%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:37:26-04:00
2021-07-02T15:37:25-04:00
2021-07-02T15:37:26-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
04-10249.a1
uuid:4cb38386-a5c5-41c9-8e18-b4196cf6dae9
uuid:08d1d63b-ab36-4416-800f-b12610a36b4e
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
[31 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(04-10249.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/04-10249.a1.html)Tj
50.24 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:37:26 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: February 27, 2007)Tj
0 -3.25 TD
(In Re:)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(-----)Tj
T*
(SSN:------)Tj
T*
(Applicant for Trustworthiness Determination)Tj
0 -3.25 TD
(ADP Case No. 04-10249)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
-5.429 -2.2 Td
(James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
6.207 -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 \(DOHA\) proposed to deny or \
revoke access to automated information)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(systems in ADP-I/II/III sensitivity)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
13.943 0 Td
(positions for Applicant. )Tj
9.721 0 Td
(On January 19, 2006, DOHA issued a statement of reasons)Tj
-23.665 -1.125 Td
(\(SOR\) advising Applicant of the basis for that decision--trustworthine\
ss)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
29.023 0 Td
(concerns raised under Guideline G \(Alcohol)Tj
-29.023 -1.125 Td
(Consumption\), Guideline J \(Criminal Conduct\), and Guideline E \(Perso\
nal Conduct\), of Department of Defense)Tj
T*
(Directive 5220.6 \(Jan. 2, 1992, as amended\) \(Directive\). )Tj
22.798 0 Td
(Applicant requested the case be decided on the written record.)Tj
-22.798 -1.125 Td
(On June 30, 2006, after considering)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.552 0 Td
(the record, Administrative Judge Shari Dam denied Applicant's request fo\
r a)Tj
-14.552 -1.375 Td
(trustworthiness designation. )Tj
11.471 0 Td
(Applicant timely appealed pursuant to the Directive)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
20.965 0 Td
(\266\266 E3.1.28 and E3.1.30.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 520.0996 339.75 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 520.0996 339 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 309.75 Tm
(Applicant raised the following issue on appeal: whether the Judge's unfa\
vorable trustworthiness determination under)Tj
T*
(Guidelines G and J is arbitrary, capricious,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
17.356 0 Td
(or contrary to law.)Tj
-17.356 -2.125 Td
(Applicant argues that the Judge's adverse trustworthiness determination \
should be reversed because many of Applicant's)Tj
T*
(alcohol-related criminal incidents are)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.16 0 Td
(not recent or were ultimately dismissed. )Tj
16.246 0 Td
(Applicant also argues that the)Tj
-31.405 -1.125 Td
(determination should be reversed because his last alcohol-related crimin\
al offense)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
33.043 0 Td
(occurred in 1999, he stopped drinking)Tj
-33.043 -1.125 Td
(in May 2004, and he has completed an alcohol treatment program. )Tj
26.797 0 Td
(Given the record of this case, the Board does not)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
19.744 0 Td
(find)Tj
-46.542 -1.125 Td
(Applicant's arguments persuasive.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(A Judge can find an applicant has engaged in criminal conduct even if th\
e criminal charges against the applicant were)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(dropped or dismissed. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
(See )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(ISCR Case)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(No. 03-11906 at 3 \(App. Bd. July 19, 2005\); ISCR Case No. 03-21761 at \
5 \(App.)Tj
T*
(Bd. Nov. 28, 2005\). )Tj
(The ultimate state court dispositions of Applicant's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
28.815 0 Td
(criminal incidents did not preclude the Judge)Tj
-28.815 -1.125 Td
(from finding that those incidents were alcohol-related. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
21.993 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No. 02-01181 at 3-4 \(App. Bd. Jan. 30,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(2004\).)Tj
-21.993 -1.125 Td
(Considering the record as a whole, the Judge's material findings with re\
spect to Applicant's alcohol-related conduct)Tj
T*
(reflect a plausible interpretation of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.077 0 Td
(the record evidence. )Tj
/TT3 1 Tf
8.329 0 Td
(See, e.g., )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.832 0 Td
(ISCR Case No. 03-21933 at 2 \(App. Bd. Aug. 18,)Tj
-26.237 -1.125 Td
(2006\).)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
/TT3 1 Tf
11.328 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 01-14740 at 7 \(App. Bd.)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Jan.15, 2003\). )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
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
(>
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
29 0 obj
<>
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
38 0 obj
<>
endobj
39 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0~
CIi9e{V'='YllIWR3$a4
[0N]\zPrL3FU|sOvJ%obfIst3l,bG-yYS_O3Z|k0(8(:ϟ$ҙ6"͆q%\1OĻ42Ud[b-1cx1ZX39A|>2K=ga`K=9ד˻9dXoY<6Hڨ/+;|tߏ(` #\
endstream
endobj
40 0 obj
<>stream
H| TTW_"q.(nF
dIbLd(QqGk
""*KuDmB9s{Nuoz} $ Am;TI+FnA!Q /}VȤ6{5@2