Summary
A 53-year-old defense contractor was granted security clearance eligibility despite concerns under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), stemming from multiple alcohol-related arrests. The Statement of Reasons detailed three incidents: a July 2005 DUI resulting in two years of probation; a December 2012 arrest for multiple charges including DUI and DWI, for which she was found not guilty in March 2013; and a June 2015 arrest for possession of a dangerous substance, resisting arrest, and impaired driving. In the 2015 incident, all charges except resisting arrest were entered as nolle prosequi, and she pleaded guilty to resisting arrest in January 2016, receiving one year of probation before judgment. The Guideline G allegations were also cross-alleged as criminal conduct under Guideline J.
Disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 22(a), AG ¶ 32(a), and AG ¶ 32(b) were raised. However, mitigating conditions AG ¶ 23(a), AG ¶ 33(a), and AG ¶ 33(c) were applied.
The judge determined that the applicant had not abused alcohol and was not diagnosed with an alcohol use disorder. Furthermore, the criminal conduct incidents were infrequent and did not indicate a pattern that would pose security concerns. The applicant also provided evidence of her good reputation and commitment to avoiding future misconduct, leading to the decision to grant her security clearance.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated that she had not abused alcohol and was not diagnosed with alcohol use disorder.
- The incidents of criminal conduct were infrequent and did not reflect a pattern that would raise security concerns.
- The applicant provided evidence of her good reputation and commitment to avoiding future misconduct.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
- AG ¶ 32(a)raisedPattern of Minor Offenses
- AG ¶ 32(b)raisedEvidence of Criminal Conduct
- AG ¶ 23(a)appliedTime Elapsed Since Behavior
- AG ¶ 33(a)appliedUnusual Circumstances of Behavior
- AG ¶ 33(c)appliedNo Reliable Evidence of Offense
Key Rule Quoted
“Each security clearance decision must be a fair, impartial, and commonsense determination based on examination of all available relevant and material information.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedJun 27, 2017
- Answer filedJul 1, 2017
- Hearing heldDecision without hearing
- Decision dateMar 1, 2018
Cite For
- Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline G for Infrequent Alcohol-related Incidents
- Application of the Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions
- Evaluation of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J with Respect to Time Elapsed and Unusual Circumstances