ISCR Case 16-04011.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 16-04011.h1

grantedMay 14, 2018· Hon. Shari Dam· hearing

Summary

A 52-year-old registered nurse was evaluated for national security eligibility under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse). Concerns arose from a history of opioid addiction and a subsequent alcohol-related incident. The applicant admitted to developing an addiction to Tramadol, a prescribed narcotic, by 2008, after using it for pain management since 2000. He voluntarily sought inpatient treatment, followed by outpatient aftercare, for this opioid dependence.

The applicant also faced an allegation of consuming alcohol in violation of a treatment agreement with his state's nursing board, which required abstinence. However, the record indicated no diagnosis of an alcohol use disorder, nor was he court-ordered to abstain or undergo alcohol treatment; his only diagnosis referenced opioid dependence.

Ultimately, the applicant successfully mitigated these concerns. He voluntarily sought treatment for opioid addiction and has maintained sobriety since 2014, with one exception. He has consistently complied with all treatment requirements, regularly attends support meetings, and received a positive assessment from his physician regarding his recovery progress. As a result, the applicant was granted national security eligibility.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant voluntarily sought treatment for opioid addiction and has maintained sobriety since 2014, except for one incident.
He has complied with all treatment requirements and continues to attend support meetings regularly.
The applicant's physician provided a positive assessment of his recovery progress.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

H22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
H22(e)rejectedFailure to Follow Treatment Advice Once Diagnosed
H22(f)rejectedAlcohol Consumption Not in Accordance with Treatment Recommendations
H22(g)rejectedFailure to Follow Any Court Order Regarding Alcohol Education, Evaluation, Treatment, or Abstinence

Mitigating

H26(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Drug Involvement and Actions Taken to Overcome the Problem
H26(c)appliedAbuse of Prescription Drugs Was After a Severe or Prolonged Illness and Has Since Ended
H26(d)appliedSatisfactory Completion of a Prescribed Drug Treatment Program
G23(a)appliedTime Has Passed or Behavior Was Infrequent, Unlikely to Recur

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 24, 2017
Answer filedMar 21, 2017
Hearing heldJan 30, 2018via MS Teams
Decision dateMay 14, 2018

Cite For

Mitigation of Substance Misuse Under Guideline H
Mitigation of Alcohol Consumption Concerns Under Guideline G
Importance of Long-term Recovery Commitment in Trustworthiness Evaluations

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	The applicant consumed alcohol in violation of a treatment agreement he had with his state’s nursing board, which required him to abstain from alcohol consumption.	For Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
2.b	The evidence does not raise trustworthiness concerns under AG ¶¶ 22(e), (f), or (g) because Applicant has not been diagnosed with an alcohol use disorder, or ordered by a court to abstain from consuming alcohol or undergo treatment.	For Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	The only diagnosis in this record references opioid dependence.	For Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

The applicant consumed alcohol in violation of a treatment agreement he had with his state’s nursing board, which required him to abstain from alcohol consumption.

For Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Admitted

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

—

2.b

The evidence does not raise trustworthiness concerns under AG ¶¶ 22(e), (f), or (g) because Applicant has not been diagnosed with an alcohol use disorder, or ordered by a court to abstain from consuming alcohol or undergo treatment.

For Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Denied

—

2.c

The only diagnosis in this record references opioid dependence.

For Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant admitted that subsequent to being prescribed Tramadol, a narcotic, in 2000 for pain management, he began misusing the drug and developed an addiction to it by 2008.	For Applicant	Prescription Opioid Misuse	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug	(b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence (c) prescription abuse followed a prolonged illness and has since ended (d) satisfactory completion of treatment with a favorable prognosis	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse Credited Rehabilitation Evidence Claimed Signed Intent with Revocation Clause
1.b	After using a prescribed narcotic for about six years for pain management, Applicant acknowledged that he developed an addiction to it and voluntarily sought inpatient treatment, followed by outpatient aftercare.	For Applicant	Prescription Opioid Misuse	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug	(b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence (c) prescription abuse followed a prolonged illness and has since ended (d) satisfactory completion of treatment with a favorable prognosis	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse Credited Rehabilitation Evidence Claimed Signed Intent with Revocation Clause

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant admitted that subsequent to being prescribed Tramadol, a narcotic, in 2000 for pain management, he began misusing the drug and developed an addiction to it by 2008.

For Applicant

Prescription Opioid Misuse

Regular

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(b) testing positive for an illegal drug

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

(c) prescription abuse followed a prolonged illness and has since ended

(d) satisfactory completion of treatment with a favorable prognosis

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

Credited

Rehabilitation Evidence

Claimed

Signed Intent with Revocation Clause

1.b

After using a prescribed narcotic for about six years for pain management, Applicant acknowledged that he developed an addiction to it and voluntarily sought inpatient treatment, followed by outpatient aftercare.

For Applicant

Prescription Opioid Misuse

Regular

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(b) testing positive for an illegal drug

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

(c) prescription abuse followed a prolonged illness and has since ended

(d) satisfactory completion of treatment with a favorable prognosis

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

Credited

Rehabilitation Evidence

Claimed

Signed Intent with Revocation Clause

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