ISCR Case 02-20454.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-20454.h1

grantedFeb 18, 2004· Hon. Barry M. Sax· hearing

Summary

A 47-year-old cost analyst was granted a security clearance despite allegations under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The allegations stemmed from multiple alcohol-related driving offenses in State A. These included a December 2001 arrest for DUI, amended to Wet Reckless, resulting in a fine, probation, and alcohol awareness classes. Earlier incidents included a December 1991 DUI arrest, leading to a guilty plea, probation, a First Conviction Program, and a fine, though the applicant did not serve jail time as initially alleged. An August 1990 DUI arrest also resulted in a guilty plea, fine, unsupervised probation, and alcohol awareness classes. Additionally, a November 1993 arrest for possession of an unspecified controlled substance was dismissed without formal charges.

The judge determined that the alcohol-related incidents were too infrequent to establish a pattern of abuse. Mitigating factors included the applicant's positive behavioral changes, with alcohol consumption limited to a single glass of wine during weekend dinners for the past two years. The applicant also presented a strong work record and positive character references from coworkers, along with family support.

Considering the significant time gaps between incidents and the applicant's demonstrated commitment to avoiding future issues, the security clearance was GRANTED.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated a significant gap between alcohol-related incidents, indicating no pattern of abuse.
The applicant's alcohol consumption has been limited to a glass of wine during weekend dinners for the past two years.
The applicant has a strong work record and positive character references from coworkers.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

G.1raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
G.4raisedHabitual or Binge Drinking
J.1raisedAny Criminal Conduct
J.2raisedA Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses

Mitigating

G.1appliedThe Alcohol-related Incidents Do Not Represent a Pattern
G.2appliedThe Problem Occurred a Number of Years Ago and There Is No Indication of a Recent Problem
G.3appliedPositive Changes in Behavior Supportive of Sobriety
J.1appliedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not Recent
J.2appliedThe Crime Was an Isolated Incident
J.5appliedThere Is Clear Evidence of Rehabilitation

Key Rule Quoted

“An applicant's admission of the information in specific allegations relieves the Government of having to prove those allegations.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 6, 2003
Answer filedMay 23, 2003
Hearing heldNov 3, 2003
Decision dateFeb 18, 2004

Cite For

Mitigation of Alcohol-related Incidents Under Guideline G
Evidence of Rehabilitation in Criminal Conduct Cases
The Significance of Time Gaps Between Incidents in Assessing Patterns of Behavior

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	On or about December 22, 2001, Applicant was arrested in State A and charged with Driving Under The Influence of Alcohol (DUI) and Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol with .08% or higher blood alcohol level. The charge was amended to Wet Reckless, Applicant was found guilty, was sentenced to pay a fine of $930.00, three years probation, and was required to attend alcohol awareness classes	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence (c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—
1.b	On or about December 20, 1991, Applicant was arrested in State A and was charged with Driving a vehicle Under the Influence of Alcohol and/or Drugs. On March 16, 1992, he entered a guilty plea, and was sentenced to five years summary probation, required to attend a First Conviction Program, pay a fine of $1,500.00. Applicant did not actually spend 20 days in jail, as alleged in the SOR.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence (c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—
1.c	On or about August 1, 1990, Applicant was arrested in State A for DUI. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay a fine of $1,000.00 to $1,200.00, five years unsupervised probation, and was ordered to attend six weeks of alcohol awareness classes.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence (c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

On or about December 22, 2001, Applicant was arrested in State A and charged with Driving Under The Influence of Alcohol (DUI) and Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol with .08% or higher blood alcohol level. The charge was amended to Wet Reckless, Applicant was found guilty, was sentenced to pay a fine of $930.00, three years probation, and was required to attend alcohol awareness classes

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

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

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

(b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence

(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse

—

1.b

On or about December 20, 1991, Applicant was arrested in State A and was charged with Driving a vehicle Under the Influence of Alcohol and/or Drugs. On March 16, 1992, he entered a guilty plea, and was sentenced to five years summary probation, required to attend a First Conviction Program, pay a fine of $1,500.00. Applicant did not actually spend 20 days in jail, as alleged in the SOR.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

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

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

(b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence

(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse

—

1.c

On or about August 1, 1990, Applicant was arrested in State A for DUI. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay a fine of $1,000.00 to $1,200.00, five years unsupervised probation, and was ordered to attend six weeks of alcohol awareness classes.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

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

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

(b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence

(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	The allegation as stated in SOR 1.a.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Unknown	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.) (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—
2.b	The allegation as stated in SOR 1.b.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Unknown	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.) (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—
2.c	The allegation as stated in SOR 1.c.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Unknown	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.) (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—
2.d	On or about November 29, 1993, Applicant was arrested in State A for Possession of a Controlled Substance, which is not described in the record. Applicant was not formally charged and the matter was subsequently dismissed.	For Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.) (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

The allegation as stated in SOR 1.a.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Unknown

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

—

2.b

The allegation as stated in SOR 1.b.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Unknown

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

—

2.c

The allegation as stated in SOR 1.c.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Unknown

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

—

2.d

On or about November 29, 1993, Applicant was arrested in State A for Possession of a Controlled Substance, which is not described in the record. Applicant was not formally charged and the matter was subsequently dismissed.

For Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

—

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