%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:57:15-04:00
2021-07-02T15:57:14-04:00
2021-07-02T15:57:15-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
96-0316.a1
uuid:7e848b0d-0286-4c25-8774-d346fc0f58a4
uuid:ce987902-0b98-4bbd-8839-cb89e6c1f62e
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
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(96-0316.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/96-0316.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:57:15 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 749.25 Tm
(DATE:)Tj
( February 24, 1997)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 51.3262 748.5 cm
0 0 m
91.318 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 723.75 Tm
(__________________________________________)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(In Re:)Tj
T*
(-------------------)Tj
T*
(SSN: -----------)Tj
T*
(Applicant for Security Clearance)Tj
T*
(__________________________________________)Tj
T*
(DOHA Case No. 96-0316)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
10.934 -2.125 Td
(APPEAL BOARD DECISION AND ORDER FOR REMAND)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
10.641 -2.125 Td
(Appearances)Tj
-2.016 -2.125 Td
(FOR GOVERNMENT)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 250.7061 493.5 cm
0 0 m
110.338 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 244.5537 468.75 Tm
(Matthew E. Malone, Esq.)Tj
0.986 -2.125 Td
(Department Counsel)Tj
0.276 -2.125 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 259.7002 417 cm
0 0 m
92.35 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
/TT2 1 Tf
12 0 0 12 290.377 392.25 Tm
(Pro se)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-22.865 -2.125 Td
(Administrative Judge Kathryn M. Braeman issued a decision, dated October\
25, 1996, in which she concluded it is)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(clearly consistent with the national interest to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(grant or continue a security clearance for Applicant. Department Counsel\
)Tj
T*
(appealed. The Board remands the case to the Administrative Judge for fur\
ther)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(processing consistent with the rulings and)Tj
T*
(instructions set forth in this Decision and Order for Remand.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(This Board has jurisdiction on appeal under Executive Order 10865 and De\
partment of Defense Directive 5220.6, dated)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(January 2, 1992, as amended.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Department Counsel's appeal presents the following issues: \(1\) whether\
the Administrative Judge misapplied an Appeal)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Board decision; \(2\) whether the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Administrative Judge misapplied pertinent Adjudicative Guidelines in eva\
luating)Tj
T*
(Applicant's drug history; and \(3\) whether the Administrative Judge err\
ed by)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(finding credible Applicant's stated intention)Tj
T*
(to not use drugs in the future.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
20.032 -2.125 Td
(Procedural History)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-20.032 -2.125 Td
(The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals issued a Statement of Reasons\
\(SOR\), dated May 8, 1996, to Applicant.)Tj
T*
(The SOR was based on Criterion H \(Drug)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Involvement\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(A hearing was held on August 8, 1996. The Administrative Judge subsequen\
tly issued a written decision in which she)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(concluded it is clearly consistent with the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for Applican\
t. The)Tj
T*
(case is before the Board on Department Counsel's appeal from that favora\
ble)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(decision.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
21.225 -2.125 Td
(Appeal Issues)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-21.225 -2.125 Td
(1. )Tj
(Whether the Administrative Judge misapplied an Appeal Board decision)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 28 52.5 cm
0 0 m
347.906 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 375.9062 53.25 Tm
(. The Administrative Judge cited the Board)Tj
ET
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
12 0 0 12 16 39.75 Tm
(decision \(and concurring opinion\) in)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(DISCR Case No. 88-2297 \(December 15, 1992\) to support her reasoning th\
at)Tj
ET
EMC
Q
endstream
endobj
24 0 obj
<>
endobj
25 0 obj
(&DpW\\P1=ZAXL)
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
33 0 obj
<>
endobj
34 0 obj
<>stream
H\Mk 9$X]ȡ4Ht
;겅
:̼/7+FfiR wS,a9\:=PrsvY#3j 4
He0ÂI+HW,،X%nfh=#Z
WZ
C-