ISCR Case 96-0886.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 96-0886.h1

grantedJun 20, 1997· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A 41-year-old defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The Statement of Reasons detailed his alcohol consumption from approximately 1975 until October 1996, including two alcohol-related arrests. The first arrest in February 1995 led to a no-contest plea for Aggravated Driving Under the Influence. A second arrest in February 1996 resulted in a guilty plea to Reckless Driving, though he had consumed alcohol prior to that incident. Additionally, he was arrested in February 1995 for Possession of Marijuana.

Disqualifying conditions were raised under G.1, H.1, and H.2. However, the judge applied mitigating conditions G.3, H.1, and H.2. The decision to grant the clearance was based on several factors. The applicant ceased alcohol consumption in October 1996 and began attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, demonstrating positive behavioral changes supportive of sobriety.

Furthermore, the marijuana possession incident was deemed isolated and had occurred more than two years prior to the decision. The judge concluded that the applicant's past conduct was no longer of present security significance, leading to the granting of the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant ceased alcohol consumption in October 1996 and began attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings.
The applicant's marijuana possession incident was isolated and occurred over two years prior to the decision.
The applicant demonstrated positive changes in behavior supportive of sobriety.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

G.1raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work, Such as Driving While Under the Influence
H.1raisedAny Drug Abuse (drug Abuse Is the Illegal Use of a Drug or Use of a Legal Drug in a Manner That Deviates From Approved Medical Direction)
H.2raisedIllegal Drug Possession

Mitigating

G.3appliedPositive Changes in Behavior Supportive of Sobriety
H.1appliedThe Drug Involvement Was Not Recent
H.2appliedThe Drug Involvement Was an Isolated or Infrequent Event

Key Rule Quoted

“[e]ach clearance decision must be a fair and impartial common sense determination based upon consideration of all the relevant and material information and the pertinent criteria and adjudication policy in enclosure 2, including as appropriate: a. Nature and seriousness of the conduct and surrounding circumstances.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 10, 1996
Answer filedDec 30, 1996
Hearing held—Determined on a written record in lieu of a hearing.
Decision dateJun 20, 1997

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions for Alcohol Consumption Under Guideline G
Mitigating Conditions for Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Importance of Demonstrating Positive Behavioral Changes for Security Clearance Approval

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant consumed alcohol, at times to excess and to the point of intoxication, from about 1975 until he last consumed alcohol in October of 1996.	For Applicant	Binge or Intoxication Pattern	Admitted	—	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—
1.b	His first alcohol related arrest occurred in February of 1995. He subsequently pled no contest to Aggravated Driving Under the Influence.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—
1.c	The Applicant's second alcohol related arrest occurred in February of 1996. In June, he pled guilty to a charge of Reckless Driving, but had consumed alcohol prior to his arrest.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	—
1.d	Since executing his sworn statement in October of 1996, the Applicant has ceased the consumption of alcohol and has begun to attend Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings.	For Applicant	Continued Use After Treatment	Admitted	—	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse	Documented Substance Treatment Ongoing
2.a–2.c	3 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 consumed alcohol, at times to excess and to the point of intoxication, from about 1975 until he last consumed alcohol in October of 1996.

For Applicant

Binge or Intoxication Pattern

Admitted

—

(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse

—

1.b

His first alcohol related arrest occurred in February of 1995. He subsequently pled no contest to Aggravated Driving Under the Influence.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse

—

1.c

The Applicant's second alcohol related arrest occurred in February of 1996. In June, he pled guilty to a charge of Reckless Driving, but had consumed alcohol prior to his arrest.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

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

(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse

—

1.d

Since executing his sworn statement in October of 1996, the Applicant has ceased the consumption of alcohol and has begun to attend Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings.

For Applicant

Continued Use After Treatment

Admitted

—

(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse

Documented

Substance Treatment Ongoing

2.a–2.c

3 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
2.a	The Applicant was arrested in February of 1995, in part, for Possession of Marijuana.	For Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Denied	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur	—
2.b–2.c	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

2.a

The Applicant was arrested in February of 1995, in part, for Possession of Marijuana.

For Applicant

MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED

Not Applicable

Denied

—

(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur

—

2.b–2.c

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

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

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