ISCR Case 08-11842.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-11842.h1

grantedSep 10, 2010· Hon. Martin H. Mogul· hearing

Summary

A 24-year-old former U.S. Air Force member was granted a security clearance despite a history of alcohol consumption and criminal conduct, evaluated under Guidelines G (Alcohol Consumption) and J (Criminal Conduct). Allegations included consuming alcohol to excess from approximately 2004 to 2009, and two Non-Judicial Punishments under Article 15 of the UCMJ. The first, in May 2006, was for underage alcohol consumption, being drunk and disorderly, and making unwanted sexual advances. The second, in January 2007, was for assault, being drunk and disorderly, and using provoking words.

Following these incidents, the applicant attended an alcohol awareness program and received treatment for Alcohol Abuse from April 2006 to August 2007. In December 2007, he was arrested and charged with Felony Grand Theft, Receiving Stolen Property, Resisting Arrest, and Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). These incidents, excluding the alcohol awareness program, were cited as criminal actions.

The clearance was granted due to significant mitigating factors. The applicant substantially reduced his alcohol consumption after becoming engaged and preparing for fatherhood. He successfully completed an alcohol awareness program and received a positive evaluation from a licensed mental health professional, indicating no signs of chemical dependency. His good employment record and engagement in positive activities further demonstrated successful rehabilitation and a commitment to responsible behavior.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant significantly reduced his alcohol consumption after becoming engaged and preparing for fatherhood.
He completed an alcohol awareness program and received a positive evaluation from a licensed mental health professional indicating no signs of chemical dependency.
The applicant's good employment record and involvement in positive activities demonstrated successful rehabilitation.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedSerious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
AG ¶ 31(c)raisedAdmissions of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

AG ¶ 23(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Alcohol Issues and Evidence of Actions Taken to Overcome Them
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful Rehabilitation

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 11, 2009
Answer filedOct 8, 2009
Hearing heldMar 17, 2010
Decision dateSep 10, 2010

Cite For

Successful Rehabilitation After Alcohol-related Incidents
Mitigating Conditions Under Guidelines G and J
Whole-person Concept 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	Applicant is alleged to have “consumed alcohol, at times to excess and to the point of intoxication, from approximately 2004 to at least 2009.”	For Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Denied	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	—	—
1.b	In May 2006, Applicant received a Non-Judicial Punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for Consuming Alcohol Beverages While Underage, being Drunk and Disorderly and Making Unwanted Sexual Advances.	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	—	—
1.c	In January 2007, Applicant received a Non-Judicial Punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ for Assault, being Drunk and Disorderly, and Using Provoking Words.	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	—	—
1.d	Because of the incidents listed as 1.b. and 1.c., above, Applicant was ordered to attend an alcohol awareness program. He received treatment from April 2006 to August 2007, for a condition that was diagnosed as Alcohol Abuse.	For Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	(b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence	—
1.e	In December 2007, Applicant was arrested and charged with (1) Felony Grand Theft, (2) Receiving Stolen Property, (3) Resisting Arrest, and (4) Driving While Intoxicated (DWI).	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	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant is alleged to have “consumed alcohol, at times to excess and to the point of intoxication, from approximately 2004 to at least 2009.”

For Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Denied

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

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

—

1.b

In May 2006, Applicant received a Non-Judicial Punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for Consuming Alcohol Beverages While Underage, being Drunk and Disorderly and Making Unwanted Sexual Advances.

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

—

1.c

In January 2007, Applicant received a Non-Judicial Punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ for Assault, being Drunk and Disorderly, and Using Provoking Words.

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

—

1.d

Because of the incidents listed as 1.b. and 1.c., above, Applicant was ordered to attend an alcohol awareness program. He received treatment from April 2006 to August 2007, for a condition that was diagnosed as Alcohol Abuse.

For Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

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

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

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

—

1.e

In December 2007, Applicant was arrested and charged with (1) Felony Grand Theft, (2) Receiving Stolen Property, (3) Resisting Arrest, and (4) Driving While Intoxicated (DWI).

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	The SOR alleged that Applicant’s conduct that is set forth under paragraph 1.b. through 1.e., above, constitutes criminal actions. At the hearing, the SOR was amended so that SOR allegation 1.d. was removed from this paragraph. The amended SOR now alleges that Applicant’s conduct that is set forth under subparagraphs 1.b., 1.c, and 1.e., above, constitutes criminal actions.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Unknown	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

The SOR alleged that Applicant’s conduct that is set forth under paragraph 1.b. through 1.e., above, constitutes criminal actions. At the hearing, the SOR was amended so that SOR allegation 1.d. was removed from this paragraph. The amended SOR now alleges that Applicant’s conduct that is set forth under subparagraphs 1.b., 1.c, and 1.e., above, constitutes criminal actions.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Unknown

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

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

—

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