ISCR Case 10-03488.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 10-03488.h1

grantedJul 1, 2010· Hon. LeRoy F. Foreman· hearing

Summary

A 42-year-old senior research associate with a PhD was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption). The applicant had a history of excessive alcohol consumption from approximately 1985 to at least January 2010, which included intoxication and occasional blackouts. In July 2009, a psychologist evaluated the applicant and concluded he was alcohol dependent, recommending abstinence and warning about potential adverse reactions with prescribed medications. Despite this, the applicant continued to consume alcohol. His facility security officer subsequently recommended substance abuse counseling, which the applicant attended from February to July 2010.

Additional personal conduct issues included the use of prostitutes and viewing pornography. However, the applicant demonstrated significant rehabilitation regarding his alcohol consumption. He established 18 months of total abstinence from alcohol and provided evidence of actions taken to overcome these issues, including counseling and regular psychiatric care.

The applicant's psychiatrist confirmed that his alcohol problems are in full sustained remission. These mitigating factors, particularly the sustained abstinence and commitment to sobriety, led to the decision to grant the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant established 18 months of total abstinence from alcohol, demonstrating significant rehabilitation.
He provided evidence of actions taken to overcome alcohol-related issues, including counseling and regular psychiatric care.
The applicant's psychiatrist confirmed that his alcohol problems are in full sustained remission.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
AG ¶ 22(b)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents at Work
AG ¶ 22(c)raisedHabitual or Binge Consumption of Alcohol
AG ¶ 22(d)raisedDiagnosis of Alcohol Dependence

Mitigating

AG ¶ 23(a)appliedSignificant Time Has Passed Without Misconduct
AG ¶ 23(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Alcoholism and Actions Taken to Overcome It
AG ¶ 23(c)notedCurrent Employee Participating in Counseling or Treatment

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the AG.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 22, 2011
Answer filedApr 9, 2011
Hearing heldJun 10, 2011
Decision dateJul 29, 2011

Cite For

Mitigation of Alcohol-related Issues Under Guideline G
Rebuttable Presumption of Rehabilitation After a Significant Period of Abstinence
Consideration of Personal Conduct Issues Under Guideline E in the Context of Overall Rehabilitation Efforts.

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a–2.c	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a–2.c

3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).

For Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant consumed alcohol, at times to excess and to the point of intoxication and occasional blackouts, from about 1985 to “at least” January 2010.	For Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment (d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	—	—
1.b	Another agency referred Applicant for evaluation by a psychologist in July 2009, who concluded that he was alcohol dependent, but that Applicant continued to consume alcohol, notwithstanding the psychologist’s recommendation of abstinence and warning about the potential adverse reaction with prescribed medications.	For Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Denied	(d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	—	—
1.c	Applicant’s excessive use of alcohol caused his facility security officer to recommend substance abuse counseling, which Applicant attended from February 2010 to July 2010.	For Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant consumed alcohol, at times to excess and to the point of intoxication and occasional blackouts, from about 1985 to “at least” January 2010.

For Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

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

(d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional

—

1.b

Another agency referred Applicant for evaluation by a psychologist in July 2009, who concluded that he was alcohol dependent, but that Applicant continued to consume alcohol, notwithstanding the psychologist’s recommendation of abstinence and warning about the potential adverse reaction with prescribed medications.

For Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Denied

(d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional

—

1.c

Applicant’s excessive use of alcohol caused his facility security officer to recommend substance abuse counseling, which Applicant attended from February 2010 to July 2010.

For Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Denied

—

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