Summary
A 56-year-old field engineer for a defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption). The denial stemmed from a history of alcohol-related incidents spanning from 1967 to 1997, coupled with deliberate falsifications on security clearance applications.
The applicant's alcohol-related history included arrests for public intoxication in 1967 and 1971, non-judicial punishment for being drunk on duty in 1972, and multiple charges and convictions for driving while intoxicated or under the influence between 1991 and 1997. These incidents included a DWI and failure to yield charge in 1991, a DUI conviction in 1992, a charge for driving with an illegal blood alcohol level in 1995, and a DWI and refusal to take a blood test charge in 1997.
Crucially, the applicant deliberately answered "no" to a question about alcohol-related offenses on a security clearance application dated November 13, 2000. The judge found that the applicant's pattern of habitual alcohol consumption and the deliberate falsification of his record were not sufficiently mitigated by any demonstrated positive behavioral changes, leading to the denial of the security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant had a pattern of alcohol-related incidents from 1991 to 1997, demonstrating habitual consumption.
- The applicant deliberately falsified his alcohol-related record on security clearance applications, which was not mitigated by any positive changes in behavior.
Conditions Referenced
- G DC 1raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
- G DC 5raisedHabitual or Binge Consumption of Alcohol to the Point of Impaired Judgment
- E DC 2raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
- G MC 1rejectedThe Alcohol-related Incidents Do Not Indicate a PatternThe applicant's incidents from 1991 to 1997 represent a clear pattern.
- G MC 3rejectedPositive Changes in Behavior Supportive of SobrietyThe applicant failed to provide corroborated evidence of substantive lifestyle changes.
- E MC 2rejectedThe Falsification Was an Isolated Incident, Was Not Recent, and the Individual Has Subsequently Provided Correct Information VoluntarilyThe applicant's falsifications were not isolated incidents and were not mitigated.
Key Rule Quoted
“Excessive alcohol consumption often leads to the exercise of questionable judgment and ultimately, security violations.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 23, 2003
- Answer filedJun 9, 2003
- Hearing heldNov 20, 2003
- Decision dateJan 22, 2004
Cite For
- Denial Based on a Pattern of Alcohol-related Incidents Under Guideline G
- Deliberate Falsification of Information Under Guideline E
- Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation or Positive Behavioral Changes