ISCR Case 20-02769

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 20-02769

grantedFeb 16, 2022· Hon. Pamela C. Benson· hearing

Summary

A 59-year-old male applicant was granted a security clearance despite a history of drug involvement, alcohol consumption, and criminal conduct, which raised concerns under Guidelines H (Drug Involvement), G (Alcohol Consumption), J (Criminal Conduct), and E (Personal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons detailed several allegations, including marijuana use from approximately January 1979 to January 2013, and a March 2017 arrest for Driving Under the Influence (DUI). The applicant also admitted to using marijuana while holding a security clearance, which was cross-alleged under Guideline E.

Disqualifying conditions were raised under AG ¶ 25(a), AG ¶ 22(a), and AG ¶ 31(a). However, the administrative judge found that the applicant successfully mitigated these concerns by demonstrating a significant period of abstinence from both illegal drugs and alcohol, with no intent to resume use. He was also forthright about his past substance use during the investigation.

The applicant further mitigated concerns by successfully completing court-ordered alcohol education and making a lifestyle change to abstain from alcohol. Mitigating conditions applied included AG ¶ 26(a), AG ¶ 26(b), AG ¶ 23(a), AG ¶ 32(a), AG ¶ 32(d), and AG ¶ 15. Ultimately, the judge concluded that the applicant's past issues do not pose a current risk to national security, and eligibility for access to classified information was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated a significant period of abstinence from illegal drugs and alcohol, with no intention to resume use.
He was forthright about his past substance use during the security clearance investigation.
The applicant successfully completed court-ordered alcohol education and made a lifestyle change to abstain from alcohol.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedA Pattern of Minor Offenses

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedBehavior Happened so Long Ago
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Drug Involvement and Established Pattern of Abstinence
AG ¶ 23(a)appliedTime Has Passed Since the Alcohol-related Incident
AG ¶ 32(a)appliedTime Elapsed Since Criminal Behavior
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful Rehabilitation
AG ¶ 15appliedRefuted Personal Conduct Allegations

Key Rule Quoted

“The clearly consistent standard indicates that security determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 531 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 25, 2021
Answer filedJul 6, 2021Applicant elected a decision on the written record.
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateFeb 16, 2022

Cite For

Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Mitigation of Alcohol Consumption Under Guideline G
Refutation of Personal Conduct Allegations 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
4.a	Applicant's use of marijuana while possessing a security clearance was specifically addressed under Guideline H, and cross-alleged under Guideline E.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (f) violation of a written commitment made as a condition of employment	(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted (b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

4.a

Applicant's use of marijuana while possessing a security clearance was specifically addressed under Guideline H, and cross-alleged under Guideline E.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form

(f) violation of a written commitment made as a condition of employment

(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted

(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant was arrested in March 2017 for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI).	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant was arrested in March 2017 for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI).

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant smoked marijuana (THC) with varying frequency from about January 1979 to January 2013.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Occasional	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence	Claimed Abstinence Period Documented
1.b–1.d	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant smoked marijuana (THC) with varying frequency from about January 1979 to January 2013.

For Applicant

Marijuana

Occasional

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur

(b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence

Claimed

Abstinence Period Documented

1.b–1.d

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

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant admitted his illegal drug use and the 2017 alcohol-related criminal offense.	For Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

3.a

Applicant admitted his illegal drug use and the 2017 alcohol-related criminal offense.

For Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

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