ISCR Case 03-08085.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-08085.h1

deniedNov 1, 2004· Hon. Paul J. Mason· hearing

Summary

A 44-year-old programmer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption). The denial stemmed from a pattern of excessive alcohol consumption, evidenced by four alcohol-related incidents between 1982 and 2000. These incidents included arrests for operating under the influence in 1982 and driving while intoxicated in 2000, as well as an intoxicated incident in a college dormitory in 1983 and an alcohol-related incident while employed as a high school teacher in 1997.

Additionally, the applicant deliberately falsified his security clearance application by answering "no" to a question regarding involuntary job termination due to misconduct within the last ten years. This pertained to his departure from a high school teaching position in 1997. The applicant maintained he did not believe his departure was due to misconduct and suggested he might have provided the information elsewhere on the application.

The judge determined that the applicant's history of alcohol-related offenses and his dishonesty regarding his employment termination, coupled with his continued denial of the falsification, undermined his credibility and trustworthiness. Consequently, the applicant did not meet the burden of persuasion for security clearance approval, and the clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had four alcohol-related incidents between 1982 and 2000, indicating a pattern of excessive alcohol consumption.
The applicant deliberately falsified his security clearance application by denying an involuntary job termination due to misconduct.
The applicant's continued denial of his falsification undermined his credibility and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

GDC 1raisedAlcohol-related Offenses Away From Work
E DC 2raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
E DC 5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations

Mitigating

GMC 1rejectedThe Alcohol-related Incidents Do Not Indicate a PatternThe applicant's four incidents established a pattern of excessive alcohol consumption.
GMC 3rejectedPositive Changes in Behavior Supportive of SobrietyThe applicant provided no evidence of current drinking habits or rehabilitation.
EMC 1rejectedThe Information Was Unsubstantiated or Not Pertinent to Judgment, Trustworthiness, or ReliabilityThe termination was substantiated by the superintendent.
EMC 3rejectedPrompt, Good-faith Efforts to Correct the FalsificationThe applicant continued to deny the falsification.

Key Rule Quoted

“The granting (or continuance) of a security clearance under this Directive may only be done upon a finding that to do so is clearly consistent with the national interest.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 25, 2003
Answer filedDec 16, 2003
Hearing held—Applicant elected to have the case decided on a written record.
Decision dateNov 1, 2004

Cite For

Pattern of Excessive Alcohol Consumption Under Guideline G
Deliberate Falsification of Security Clearance Application Under Guideline E
Credibility Issues Arising From Continued Denial of Misconduct.

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	On August 20, 2002, Applicant answered "no" to the question 20 of his SCA. Question 20 applies to an involuntary termination in the last 10 years from a job because of (1) being fired, (2) quitting after being told of the firing, (3) leaving a job by mutual agreement following allegations of misconduct, (4) leaving a job by mutual agreement following allegations of unsatisfactory job performance, and (5) leaving a job for other reason(s) under unfavorable circumstances.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.b	Applicant does not believe he left the high school job in 1997 following an allegation of misconduct. Applicant opined he may have furnished information about his termination in another part of the SCA.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

On August 20, 2002, Applicant answered "no" to the question 20 of his SCA. Question 20 applies to an involuntary termination in the last 10 years from a job because of (1) being fired, (2) quitting after being told of the firing, (3) leaving a job by mutual agreement following allegations of misconduct, (4) leaving a job by mutual agreement following allegations of unsatisfactory job performance, and (5) leaving a job for other reason(s) under unfavorable circumstances.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Employment History

Denied

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form

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

—

2.b

Applicant does not believe he left the high school job in 1997 following an allegation of misconduct. Applicant opined he may have furnished information about his termination in another part of the SCA.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Employment History

Denied

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	The applicant has consumed alcohol to excess and occasionally to the point of intoxication from 1977 to at least September 23, 2002.	Against Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
1.b	On May 30, 1982, the applicant was arrested for operating (auto) under the influence of intoxicating liquor/excessive blood alcohol content.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
1.c	In February 1983, the applicant was involved in an incident in a college dormitory where he was loud and boisterous. He was highly intoxicated.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Related Arrest	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
1.d	In February 1997, the applicant was employed as a teacher at a high school and attended a function after consuming alcohol.	Against Applicant	Intoxication at Work or Duty	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
1.e	On July 18, 2000, the applicant was arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI).	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

The applicant has consumed alcohol to excess and occasionally to the point of intoxication from 1977 to at least September 23, 2002.

Against Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

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

—

1.b

On May 30, 1982, the applicant was arrested for operating (auto) under the influence of intoxicating liquor/excessive blood alcohol content.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

—

1.c

In February 1983, the applicant was involved in an incident in a college dormitory where he was loud and boisterous. He was highly intoxicated.

Against Applicant

Alcohol Related Arrest

Admitted

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

—

1.d

In February 1997, the applicant was employed as a teacher at a high school and attended a function after consuming alcohol.

Against Applicant

Intoxication at Work or Duty

Admitted

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

—

1.e

On July 18, 2000, the applicant was arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI).

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

—

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES