ISCR Case 03-18601.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-18601.h1

deniedJun 2, 2005· Hon. Wilford H. Ross· hearing

Summary

A 44-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to a significant history of personal conduct issues, alcohol consumption, drug involvement, and criminal conduct. The denial was based on the applicant's extensive record of eight Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) arrests between 1984 and 2001, and a pattern of alcohol abuse spanning most of his adult life. Despite recent Alcoholics Anonymous attendance, the judge found insufficient evidence of rehabilitation or reform regarding his alcohol problem.

Further concerns arose from the applicant's history of drug use, including marijuana use in high school and again in 2002, and approximately ten instances of cocaine use between 1985 and 2000. He also had a felony drug possession arrest in 1985 and a total of 16 arrests over a 15-year period.

Crucially, the applicant intentionally falsified a DoD questionnaire completed on February 1, 2001. He falsely denied felony charges, multiple alcohol-related arrests, illegal drug use, and a property repossession. These misrepresentations, which violated felony criminal provisions, contributed to the judge's conclusion that granting a clearance was not consistent with national interest.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The Applicant has an extensive history of alcohol-related arrests, including eight DWI arrests from 1984 to 2001.
The Applicant falsified material information on a government questionnaire, including omissions of felony charges and multiple alcohol-related arrests.
The Applicant has a history of illegal drug use, including cocaine and marijuana, which he did not adequately address or mitigate.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A5.1.2.2appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
E2.A10.1.2.2appliedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
H2.A8.1.2.1appliedAny Drug Abuse
H2.A8.1.2.2appliedIllegal Drug Possession, Including Cultivation, Processing, Manufacture, Purchase, Sale, or Distribution
G2.A7.1.2.1appliedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
G2.A7.1.2.5appliedHabitual or Binge Consumption of Alcohol to the Point of Impaired Judgment

Mitigating

E2.A5.1.3.1rejectedThe Individual Did Not Understand the Impact of the Conduct
E2.A10.1.3.1appliedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not Recent
H2.A8.1.3.1rejectedThe Drug Abuse Was Not Recent

Key Rule Quoted

“The eligibility guidelines established in the DoD Directive identify personal characteristics and conduct which are reasonably related to the ultimate question of whether it is "clearly consistent with the national interest" to grant an Applicant's request for access to classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 6, 2004
Answer filedApr 1, 2004Applicant requested decision without a hearing.
Hearing held—
Decision dateJun 2, 2005

Cite For

Denial Based on Extensive Alcohol-related Arrests and Drug Use
Falsification of Government Security Questionnaires
Lack of Evidence for Rehabilitation or Reform in Substance Abuse 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	The Applicant intentionally falsified material aspects of his personal background during the clearance screening process.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
2.b	On February 1, 2001, the Applicant completed an official DoD questionnaire in which he stated that he had never been charged with a felony offense.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
2.c	The Applicant admitted to a single alcohol related arrest in 1999. This statement was also a false answer, since the Applicant had five other alcohol related arrests as of the time he filled out the questionnaire.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
2.d	The same questionnaire asked the Applicant whether he had any other arrests, charges or convictions, within the seven years prior to filling out the form. The Applicant answered "No," to this question. This answer was false as the Applicant had been arrested five times between 1996 and 1998.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
2.e	The Applicant answered "No" to the question about illegal drug use, which was false as the Applicant used cocaine ten times between 1988 and 2000.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
2.f	The Applicant answered "No" to the question about property repossession, which was false as the Applicant's house had been repossessed.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
2.g–2.i	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

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

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

—

2.b

On February 1, 2001, the Applicant completed an official DoD questionnaire in which he stated that he had never been charged with a felony offense.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

—

2.c

The Applicant admitted to a single alcohol related arrest in 1999. This statement was also a false answer, since the Applicant had five other alcohol related arrests as of the time he filled out the questionnaire.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

—

2.d

The same questionnaire asked the Applicant whether he had any other arrests, charges or convictions, within the seven years prior to filling out the form. The Applicant answered "No," to this question. This answer was false as the Applicant had been arrested five times between 1996 and 1998.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

—

2.e

The Applicant answered "No" to the question about illegal drug use, which was false as the Applicant used cocaine ten times between 1988 and 2000.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Denied

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

—

2.f

The Applicant answered "No" to the question about property repossession, which was false as the Applicant's house had been repossessed.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

2.g–2.i

3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)

Against Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant has a history of alcohol-related arrests, including multiple Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) incidents.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.b	The Applicant has abused alcohol for most of his adult life and has been arrested for Driving While Intoxicated eight times between 1984 and 2001.	Against Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Denied	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.c	The Applicant admitted to having a drinking problem for many years and only recently began attending Alcoholics Anonymous.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.d	The Applicant's excessive alcohol use has resulted in a number of arrests for Driving While Intoxicated.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.e	The Applicant has failed to demonstrate rehabilitation or reform regarding his alcohol abuse problem.	Against Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Denied	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.f	The Applicant has not provided sufficient evidence of understanding the impact of his alcohol abuse or controlling it.	Against Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Denied	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.g	The Applicant's alcohol-related incidents have occurred away from work, including multiple DWIs.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.h	The Applicant has a cavalier attitude towards his alcohol-related arrests and history.	Against Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Denied	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.i	The Applicant has not shown evidence of reform or rehabilitation regarding his alcohol abuse.	Against Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Denied	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.) (b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
2.a–2.e	5 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (rulings shown). (low confidence)	Mixed			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant has a history of alcohol-related arrests, including multiple Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) incidents.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.b

The Applicant has abused alcohol for most of his adult life and has been arrested for Driving While Intoxicated eight times between 1984 and 2001.

Against Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Denied

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.c

The Applicant admitted to having a drinking problem for many years and only recently began attending Alcoholics Anonymous.

Against Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.d

The Applicant's excessive alcohol use has resulted in a number of arrests for Driving While Intoxicated.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.e

The Applicant has failed to demonstrate rehabilitation or reform regarding his alcohol abuse problem.

Against Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Denied

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.f

The Applicant has not provided sufficient evidence of understanding the impact of his alcohol abuse or controlling it.

Against Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Denied

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.g

The Applicant's alcohol-related incidents have occurred away from work, including multiple DWIs.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.h

The Applicant has a cavalier attitude towards his alcohol-related arrests and history.

Against Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Denied

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.i

The Applicant has not shown evidence of reform or rehabilitation regarding his alcohol abuse.

Against Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Denied

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

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

2.a–2.e

5 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (rulings shown). (low confidence)

Mixed

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
4.a–4.d	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant).	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified		—	—	—
4.e	The Applicant used marijuana two to three times a week during 1978 and 1979, while in high school. He used it again at a party one time in 2002.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Occasional	Admitted	—	—	—
4.f	The Applicant used cocaine about ten times during the period 1985 to 2000.	Against Applicant	CocaineRelated Misconduct	Occasional	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

4.a–4.d

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

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

—

4.e

The Applicant used marijuana two to three times a week during 1978 and 1979, while in high school. He used it again at a party one time in 2002.

For Applicant

Marijuana

Occasional

Admitted

—

4.f

The Applicant used cocaine about ten times during the period 1985 to 2000.

Against Applicant

CocaineRelated Misconduct

Occasional

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	The Applicant has been arrested for felony drug possession in 1985.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Convicted	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.b	The Applicant has been arrested for Failure to Appear or on Fugitive Warrants.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.c	The Applicant has been arrested at least eight other times between 1985 and 1998.	Against Applicant	Multiple Arrests Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.d	The Applicant has a more than 15 year history of being arrested 16 times.	Against Applicant	Multiple Arrests Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.e	The Applicant has not introduced persuasive evidence in rebuttal, explanation or mitigation which is sufficient to overcome the Government's case against him.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	—	Unknown	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.f	The Applicant has engaged in criminal acts.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.g	The Applicant knowingly and willfully provided false material information to DoD during the clearance screening process.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
3.h–3.i	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant		—		—	—	—
3.j	The Applicant's actions violated the felony criminal provisions of 18 USC 1001.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

3.a

The Applicant has been arrested for felony drug possession in 1985.

Against Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Convicted

Denied

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

—

3.b

The Applicant has been arrested for Failure to Appear or on Fugitive Warrants.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

—

3.c

The Applicant has been arrested at least eight other times between 1985 and 1998.

Against Applicant

Multiple Arrests Pattern

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

—

3.d

The Applicant has a more than 15 year history of being arrested 16 times.

Against Applicant

Multiple Arrests Pattern

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

—

3.e

The Applicant has not introduced persuasive evidence in rebuttal, explanation or mitigation which is sufficient to overcome the Government's case against him.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

—

Unknown

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

—

3.f

The Applicant has engaged in criminal acts.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

—

3.g

The Applicant knowingly and willfully provided false material information to DoD during the clearance screening process.

Against Applicant

Fraud or Deception Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

—

3.h–3.i

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)

Against Applicant

—

3.j

The Applicant's actions violated the felony criminal provisions of 18 USC 1001.

Against Applicant

Fraud or Deception Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Denied

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

—

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

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES