ISCR Case 12-06004.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 12-06004.h1

grantedFeb 10, 2015· Hon. Juan J. Rivera· hearing

Summary

A 29-year-old defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons cited the applicant's illegal marijuana use from 1999 to June 2005, a May 2011 DUI, and a 2008 violation of a lawful order not to consume alcohol. While the applicant consumed alcohol to excess in 2008 and drove under the influence in 2011, he was not diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or dependent.

The judge applied several mitigating conditions, noting that the applicant demonstrated successful rehabilitation from past alcohol and drug use. The misconduct occurred several years prior and had not recurred, indicating a positive change in behavior.

Furthermore, the applicant was found to be candid and remorseful about his past actions, which demonstrated maturity and responsibility. These factors led the judge to conclude that the applicant currently exhibits reliability and trustworthiness, resulting in the security clearance being granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated successful rehabilitation from past alcohol and drug use.
The applicant's past misconduct occurred several years prior and has not recurred.
The applicant was candid and remorseful about his past behavior, indicating maturity and responsibility.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

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

Mitigating

AG ¶ 23(a)appliedTime Has Passed or Behavior Was Infrequent
AG ¶ 23(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Alcohol Issues and Evidence of Responsible Use
AG ¶ 32(a)appliedTime Elapsed Since Criminal Behavior
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful Rehabilitation
AG ¶ 17(c)appliedOffense Is Minor or Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 17(d)appliedAcknowledgment of Behavior and Positive Steps Taken
AG ¶ 17(e)appliedPositive Steps to Reduce Vulnerability

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for access to classified information may be granted "only upon a finding that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to do so."”
— Exec. Or. 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry § 2 (Feb. 20, 1960), as amended.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 25, 2014
Answer filedMay 16, 2014
Hearing heldDec 4, 2014
Decision dateFeb 10, 2015

Cite For

Successful Rehabilitation Mitigating Security Concerns Under Guideline G
Time Elapsed Mitigating Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Candidness and Remorse as Factors in Personal Conduct Evaluations Under Guideline E

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
3.a	The personal conduct security concerns are based on the same facts alleged under the alcohol consumption and criminal conduct guidelines, incorporated herein: Applicant’s illegal marijuana use from 1999 to June 2005, his May 2011 DUI, and his violation of a lawful order in 2008.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances (d) acknowledged the behavior; counseling/positive steps taken (e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation	Credited Passage of Time Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse Credited Other

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

The personal conduct security concerns are based on the same facts alleged under the alcohol consumption and criminal conduct guidelines, incorporated herein: Applicant’s illegal marijuana use from 1999 to June 2005, his May 2011 DUI, and his violation of a lawful order in 2008.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

—

(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances

(d) acknowledged the behavior; counseling/positive steps taken

(e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation

Credited

Passage of Time

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

Credited

Other

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	The applicant consumed alcohol to excess in 2008, when he violated an order not to consume alcohol.	For Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur	—
1.b	The applicant drove while under the influence of alcohol in May 2011.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur	—
1.c	The applicant has not been diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent.	For Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

The applicant consumed alcohol to excess in 2008, when he violated an order not to consume alcohol.

For Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

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

(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur

—

1.b

The applicant drove while under the influence of alcohol in May 2011.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur

—

1.c

The applicant has not been diagnosed as an alcohol abuser or alcohol dependent.

For Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a–2.b	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant		Conduct No Charge		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a–2.b

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

For Applicant

Conduct No Charge

—

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