ISCR Case 10-01513.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 10-01513.h1

grantedJul 6, 2012· Hon. John Grattan Metz, Jr.· hearing

Summary

This DOHA security clearance decision involved a 41-year-old systems administrator seeking to retain her clearance under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption). The applicant had a 15-year history of excessive alcohol consumption, which led to allegations including alcohol-related incidents away from and at work, habitual consumption impairing judgment, a diagnosis of alcohol dependence, and relapse after rehabilitation. Disqualifying conditions G ¶ 22(a), G ¶ 22(b), G ¶ 22(c), G ¶ 22(d), and G ¶ 22(f) were raised.

Despite this history, the applicant demonstrated a significant commitment to recovery. She acknowledged her alcohol dependence and took steps to reduce consumption, including regular attendance at Alcoholics Anonymous and engaging in support activities. She maintained a sustained period of abstinence since November 2010.

The judge applied mitigating conditions G ¶ 23(b) and G ¶ 23(d), finding that the applicant's acceptance of her condition and demonstrated commitment to abstinence made future alcohol abuse unlikely. Consequently, the security clearance was GRANTED.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant acknowledged her alcohol dependence and took steps to reduce consumption.
She demonstrated a commitment to abstinence through regular AA attendance and support activities.
The judge found the applicant unlikely to abuse alcohol in the future based on her acceptance of her condition.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

G ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
G ¶ 22(b)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents at Work
G ¶ 22(c)raisedHabitual or Binge Consumption of Alcohol
G ¶ 22(d)raisedDiagnosis of Alcohol Abuse or Dependence
G ¶ 22(f)raisedRelapse After Diagnosis

Mitigating

G ¶ 23(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Alcoholism and Actions Taken to Overcome It
G ¶ 23(d)rejectedSuccessful Completion of Treatment and Established Pattern of AbstinenceThe applicant did not receive a favorable prognosis from a recognized alcohol treatment program.

Key Rule Quoted

“The conviction of that acknowledgment and the strength of that acceptance are more important than any particular length of abstinence as long as the length of abstinence demonstrates that an Applicant has acquired the tools necessary to remain abstinent.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 13, 2012
Answer filed—
Hearing heldMay 10, 2012
Decision dateJul 6, 2012

Cite For

Commitment to Recovery Under Guideline G
Importance of Acknowledgment in Alcohol Dependence Cases
Mitigating Factors Related to Alcohol Consumption and Treatment Success

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	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	Public Intoxication	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Alcohol-related incidents at work, such as reporting for work or duty in an intoxicated or impaired condition, regardless of whether the individual is diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent.	For Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	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	—	—	—
1.d	Diagnosis by a duly qualified medical professional of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence.	For Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	Relapse after diagnosis of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence and completion of an alcohol rehabilitation program.	For Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.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

Public Intoxication

Admitted

—

1.b

Alcohol-related incidents at work, such as reporting for work or duty in an intoxicated or impaired condition, regardless of whether the individual is diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent.

For Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Admitted

—

1.c

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

—

1.d

Diagnosis by a duly qualified medical professional of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence.

For Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

—

1.e

Relapse after diagnosis of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence and completion of an alcohol rehabilitation program.

For Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Admitted

—

1.f

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Unknown

—

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

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES