ISCR Case 02-21551.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-21551.h1

grantedJan 16, 2004· Hon. James A. Young· hearing

Summary

A 33-year-old network engineer was granted a security clearance despite a history of alcohol-related incidents and criminal conduct, primarily under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), G (Alcohol Consumption), and J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons detailed multiple convictions, including driving under the influence (DUI) in 1991, 1992, and 1997, and drunk in public in 1997. Additional charges included driving with a suspended license and allowing a minor to possess alcohol in 1994. The applicant also attended a DUI program from September 1997 through March 1999.

A key allegation involved whether the applicant falsified his security clearance application by answering "no" to a question about receiving alcohol-related treatment in the previous seven years. However, the judge found insufficient evidence to support this claim, accepting the applicant's explanation regarding the nature of alcohol awareness programs.

The decision to grant the clearance was based on the applicant's demonstrated rehabilitation and maturity. He had no legal troubles for almost seven years since his last offense in 1997, indicating significant positive changes in behavior. The judge concluded that the applicant's alcohol-related incidents occurred many years prior and that he had successfully rehabilitated.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant has not had any legal troubles for almost seven years, indicating successful rehabilitation.
The applicant's alcohol-related incidents occurred many years prior, and he has shown positive changes in behavior.
The judge found the applicant's explanation regarding the nature of alcohol awareness programs credible, ruling that he did not falsify his application.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A7.1.2.1raisedAlcohol Consumption
E2.A10.1.2.1raisedCriminal Conduct
E2.A10.1.2.2raisedCriminal Conduct

Mitigating

E2.A7.1.3.2appliedAlcohol ConsumptionThe applicant's alcohol-related incidents occurred years ago, with no recent problems.
E2.A7.1.3.3appliedAlcohol ConsumptionThe applicant has matured and shown positive changes in behavior supportive of sobriety.
E2.A10.1.3.1appliedCriminal ConductThe applicant's criminal behavior is not recent, with the last incident occurring almost seven years ago.
E2.A10.1.3.6appliedCriminal ConductThe applicant demonstrated clear evidence of successful rehabilitation.
E2.A5.l.lrejectedPersonal ConductThe government failed to establish that the applicant falsified his security clearance application.

Key Rule Quoted

“The decision to deny an individual a security clearance is not necessarily a determination as to the loyalty of the applicant.”
— Exec. Or. 10865 § 7.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 10, 2003
Answer filedAug 5, 2003
Hearing heldDec 10, 2003
Decision dateJan 16, 2004

Cite For

Successful Rehabilitation After a History of Alcohol-related Incidents
Credibility of Applicant's Testimony Regarding Alcohol Treatment
Mitigating Factors Under Guidelines G, J, and 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	Falsified his SCA by answering "no" to question 30 about receiving alcohol-related treatment in the previous seven years	For Applicant	Falsification Security Form	Other	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

Falsified his SCA by answering "no" to question 30 about receiving alcohol-related treatment in the previous seven years

For Applicant

Falsification Security Form

Other

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	Convicted in 1997 of driving with a blood alcohol content in excess of the maximum permitted	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—
1.b	Convicted of drunk in public in 1997	For Applicant	Public Intoxication	Admitted	—	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—
1.c	Convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) in 1992	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—
1.d	Convicted of DUI in 1991	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—
1.e	Attended a DUI program from September 1997 through March 1999	For Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

Convicted in 1997 of driving with a blood alcohol content in excess of the maximum permitted

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

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

—

1.b

Convicted of drunk in public in 1997

For Applicant

Public Intoxication

Admitted

—

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

—

1.c

Convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) in 1992

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

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

—

1.d

Convicted of DUI in 1991

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

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

—

1.e

Attended a DUI program from September 1997 through March 1999

For Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Admitted

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

(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	In December 1994, Applicant was arrested and charged with allowing a minor to possess alcohol and willfully violating a promise to appear.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Charged Not Convicted	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
2.b	In August 1994, Applicant was arrested and charged with driving with a suspended or revoked license, habitual traffic offender.	For Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Charged Not Convicted	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
2.c	In November 1993, charged with broken or improper height for headlights; driver's license suspended or revoked, and failure to appear.	For Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Charged Not Convicted	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
2.d	Convicted in 1997 of driving with a blood alcohol content in excess of the maximum permitted.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
2.e	Convicted of drunk in public in 1997.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Convicted	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
2.f	Convicted of DUI in 1992.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
2.g	Convicted of DUI in 1991.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

In December 1994, Applicant was arrested and charged with allowing a minor to possess alcohol and willfully violating a promise to appear.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Charged Not Convicted

Denied

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

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

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

—

2.b

In August 1994, Applicant was arrested and charged with driving with a suspended or revoked license, habitual traffic offender.

For Applicant

Traffic Offense Pattern

Charged Not Convicted

Denied

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

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

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

—

2.c

In November 1993, charged with broken or improper height for headlights; driver's license suspended or revoked, and failure to appear.

For Applicant

Traffic Offense Pattern

Charged Not Convicted

Denied

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

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

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

—

2.d

Convicted in 1997 of driving with a blood alcohol content in excess of the maximum permitted.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Denied

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

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

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

—

2.e

Convicted of drunk in public in 1997.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Convicted

Denied

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

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

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

—

2.f

Convicted of DUI in 1992.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Denied

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

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

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

—

2.g

Convicted of DUI in 1991.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Denied

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

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

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

—

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