ISCR Case 15-06687.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-06687.h1

deniedJan 13, 2017· Hon. Jennifer I. Goldstein· hearing

Summary

A 33-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons detailed multiple alcohol-related driving offenses, including two DUI arrests and convictions in 2007, and subsequent arrests in 2008 and 2012 for driving on a suspended/revoked license. Additionally, the applicant failed to complete a court-ordered alcohol program and was diagnosed with alcohol abuse or dependence.

Disqualifying conditions were raised under both guidelines, citing a pattern of criminal conduct and alcohol consumption. While the applicant obtained a bachelor's degree and sought counseling, and mitigating conditions were considered, these were insufficient to overcome the security concerns.

The denial was based on the applicant's history of multiple alcohol-related driving offenses, including two DUIs and two convictions for driving on a suspended license. The applicant was also on probation for a 2015 alcohol-related offense and continued to consume alcohol. Ultimately, the applicant failed to demonstrate successful rehabilitation or a consistent pattern of responsible alcohol use.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has multiple alcohol-related driving offenses, including two DUIs and two convictions for driving on a suspended license.
He is currently on probation for a 2015 alcohol-related offense and continues to consume alcohol.
The applicant failed to demonstrate successful rehabilitation or a pattern of responsible alcohol use.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
AG ¶ 22(c)raisedHabitual or Binge Consumption of Alcohol
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedMultiple Lesser Offenses
AG ¶ 31(c)raisedAdmission of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

AG ¶ 32(d)rejectedEvidence of Successful RehabilitationWhile the applicant expressed remorse and sought treatment, he did not provide evidence of a favorable prognosis or satisfactory progress.
AG ¶ 23(b)rejectedAcknowledgment of Alcohol Issues and Actions TakenThe applicant continues to consume alcohol and has not established a pattern of abstinence.
AG ¶ 23(c)rejectedParticipation in Counseling or Treatment ProgramThe applicant is enrolled in a court-ordered alcohol class but has not demonstrated satisfactory progress.

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of the national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 28, 2016
Answer filedMay 12, 2016
Hearing heldSep 12, 2016
Decision dateJan 13, 2017

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Multiple Alcohol-related Offenses
Failure to Demonstrate Rehabilitation Under Guideline G
Impact of Ongoing Alcohol Consumption on Security Clearance Eligibility

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
2.a	The applicant was arrested for, and convicted of, two DUI offenses in 2007.	Against 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	—	—
2.b	The applicant failed to complete a court-ordered alcohol program.	Against Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Denied	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

The applicant was arrested for, and convicted of, two DUI offenses in 2007.

Against 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

—

2.b

The applicant failed to complete a court-ordered alcohol program.

Against Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Denied

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

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was arrested in August 2007 and charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI), as alleged in SOR subparagraph 1.a.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
1.b	Applicant was arrested again in September 2007 and charged with DUI, as alleged in SOR subparagraph 1.b.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
1.c	Applicant was arrested in November 2008 and charged with Driving on a Suspended/Revoked License, as alleged in SOR subparagraph 1.c.	Against Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
1.d	Applicant was again arrested in November 2012 and charged with Driving on a Suspended/Revoked License.	Against Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
2.a	The SOR alleged that Applicant failed to complete a court-ordered alcohol program, as identified in SOR subparagraph 2.a.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
2.b	The SOR alleged that Applicant was diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent, as identified in SOR subparagraph 2.b.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant was arrested in August 2007 and charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI), as alleged in SOR subparagraph 1.a.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Admitted

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

—

1.b

Applicant was arrested again in September 2007 and charged with DUI, as alleged in SOR subparagraph 1.b.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Admitted

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

—

1.c

Applicant was arrested in November 2008 and charged with Driving on a Suspended/Revoked License, as alleged in SOR subparagraph 1.c.

Against Applicant

Traffic Offense Pattern

Convicted

Admitted

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

—

1.d

Applicant was again arrested in November 2012 and charged with Driving on a Suspended/Revoked License.

Against Applicant

Traffic Offense Pattern

Convicted

Admitted

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

—

2.a

The SOR alleged that Applicant failed to complete a court-ordered alcohol program, as identified in SOR subparagraph 2.a.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

—

2.b

The SOR alleged that Applicant was diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent, as identified in SOR subparagraph 2.b.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

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