Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-01216 · CASE

ISCR Case 23-01216granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 23-01216

grantedAug 20, 2024· Hon. Robert Tuider· hearing

Synopsis

The applicant, a 52-year-old egress systems technician, sought a permanent security clearance after previously being granted an interim clearance. The concerns involved criminal conduct and alcohol consumption, stemming from multiple DUI arrests and a bench warrant. The applicant demonstrated significant rehabilitation efforts, including completing a DUI Traffic School and maintaining sobriety since his last arrest in October 2021, leading to the granting of his clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant has maintained sobriety since October 2021 and has not consumed alcohol since his last DUI arrest.
He completed a nine-month DUI Traffic School, which provided him with coping mechanisms and support.
The applicant resolved all legal issues related to his past arrests and demonstrated a commitment to positive change.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 31(a)raisedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 31(b)raisedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 31(c)raisedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol Consumption

Mitigating

AG ¶ 23(a)appliedAlcohol Consumption
AG ¶ 23(b)appliedAlcohol Consumption
AG ¶ 23(d)appliedAlcohol Consumption
AG ¶ 32(a)appliedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedCriminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 9, 2023
Answer filedJun 13, 2023
Hearing heldNov 15, 2023
Decision dateAug 20, 2024

Cite For

Mitigation of Alcohol Consumption Concerns Under Guideline G
Successful Rehabilitation in Criminal Conduct Cases
Impact of Time Elapsed on Criminal Conduct Concerns

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: grantedTREATMENT COMPLETED · FAVORABLE

The applicant had a history of alcohol-related incidents, including multiple DUIs. However, he has demonstrated significant rehabilitation efforts, including completing a nine-month DUI Traffic School and maintaining sobriety since his last DUI arrest in October 2021. The judge found that the applicant mitigated the alcohol consumption concerns, resulting in a favorable decision for the applicant.

2.a alcohol-related incidents away from work, such as driving while under the influence, fighting, child or spouse abuse, disturbing the peace, or other incidents of concern, regardless of the frequency of the individual's alcohol use or whether the individual has been diagnosed with alcohol use disorder.
Finding: For Applicant
Incident: DUI or DWI Alcohol
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶22):
(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)
Mitigating applied (¶23):
(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur
(b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence
(d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use
Mitigation: —

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	alcohol-related incidents away from work, such as driving while under the influence, fighting, child or spouse abuse, disturbing the peace, or other incidents of concern, regardless of the frequency of the individual's alcohol use or whether the individual has been diagnosed with alcohol use disorder.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(a) alcohol-related incident away from work (DUI, fighting, etc.)	(a) so much time has passed / so infrequent that it is unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges the pattern and has established modified use or abstinence (d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline G). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant mitigated security concerns regarding criminal conduct under Guideline J. The applicant's history of DUI arrests and other related incidents were acknowledged, but the judge determined that the applicant had taken significant steps towards rehabilitation and demonstrated a commitment to sobriety, leading to a favorable decision.

1.a In October 2021, Applicant was arrested and charged with driving under the influence (DUI) in State A. He pled nolo contendere and was sentenced to 20 days in jail (16 suspended), three years of probation, and to pay $1,873 in fines.
Finding: For Applicant
Offense: DUI or DWI Criminal
Criminal disposition: Convicted
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶31):
(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability
(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction
(c) currently on parole or probation
Mitigating applied (¶32):
(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur
(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)
Mitigation: —
1.b In May 2019, Applicant was arrested in State B for a bench warrant issued in 2003 for failure to resolve a traffic ticket for driving with a suspended license.
Finding: For Applicant
Offense: Traffic Offense Pattern
Criminal disposition: Charged Not Convicted
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶31):
(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability
(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction
(c) currently on parole or probation
Mitigating applied (¶32):
(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur
(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)
Mitigation: —
1.c In January 2000, Applicant was arrested and charged with operating a vehicle while intoxicated in State C. He pled guilty (sentence information not available).
Finding: For Applicant
Offense: DUI or DWI Criminal
Criminal disposition: Convicted
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶31):
(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability
(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction
(c) currently on parole or probation
Mitigating applied (¶32):
(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur
(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)
Mitigation: —
1.d In September 1997, Applicant was arrested and charged with operating a vehicle while intoxicated in State C. He pled guilty (sentence information not available).
Finding: For Applicant
Offense: DUI or DWI Criminal
Criminal disposition: Convicted
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶31):
(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability
(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction
(c) currently on parole or probation
Mitigating applied (¶32):
(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur
(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)
Mitigation: —

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	In October 2021, Applicant was arrested and charged with driving under the influence (DUI) in State A. He pled nolo contendere and was sentenced to 20 days in jail (16 suspended), three years of probation, and to pay $1,873 in fines.	For 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 (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
1.b	In May 2019, Applicant was arrested in State B for a bench warrant issued in 2003 for failure to resolve a traffic ticket for driving with a suspended license.	For Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Charged Not Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
1.c	In January 2000, Applicant was arrested and charged with operating a vehicle while intoxicated in State C. He pled guilty (sentence information not available).	For 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 (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
1.d	In September 1997, Applicant was arrested and charged with operating a vehicle while intoxicated in State C. He pled guilty (sentence information not available).	For 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 (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline J). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text, footnotes and signatures included, is in the original PDF.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

For Applicant Paragraph 2, Guideline G: FOR APPLICANT Subparagraph 2.a: For Applicant Conclusion In light of the record as a whole, it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue Applicant's national security eligibility for a security clearance. Eligibility for access to classified information is granted. Robert Tuider Administrative Judge 9