ISCR Case 03-07011.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-07011.h1

deniedJun 4, 2004· Hon. Philip S. Howe· hearing

Summary

A 25-year-old 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, including two DUI arrests, and a diagnosis of alcohol dependence by a medical professional. The applicant was found to have engaged in habitual or binge alcohol consumption leading to impaired judgment, and continued to consume alcohol after diagnosis and completing a rehabilitation program.

Additionally, the applicant failed to disclose several significant past events on his security clearance application. These omissions included a non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ, participation in an alcohol treatment program while in the U.S. Marine Corps, and marijuana use from 1995 to 1997.

The judge determined that the applicant's two alcohol-related driving incidents demonstrated a pattern of excessive consumption, and the failure to disclose relevant past conduct, including alcohol treatment and DUI incidents, was a significant concern. The applicant's explanation that he relied on a supervisor's advice regarding disclosure was found unpersuasive. Despite the applicant not currently consuming alcohol, insufficient evidence of rehabilitation and mitigating circumstances led to the denial of the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had two alcohol-related driving incidents, indicating a pattern of excessive alcohol consumption.
The applicant failed to disclose significant past conduct, including alcohol treatment and DUI incidents, on his security clearance application.
The applicant's reliance on advice from an unnamed supervisor regarding disclosure was deemed unpersuasive and insufficient to mitigate concerns.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A7.1.2.1raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work, Such as Driving While Under the Influence.
E2.A7.1.2.3raisedDiagnosis by a Credentialed Medical Professional of Alcohol Dependence.
E2.A7.1.2.6raisedConsumption of Alcohol, Subsequent to a Diagnosis of Alcoholism by a Credentialed Medical Professional and Following Completion of an Alcohol Rehabilitation Program.
E2.A5.1.2.2raisedThe Deliberate Omission, Concealment, Falsification or Misrepresentation of Relevant and Material Facts.
E2.A5.1.2.5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations.

Mitigating

E2.A7.1.3.2appliedThe Problem Occurred a Number of Years Ago and There Is No Indication of a Recent Problem.
E2.A7.1.3.3appliedPositive Changes in Behavior Supportive of Sobriety.
E2.A5.1.3.2rejectedThe Falsification Was an Isolated Incident, Was Not Recent, and the Individual Has Subsequently Provided Correct Information Voluntarily.
E2.A5.1.3.4rejectedThe Omission of Material Facts Was Caused or Significantly Contributed to by Improper or Inadequate Advice of Authorized Personnel.

Key Rule Quoted

“"No one has a 'right' to a security clearance."”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 15, 2003
Answer filedNov 14, 2003
Hearing heldFeb 4, 2004
Decision dateJun 4, 2004

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Alcohol-related Incidents Under Guideline G
Failure to Disclose Relevant Past Conduct Under Guideline E
Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation and Mitigating Circumstances in Alcohol-related 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	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant did not disclose his non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ on his security clearance application.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to Disclose	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.b	Applicant did not disclose his participation in an alcohol treatment program while in the U.S. Marine Corps.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—
2.c	Applicant did not disclose his marijuana use from 1995 to 1997 on his security clearance application.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant did not disclose his non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ on his security clearance application.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to Disclose

Criminal Conduct

Admitted

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

—

2.b

Applicant did not disclose his participation in an alcohol treatment program while in the U.S. Marine Corps.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Admitted

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

2.c

Applicant did not disclose his marijuana use from 1995 to 1997 on his security clearance application.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Admitted

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	The applicant has a history of alcohol-related incidents, including two DUI arrests.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment (f) alcohol consumption after a diagnosis, contrary to treatment	—	—
1.b	The applicant was diagnosed with alcohol dependence by a credentialed medical professional.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	(c) habitual or binge consumption to the point of impaired judgment	—	—
1.c	The applicant has engaged in habitual or binge consumption of alcohol to the point of impaired judgment.	Against Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	(e) failure to follow treatment advice once diagnosed	—	—
1.d	The applicant consumed alcohol after being diagnosed with alcohol dependence and after completing an alcohol rehabilitation program.	Against Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Admitted	(f) alcohol consumption after a diagnosis, contrary to treatment	—	—
1.e	The applicant has not demonstrated a favorable prognosis following treatment for alcohol dependence.	Against Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Admitted	(f) alcohol consumption after a diagnosis, contrary to treatment	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

The applicant has a history of alcohol-related incidents, including two DUI arrests.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

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

(f) alcohol consumption after a diagnosis, contrary to treatment

—

1.b

The applicant was diagnosed with alcohol dependence by a credentialed medical professional.

Against Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

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

—

1.c

The applicant has engaged in habitual or binge consumption of alcohol to the point of impaired judgment.

Against Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

(e) failure to follow treatment advice once diagnosed

—

1.d

The applicant consumed alcohol after being diagnosed with alcohol dependence and after completing an alcohol rehabilitation program.

Against Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Admitted

(f) alcohol consumption after a diagnosis, contrary to treatment

—

1.e

The applicant has not demonstrated a favorable prognosis following treatment for alcohol dependence.

Against Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Admitted

(f) alcohol consumption after a diagnosis, contrary to treatment

—

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