ISCR Case 03-11536.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-11536.h1

deniedMay 31, 2006· Hon. Erin C. Hogan· hearing

Summary

A 41-year-old product manager for a defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), G (Alcohol Consumption), and J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a long history of alcohol-related and criminal offenses.

The applicant had been arrested for alcohol-related driving offenses on three occasions, with the first occurring at age 18 and resulting in the death of a friend. Two of these offenses took place within the last five years. Additionally, since 1982, the applicant had been arrested or charged with criminal offenses six times, with four of these occurring within the past ten years.

Further concerns arose from the applicant's repeated disrespect for authority, evidenced by three violations of probation terms. The judge found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient information to mitigate the concerns related to his criminal conduct, alcohol consumption, and personal conduct, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had a history of alcohol-related driving offenses, including one that resulted in a fatality.
He violated probation terms on multiple occasions, demonstrating a lack of respect for authority.
The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or mitigating circumstances.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A10.1.2.1raisedAllegations or Admission of Criminal Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged
E2.A10.1.2.2raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
E2.A7.1.2.1raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work, Such as Driving While Under the Influence
E2.A5.1.2.1raisedReliable, Unfavorable Information Provided by Associates, Employers, Coworkers, Neighbors, and Other Acquaintances
E2.A5.1.2.5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations, Including Violation of Any Written or Recorded Agreement Made Between the Individual and the Agency

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 eligible for a security clearance.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 51

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 30, 2005
Answer filedOct 18, 2005Applicant elected to have case decided on written record.
Hearing held—
Decision dateMay 31, 2006

Cite For

Disqualifying Conditions Under Guidelines J, G, and E Due to Criminal Conduct and Alcohol Consumption
Lack of Sufficient Evidence for Rehabilitation in Alcohol-related Offenses
Pattern of Disregard for Authority and Probation Violations Affecting Security Clearance Eligibility

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–3.d	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (3 against, 1 for the applicant).	Mixed		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a–3.d

4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (3 against, 1 for the applicant).

Mixed

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	The applicant has been arrested on three occasions for alcohol-related driving offenses.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
2.b	The applicant's first alcohol-related driving offense occurred when he was 18 and resulted in the death of his friend.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
2.c	The applicant's last two alcohol-related driving offenses occurred within the past five years.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—
2.d	The applicant has shown a disrespect for authority by violating the terms of his probation on three occasions.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

The applicant has been arrested on three occasions for alcohol-related driving offenses.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

—

2.b

The applicant's first alcohol-related driving offense occurred when he was 18 and resulted in the death of his friend.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

—

2.c

The applicant's last two alcohol-related driving offenses occurred within the past five years.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

—

2.d

The applicant has shown a disrespect for authority by violating the terms of his probation on three occasions.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Admitted

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was arrested on three occasions for alcohol-related driving offenses, including one that resulted in the death of a friend.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
1.b	Applicant has shown a disrespect for authority by violating the terms of his probation on three occasions.	Against Applicant	Probation or Court Order Violation	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
1.c	Since 1982, Applicant has been arrested and/or charged with criminal offenses on six occasions, four of which occurred within the past ten years.	Against Applicant	Multiple Arrests Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
1.d	Applicant's last two alcohol-related driving offenses occurred within the past five years.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
1.e	Applicant has not provided sufficient information to mitigate the criminal conduct, alcohol consumption, and personal conduct concerns.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
1.f	Applicant's pattern of disregarding the orders of the court during probation indicates a disrespect for the law and an inability to follow rules.	Against Applicant	Probation or Court Order Violation	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant was arrested on three occasions for alcohol-related driving offenses, including one that resulted in the death of a friend.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Admitted

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

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

—

1.b

Applicant has shown a disrespect for authority by violating the terms of his probation on three occasions.

Against Applicant

Probation or Court Order Violation

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

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

—

1.c

Since 1982, Applicant has been arrested and/or charged with criminal offenses on six occasions, four of which occurred within the past ten years.

Against Applicant

Multiple Arrests Pattern

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

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

—

1.d

Applicant's last two alcohol-related driving offenses occurred within the past five years.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Admitted

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

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

—

1.e

Applicant has not provided sufficient information to mitigate the criminal conduct, alcohol consumption, and personal conduct concerns.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

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

—

1.f

Applicant's pattern of disregarding the orders of the court during probation indicates a disrespect for the law and an inability to follow rules.

Against Applicant

Probation or Court Order Violation

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

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

—

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

SYNOPSIS

APPEARANCES

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES