%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:32:55-04:00
2021-07-02T15:32:54-04:00
2021-07-02T15:32:55-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
04-07360.a1
uuid:0195f8e9-5afe-42de-9435-a2848191e4cf
uuid:33ebe372-6711-4fd8-ab4d-db4247ff5fa5
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
20 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
21 0 obj
<>
endobj
22 0 obj
<>
endobj
24 0 obj
[23 0 R 23 0 R]
endobj
25 0 obj
[23 0 R 23 0 R]
endobj
26 0 obj
[23 0 R 23 0 R]
endobj
27 0 obj
[23 0 R 23 0 R]
endobj
28 0 obj
[23 0 R 23 0 R]
endobj
29 0 obj
[23 0 R 23 0 R]
endobj
30 0 obj
[23 0 R 23 0 R]
endobj
23 0 obj
<><><><><><><><><><><><>]/P 21 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
31 0 obj
[38 0 R 39 0 R 40 0 R]
endobj
32 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(04-07360.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/04-07360.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:32:54 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: September 26, 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. 04-07360)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
-4.166 -2.2 Td
(Julie R. Edmunds, Esq., Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
4.944 -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 \(DOHA\) declined to grant Ap\
plicant a security clearance. )Tj
41.649 0 Td
(On June 15,)Tj
-41.649 -1.125 Td
(2005, DOHA issued a statement of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(reasons advising Applicant of the basis for that decision--security conc\
erns raised)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(under Guideline F \(Financial Considerations\) and Guideline E \(Persona\
l)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
29.188 0 Td
(Conduct\) of Department of Defense Directive)Tj
-29.188 -1.125 Td
(5220.6 \(Jan. 2, 1992, as amended\) \(Directive\). )Tj
18.828 0 Td
(Applicant requested a hearing. )Tj
12.467 0 Td
(On January 30, 2006, after the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
12.385 0 Td
(hearing,)Tj
-43.68 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Judge Mary E. Henry granted Applicant's request for a sec\
urity clearance. )Tj
36.056 0 Td
(Department Counsel timely)Tj
-36.056 -1.125 Td
(appealed pursuant to the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
9.997 0 Td
(Directive \266\266 E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.)Tj
-9.997 -2.125 Td
(Department Counsel raised the following issue on appeal: whether the Adm\
inistrative Judge's conclusion that the)Tj
T*
(security concerns raised by Applicant's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.87 0 Td
(history of indebtedness and excessive gambling had been mitigated is arb\
itrary)Tj
-15.87 -1.375 Td
(and capricious.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 88.6387 300.75 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 88.6387 300 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 270.75 Tm
(\(1\) Department Counsel contends that it was arbitrary and capricious f\
or the Administrative Judge to conclude that the)Tj
T*
(security concerns raised by Applicant's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.87 0 Td
(history of indebtedness were mitigated by application of Guideline F Mit\
igating)Tj
-15.87 -1.375 Td
(Conditions 4)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 77.6758 245.25 Tm
( \(2\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 77.6758 244.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 91.4819 240.75 Tm
( and 6,)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 123.8081 245.25 Tm
( \(3\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 123.8081 244.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 137.6143 240.75 Tm
( and a "whole person" analysis. )Tj
(In support of that)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(contention, Department Counsel argues that:)Tj
-10.135 -1.125 Td
(\(a\) not all of the debts have been paid off, \(b\) two of the four deb\
ts were satisfied by garnishment, and \(c\) what)Tj
T*
(counseling Applicant received was for his depression and excessive gambl\
ing, not financial counseling. )Tj
41.738 0 Td
(Department)Tj
-41.738 -1.125 Td
(Counsel's contention has some merit, but)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.65 0 Td
(does not render the Judge's overall favorable decision arbitrary or capr\
icious.)Tj
-16.65 -2.125 Td
(The findings that Applicant had successfully mitigated the security conc\
erns under Guideline F reflect permissible)Tj
T*
(interpretations of the record evidence by the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
17.909 0 Td
(Administrative Judge. )Tj
9.082 0 Td
(The fact that Department Counsel can articulate a)Tj
-26.991 -1.125 Td
(reasonable alternative interpretation is of no moment. )Tj
21.659 0 Td
(Department Counsel has not)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
11.609 0 Td
(met her burden of demonstrating that)Tj
-33.268 -1.125 Td
(the Judge's findings do not reflect a reasonable or plausible interpreta\
tion of the record evidence. )Tj
38.944 0 Td
(Considering the record)Tj
-38.944 -1.125 Td
(evidence as a whole, the Judge's findings about Applicant's history of i\
ndebtedness are sustainable.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Given the record evidence in this case, it was error for the Administrat\
ive Judge to fully apply )Tj
37.877 0 Td
(Financial Considerations)Tj
-37.877 -1.125 Td
(Mitigating Condition 4. )Tj
9.723 0 Td
(In this)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(instance, Applicant did not complete any type of financial counseling an\
d did not)Tj
-9.723 -1.125 Td
(favorably complete the counseling for depression and excessive gambling.\
)Tj
T*
(As to Guideline F Mitigating Condition 6, it was error for the Administr\
ative Judge to favorably apply that mitigating)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
33 0 obj
<>
endobj
34 0 obj
(D6#\nT.)
endobj
35 0 obj
<>
endobj
36 0 obj
<>
endobj
37 0 obj
<>
endobj
45 0 obj
<>
endobj
46 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
47 0 obj
<>stream
H|Xϙsgw**evfa
<)b`@E`-u(!*}*F