 0 Td
(. )Tj
(An )Tj
(applicant's disagreement with the Judge's weighing of the evidence, or a\
n ability)Tj
-13.937 -1.125 Td
(to argue for a different interpretation of the evidence, is not sufficie\
nt to )Tj
29.044 0 Td
(demonstrate the Judge weighed the evidence or)Tj
-29.044 -1.125 Td
(reached conclusions in a manner that is arbitrary, capricious, or contra\
ry to law.)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
<>
endobj
24 0 obj
(ٽHԔC?_)
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
32 0 obj
<>
endobj
33 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0~
Cdi9e{V'='Yll%d)ccw?k9/~͓θUћ7{Wn!jv
s݈]c?,bCH=bdpvF2UALRh?(a^w^)q-\3OYh2Qe.5=Θ{B`>Gf!40b_pBȅ4)W_ֆqr7EV Th
endstream
endobj
34 0 obj
<>stream
H|XTgv΅HS݅
4XC
ŗDM
&*FTEh,X.V
{uQ,OKw}|9sܹ} jC*~ۢ|-"*!2)gU p5:Y#[fp\4(wq hs} P~0~N^@_pi%$tx@K|bT$` )I'`So'%Ly8}?iDLF{% 1ł?4G\UP$0AI&!?b}zwV%dUDG-,,
@Å^ȟw6Ba7 ɹVm:nuyyoаJ-i:_YI&M5ԯEV۴
lCǠN?ҵ[=?˯z:4|}C~i@xD$7xaIGL5zLq?2~INN2uZ3feϞ3ws-%K-]r5k
oH6oٚmv[o)>ZrғN9[_xvha.VgUGp hSh}ɇBiMA+,bYBN ,Hx:*UϤJ!JNX KZ,j*u:AWG箫ktMtt!H]G+kɮ-7}r9HS49]!ϕWțr_.Ogk}}>XUOj
1/`X]ݭ>**@USl!_
q9d**̅ B0])ʄJpbUԩ\s[H!R{R[*.K7+
hb5ɚlM. pm67ΡNC./8}->p(r>p"e
y[r`8`k7kjux}Ի+Q=b⳦\I:D8;pd* 5 wӹoo [Z[ZYZZZX>4444-ǫf P|yy9־SenQKskia
27M-MML:SC OF-cxИgGk[=]]FQkT*7c0hJjbE9Ng5Z`~ B=!Z}Ux?w^lWlޒoPVnP(|so7iӼșPSYs-R VALQ<pBdRX280*̄E/=e^sx +a!
!J! 8',O`6\p!Tta($@<\H#`$d
c)00~|Xa<