Summary
A 46-year-old security systems engineer was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons cited three driving-related convictions: driving with a blood alcohol level of .08 or more in 2005, driving under the influence (DUI) and refusal to submit to a breathalyzer in 2008, and a driving infraction for operating without a license in 2009. These issues raised disqualifying conditions under Adjudicative Guideline paragraphs 31(a) and 31(c).
However, the applicant successfully demonstrated significant mitigating factors, specifically Adjudicative Guideline paragraphs 32(a) and 32(d). He provided substantial evidence of rehabilitation and a commitment to sobriety following his alcohol-related incidents. This included active participation in Alcoholics Anonymous and the completion of an alcohol education program.
The judge found that the applicant had made significant lifestyle changes and presented credible evidence of rehabilitation. Furthermore, character references and his work performance supported his reliability and trustworthiness. Based on these demonstrated changes and mitigating factors, the security clearance was granted.
Why the applicant prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated a commitment to sobriety and made significant lifestyle changes after his alcohol-related incidents.
- He provided credible evidence of rehabilitation, including participation in Alcoholics Anonymous and an alcohol education program.
- The applicant's character references and work performance indicated he is a reliable and trustworthy individual.
Conditions referenced
- AG ¶ 31(a)raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
- AG ¶ 31(c)raisedAllegation or Admission of Criminal Conduct
- AG ¶ 32(a)appliedSo Much Time Has Elapsed Since the Criminal Behavior Happened, or It Happened Under Such Unusual Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
- AG ¶ 32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful Rehabilitation
Key rule quoted
“"Once a concern arises regarding an Applicant’s security clearance eligibility, there is a strong presumption against the grant or maintenance of a security clearance."”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedApr 18, 2010
- Answer filedMay 7, 2010
- Hearing heldOct 13, 2010rescheduled from October 12, 2010
- Decision dateJan 18, 2011
Cite for
- Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation Under Guideline J
- Impact of Lifestyle Changes on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Consideration of the Whole-person Concept in Adjudication