L@ރMK7MiTc
MҠt
u|)Y[;[NyC<$_[?)>ηB B G/
A ^p!C,0=k3v.I :4I48U?saEM9PԵFZ.¸kQ >/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[433.0 351.0 447.0 362.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
14 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 1/Type/Page>>
endobj
38 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(04-00225.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/04-00225.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:22:19 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 104.25 591.75 661.5 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(evidence as a whole is sustainable.)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 729.75 Tm
(The Board's review of an administrative judge's findings is limited to d\
etermining if they are supported by substantial)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(evidence--such relevant evidence as a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.353 0 Td
(reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support such a conclusion in\
light of)Tj
-15.353 -1.125 Td
(all the contrary evidence in the record. )Tj
15.659 0 Td
(Directive \266 E3.1.32.1. "This is)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
12.387 0 Td
(something less than the weight of the evidence,)Tj
-28.046 -1.125 Td
(and the possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the evi\
dence does not prevent an)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
39.464 0 Td
(administrative)Tj
-39.464 -1.125 Td
(agency's finding from being supported by substantial evidence." )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
25.888 0 Td
(Consolo v. Federal Maritime Comm'n)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
15.24 0 Td
(, 383 U.S. 607,)Tj
-41.128 -1.125 Td
(620, \(1966\). )Tj
(The)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(findings which Applicant complains about are permissible characterizatio\
ns of the record evidence on)Tj
T*
(the part of the Judge. )Tj
8.664 0 Td
(The Judge's material findings with)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.039 0 Td
(respect Applicant's conduct of security concern reflect a)Tj
-22.703 -1.125 Td
(reasonable or plausible interpretation of the record evidence. )Tj
24.517 0 Td
(The Board does not review a case )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
13.745 0 Td
(de)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(novo)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(. )Tj
(Considering the)Tj
-38.262 -1.125 Td
(record evidence as a whole, the Judge's material findings of security co\
ncern are sustainable. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
37.333 0 Td
(See, e.g., )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.832 0 Td
(ISCR Case No.)Tj
-41.164 -1.125 Td
(96-0461 at 3)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(App. Bd. Dec. 31, 1997\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(In this case, the Administrative Judge weighed the mitigating evidence o\
ffered by Applicant against the seriousness of)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(the disqualifying conduct and considered)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.69 0 Td
(the possible application of relevant mitigating conditions. )Tj
23.273 0 Td
(The Judge found in)Tj
-39.963 -1.125 Td
(favor of the Applicant under Guideline B and with respect to several of \
the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
30.212 0 Td
(allegations under Guidelines J and E.)Tj
-30.212 -1.125 Td
(However, the Judge reasonably explained why the evidence Applicant had p\
resented in mitigation was insufficient to)Tj
T*
(overcome all of the government's security concerns. )Tj
21.062 0 Td
(Given the record that was before her, the Judge's unfavorable)Tj
-21.062 -1.125 Td
(clearance decision under Guidelines J and E)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
17.91 0 Td
(is not arbitrary, capricious or contrary to law.)Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
4.914 -2.125 Td
(Order)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-22.823 -2.125 Td
(The decision of the Administrative Judge denying Applicant a clearance i\
s AFFIRMED.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Signed: Jean E. Smallin)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 16 438 cm
0 0 m
114.656 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 413.25 Tm
(Jean E. Smallin)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: William S. Fields)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 336 cm
0 0 m
124.002 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 311.25 Tm
(William S. Fields)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: James E. Moody)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 234 cm
0 0 m
119.994 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 209.25 Tm
(James E. Moody)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(1. )Tj
(The Administrative Judge found in favor of Applicant under Guideline D a\
nd with respect to SOR paragraphs 2.a,)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(2.b, 2.c, and 3.a. Those favorable findings are not at issue on appeal.)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
12 0 obj
<>
endobj
39 0 obj
<>
endobj
9 0 obj
<>
endobj
10 0 obj
<>
endobj
11 0 obj
<>
endobj
42 0 obj
(file:///usr.osd.mil/Home/OSD/OGC/JosephLM/_MyComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/04-00225.a1.html)
endobj
41 0 obj
<>
endobj
43 0 obj
<>
endobj
40 0 obj
[14 0 R/XYZ 0 143.0 null]
endobj
4 0 obj
<>
endobj
xref
0 44
0000000000 65535 f
0000000016 00000 n
0000000141 00000 n
0000003658 00000 n
0000121938 00000 n
0000003536 00000 n
0000003591 00000 n
0000003717 00000 n
0000003744 00000 n
0000121409 00000 n
0000121465 00000 n
0000121507 00000 n
0000121219 00000 n
0000004178 00000 n
0000116438 00000 n
0000003847 00000 n
0000003893 00000 n
0000003942 00000 n
0000004051 00000 n
0000003987 00000 n
0000004019 00000 n
0000004403 00000 n
0000004428 00000 n
0000010723 00000 n
0000010772 00000 n
0000010807 00000 n
0000011433 00000 n
0000011826 00000 n
0000116114 00000 n
0000063880 00000 n
0000064147 00000 n
0000036505 00000 n
0000036778 00000 n
0000012231 00000 n
0000012507 00000 n
0000012908 00000 n
0000037171 00000 n
0000064758 00000 n
0000116649 00000 n
0000121304 00000 n
0000121896 00000 n
0000121715 00000 n
0000121549 00000 n
0000121843 00000 n
trailer
<<9B4C9DF4373EBB4F917B730AF2720CBF>]>>
startxref
122111
%%EOF