%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-07-07T15:17:50-04:00
2021-07-07T15:17:49-04:00
2021-07-07T15:17:50-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
99-0122.a1
uuid:68f81dfa-952e-4405-a8b8-69fe793b9203
uuid:6f7665ad-e5ca-4dce-8e8c-84a04ba4bfd5
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
17 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
18 0 obj
<>
endobj
19 0 obj
<>
endobj
21 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
23 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
20 0 obj
<><><><><><>]/P 18 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
25 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(99-0122.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/99-0122.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/7/2021 3:17:50 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: April 7, 2000)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. 99-0122)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
-4.193 -2.2 Td
(Melvin A. Howry, Esq., Department Counsel)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
4.971 -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
(Administrative Judge Robert R. Gales issued a decision, dated October 27\
, 1999, in which he concluded it is clearly)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(consistent with the national interest to grant)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(or continue a security clearance for Applicant. )Tj
36.515 0 Td
(Department Counsel)Tj
-36.515 -1.125 Td
(appealed. )Tj
4.053 0 Td
(For the reasons set forth below, the Board reverses the Administrative J\
udge's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(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 erred by not finding)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(against Applicant based on two incidents)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(not alleged in the Statement of Reasons; \(2\) whether the Administrativ\
e Judge)Tj
T*
(erred by analyzing Applicant's conduct in a piecemeal manner; \(3\) whet\
her the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Administrative Judge erred by applying)Tj
T*
(Criminal Conduct Mitigating Condition 5; and \(4\) whether the Administr\
ative Judge's favorable security clearance)Tj
T*
(decision is arbitrary, capricious, or contrary 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 February 23,)Tj
T*
(1999. )Tj
(The SOR was based on Criterion E)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(Personal Conduct\) and Criterion J \(Criminal Conduct\). )Tj
39.355 0 Td
(A hearing was held)Tj
-39.355 -1.125 Td
(on August 18, 1999. )Tj
(The Administrative Judge issued a written decision, dated)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(October 27, 1999, in which he concluded)Tj
T*
(it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue\
a security clearance for Applicant. )Tj
41.208 0 Td
(The case is)Tj
-41.208 -1.125 Td
(before the Board on Department Counsel's appeal from the Judge's favorab\
le security clearance 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 erred by not finding against Applicant \
based on two incidents not alleged in the)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 28 117 cm
0 0 m
549.527 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 104.25 Tm
(Statement of Reasons)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 103.5 cm
0 0 m
103.98 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 119.9805 104.25 Tm
(. )Tj
(The SOR alleged)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(under Criterion E that, among other things, Applicant violated security \
rules)Tj
-8.665 -1.125 Td
(and regulations of his employer in October 1997 by leaving a controlled \
room for)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(classified information unattended for)Tj
T*
(more than 10 minutes while he was the room custodian. )Tj
22.579 0 Td
(During the course of the hearing, information was admitted into)Tj
-22.579 -1.125 Td
(the record evidence that indicated that, on two other occasions, Applica\
nt failed to secure a dial lock on a cabinet.)Tj
T*
(Although the Administrative Judge discussed)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(that evidence in his findings of fact, the Judge indicated he would )Tj
44.935 0 Td
(not base)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
26 0 obj
<>
endobj
27 0 obj
(G:\)~e)
endobj
28 0 obj
<>
endobj
29 0 obj
<>
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
35 0 obj
<>
endobj
36 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
37 0 obj
<>stream
H|XTg{/*
]k
vlh
%OcL
JDTb`ž+]؟%kw@/97gΜ3ww T@uoZ+;6.!1KV@_ Mcb
nЦFP'@zpԸ5 J?vo
Fx>|õ{S, OG
! A0:$.zoX
CCbFuVn 2