CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 17-02687.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 17-02687.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-02687.h1

grantedMay 23, 2018· Hon. Robert J. Tuider· hearing

Summary

This case concerns an applicant, a former U.S. Marine Corps member, who sought a security clearance under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) following two DUI arrests in 2015 and 2016. The Statement of Reasons alleged a history of alcohol consumption, including these two arrests, and a diagnosis of a substance abuse handicap with a recommendation for treatment. Disqualifying conditions G.2.a and G.2.c were raised.

However, the applicant demonstrated significant rehabilitation. She had successfully held a secret clearance for 12 years prior to these incidents. Crucially, a qualified medical professional later determined that she did not, in fact, have a substance abuse handicap.

After her second DUI arrest, the applicant quit drinking entirely and adopted a sober lifestyle. Mitigating conditions G.3.a and G.3.b were applied, reflecting her sustained period of abstinence and positive changes. Based on her established trustworthiness, reliability, and demonstrated rehabilitation, the security clearance was GRANTED.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant successfully held a secret clearance for 12 years prior to the incidents.
A qualified medical professional determined the applicant did not have a substance abuse handicap.
The applicant quit drinking and adopted a sober lifestyle after her second DUI arrest.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

G.2.araisedAlcohol-related Offenses
G.2.craisedAlcohol Abuse

Mitigating

G.3.aappliedThe Behavior Was Not Recent and the Applicant Has Demonstrated a Positive Change
G.3.brejectedThe Applicant Has Received Professional Treatment and Has a Favorable PrognosisThe applicant was determined not to have a substance abuse handicap.

Key Rule Quoted

“The concerns over Applicant’s history of alcohol consumption do not create doubt about her current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 30, 2017
Answer filed—
Hearing heldMay 10, 2018
Decision dateMay 23, 2018

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline G for Alcohol Consumption
Evidence of Rehabilitation and Lifestyle Changes
Consideration of Whole-person Factors in Security Clearance Decisions

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: grantedTREATMENT COMPLETED · FAVORABLE

The judge found sufficient evidence of two DUI arrests in 2015 and 2016 but concluded that the applicant mitigated the alcohol consumption concerns. The applicant quit drinking after the second arrest and adopted a sober lifestyle, which contributed to the decision to grant her security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	The applicant has a history of alcohol consumption, including two driving under the influence (DUI) arrests in 2015 and 2016.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence	—
1.b	The applicant was diagnosed with a substance abuse handicap and recommended for treatment.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Denied	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline G). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 17-02687 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Chris Morin, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

05/23/2018 ______________

DECISION

______________

TUIDER, Robert, Administrative Judge:

On August 17, 2016, Applicant submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (SF-86). On August 30, 2017, after reviewing the application and information gathered during a background investigation, the Department of Defense (DOD) Consolidated Adjudications Facility, Fort Meade, Maryland, sent Applicant a statement of reasons (SOR), explaining it was unable to find that it was clearly consistent with the national interest to grant her eligibility for access to classified information.1 The SOR detailed the factual reasons for the action under the security guideline known as Guideline G for alcohol consumption. Applicant timely answered the SOR and requested a hearing. On March 20, 2018, the case was assigned to me. On May 10, 2018, the hearing was held as scheduled. After reviewing Applicant’s hearing transcript, evidence, and post-hearing evidence, I emailed the parties indicating that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Applicant did not object. Department Counsel had 10 days to consider the matter and provided written notice that Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant’s SOR alleged allegations under Guideline G, consisting of two driving under the influence (DUI) arrests that occurred in 2015 and 2016. A duly qualified medical health professional determined that she did not have a substance abuse handicap and did not recommend her for any additional treatment. Since her second DUI arrest in 2016, Applicant quit drinking and adopted a lifestyle consistent with sobriety to include hobbies and activities that do not involve alcohol.

Applicant successfully held a secret clearance for the past 12 years, honorably served in the U.S. Marine Corps for ten years, and has an excellent reputation for trustworthiness. Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that Department Counsel presented sufficient evidence to establish the facts alleged in the SOR under Guideline G. I also conclude that Applicant presented sufficient evidence to explain, extenuate, or mitigate the facts admitted by Applicant or proven by Department Counsel. In particular, I conclude that the alcohol consumption security concerns are resolved in whole or in part under the mitigating conditions AG ¶¶ 23(a) and 23(b).

The concerns over Applicant’s history of alcohol consumption do not create doubt about her current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information. In reaching this conclusion, I weighed the evidence as a whole and considered if the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence or vice versa. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, Applicant met her ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant her eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

Robert Tuider Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This case is adjudicated under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the adjudicative guidelines (AG), which became effective on June 8, 2017.