ISCR Case 15-04269

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-04269

deniedSep 18, 2019· Hon. LeRoy F. Foreman· hearing

Summary

A 39-year-old logistics management specialist was denied a security clearance due to unmitigated psychological conditions. The applicant faced concerns under Guideline I (Psychological Conditions), Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption), and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). While issues related to alcohol consumption and personal conduct were successfully mitigated, the applicant failed to resolve ongoing psychological issues.

The Statement of Reasons detailed several incidents, including a 2002 employment termination for an altercation and property destruction, and a May 2014 simple assault and battery charge following a physical altercation with a co-worker. The applicant pleaded guilty to the 2014 charge, paid a fine, and was removed from a contract and barred from a military base. Alcohol consumption was a factor in the 2014 incident.

The applicant had a history of mental health diagnoses, including alcohol abuse and bipolar disorder around 2001, and a January 2018 diagnosis of alcohol use disorder, bipolar disorder, and anxiety disorder. The denial was based on the applicant's failure to mitigate psychological conditions, as multiple evaluations indicated ongoing mental health issues, and concerns were raised regarding the applicant's candor during these evaluations.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant mitigated concerns related to alcohol consumption under Guideline G.
The applicant mitigated concerns related to personal conduct under Guideline E.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 28(b)appliedOpinion by a Qualified Mental Health ProfessionalThe applicant was diagnosed with conditions that may impair judgment.
AG ¶ 28(d)appliedFailure to Follow Treatment PlanThe applicant resumed alcohol consumption after being advised to abstain.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 29(a)appliedCondition Controllable with TreatmentThe applicant demonstrated compliance with treatment recommendations.
AG ¶ 29(b)appliedVoluntary Counseling or TreatmentThe applicant is currently receiving counseling with a favorable prognosis.
AG ¶ 29(d)rejectedTemporary ConditionThe applicant continues to deal with PTSD, anxiety, and depression.

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”
— Exec. Or. 10865 § 2.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 20, 2019
Answer filedMar 22, 2019
Hearing heldJun 12, 2019
Decision dateSep 18, 2019

Cite For

Evaluation of Psychological Conditions Under Guideline I
Mitigation of Alcohol Consumption Issues Under Guideline G
Consideration of Personal Conduct in Security Clearance Determinations Under Guideline E

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant was terminated from employment in 2002 for engaging in an altercation with another employee and for destruction of property.	For Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	In May 2014, Applicant was charged with simple assault and battery following a physical altercation with a co-worker, that he pleaded guilty, that he was ordered to pay a fine, and that he was removed from working on a contract and barred from the military base on which he had been working.	For Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Denied	—	—	—
3.c–3.d	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

Applicant was terminated from employment in 2002 for engaging in an altercation with another employee and for destruction of property.

For Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Denied

—

3.b

In May 2014, Applicant was charged with simple assault and battery following a physical altercation with a co-worker, that he pleaded guilty, that he was ordered to pay a fine, and that he was removed from working on a contract and barred from the military base on which he had been working.

For Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Denied

—

3.c–3.d

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)

For Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant had been consuming alcohol at the time of the criminal incidents alleged in SOR 3.b.	For Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant had been consuming alcohol at the time of the criminal incidents alleged in SOR 3.b.

For Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶28)	Mitigating applied (¶29)	Mitigation
1.a	In January 2018, Applicant was evaluated and diagnosed with alcohol use disorder, bipolar disorder, and anxiety disorder.	Against Applicant	Mood Disorder Diagnosed	Denied	(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per… (b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort…	—	—
1.b	In around 2001, Applicant was diagnosed with alcohol abuse and bipolar disorder.	Against Applicant	Mood Disorder Diagnosed	Denied	(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per… (b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort…	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶28)

Mitigating applied (¶29)

Mitigation

1.a

In January 2018, Applicant was evaluated and diagnosed with alcohol use disorder, bipolar disorder, and anxiety disorder.

Against Applicant

Mood Disorder Diagnosed

Denied

(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per…

(b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort…

—

1.b

In around 2001, Applicant was diagnosed with alcohol abuse and bipolar disorder.

Against Applicant

Mood Disorder Diagnosed

Denied

(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per…

(b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort…

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION