ISCR Case 08-02337.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-02337.h1

grantedJun 8, 2009· Hon. Noreen A. Lynch· hearing

Summary

A 44-year-old systems engineer was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons cited two alcohol-related incidents: a January 2004 arrest for DUI and an illegal lane change, resulting in a no-contest plea to alcohol-related reckless driving, a $950 fine, and a suspended jail sentence. A second incident occurred on April 1, 2007, when the applicant was arrested for DUI and improper lane operation. He pled guilty to the DUI and entered a state-sponsored substance abuse court program, which held the charge in abeyance pending successful completion.

Disqualifying conditions raised included alcohol-related incidents away from work and habitual or binge consumption leading to impaired judgment. However, the judge applied several mitigating conditions. The applicant demonstrated significant rehabilitation by successfully completing the state-sponsored substance abuse program and consistently participating in Alcoholics Anonymous meetings.

Crucially, the applicant has had no alcohol-related incidents since 2007, showing a sustained commitment to responsible drinking. Additionally, his employer provided positive references, affirming his trustworthiness and reliability in his professional capacity. The judge concluded that the applicant's current reliability and judgment were not in doubt, leading to the favorable decision to grant the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated significant rehabilitation by completing a state-sponsored substance abuse program and attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings.
The applicant has not had any alcohol-related incidents since 2007 and has shown a commitment to responsible drinking.
The applicant's employer provided positive references, indicating trustworthiness and reliability in his professional role.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
AG ¶ 22(c)raisedHabitual or Binge Consumption of Alcohol
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
AG ¶ 31(b)raisedAllegation or Admission of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

AG ¶ 23(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Alcohol Issues and Evidence of Actions Taken to Overcome Them
AG ¶ 23(d)appliedSuccessful Completion of Counseling or Rehabilitation
AG ¶ 32(a)appliedTime Elapsed Since Criminal Behavior Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful Rehabilitation

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 28, 2008
Answer filedNov 24, 2008
Hearing heldMay 14, 2009
Decision dateJun 8, 2009

Cite For

Mitigation of Alcohol-related Incidents Under Guideline G
Successful Rehabilitation After Multiple Duis
Consideration of the Whole Person Concept 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.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	alcohol-related incidents away from work, such as driving while under the influence, fighting, child or spouse abuse, disturbing the peace, or other incidents of concern, regardless of whether the individual is diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent	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	—	—
2.b	habitual or binge consumption of alcohol to the point of impaired judgment, regardless of whether the individual is diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent	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	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

alcohol-related incidents away from work, such as driving while under the influence, fighting, child or spouse abuse, disturbing the peace, or other incidents of concern, regardless of whether the individual is diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent

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

—

2.b

habitual or binge consumption of alcohol to the point of impaired judgment, regardless of whether the individual is diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	In January 2004, Applicant was arrested and charged with lane traveling (an illegal lane change) and driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). He pled no contest to alcohol-related reckless driving and was sentenced to a fine of $950 and a 90 day suspended jail sentence.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse Credited No Subsequent Offenses
1.b	On April 1, 2007, Applicant was arrested and charged with a DUI and improper lane operation. He pled guilty to the DUI and agreed to participate in a state sponsored substance abuse court program (DASAC) program. The participation in the program permitted the DUI charge to be held in abbeyance (no sentencing) provided Applicant successfully completed the program.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Diversion or Deferred	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse Credited No Subsequent Offenses

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

In January 2004, Applicant was arrested and charged with lane traveling (an illegal lane change) and driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). He pled no contest to alcohol-related reckless driving and was sentenced to a fine of $950 and a 90 day suspended jail sentence.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Admitted

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

Credited

No Subsequent Offenses

1.b

On April 1, 2007, Applicant was arrested and charged with a DUI and improper lane operation. He pled guilty to the DUI and agreed to participate in a state sponsored substance abuse court program (DASAC) program. The participation in the program permitted the DUI charge to be held in abbeyance (no sentencing) provided Applicant successfully completed the program.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Diversion or Deferred

Admitted

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

Credited

No Subsequent Offenses

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