%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:57:17-04:00
2021-07-02T15:57:17-04:00
2021-07-02T15:57:17-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
96-0360.a1
uuid:69b1841e-89b9-4873-9957-cc0c14dcf454
uuid:70d20882-9b8d-42da-a160-66873df984bd
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
18 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
19 0 obj
<>
endobj
20 0 obj
<>
endobj
22 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
23 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
25 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
26 0 obj
[21 0 R 21 0 R]
endobj
21 0 obj
<><><><><><><><>]/P 19 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(96-0360.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/96-0360.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:57:17 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 25, 1997)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. 96-0360.a1)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
11.641 -2.125 Td
(APPEAL BOARD DECISION AND REVERSAL ORDER)Tj
8.793 -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
-4.609 -2.2 Td
(Matthew E. Malone, Esq., Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
5.387 -2.2 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-1.388 -2.2 Td
(Rudolf A. Carrico, Jr., Esq.)Tj
12 0 0 12 16 419.25 Tm
(Administrative Judge Kathryn Moen Braeman issued a decision, dated Febru\
ary 27, 1997, in which she concluded it is)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(clearly consistent with the national)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(interest to grant or continue a security clearance for Applicant. )Tj
39.485 0 Td
(Department Counsel)Tj
-39.485 -1.125 Td
(appealed. )Tj
4.053 0 Td
(For the reasons set forth below, the Board reverses the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Administrative Judge's decision.)Tj
-4.053 -2.125 Td
(This Board has jurisdiction on appeal under Executive Order 10865 and De\
partment of Defense Directive 5220.6)Tj
T*
(\(Directive\), dated January 2, 1992, as)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(amended.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Department Counsel's appeal presents the following issues: \(1\) whether\
the Administrative Judge's findings and)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(conclusions concerning Statement of Reasons)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\2661.e. are supported by the record evidence; \(2\) whether the)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge erred by applying Criminal Conduct Mitigating Guide\
lines 3 and 4; \(3\))Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(whether the)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge erred by relying on inadmissible evidence to apply \
Criminal Conduct Mitigating Guideline 5; and)Tj
T*
(\(4\) whether the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Administrative Judge's favorable decision is arbitrary, capricious, or c\
ontrary to law.)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 to Applicant a Stateme\
nt of Reasons \(SOR\) dated September 24,)Tj
T*
(1996. )Tj
(The SOR was based on Criterion J)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(Criminal Conduct\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(A hearing was held on January 3, 1997. )Tj
16.107 0 Td
(The Administrative Judge subsequently issued a written decision in which\
she)Tj
-16.107 -1.125 Td
(concluded it is clearly consistent with)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for Appl\
icant. )Tj
45.567 0 Td
(The)Tj
-45.567 -1.125 Td
(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's findings and conclusions concerning S\
tatement of Reasons \2661.e. are supported by)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 28 105 cm
0 0 m
566.133 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 92.25 Tm
(the record evidence)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 91.5 cm
0 0 m
93.943 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 109.9434 92.25 Tm
(. )Tj
(SOR \2661.e. alleged)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(that Applicant made threats against state police officers and a state co\
urt judge,)Tj
-7.829 -1.125 Td
(and had threatened to blow up a courthouse. )Tj
17.911 0 Td
(After a detailed discussion of the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(record evidence, the Administrative Judge)Tj
-17.911 -1.125 Td
(concluded Applicant did not make a "real threat." )Tj
20.059 0 Td
(On appeal, Department Counsel contends the Administrative)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Judge's)Tj
-20.059 -1.125 Td
(findings and conclusions about SOR \2661.e. are not supported by the rec\
ord evidence. )Tj
33.778 0 Td
(For the reasons that follow, the)Tj
ET
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
12 0 0 12 16 38.25 Tm
(Board finds Department Counsel's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(contention persuasive.)Tj
ET
EMC
Q
endstream
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
29 0 obj
(EcR"\)\)\\OI)
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
31 0 obj
<>
endobj
34 0 obj
<>
endobj
35 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0E
-EpDLYA~cORC#YRA-mhzǶioMK3mTm7|Sٙ,%^OphMQ#xuGZck{u?z۱],l{-Oj!my_G)/ک͇2U[++e8)YbP;N?Te4E8-MNK✜)xFف,`O9y~"?%xE^5xCNnnnnnn>>¾} xAA/BOS)t nnnnn