%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-02T15:59:58-04:00
2021-07-02T15:59:58-04:00
2021-07-02T15:59:58-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
96-0897.a1
uuid:ae8f9c4d-04a6-4997-88d2-ab4759f44322
uuid:e9e6e906-94a7-49db-b7f8-a3c69fe09f9b
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
15 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
16 0 obj
<>
endobj
17 0 obj
<>
endobj
19 0 obj
[18 0 R 18 0 R]
endobj
20 0 obj
[18 0 R 18 0 R]
endobj
21 0 obj
[18 0 R 18 0 R]
endobj
18 0 obj
<><><><>]/P 16 0 R/Pg 12 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
12 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
22 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(96-0897.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/96-0897.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:59:58 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 624.7503 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.751 l
579 -0.751 l
579.749 0 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.7499 623.9997 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 623.25 cm
0 0 m
0.75 0.75 l
0 1.5 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 594.9999 623.9997 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.75 l
0.75 0.751 l
h
f
Q
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 749.25 Tm
(DATE: )Tj
(December 9, 1997)Tj
0 -2.75 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. 96-0897)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 549 cm
0 0 m
89.338 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 247.375 524.25 Tm
(FOR GOVERNMENT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-4.664 -2.125 Td
(Michael H. Leonard, Esq., Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
5.442 -2.125 Td
(FOR APPLICANT)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-0.985 -2.125 Td
(Michael P. Heiskell, Esq.)Tj
-19.074 -2.125 Td
(Administrative Judge Paul J. Mason issued a decision, dated July 8, 1997\
, in which he concluded it is not clearly)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security cl\
earance for)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Applicant. )Tj
36.515 0 Td
(Applicant appealed. )Tj
8.247 0 Td
(For the)Tj
-44.762 -1.125 Td
(reasons set forth below, the Board affirms the Administrative Judge's de\
cision.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(This Board has jurisdiction on appeal under Executive Order 10865 and De\
partment of Defense Directive 5220.6)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(\(Directive\), dated January 2, 1992, as amended.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant's appeal presents the following issues: \(1\) whether the Admi\
nistrative Judge demonstrated bias in favor of the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Government; and \(2\) whether Applicant was denied due process because t\
here is)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(no applicable burden of proof that)Tj
T*
(Department Counsel shouldered in presenting its evidence against Applica\
nt.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -2.125 TD
(Procedural History)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals issued a Statement of Reasons\
\(SOR\) dated January 30, 1997 to Applicant.)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(The SOR was based on Criteria H \(Drug Involvement\), E \(Personal Condu\
ct\),)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(and J \(Criminal Conduct\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(A hearing was held on May 7, 1997. )Tj
(The Administrative Judge subsequently issued a written decision in which\
he)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(concluded it is not clearly consistent with the national interest to gra\
nt or continue a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(security clearance for Applicant.)Tj
T*
(The case is before the Appeal Board on Applicant's appeal from that unfa\
vorable decision.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -2.125 TD
(Appeal Issues)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(1. )Tj
(Whether the Administrative Judge demonstrated bias in favor of the Gover\
nment)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 28 135 cm
0 0 m
389.221 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 417.2207 135.75 Tm
(. )Tj
(Applicant contends the)Tj
-33.435 -1.125 Td
(Administrative Judge was biased in favor of the Government, thereby depr\
iving him of a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(fair and impartial hearing and)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(denying him due process. )Tj
10.47 0 Td
(In support of this contention, Applicant points to a statement the Judge\
made at the hearing)Tj
-10.47 -1.125 Td
(and contends the statement demonstrates the Judge)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(prejudged the evidence to Applicant's detriment. )Tj
40.279 0 Td
(For the reasons that)Tj
-40.279 -1.125 Td
(follow, the Board concludes Applicant's contention lacks merit.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(There is a rebuttable presumption that quasi-judicial officials are impa\
rtial and unbiased, and the appealing party has a)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(heavy burden when seeking to overcome that presumption. )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
23.854 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No.)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(94-1055 \(May 8, 1996\) at p. 2 \(citing)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
<>
endobj
24 0 obj
(kF$^H<[d)
endobj
25 0 obj
<>
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
32 0 obj
<>
endobj
33 0 obj
<>stream
H\j@sLAc]"~P0c*UVs;Ro3&eu|7C[m]ipk6~o7J(^ʷsH>9aճ.V[p:WY!o=R(
pRf|mz$m*Gn^6YoENcc14*O
i~7A)Rd> wd{fq)2md29^kal
WR_s}}ʍh6dh0fÚ5q8)h@+sw8@Y_
endstream
endobj
34 0 obj
<>stream
H|XTgv΅HS,wwnlA$j" ETPThbDEPĎƂucE`^v]b%;>}{_rogs
Bj۾E~
c? 8m[ l_84_wq MR:;n@
~8it`^v<5;.!)9{0Ǐ&
O"]27><_=22!f'%du=t̶8&&qs+5 DamP})b.(( LP HīxzLm2kVThk m>q~|Mٽ+b+PrwEbtWcC'gWF=4m\)5Z/oYQZاo~:tܥk`٫wOC>}7~7` Ccb
>">ac&8n|?cfڬs2f͛`K.+VYf7m-[m۱s={/8p#G/9qTi3gϕ/]r0o*5o#`2Zj VPOS(fj:GY*
B0W8!<^FJUV)zwVWojQY:qA>j]~%WvXxgl=@MyMY%+K㾳9gnong55lncnmnina֙WP[ششƔ``[p76d3y{F?Qklft3ᩡ`67ܱ2
|vܰްla6h
B[3V
cyݦ/_jx^ ƵMh,D#O
8a;=;D!f+#㔛E Z }+p