ISCR Case 01-09830.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 01-09830.h1

deniedOct 29, 2002· Hon. Wilford H. Ross· hearing

Summary

A 40-year-old engineer sought to retain his Top Secret security clearance, facing concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Applicant had a history of alcohol abuse and five arrests for domestic violence between September 1995 and September 2000. Charges from the 1995, 1996, and 1997 incidents resulted in guilty pleas and sentences including counseling and probation. Charges from the January 1999 and September 2000 incidents were dismissed, though the Applicant did not deny the events occurred. He admitted to being an alcoholic and testified that he last drank alcohol on September 19, 2000.

Following his last arrest, the Applicant began a successful treatment program in October 2000, received a favorable prognosis, and consistently attended a church-based abstinence support group, abstaining from alcohol for fifteen months as of the hearing date. While these actions mitigated concerns related to his alcohol abuse and criminal history, a significant issue remained regarding his personal conduct.

On July 27, 2000, the Applicant provided a sworn statement to a Special Agent, falsely claiming he had never been arrested due to drinking. He later admitted this was untrue, explaining he was embarrassed and ashamed and thought he could hide the arrests. The intentional falsification of this sworn statement regarding his prior arrests undermined his credibility and trustworthiness, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The Applicant demonstrated successful rehabilitation from alcohol abuse by abstaining for over fifteen months and completing a treatment program.
The Applicant's criminal conduct was found to be related to his alcohol abuse, which he has since mitigated.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E3raisedPersonal Conduct
G1raisedAlcohol Consumption
J1raisedCriminal Conduct

Mitigating

G4appliedAlcohol Consumption
J6appliedCriminal Conduct
E3rejectedPersonal ConductNo mitigating conditions applied due to the intentional falsification of a sworn statement.

Key Rule Quoted

“The Government relies heavily upon the integrity and honesty of clearance holders, and it is a negative factor for security clearance purposes where an Applicant has deliberately provided false information about material aspects of his or her personal background.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 17, 2002
Answer filedFeb 12, 2002
Hearing heldMay 24, 2002
Decision dateOct 29, 2002

Cite For

Mitigation of Alcohol Abuse Under Guideline G
Impact of Falsification on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline E
Relationship Between Criminal Conduct and Alcohol Abuse Under Guideline J

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	On July 27, 2000, the Applicant was interviewed by a Special Agent of the Defense Security Service. In a sworn statement, the Applicant stated, "I was never involved in any embarrassing incidents when I was drinking that could lead to being blackmailed. I was never arrested because of my drinking." This was a false statement as the Applicant had in fact been arrested four times before July 2000 because of domestic violence incidents brought about by his drinking.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	During this interview he discussed the four earlier arrests, as well as his arrest on September 19, 2000, for domestic violence. He stated, "In my prior statement I stated that I had not been arrested. I said this because I'm embarrassed and ashamed. I thought I could hide these arrests."	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

On July 27, 2000, the Applicant was interviewed by a Special Agent of the Defense Security Service. In a sworn statement, the Applicant stated, "I was never involved in any embarrassing incidents when I was drinking that could lead to being blackmailed. I was never arrested because of my drinking." This was a false statement as the Applicant had in fact been arrested four times before July 2000 because of domestic violence incidents brought about by his drinking.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

—

3.b

During this interview he discussed the four earlier arrests, as well as his arrest on September 19, 2000, for domestic violence. He stated, "In my prior statement I stated that I had not been arrested. I said this because I'm embarrassed and ashamed. I thought I could hide these arrests."

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	The Applicant admits that he is an alcoholic and has been one for some time.	For Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	He testified credibly that he last drank alcohol on September 19, 2000.	For Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Admitted	—	—	—
2.c	The Applicant attempted to control his drinking several times in the 1990s.	For Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	—	—	—
2.d	In October 2000, after his last arrest for domestic violence, the Applicant began a treatment program that seemed to work for him.	For Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Admitted	—	—	—
2.e	He received a favorable prognosis from the treatment program, has attended a church based abstinence support group on a consistent basis since then, and has abstained from alcohol use for fifteen months as of the date of the hearing.	For Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

The Applicant admits that he is an alcoholic and has been one for some time.

For Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

—

2.b

He testified credibly that he last drank alcohol on September 19, 2000.

For Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Admitted

—

2.c

The Applicant attempted to control his drinking several times in the 1990s.

For Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

—

2.d

In October 2000, after his last arrest for domestic violence, the Applicant began a treatment program that seemed to work for him.

For Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Admitted

—

2.e

He received a favorable prognosis from the treatment program, has attended a church based abstinence support group on a consistent basis since then, and has abstained from alcohol use for fifteen months as of the date of the hearing.

For Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant has been arrested five times for Domestic Violence. These arrests occurred in September 1995, December 1996, June 1997, January 1999 and September 2000.	For Applicant	Domestic Violence	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	All of the above arrests resulted in the Applicant being charged with Harassment and/or Domestic Violence. The Applicant plead Guilty and received sentences involving domestic violence counseling and probation after the 1995, 1996 and 1997 offenses.	For Applicant	Domestic Violence	Convicted	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	The charges in the January 1999 and September 2000 cases were dismissed because the Applicant's wife refused to appear. However, the Applicant does not deny the fact that the incidents occurred.	For Applicant	Domestic Violence	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	—	—	—
1.d	The Applicant testified that both he and his wife were alcoholics, and had been drinking alcohol before all of these arrests.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
1.e	The Applicant and his wife were divorced in January 2002.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.a	The Applicant admits that he is an alcoholic and has been one for some time. He testified credibly that he last drank alcohol on September 19, 2000.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	While he had alcohol problems for several years, they accelerated during 1999 and 2000.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	The Applicant attempted to control his drinking several times in the 1990s. He eventually began using Antabuse, prescribed for him by his personal physician, in 1997.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.d	In October 2000, after his last arrest for domestic violence, the Applicant began a treatment program that seemed to work for him.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
2.e	Since his discharge the Applicant has been attending a church based abstinence program twice a week.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
3.a	On July 27, 2000, the Applicant was interviewed by a Special Agent of the Defense Security Service. In a sworn statement, the Applicant stated, "I was never involved in any embarrassing incidents when I was drinking that could lead to being blackmailed. I was never arrested because of my drinking."	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.b	The Applicant was re-interviewed on September 22, 2000. During this interview he discussed the four earlier arrests, as well as his arrest on September 19, 2000, for domestic violence.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant has been arrested five times for Domestic Violence. These arrests occurred in September 1995, December 1996, June 1997, January 1999 and September 2000.

For Applicant

Domestic Violence

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

1.b

All of the above arrests resulted in the Applicant being charged with Harassment and/or Domestic Violence. The Applicant plead Guilty and received sentences involving domestic violence counseling and probation after the 1995, 1996 and 1997 offenses.

For Applicant

Domestic Violence

Convicted

Denied

—

1.c

The charges in the January 1999 and September 2000 cases were dismissed because the Applicant's wife refused to appear. However, the Applicant does not deny the fact that the incidents occurred.

For Applicant

Domestic Violence

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Denied

—

1.d

The Applicant testified that both he and his wife were alcoholics, and had been drinking alcohol before all of these arrests.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

1.e

The Applicant and his wife were divorced in January 2002.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.a

The Applicant admits that he is an alcoholic and has been one for some time. He testified credibly that he last drank alcohol on September 19, 2000.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.b

While he had alcohol problems for several years, they accelerated during 1999 and 2000.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.c

The Applicant attempted to control his drinking several times in the 1990s. He eventually began using Antabuse, prescribed for him by his personal physician, in 1997.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.d

In October 2000, after his last arrest for domestic violence, the Applicant began a treatment program that seemed to work for him.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

2.e

Since his discharge the Applicant has been attending a church based abstinence program twice a week.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

3.a

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

—

3.b

The Applicant was re-interviewed on September 22, 2000. During this interview he discussed the four earlier arrests, as well as his arrest on September 19, 2000, for domestic violence.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

—

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES