I’ve written often about the wisdom of retaining experienced legal counsel for help in the security clearance process. Nothing underscores this point quite like a Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) case from late last year.
In ISCR Case No. 21-00606, a 37-year-old defense contractor challenged pro se (without counsel) the denial of a security clearance under Guideline “G” (alcohol use). The government alleged, and the applicant admitted, a significant history of alcohol abuse beginning at age 14. His criminal record included a minor-in-possession charge, three (3) DUI arrests, a disorderly intoxication charge, and a hospitalization for alcohol overdose.
That’s a lot of bad decisions, but the most recent was nearly two years prior to the applicant’s DOHA hearing date. The security clearance process is designed to make predictive determinations of an applicant’s reliability, trustworthiness, and judgement, not punish past transgressions. Accordingly, even an extensive alcohol history like this applicant’s might have been mitigable with the passage of time and some proactive effort. Ideally, that means:
- An intensive recovery program, including inpatient treatment followed by an accountability program like Alcoholics Anonymous;
- Permanent and complete abstinence from alcohol;
- Periodic PeTH testing to validate abstinence;
- Demonstrated sincere lifestyle changes like exercise and healthy eating habits;
- A favorable diagnosis from a medical practitioner and the support of a sponsor;
- References from people familiar with the applicant socially who know of the alcohol history and can credibly attest to the claimed lifestyle changes.
The Importance of Mitigating Alcohol-Related Issues
None of these steps, standing alone, would likely have been enough to overcome such a significant alcohol history; but taken together, they may have offered enough mitigation to satisfy a DOHA judge that the applicant had changed his ways.
Instead, this applicant decided to do what so many applicants do: deny he had a problem and double-down on the claim that he can be trusted to drink responsibly despite his history. To prove the point, he brought in his ‘regular bartender’ to testify that she’s never had to stop serving him alcohol and that he “exhibits caution” while drinking.
The Problem with Denial
In the mind of someone in denial, this might make sense. But the first step to recovery is acknowledging the problem. This applicant, like a lot of security clearance applicants, couldn’t do that. It was precisely his refusal to acknowledge the obvious that proved the government’s point and sunk his chances.
If I had to guess, a big part of the reason why this applicant continued to deny a need for help was that the people in his life were validating his righteous indignation instead of telling him the hard truth. Five alcohol-related arrests and a hospitalization aren’t all one-offs. They’re signs of alcoholism – a disease that doesn’t just magically disappear.
The Consequences of Avoiding Help
The DOHA judge, who denied the applicant’s security clearance, clearly knew it, as would an experienced security clearance attorney. I didn’t relish conversations like this, but I had plenty of them over the years I was in law practice, and they usually went something like this:
“You can move forward with this clearance application, but you’ll almost certainly be denied, thereby making it all the more difficult on yourself to reapply once you do finally get your act together. Or, you can pull the plug now, go do the things I’m telling you to do, and come back to me in a year or two. You might just save your life and your relationships in the process.”
The Rewards of Taking Proactive Steps
This was undoubtedly a bitter pill to swallow, but the smartest people who called my office were the ones who sought out advice before applying for the clearance (or having it revoked) and actively followed it. The occasional phone call I received from someone who listened and sought me out a year or two after attaining sobriety was one of the most rewarding aspects of my practice. I still think about those folks and feel pride over the small part I played in salvaging careers, relationships, and maybe even a life.
The Value of Genuine Mitigation
A lawyer can help fight a security clearance denial – and a good one might have improved this applicant’s chances somewhat – but mitigation takes time and looks much more sincere if done for the applicant’s health and wellness instead of for a security clearance. Trust someone who has seen plenty of both scenarios: the difference isn’t usually hard to spot.
This article is intended as general information only and should not be construed as legal advice. Although the information is believed to be accurate as of the publication date, no guarantee or warranty is offered or implied. Laws and government policies are subject to change, and the information provided herein may not provide a complete or current analysis of the topic or other pertinent considerations. Consult an attorney regarding your specific situation.
