ISCR Case 02-20977.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-20977.h1

grantedOct 26, 2004· Hon. Philip S. Howe· hearing

Summary

This case involved a 44-year-old electronics technician and Air Force veteran whose security clearance was initially questioned under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons cited alcohol-related incidents away from work and diagnoses of alcohol abuse or dependence by both a credentialed medical professional and a licensed clinical social worker from a recognized treatment program.

Disqualifying conditions related to alcohol consumption and criminal conduct were raised. However, the applicant demonstrated significant mitigating factors. These included successful completion of alcohol dependence treatment and maintaining sobriety since December 2003. The applicant also showed positive behavioral changes and effective coping strategies to avoid alcohol triggers.

Furthermore, the criminal conduct was identified as an isolated incident that occurred four years prior and had been addressed through rehabilitation efforts. Based on these demonstrated rehabilitation efforts and sustained sobriety, the applicant's security clearance was GRANTED.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant successfully completed treatment for alcohol dependence and has maintained sobriety since December 2003.
The applicant demonstrated positive behavioral changes and coping strategies to avoid triggers for alcohol consumption.
The applicant's criminal conduct was an isolated incident that occurred four years prior and has been addressed through rehabilitation.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A7.1.2.1raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
E2.A7.1.2.3raisedDiagnosis by a Credentialed Medical Professional of Alcohol Abuse or Alcohol Dependence
E2.A10.1.2.1raisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct
E2.A10.1.2.2raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses

Mitigating

E2.A7.1.3.3appliedPositive Changes in Behavior Supportive of Sobriety
E2.A7.1.3.4appliedSuccessful Completion of Rehabilitation and Participation in AA
E2.A10.1.3.1appliedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not Recent
E2.A10.1.3.2appliedThe Crime Was an Isolated Incident
E2.A10.1.3.6appliedClear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation

Key Rule Quoted

“"Any doubt as to whether access to classified information is clearly consistent with national security will be resolved in favor of the national security."”
— Directive ¶ E2.2.2.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 5, 2004
Answer filedJan 30, 2004
Hearing heldMay 5, 2004
Decision dateOct 26, 2004

Cite For

Mitigation of Alcohol Consumption Issues Under Guideline G
Mitigation of Criminal Conduct Concerns Due to Isolated Incidents
Successful Rehabilitation Efforts in Security Clearance Cases.

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	Alcohol-related incidents away from work.	For Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment (d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse (d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use	—
1.b	Diagnosis by a credentialed medical professional (e.g., physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist) of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence.	For Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment (d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse (d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use	—
1.c	Evaluation of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence by a licensed clinical social worker who is a staff member of a recognized alcohol treatment program.	For Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment (d) diagnosis of alcohol use disorder by a qualified professional	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse (d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use	—
1.d–1.f	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

Alcohol-related incidents away from work.

For Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Admitted

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

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

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

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

(d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use

—

1.b

Diagnosis by a credentialed medical professional (e.g., physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist) of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence.

For Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

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

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

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

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

(d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use

—

1.c

Evaluation of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence by a licensed clinical social worker who is a staff member of a recognized alcohol treatment program.

For Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

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

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

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

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

(d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use

—

1.d–1.f

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

For Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	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 (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

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

(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

APPEARANCES