CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 19-00903 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 19-00903

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date12/12/2019
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Noreen A. Lynch
Government Counsel: Jeff Kent
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 38-year-old asbestos worker who sought a security clearance but faced allegations under Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Abuse) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) indicated that the applicant had used marijuana from May 2001 to at least August 2018 and had tested positive for marijuana in two employer-administered drug tests in 2017 and 2018. Additionally, the applicant was accused of falsifying his security clearance application by answering "No" to a question regarding illegal drug use in the past year.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to the marijuana use and the positive drug tests but denied the allegation of drug use in the last year while admitting to the falsification of his application. He explained that he believed he had misunderstood the question due to difficulties with reading and writing. The applicant claimed to have ceased marijuana use and attempted to modify his behavior by avoiding social situations where drug use might occur. However, he continued to associate with friends who used marijuana.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he had not sufficiently mitigated the security concerns related to drug involvement and personal conduct. The judge found the applicant's explanations for his drug use and the falsification of his application to be implausible, leading to doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness. Consequently, the applicant's request for a security clearance was denied.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · Against Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 19-00903

deniedDec 12, 2019· Hon. Noreen A. Lynch· hearing

Summary

A 38-year-old asbestos worker was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The applicant admitted to using marijuana from approximately May 2001 to at least August 2018, and tested positive for the substance in June 2017 and August 2018 during employer-mandated urinalysis tests.

A significant factor in the denial was the applicant's intentional falsification of his February 26, 2018 security clearance application. He answered "No" to a question regarding illegal drug use in the preceding year, despite his admitted and verified drug use during that period. This lack of candor raised serious concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.

The judge also noted the applicant's ongoing association with friends who use drugs, which further contributed to the security concerns. Ultimately, the combination of extensive drug involvement, two failed drug tests, and the deliberate falsification of a security clearance application led to the denial of his clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using marijuana from 2001 to 2018 and failed two drug tests.
The applicant intentionally falsified his security clearance application by denying drug use.
The applicant's ongoing association with drug-using friends raised concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(b)raisedTesting Positive for an Illegal Drug
AG ¶ 16(a)appliedDeliberate Omission or Falsification
AG ¶ 16(c)appliedCredible Adverse Information

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 10, 2019
Answer filed—
Hearing heldNov 21, 2019
Decision dateDec 12, 2019

Cite For

Denial Based on Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Denial Based on Personal Conduct and Falsification Under Guideline E
Importance of Candor in Security Clearance Applications

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 E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on personal conduct concerns related to drug use and falsification of a security clearance application. The applicant admitted to using marijuana frequently over several years and intentionally falsified his SCA by denying illegal drug use. The judge concluded that the applicant did not mitigate the concerns raised by this conduct, resulting in a denied clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	The drug use raised security concerns under Guideline E.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.b	Applicant falsified his February 26, 2018 SCA when he answered 'No' to Section 14: Illegal Drugs in the last year.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	Claimed Explanation of Omission Credible

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline H (Drug Involvement) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant used marijuana with varying frequency from May 2001 to at least August 2018 and tested positive for marijuana on two occasions in 2017 and 2018. The judge concluded that the applicant's drug involvement and substance misuse were not mitigated, leading to a denial of the security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant used marijuana, with varying frequency, from about May 2001 to at least August 2018.	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Frequent	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug	—	—
1.b	Applicant tested positive for marijuana on an employer’s urinalysis test in June 2017 and August 2018.	Against Applicant	Drug Test Failure	Not Applicable	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug	—	—

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

Full decision

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