ISCR Case 06-02573.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 06-02573.h1

deniedDec 29, 2006· Hon. Kathryn Moen Braeman· hearing

Summary

A 55-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), G (Alcohol Consumption), and J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant had a history of alcohol abuse and related criminal conduct, including a March 1998 arrest for Operating a Motor Vehicle While Intoxicated, resulting in a guilty plea to a reduced charge and a $500 fine. He attended twelve weeks of alcohol treatment that year. In January 2001, he was arrested and convicted of Driving While Intoxicated, fined $750, and had his license revoked. Following this, he was diagnosed with Alcohol Dependence and completed an alcohol abuse treatment program.

Further evaluations in 2003 and 2006 diagnosed him with Alcohol Abuse, with a guarded prognosis in 2006. The applicant also failed to fully disclose the extent of his alcohol issues and treatment on his 2004 security form. While he stated he had not been intoxicated in the five years prior to July 2006 and decided to abstain from alcohol following a recent serious medical diagnosis, the adjudicator found insufficient evidence of rehabilitation.

The denial was based on the applicant's diagnosis of alcohol abuse without establishing twelve months of abstinence, his failure to fully disclose relevant information, and a guarded prognosis, which collectively prevented him from meeting the mitigating conditions for the raised concerns.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has a diagnosis of alcohol abuse and has not established twelve months of abstinence.
He failed to disclose the full extent of his alcohol issues and treatment on his security form.
The applicant's prognosis was deemed guarded, and he did not meet the mitigating conditions for alcohol-related issues.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

G.2.araisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work
E.2.araisedConduct Involving Questionable Judgment, Untrustworthiness, Unreliability
J.2.araisedA History or Pattern of Criminal Activity

Mitigating

G.3.5rejectedPositive Changes in Behavior Supportive of SobrietyThe applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate positive changes in behavior.
E.3.1rejectedThe Information Was Unsubstantiated or Not PertinentThe applicant's omissions were deliberate and not isolated.
J.1appliedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not RecentThe applicant had no recent incidents in the past five years.

Key Rule Quoted

“The responsibility for producing evidence initially falls on the Government to demonstrate that it is not clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue Applicant's access to classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 19, 2006
Answer filedJul 5, 2006
Hearing held—Applicant requested a decision without a hearing.
Decision dateDec 29, 2006

Cite For

Failure to Disclose Alcohol Treatment on Security Forms Under Guideline E
Guarded Prognosis for Alcohol Abuse Under Guideline G
Pattern of Criminal Conduct and Its Implications 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
2.a	Applicant failed to disclose the full extent of his alcohol issues and treatment on his 2004 security form.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant disclosed substantial adverse information in his SF-86 about a more serious 2001 DUI incident where he was convicted and his license revoked.	For Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant failed to disclose the full extent of his alcohol issues and treatment on his 2004 security form.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

2.b

Applicant disclosed substantial adverse information in his SF-86 about a more serious 2001 DUI incident where he was convicted and his license revoked.

For Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	The applicant was arrested in March 1998, charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle While Intoxicated, pled guilty to a reduced charge of Operating a Motor Vehicle While Impaired (DWAI), and was fined $500.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	The applicant attended alcohol treatment in 1998 for twelve weeks where he watched videos and was told to "watch his drinking."	Against Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	The applicant was arrested in January 2001 and charged with Driving While Intoxicated (DWI), was convicted and was given a $750 fine; his license was revoked.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	The applicant was evaluated in May 2001 prior to his court date and was diagnosed with 303.9 Alcohol Dependence and recommended to seek treatment.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	The applicant attended alcohol abuse treatment in 2001 and was diagnosed with 303.90 Alcohol Dependence; he completed the program.	Against Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	The applicant was evaluated in March 2003 to obtain his driver's license, diagnosed with 305.00 Alcohol Abuse, recommended to abstain from alcohol, seek treatment, and attend AA.	Against Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	The applicant was evaluated in March 2006 for DOHA, diagnosed with 305.00 Alcohol Abuse, and his prognosis was guarded.	Against Applicant	Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed	Admitted	—	—	—
1.h	The applicant stated to OPM that he drank on a daily basis for 30 years until April 2001. In July 2006 he stated he had not been intoxicated from alcohol in the past five years.	Against Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

The applicant was arrested in March 1998, charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle While Intoxicated, pled guilty to a reduced charge of Operating a Motor Vehicle While Impaired (DWAI), and was fined $500.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

1.b

The applicant attended alcohol treatment in 1998 for twelve weeks where he watched videos and was told to "watch his drinking."

Against Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Admitted

—

1.c

The applicant was arrested in January 2001 and charged with Driving While Intoxicated (DWI), was convicted and was given a $750 fine; his license was revoked.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

1.d

The applicant was evaluated in May 2001 prior to his court date and was diagnosed with 303.9 Alcohol Dependence and recommended to seek treatment.

Against Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

—

1.e

The applicant attended alcohol abuse treatment in 2001 and was diagnosed with 303.90 Alcohol Dependence; he completed the program.

Against Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance

Admitted

—

1.f

The applicant was evaluated in March 2003 to obtain his driver's license, diagnosed with 305.00 Alcohol Abuse, recommended to abstain from alcohol, seek treatment, and attend AA.

Against Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Admitted

—

1.g

The applicant was evaluated in March 2006 for DOHA, diagnosed with 305.00 Alcohol Abuse, and his prognosis was guarded.

Against Applicant

Alcohol Use Disorder Diagnosed

Admitted

—

1.h

The applicant stated to OPM that he drank on a daily basis for 30 years until April 2001. In July 2006 he stated he had not been intoxicated from alcohol in the past five years.

Against Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a–3.b	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (1 against, 1 for the applicant).	Mixed		Conduct No Charge		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

3.a–3.b

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

Mixed

Conduct No Charge

—

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