%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:31:51-04:00
2021-07-02T15:31:49-04:00
2021-07-02T15:31:51-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
04-06501.a1
uuid:ce3e4e38-9f62-4992-a714-18729f533b22
uuid:f4c6ca2d-5d87-45d2-9571-1394b07827e7
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 30 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(04-06501.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/04-06501.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:31:49 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: July 5, 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. 04-06501)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
-4.276 -2.2 Td
(Stephanie C. Hess, Esq., Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
5.054 -2.2 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-1.194 -2.2 Td
(Robert R. Sparks, Jr., 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 6,)Tj
-41.649 -1.125 Td
(2005, DOHA issued a statement of reasons)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(SOR\) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision--security conc\
erns)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(raised under Guideline B \(Foreign Influence\), pursuant to Department o\
f Defense)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
32.878 0 Td
(Directive 5220.6 \(Jan. 2, 1992, as)Tj
-32.878 -1.125 Td
(amended\) \(Directive\). )Tj
9.079 0 Td
(Applicant requested a hearing. )Tj
12.467 0 Td
(On December 27, 2005, after the hearing, Administrative Judge)Tj
-21.546 -1.125 Td
(Shari)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Dam denied Applicant's request for a security clearance. )Tj
25.17 0 Td
(Applicant timely appealed pursuant to the Directive \266\266)Tj
-25.17 -1.375 Td
(E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 116.9863 353.25 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 116.9863 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 issues on appeal: whether the Administrat\
ive Judge erred in making an adverse finding)Tj
T*
(under SOR paragraph 1.b.; whether the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.94 0 Td
(Administrative Judge's unfavorable clearance decision is arbitrary, capr\
icious or)Tj
-15.94 -1.125 Td
(contrary to law.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant argues that the Administrative Judge erred in making an advers\
e finding under SOR paragraph 1.b, because)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(the finding is contrary to the record)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.412 0 Td
(evidence and the Judge's own finding of fact. )Tj
18.313 0 Td
(The Board finds Applicant's argument)Tj
-32.726 -1.125 Td
(persuasive.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(The Administrative Judge found that the brother referred to in SOR parag\
raph 1.b had died in November 2004 at the age)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(of 74. )Tj
(Decision at 4. )Tj
8.359 0 Td
(Because that)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
5.331 0 Td
(brother is deceased, he no longer presents any security concern for the \
Applicant.)Tj
-13.69 -1.125 Td
(Accordingly, the Applicant has established error, but the error is harml\
ess)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
29.797 0 Td
(because it would not change the outcome of)Tj
-29.797 -1.125 Td
(the case.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant also argues that the Administrative Judge's decision should be\
reversed because her application of Guideline)Tj
0 -1.375 TD
(B Mitigating Conditions 1)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 142.3457 140.25 Tm
( \(2\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 142.3457 139.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 156.1519 135.75 Tm
( and 3,)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 188.478 140.25 Tm
( \(3\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 188.478 139.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
/Span<>> BDC
12 0 0 12 202.2842 135.75 Tm
( )Tj
EMC
(and the whole )Tj
6.109 0 Td
(person factors)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 343.2373 140.25 Tm
( \(4\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 343.2373 139.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 357.0435 135.75 Tm
( is not sustainable. )Tj
7.638 0 Td
(The Board does not find this)Tj
-36.058 -1.125 Td
(argument persuasive.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Given the record in this case, the Administrative Judge's application of\
Guideline B Mitigating Conditions 1 and 3 was)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(sustainable. )Tj
4.943 0 Td
(Moreover, the Judge made)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
10.913 0 Td
(extensive findings of fact which indicate that she evaluated the totalit\
y of)Tj
-15.856 -1.125 Td
(Applicant's circumstances in reaching her decision. )Tj
20.756 0 Td
(The Judge weighed the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
9.497 0 Td
(mitigating evidence offered by Applicant)Tj
-30.253 -1.125 Td
(against the seriousness of the security concerns presented by Applicant'\
s circumstances and reasonably explained why)Tj
T*
(that evidence was insufficient to overcome those concerns. )Tj
23.797 0 Td
(Therefore, the Judge's whole person analysis is also)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
<>
endobj
24 0 obj
(@UN v:o*p)
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
33 0 obj
<>
endobj
34 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0~
CI)i9e{V'='E},!')c 8'h;"-Z^;6N}TBMf->}h!ss/Pܻmׄ[ɗs;"` d
endstream
endobj
35 0 obj
<>stream
H|{|LkΜ5DBH$'E]RzԳTro*nI %("W#oW=#ԛq$3݃K>^kk /7o8OXD$G0@@ܘ,^MS$M݀Q,]@c~9r[*A"BMHNM6fF>m4$&ZUdz贔9\^+G'ǽy,G'F˟2,.E?#HRfdrK
U+!^KFtyi},nBг{'㬖9PK9Nmކ:Dh\cYwsSϿN݀z4
VFSHNMmfkjQv;tq.t=E/{1q&JJ<$eߌ6joǎK?ỉ0i̬ӦȞ9k9/XKr-[b5k6lߴymw,ص{}<#EG?Qrr9[q|bZy
Z0T0f"FJR4UZ&Iϴ^rscXTXLX|ؠ!Mӛ4h6'f {+{c!:iM55G#Qv,45}4R)2
\zߓ{yW790滗?VG!h# R}e])a290YXX d
1Oa&{1r?
Op؈lĢq88()E<Π Cui*B:@ ML)P5Dt~
$d$tJ$):M!JCʨYsCP#jLMpE|\'Oi.rmF:eGCd,,d&|r|/eUk||omwl_~D"]t,:]mO~:{y{6ﲍ]:"eYI13$!ҔA4AP `8. uQRl3_>?<qp82F8DZ8Gr7B.fܜ[pK|or+nmp. "\Kp).W* WRs\2q
5e
~4$;sιw8NST;5NS