ISCR Case 15-00536.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-00536.h1

deniedApr 28, 2017· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 35-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), H (Drug Involvement), and J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant had a history of substance abuse, primarily cocaine, beginning in high school and resuming in 2012. This included an arrest in June 2013 for narcotic drug possession/use and drug paraphernalia possession/use, resulting in convictions for reduced felony charges, 18 months’ probation, a drug education program, and a $2,000 fine.

His criminal record also included a September 2007 conviction for extreme DUI with a BAC of .15 or more, leading to a $5,000 fine, 180 days of jail work-release, 24 months’ probation, and a one-year license revocation. In July 2004, he was convicted of DUI. Additionally, he faced dismissed charges for failure to appear in June 2013 and violation of promise to appear in December 2012.

Financially, the applicant had multiple unresolved debts, including three medical debts totaling $1,140, another three medical debts totaling $62, and a further three medical debts totaling $210. He also had an unpaid Internet account balance of $304 and an electric utility account balance of $95, both placed for collection. A $14,000 credit union vehicle loan resulted in repossession and a $10,000 deficiency. The denial was based on his admitted drug involvement and criminal conduct, lack of mitigating evidence, and unresolved financial issues.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to multiple incidents of drug involvement and criminal conduct, including arrests and convictions.
He failed to provide evidence of mitigating circumstances for his drug use and criminal history.
The applicant's financial issues remained unresolved, with multiple delinquent debts and no evidence of financial counseling.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedDrug Abuse
AG ¶ 25(b)raisedPositive Drug Test
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedSerious Crime or Multiple Offenses
AG ¶ 31(c)raisedAllegation of Criminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 14, 2015
Answer filedDec 11, 2015Applicant elected to proceed without a hearing.
Hearing held—Case decided on the written record.
Decision dateApr 28, 2017

Cite For

Denial Based on Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Denial Due to Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Financial Considerations Impacting Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline F

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a–3.b	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant).	Against Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a–3.b

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant).

Against Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
4.a	There are three medical debts that were placed for collection in the amounts of $1,140 $1,140	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
4.b	There is an Internet account with an unpaid balance of $304 that was placed for collection $304	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
4.c	There is an electric utility account with an unpaid balance of $95 that was placed for collection $95	Against Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
4.d	There are three medical debts that were placed for collection in the amounts of $62 $62	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
4.e	There is the aforementioned $14,000 credit union vehicle loan upon which Applicant ceased making monthly payments in November 2007 that was placed for collection and the vehicle was repossessed. After the repossession and subsequent auction, Applicant was responsible for the remaining $10,000 deficiency $10,000	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
4.f	There are three medical debts that were placed for collection in the amounts of $210 $210	Against Applicant	Medical Debt	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

4.a

There are three medical debts that were placed for collection in the amounts of $1,140

$1,140

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Admitted

—

4.b

There is an Internet account with an unpaid balance of $304 that was placed for collection

$304

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Admitted

—

4.c

There is an electric utility account with an unpaid balance of $95 that was placed for collection

$95

Against Applicant

Utility or Phone Debt

Admitted

—

4.d

There are three medical debts that were placed for collection in the amounts of $62

$62

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Admitted

—

4.e

There is the aforementioned $14,000 credit union vehicle loan upon which Applicant ceased making monthly payments in November 2007 that was placed for collection and the vehicle was repossessed. After the repossession and subsequent auction, Applicant was responsible for the remaining $10,000 deficiency

$10,000

Against Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Admitted

—

4.f

There are three medical debts that were placed for collection in the amounts of $210

$210

Against Applicant

Medical Debt

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has a lengthy history of substance abuse, with his preferred substance being cocaine, and to a much lesser degree, marijuana. He initially experimented with cocaine as a high school sophomore, in about 1998, when out of curiosity at a party, he snorted one “line” of cocaine that was furnished to him by a friend. During the period between his sophomore and senior years, he purchased cocaine from a classmate (whom he refused to identify), and again snorted a “line” of cocaine. He did not resume any relationship with cocaine until October 2012.	Against Applicant	CocaineWHILE CLEARED	Experimental	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia (g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue	—	—
1.b–1.d	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant has a lengthy history of substance abuse, with his preferred substance being cocaine, and to a much lesser degree, marijuana. He initially experimented with cocaine as a high school sophomore, in about 1998, when out of curiosity at a party, he snorted one “line” of cocaine that was furnished to him by a friend. During the period between his sophomore and senior years, he purchased cocaine from a classmate (whom he refused to identify), and again snorted a “line” of cocaine. He did not resume any relationship with cocaine until October 2012.

Against Applicant

CocaineWHILE CLEARED

Experimental

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(b) testing positive for an illegal drug

(c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia

(g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue

—

1.b–1.d

3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	In June 2013, Applicant was arrested and charged with failure to appear 1st degree – a felony. The charge was subsequently dismissed.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	In December 2012, Applicant was arrested and charged with violation of promise to appear – a misdemeanor. The charge was subsequently dismissed.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Admitted	—	—	—
2.c	In September 2007, after consuming seven beers and two to three shots of liquor at bars during a four to five hour period, Applicant was arrested and charged with extreme DUI, BAC .15 or more – a misdemeanor. He was found guilty of the charge. He was sentenced to a $5,000 fine, jail work-release for 180 days, probation for 24 months, and his operator’s license was revoked for one year.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	—	—	—
2.d	In July 2004, Applicant was arrested and charged (1) with driving under the influence (DUI) liquor, drugs, vapors, combo – a misdemeanor; and (2) DUI with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .08 or more – a misdemeanor. He was found guilty of charge (1). He was sentenced to a fine and ten days in jail. The remaining charge was dismissed.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	—	—	—
2.e	In June 2013, Applicant was arrested and charged with (1) narcotic drug possession/use – a felony; and (2) drug paraphernalia possession/use – a felony. At the time, he was in possession of approximately one gram of cocaine. Charge (1) was reduced to narcotic drug violation – a felony, and charge (2) was reduced to drug paraphernalia violation – a felony. Applicant was found guilty of both reduced charges and sentenced to 18 months’ probation, ordered to attend a drug education program, and fined $2,000.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Convicted	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

In June 2013, Applicant was arrested and charged with failure to appear 1st degree – a felony. The charge was subsequently dismissed.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Admitted

—

2.b

In December 2012, Applicant was arrested and charged with violation of promise to appear – a misdemeanor. The charge was subsequently dismissed.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Admitted

—

2.c

In September 2007, after consuming seven beers and two to three shots of liquor at bars during a four to five hour period, Applicant was arrested and charged with extreme DUI, BAC .15 or more – a misdemeanor. He was found guilty of the charge. He was sentenced to a $5,000 fine, jail work-release for 180 days, probation for 24 months, and his operator’s license was revoked for one year.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Admitted

—

2.d

In July 2004, Applicant was arrested and charged (1) with driving under the influence (DUI) liquor, drugs, vapors, combo – a misdemeanor; and (2) DUI with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .08 or more – a misdemeanor. He was found guilty of charge (1). He was sentenced to a fine and ten days in jail. The remaining charge was dismissed.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Admitted

—

2.e

In June 2013, Applicant was arrested and charged with (1) narcotic drug possession/use – a felony; and (2) drug paraphernalia possession/use – a felony. At the time, he was in possession of approximately one gram of cocaine. Charge (1) was reduced to narcotic drug violation – a felony, and charge (2) was reduced to drug paraphernalia violation – a felony. Applicant was found guilty of both reduced charges and sentenced to 18 months’ probation, ordered to attend a drug education program, and fined $2,000.

Against Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Convicted

Admitted

—

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