Summary
The applicant, a 61-year-old principal systems engineer, faced security clearance denial primarily due to foreign influence concerns related to his estranged spouse, a dual citizen of Russia and the U.S., and a long history of alcohol and drug abuse. Despite some mitigating evidence regarding foreign ties, the applicant's ongoing alcohol issues and past illegal drug use were deemed too serious to overcome the security concerns.
Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption), and Guideline H (Drug Involvement), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant has connections to Russia via his marriage, because his spouse is a dual citizen of Russia and the United States (1.a). Applicant has a stepson who is a citizen of and resident in Russia (1.b). Applicant had contact with a Russian nuclear physicist during 1999-2004, which he did not report to security officials until about 2008 (1.c). Applicant lived with a Chinese national in the United States during 1999-2001, which he did not report to security officials until about 2009 (1.d). The applicant has a long history of excessive alcohol consumption, which includes multiple sessions of inpatient treatment and a recent resumption of drinking (2.a). The applicant was diagnosed with alcohol dependency during his treatment programs (2.b). The applicant has failed to maintain abstinence from alcohol after treatment, resuming drinking after periods of sobriety (2.c). The applicant has a history of illegal drug use, including the misuse of prescription medications, marijuana, and cocaine, which occurred after being granted a security clearance (3.a). The applicant misused prescription medications, including Ritalin, approximately 25 to 30 times from June 1991 to June 1993 (3.b). The applicant used marijuana on multiple occasions, including during his youth and later in life (3.c). The applicant used cocaine several times while drinking, including during January-February 2004 and May 2006 (3.d). The applicant failed to disclose the full extent of his illegal drug use during his background investigations (3.e).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 7(a), AG ¶ 7(b), AG ¶ 8(a). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 8(c), AG ¶ 8(d). The decision turned on the following: The applicant's long-standing battle with alcohol, including multiple inpatient treatments and recent resumption of drinking, was a significant concern; The applicant's history of illegal drug use, including use while holding a security clearance, was too serious to mitigate.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant's long-standing battle with alcohol, including multiple inpatient treatments and recent resumption of drinking, was a significant concern.
- The applicant's history of illegal drug use, including use while holding a security clearance, was too serious to mitigate.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family Member
- AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections Creating Potential Conflict of Interest
- AG ¶ 8(a)raisedNature of Relationships with Foreign Persons
- AG ¶ 8(c)appliedNo Foreign Influence Due to Estrangement
- AG ¶ 8(d)appliedEvidence of Good Character
Key Rule Quoted
“It is well-established law that no one has a right to a security clearance.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedJun 27, 2016
- Answer filedAug 1, 2016
- Hearing held04/25/2017 and 07/12/2017conducted over two sessions
- Decision dateAug 15, 2018
Cite For
- Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
- Impact of Substance Abuse History on Security Clearance
- Mitigating Factors Related to Family Estrangement and Character Evidence