%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:36:51-04:00
2021-07-02T15:36:51-04:00
2021-07-02T15:36:51-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
04-09684.a1
uuid:ab7d9edb-984e-410c-959f-1824da52e143
uuid:8905bd84-acde-41ae-944e-5ee510b98064
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
16 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
17 0 obj
<>
endobj
18 0 obj
<>
endobj
20 0 obj
[19 0 R 19 0 R]
endobj
21 0 obj
[19 0 R 19 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj
[19 0 R 19 0 R]
endobj
19 0 obj
<><><><>]/P 17 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
23 0 obj
[30 0 R 31 0 R 32 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(04-09684.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/04-09684.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:36:51 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 6, 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. 04-09684)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 July 20,)Tj
-41.649 -1.125 Td
(2005, DOHA issued a statement of reasons)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(advising Applicant of the basis for that decision--security concerns rai\
sed)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(under Guideline F \(Financial Considerations\) of Department of Defense \
Directive)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
33.045 0 Td
(5220.6 \(Jan. 2, 1992, as amended\))Tj
-33.045 -1.125 Td
(\(Directive\). )Tj
4.886 0 Td
(Applicant requested a hearing. )Tj
12.467 0 Td
(On January 23, 2006, after the hearing, )Tj
15.884 0 Td
(Administrative Judge Joseph Testan)Tj
-33.237 -1.125 Td
(granted Applicant's request for a security clearance. )Tj
20.948 0 Td
(Department Counsel timely appealed pursuant to the Directive \266\266)Tj
-20.948 -1.125 Td
(E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Department Counsel raised the following issue on appeal: whether the Adm\
inistrative Judge's favorable clearance)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(decision under Guidelines F is arbitrary,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
16.357 0 Td
(capricious or contrary to law.)Tj
-16.357 -2.125 Td
(Department Counsel argues that the Administrative Judge erred in his app\
lication of Guideline F Mitigating Conditions)Tj
0 -1.375 TD
(1,)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 25 275.25 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 25 274.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 38.8062 270.75 Tm
( 3)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 47.8062 275.25 Tm
( \(2\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 47.8062 274.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 61.6123 270.75 Tm
( and 6.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 93.9385 275.25 Tm
( \(3\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 93.9385 274.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 107.7446 270.75 Tm
( )Tj
(The Board does not)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
8.359 0 Td
(find Department Counsel's argument persuasive.)Tj
-16.005 -2.125 Td
(In this case, the Administrative Judge made the following sustainable fi\
ndings: )Tj
31.827 0 Td
(Applicant had paid off two of the three)Tj
-31.827 -1.125 Td
(debts alleged in the SOR, totaling)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
13.748 0 Td
(approximately $28,000, prior to the invocation of the security clearance\
process. )Tj
32.434 0 Td
(He)Tj
-46.182 -1.125 Td
(still had not paid off the third debt of approximately $10,000. )Tj
24.801 0 Td
(This latter)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
4.332 0 Td
(debt was for the balance owed on the voluntary)Tj
-29.133 -1.125 Td
(return of his leased vehicle prior to the end of the contract period. )Tj
26.49 0 Td
(Applicant disagrees as to that amount and is)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
17.885 0 Td
(still in)Tj
-44.375 -1.125 Td
(the process of trying to negotiate a lower amount. )Tj
20.105 0 Td
(Applicant's financial problems were due in part to the loss of)Tj
-20.105 -1.125 Td
(employment as a result of the terrorist)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.468 0 Td
(acts of September 11, 2001, and his failure to anticipate and prepare fo\
r the)Tj
-15.468 -1.125 Td
(significant tax implications of receiving an early distribution from his\
employer's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
32.7 0 Td
(stock/savings account. )Tj
9.248 0 Td
(None of)Tj
-41.948 -1.125 Td
(Applicant's recent debts have gone delinquent, and he now has the abilit\
y to satisfy his remaining debt.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Given the record in this case, Department Counsel has not demonstrated i\
t was arbitrary capricious, or contrary to law)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(for the Administrative Judge to give)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.719 0 Td
(Applicant some credit for the mitigating evidence he produced under Guid\
eline F)Tj
-14.719 -1.125 Td
(Mitigating Condition 1.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Department Counsel's argument concerning Guideline F Mitigating Conditio\
n 3 is premised on the notion that an)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Administrative Judge cannot apply that)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.969 0 Td
(mitigating condition unless the applicant demonstrates that the debts at\
issue)Tj
-15.969 -1.125 Td
(became delinquent as a direct result of the circumstances beyond applica\
nt's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
30.696 0 Td
(control. )Tj
3.333 0 Td
(The Board has previously noted)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
(tԛy#*j)
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
29 0 obj
<>
endobj
37 0 obj
<>
endobj
38 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
39 0 obj
<>stream
H|XϙsAEP2`džk@^)bAQ-F1R,Xb,b+((6e*F