ISCR Case 02-24062.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-24062.h1

deniedSep 13, 2004· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 28-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), G (Alcohol Consumption), H (Drug Involvement), and J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a history of illegal drug use, alcohol abuse, and intentional falsifications on her security application.

The Applicant began using various illegal drugs, including marijuana, LSD, nitrous oxide, and mushrooms, as a teenager in 1991, continuing marijuana use regularly until at least April 2000. She received treatment for "Cannabis Dependence" from November 1999 to April 2000, though she admitted to using marijuana twice during this program. Concurrently, she began consuming alcohol in 1991, was arrested for Minor Consumption of Alcohol in August 1994, and by October 1999, was drinking about four times a week and experiencing blackouts. She was diagnosed with "Alcohol Abuse" and received treatment from November 1999 to April 2000.

Despite mitigation for her drug use, her alcohol abuse and dishonesty were not mitigated. The Applicant intentionally falsified her security clearance application by failing to disclose her arrest for Minor Consumption of Alcohol and her complete criminal and drug involvement history. Her stated reason for the falsification was fear of losing her job. The decision highlighted that her alcohol abuse continued post-treatment, indicating insufficient rehabilitation, and her deliberate falsifications, a violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 1001, undermined her trustworthiness.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The Applicant's history of alcohol abuse continued post-treatment, demonstrating insufficient rehabilitation.
The Applicant intentionally falsified material information on her security clearance application, violating Title 18 U.S.C. § 1001.
The Applicant's excuses for dishonesty were deemed unacceptable, undermining her trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

G.2raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work, Such as Driving Under the Influence . . .
G.3raisedDiagnosis by a Credentialed Medical Professional of Alcohol Abuse or Alcohol Dependence;
E.2raisedThe Deliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts From Any Personnel Security Questionnaire, Personal History Statement, or Similar Form Used to Conduct Investigations, Determine Employment Qualifications, Award Benefits or Status, Determine Security Clearance Eligibility or Trustworthiness, or Award Fiduciary Responsibilities.
J.1raisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged;

Mitigating

H.1appliedThe Drug Involvement Was Not Recent.
G.1notedNone.
E.1notedNone.
J.1notedNone.

Key Rule Quoted

“The adjudicative process is an examination of a sufficient period of a person's life to make an affirmative determination that the person is an acceptable security risk.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 20, 2003
Answer filedJan 10, 2004
Hearing heldJul 12, 2004rescheduled twice
Decision dateSep 13, 2004

Cite For

Insufficient Rehabilitation of Alcohol Abuse Under Guideline G
Intentional Falsification of Information Under Guideline E
Criminal Conduct Related to Dishonesty 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	The Applicant intentionally falsified material aspects of her personal background during the clearance screening process.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	The Applicant failed to list the fact that she was arrested for Minor Consumption of Alcohol.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	—	—	—
not recovered from source	specific text not stated in this decision	Unknown	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

The Applicant intentionally falsified material aspects of her personal background during the clearance screening process.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

—

3.b

The Applicant failed to list the fact that she was arrested for Minor Consumption of Alcohol.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

—

not recovered from source

specific text not stated in this decision

Unknown

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	The Applicant began consuming alcohol as a teenager, in 1991, about the same time she was using illegal drugs.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	In August 1994, she was arrested and charged with Minor Consumption of Alcohol.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Related Arrest	Admitted	—	—	—
2.c	By October 1999, the Applicant's consumption of alcohol had increased to the point where she was drinking about four times a week, and experiencing black outs.	Against Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	—	—	—
2.d	From November 1999 to April 2000, the Applicant received treatment for her condition and was diagnosed with 'Alcohol Abuse.'	Against Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	(b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

The Applicant began consuming alcohol as a teenager, in 1991, about the same time she was using illegal drugs.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Admitted

—

2.b

In August 1994, she was arrested and charged with Minor Consumption of Alcohol.

Against Applicant

Alcohol Related Arrest

Admitted

—

2.c

By October 1999, the Applicant's consumption of alcohol had increased to the point where she was drinking about four times a week, and experiencing black outs.

Against Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

—

2.d

From November 1999 to April 2000, the Applicant received treatment for her condition and was diagnosed with 'Alcohol Abuse.'

Against Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant began using illegal drugs as a teenager. She experimented with a number of different drugs, including marijuana, LSD, nitrous oxide and mushrooms.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	She used LSD about four times from June 1991 until February 1992.	For Applicant	LSD	Experimental	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	She used nitrous oxide in January 1992.	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	She used mushrooms twice in the summer of 1995 and again in the summer of 1998.	For Applicant	Psilocybin	Occasional	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	Her drug of choice, however, became marijuana. She used marijuana on a regular basis and at times daily from 1991 to at least April 2000.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	During the period she used marijuana she purchased it on a number of occasions.	For Applicant	Drug Distribution or Dealing	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	Her use of marijuana progressed to the point where she realized that she had a serious problem and she sought treatment.	For Applicant	Treatment Failure	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.h	She received treatment from November 1999 through April 2000 and was diagnosed with "Cannabis Dependence."	For Applicant	Drug Diagnosed Disorder	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.i	She testified that she used marijuana on two occasions during her treatment program for Cannabis Dependence.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Occasional	Admitted	—	—	—
2.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because she abuses intoxicants.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	The Applicant began consuming alcohol as a teenager, in 1991, about the same time she was using illegal drugs.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	By October 1999, the Applicant's consumption of alcohol had increased to the point where she was drinking about four times a week, and experiencing black outs.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Denied	—	—	—
2.d	Following her treatment program for alcohol abuse in 2000, she has not abstained from the use of alcohol for at least twelve months as required by the Directive.	Against Applicant	Treatment Failure	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—
3.a	The Applicant did not reveal her complete criminal or drug involvement history in response to questions 24 and 27 on her security clearance application.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	The Applicant's excuse for not being truthful was because she was scared and afraid that she would lose her job.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	Claimed Other
4.a	The Applicant's deliberate falsifications on her security clearance application, discussed above, are a violation of Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001, a felony.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant began using illegal drugs as a teenager. She experimented with a number of different drugs, including marijuana, LSD, nitrous oxide and mushrooms.

For Applicant

Marijuana

Regular

Admitted

—

1.b

She used LSD about four times from June 1991 until February 1992.

For Applicant

LSD

Experimental

Admitted

—

1.c

She used nitrous oxide in January 1992.

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.d

She used mushrooms twice in the summer of 1995 and again in the summer of 1998.

For Applicant

Psilocybin

Occasional

Admitted

—

1.e

Her drug of choice, however, became marijuana. She used marijuana on a regular basis and at times daily from 1991 to at least April 2000.

For Applicant

Marijuana

Regular

Admitted

—

1.f

During the period she used marijuana she purchased it on a number of occasions.

For Applicant

Drug Distribution or Dealing

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.g

Her use of marijuana progressed to the point where she realized that she had a serious problem and she sought treatment.

For Applicant

Treatment Failure

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.h

She received treatment from November 1999 through April 2000 and was diagnosed with "Cannabis Dependence."

For Applicant

Drug Diagnosed Disorder

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.i

She testified that she used marijuana on two occasions during her treatment program for Cannabis Dependence.

For Applicant

Marijuana

Occasional

Admitted

—

2.a

The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because she abuses intoxicants.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

Denied

—

2.b

The Applicant began consuming alcohol as a teenager, in 1991, about the same time she was using illegal drugs.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

Denied

—

2.c

By October 1999, the Applicant's consumption of alcohol had increased to the point where she was drinking about four times a week, and experiencing black outs.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

Denied

—

2.d

Following her treatment program for alcohol abuse in 2000, she has not abstained from the use of alcohol for at least twelve months as required by the Directive.

Against Applicant

Treatment Failure

Not Applicable

Denied

—

3.a

The Applicant did not reveal her complete criminal or drug involvement history in response to questions 24 and 27 on her security clearance application.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Not Applicable

Denied

—

3.b

The Applicant's excuse for not being truthful was because she was scared and afraid that she would lose her job.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Not Applicable

Denied

—

Claimed

Other

4.a

The Applicant's deliberate falsifications on her security clearance application, discussed above, are a violation of Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001, a felony.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Not Applicable

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
4.a	The Applicant's deliberate falsifications on her security clearance application, discussed above, are a violation of Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001, a felony.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

4.a

The Applicant's deliberate falsifications on her security clearance application, discussed above, are a violation of Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001, a felony.

Against Applicant

Fraud or Deception Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

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