ISCR Case 17-01560.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-01560.h1

deniedDec 1, 2017· Hon. Robert J. Kilmartin· hearing

Summary

A 32-year-old U.S. Army veteran was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption), Guideline H (Drug Involvement), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant's history included two arrests for driving under the influence (DUI) in June 2012 and August 2013, along with a 2012 diagnosis of alcohol use disorder. He failed to follow treatment advice and complete required treatment for this condition.

Additionally, the applicant admitted to a single instance of cocaine use in 2006 while serving as a young private in the Army. While mitigating factors were applied for his drug involvement, the ongoing alcohol misuse and unresolved criminal issues were central to the denial.

Specifically, the applicant's continued social alcohol consumption, including instances of intoxication, undermined his claims of control. Furthermore, he failed to resolve outstanding legal issues related to a warrant for his arrest, demonstrating a lack of compliance with legal obligations. These factors collectively led to the denial of his security clearance application.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has a history of alcohol abuse and two DUI arrests, which raise concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
He continues to consume alcohol socially, including instances of intoxication, which undermines claims of control over his alcohol use.
The applicant failed to resolve outstanding legal issues related to a warrant for his arrest, indicating a lack of compliance with legal obligations.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

G22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
G22(d)raisedDiagnosis of Alcohol Use Disorder
G22(f)raisedAlcohol Consumption Not in Accordance with Treatment Recommendations
H25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
J31(a)raisedPattern of Minor Offenses
J31(d)raisedViolation or Revocation of Parole or Probation

Mitigating

H26(a)appliedBehavior Happened so Long Ago or Was Infrequent
H26(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Drug Involvement and Established Pattern of Abstinence
G23(a)appliedTime Has Passed Since Last Alcohol-related Incident

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 10, 2017
Answer filedAug 9, 2017
Hearing heldSep 27, 2017Applicant waived the 15-days notice required.
Decision dateDec 1, 2017

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Ongoing Alcohol Misuse Under Guideline G
Impact of Unresolved Criminal Issues on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline J
Mitigating Factors for Drug Involvement Under Guideline H Despite Other Disqualifying Conditions.

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
1.a	Driving under the influence (DUI) in June 2012.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	—	—
1.b	Driving under the influence (DUI) in August 2013.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	—	—
1.c	Diagnosis of alcohol use disorder in 2012.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	(d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	—	—
1.d	Failure to follow treatment advice after diagnosis.	Against Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Admitted	(e) failure to follow treatment advice once diagnosed (f) alcohol consumption after a diagnosis, contrary to treatment	—	—
1.e	Failure to complete treatment as required.	For Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	Not recovered from alcohol use disorder as evidenced by continued drinking.	Against Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

Driving under the influence (DUI) in June 2012.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

(d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional

—

1.b

Driving under the influence (DUI) in August 2013.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

(d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional

—

1.c

Diagnosis of alcohol use disorder in 2012.

Against Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

(d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional

—

1.d

Failure to follow treatment advice after diagnosis.

Against Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Admitted

(e) failure to follow treatment advice once diagnosed

(f) alcohol consumption after a diagnosis, contrary to treatment

—

1.e

Failure to complete treatment as required.

For Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Admitted

—

1.f

Not recovered from alcohol use disorder as evidenced by continued drinking.

Against Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant used cocaine one time in 2006 while he was a young private in the Army.	For Applicant	Cocaine	Not Applicable	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence	Credited Passage of Time Claimed Other

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant used cocaine one time in 2006 while he was a young private in the Army.

For Applicant

Cocaine

Not Applicable

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

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

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

Credited

Passage of Time

Claimed

Other

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant has admitted to two arrests for DUI. His failure to appear and subsequent issuance of a warrant, have been established by the Government’s evidence. (GE 5 and GE 7)	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (d) violation of parole/probation or failure to complete a court program	—	—
3.b	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

3.a

Applicant has admitted to two arrests for DUI. His failure to appear and subsequent issuance of a warrant, have been established by the Government’s evidence. (GE 5 and GE 7)

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

(d) violation of parole/probation or failure to complete a court program

—

3.b

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

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

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES