ISCR Case 06-16005.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 06-16005.h1

deniedJul 1, 2006· Hon. Shari Dam· hearing

Summary

A 47-year-old software engineer and former U.S. Air Force member was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a history of alcohol-related incidents and criminal behavior, including domestic violence and child endangerment.

Specific allegations included a 1996 DWI arrest, a 2002 arrest for striking his son while intoxicated, and a 2005 arrest in Huber Heights, Ohio, for Child Endangering, which was reduced to Attempted Child Endangering, resulting in a guilty plea and a fine. The applicant also had a diagnosed alcohol-related disorder from March 2008 and a history of drinking to excess.

Despite recent efforts to address his alcohol consumption and positive character references, the judge found insufficient evidence of a sustained pattern of sobriety. The applicant had not completed a formalized treatment program as implied by the guideline, nor demonstrated a clear pattern of modified consumption or abstinence in accordance with treatment recommendations. Ultimately, the applicant's history of excessive alcohol consumption and criminal conduct raised unmitigated concerns about his judgment and reliability, leading to the denial.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had a history of alcohol-related incidents, including two misdemeanors and a diagnosis of alcohol-related disorder.
The applicant's pattern of excessive alcohol consumption raised questions about his judgment and reliability.
The applicant did not establish a sufficient pattern of sobriety or rehabilitation to mitigate the security concerns.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
AG ¶ 22(c)raisedHabitual or Binge Consumption of Alcohol
AG ¶ 22(d)raisedDiagnosis of Alcohol Abuse or Dependence
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses

Mitigating

AG ¶ 23(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Alcohol Issues and Actions Taken
AG ¶ 32(a)rejectedTime Elapsed Since Criminal BehaviorThe applicant's criminal behavior was recent and ongoing.
AG ¶ 32(d)rejectedEvidence of Successful RehabilitationInsufficient evidence of a sustained pattern of sobriety.

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 3, 2007
Answer filedJan 9, 2008
Hearing heldMar 19, 2008
Decision date—

Cite For

Disqualifying Conditions Related to Alcohol Consumption Under Guideline G
Criminal Conduct Implications Under Guideline J
Mitigating Conditions for Alcohol-related Issues and Criminal Behavior

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	The applicant was arrested for driving while intoxicated in 1996.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
1.b	The applicant was arrested for striking his son in 2002 while under the influence of alcohol.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Related Arrest	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
1.c	The applicant has a history of drinking to excess and to the point of intoxication.	Against Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	(c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	—	—
1.d	The applicant was diagnosed with an alcohol-related disorder by a clinical psychologist in March 2008.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	(d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	—	—
1.e	The applicant did not complete a formalized treatment program as implied under this guideline.	Against Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Admitted	(c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	—	—
1.f	specific text not stated in this decision	Unknown	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Unknown	—	—	—
1.g	The applicant has not demonstrated a clear and established pattern of modified consumption or abstinence in accordance with treatment recommendations.	Against Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Denied	(c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

The applicant was arrested for driving while intoxicated in 1996.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

—

1.b

The applicant was arrested for striking his son in 2002 while under the influence of alcohol.

Against Applicant

Alcohol Related Arrest

Admitted

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

—

1.c

The applicant has a history of drinking to excess and to the point of intoxication.

Against Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

(c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment

—

1.d

The applicant was diagnosed with an alcohol-related disorder by a clinical psychologist in March 2008.

Against Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

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

—

1.e

The applicant did not complete a formalized treatment program as implied under this guideline.

Against Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Admitted

(c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment

—

1.f

specific text not stated in this decision

Unknown

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Unknown

—

1.g

The applicant has not demonstrated a clear and established pattern of modified consumption or abstinence in accordance with treatment recommendations.

Against Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Denied

(c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	That information in Subparagraph 1.b, above.	For Applicant	Domestic Violence	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation (d) violation of parole/probation or failure to complete a court program	(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse
2.b	That information in Subparagraph 1.d, above.	For Applicant	Domestic Violence	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation (d) violation of parole/probation or failure to complete a court program	(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse
2.c	You were arrested on or about May 9, 2005, in Huber Heights, Ohio, and charged with Child Endangering. The charge was subsequently reduced to Attempted Child Endangering, and on or about September 22, 2005, you pleaded guilty and were ordered to pay fine/court costs of approximately $66.00.	For Applicant	Domestic Violence	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation (d) violation of parole/probation or failure to complete a court program	(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

That information in Subparagraph 1.b, above.

For Applicant

Domestic Violence

Convicted

Admitted

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

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

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

2.b

That information in Subparagraph 1.d, above.

For Applicant

Domestic Violence

Convicted

Admitted

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

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

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

2.c

You were arrested on or about May 9, 2005, in Huber Heights, Ohio, and charged with Child Endangering. The charge was subsequently reduced to Attempted Child Endangering, and on or about September 22, 2005, you pleaded guilty and were ordered to pay fine/court costs of approximately $66.00.

For Applicant

Domestic Violence

Convicted

Admitted

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

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

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES