Summary
This case involves a mid-forties applicant whose security clearance was denied under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) due to a diagnosis of moderate Alcohol Use Disorder and a moderate risk of future alcohol-related incidents. The initial denial was based on the judge's finding that the applicant's history and plans for continued alcohol consumption raised doubts about his reliability and judgment.
The applicant appealed the decision, alleging judicial bias and the use of evidence not present in the record. This appeal resulted in a remand for a new hearing, indicating that the initial decision was not upheld.
Disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 22(a), AG ¶ 22(c), and AG ¶ 22(d) were raised, while mitigating conditions AG ¶ 23(a), AG ¶ 23(b), AG ¶ 23(c), and AG ¶ 23(d) were applied. Ultimately, no final outcome regarding the clearance was reached, as the case was sent back for further proceedings.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
- AG ¶ 22(c)raisedHabitual or Binge Consumption of Alcohol
- AG ¶ 22(d)raisedDiagnosis of Alcohol Use Disorder
- AG ¶ 23(a)rejectedSo Much Time Has Passed, or the Behavior Was so Infrequent, or It Happened Under Such Unusual Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur or Does Not Cast Doubt on the Individual’s Current Reliability, Trustworthiness, or Judgment
- AG ¶ 23(b)rejectedThe Individual Acknowledges His or Her Pattern of Maladaptive Alcohol Use, Provides Evidence of Actions Taken to Overcome This Problem, and Has Demonstrated a Clear and Established Pattern of Modified Consumption or Abstinence in Accordance with Treatment Recommendations
- AG ¶ 23(c)rejectedThe Individual Is Participating in Counseling or a Treatment Program, Has No Previous History of Treatment and Relapse, and Is Making Satisfactory Progress in a Treatment Program
- AG ¶ 23(d)rejectedThe Individual Has Successfully Completed a Treatment Program Along with Any Required Aftercare, and Has Demonstrated a Clear and Established Pattern of Modified Consumption or Abstinence in Accordance with Treatment Recommendations
Key Rule Quoted
“A commitment to sobriety is not required under the Adjudicative Guidelines; however, [Applicant’s] declination from committing to sobriety while holding a security clearance is inconsistent with the recommendation of the evaluating psychologist, Dr. B.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedJun 12, 2020
- Answer filed—
- Hearing heldApr 11, 2022
- Decision dateJul 18, 2022Decision remanded for a new hearing.
Cite For
- Issues of Bias in Security Clearance Adjudications
- Remand for Reliance on Non-record Evidence
- Interpretation of Treatment Recommendations Under Guideline G