ISCR Case 09-05333.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-05333.h1

grantedJul 1, 2009· Hon. Juan J. Rivera· hearing

Summary

A 25-year-old reliability engineer was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption). The Statement of Reasons detailed several alcohol-related incidents, beginning in 2002 and continuing until at least August 2008. These included a 2003 arrest for Possession of Alcohol by a Minor at age 19, a 2006 noise violation, and a 2008 DWI charge. Following the DWI, the applicant was diagnosed with alcohol dependence in 2008-2009 after attending court-ordered rehabilitation, though he continued consuming alcohol after this diagnosis.

Disqualifying conditions under Guideline G, specifically AG ¶ 22(a) and AG ¶ 22(c), were raised due to the pattern of excessive alcohol consumption and the diagnosis of alcohol dependence. However, the judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 23(a), AG ¶ 23(b), and AG ¶ 23(c).

The decision to grant the clearance was based on the applicant's demonstrated significant lifestyle changes and responsible alcohol consumption since his last incident. He successfully completed his court-mandated alcohol rehabilitation program with a favorable prognosis. Additionally, the applicant's strong job performance and support from supervisors indicated his reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the favorable outcome.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated significant lifestyle changes and responsible alcohol consumption since his last incident.
He successfully completed a court-mandated alcohol rehabilitation program with a favorable prognosis.
The applicant's strong job performance and support from supervisors indicated reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
AG ¶ 22(c)raisedHabitual or Binge Consumption of Alcohol to the Point of Impaired Judgment

Mitigating

AG ¶ 23(a)appliedSo Much Time Has Passed, or the Behavior Was so Infrequent, or It Happened Under Such Unusual Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 23(b)appliedThe Individual Acknowledges His or Her Alcoholism or Issues of Alcohol Abuse, Provides Evidence of Actions Taken to Overcome This Problem, and Has Established a Pattern of Abstinence
AG ¶ 23(c)appliedThe Individual Is a Current Employee Who Is Participating in a Counseling or Treatment Program, Has No History of Previous Treatment and Relapse, and Is Making Satisfactory Progress

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”
— Exec. Or. 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry § 2 (Feb. 20, 1960), as amended.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 14, 2010
Answer filedJul 7, 2010
Hearing heldSep 7, 2010Applicant requested an expedited hearing.
Decision dateOct 15, 2010

Cite For

Mitigation of Alcohol-related Security Concerns Under Guideline G
Consideration of Lifestyle Changes and Job Performance in Security Clearance Decisions
The Importance of Contrition and Rehabilitation in Security Clearance 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
1.a	The applicant has consumed alcohol, at times to excess, from around 2002 until at least August 2008.	For Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	(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	In 2003, at age 19, the applicant was arrested while drinking beer in a bar. He was found guilty of Possession of Alcohol by a Minor, spent one night in jail, and paid a fine.	For Applicant	Alcohol Related Arrest	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	(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.c	In 2006, the applicant was charged with a noise violation after hosting a party where his friends became loud and disorderly. He acknowledged consuming a couple of drinks but claimed he was not intoxicated.	For Applicant	Alcohol Related Arrest	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	(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.d	In August 2008, the applicant consumed alcoholic beverages at a party and drove his car under the influence of alcohol, resulting in a DWI charge.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	(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.e	The applicant was diagnosed with alcohol dependence in 2008-2009 after attending court-ordered alcohol rehabilitation treatment.	For Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	(d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional (e) failure to follow treatment advice once diagnosed	(b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence	—
1.f	The applicant continued consuming alcohol after his 2008 diagnosis of alcohol dependence.	For Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	(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	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

The applicant has consumed alcohol, at times to excess, from around 2002 until at least August 2008.

For Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

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

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

(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

In 2003, at age 19, the applicant was arrested while drinking beer in a bar. He was found guilty of Possession of Alcohol by a Minor, spent one night in jail, and paid a fine.

For Applicant

Alcohol Related Arrest

Admitted

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

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

(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.c

In 2006, the applicant was charged with a noise violation after hosting a party where his friends became loud and disorderly. He acknowledged consuming a couple of drinks but claimed he was not intoxicated.

For Applicant

Alcohol Related Arrest

Admitted

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

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

(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.d

In August 2008, the applicant consumed alcoholic beverages at a party and drove his car under the influence of alcohol, resulting in a DWI charge.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

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

(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.e

The applicant was diagnosed with alcohol dependence in 2008-2009 after attending court-ordered alcohol rehabilitation treatment.

For Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

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

(e) failure to follow treatment advice once diagnosed

(b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence

—

1.f

The applicant continued consuming alcohol after his 2008 diagnosis of alcohol dependence.

For Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Admitted

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

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

(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

—

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

FOOTNOTES