CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 20-01569 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 20-01569

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

Case Profile
Decision Date12/14/2021
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Robert Robinson Gales
Government Counsel: Kelly M. Folks
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 42-year-old employee of a defense contractor, serving as a principal financial program analyst since August 2014. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The SOR detailed the applicant's history of recreational marijuana use, which continued even after she had been granted an interim security clearance in September 2017.
The applicant admitted to the allegations regarding her drug involvement and personal conduct, acknowledging her use of marijuana from approximately January 2000 until at least April 2020. She initially claimed to have stopped using marijuana in June 2017 but later admitted to resuming use shortly after submitting her security clearance application. Despite her claims of no future intention to use marijuana, her responses indicated uncertainty about her future drug use. The applicant had not sought drug-related counseling or treatment, although she consulted healthcare professionals for other issues.
The administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's eligibility for a security clearance, concluding that she failed to mitigate the security concerns related to her drug involvement and personal conduct. The judge emphasized the importance of trust and confidence in individuals granted access to classified information and noted the applicant's lack of candor in her disclosures, which undermined her credibility. The decision highlighted that the applicant's continued substance use and ambivalence about future use posed a potential risk to national security.
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. 20-01569

deniedDec 14, 2021· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 42-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The denial stemmed from allegations that she was a recreational marijuana user, purchased the substance, and used it while holding an interim security clearance, which granted her access to classified information.

Further concerns arose from her alleged lack of candor on her SF 86 form and during her OPM interview. Although the applicant claimed to have ceased marijuana use in April 2020, the judge found her commitment to abstain and her efforts toward rehabilitation to be insufficient.

The denial was based on her admitted marijuana use while holding an interim clearance, her failure to demonstrate adequate rehabilitation, and inconsistent statements about future drug use, which raised doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using marijuana while holding an interim security clearance.
She failed to demonstrate sufficient rehabilitation or commitment to abstain from drug use.
Her inconsistent statements regarding future marijuana use raised doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)appliedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)appliedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
AG ¶ 25(f)appliedIllegal Drug Use While Granted Access to Classified Information
AG ¶ 25(g)appliedIntent to Continue Drug Involvement
AG ¶ 16(e)appliedPersonal Conduct Creating Vulnerability

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is denied.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 20, 2020
Answer filedJan 8, 2021Applicant elected to have her case decided on the written record.
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateDec 14, 2021

Cite For

Denial of Clearance Due to Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Lack of Rehabilitation Efforts in Drug-related Cases
Impact of Personal Conduct on Security Clearance Eligibility

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the personal conduct allegation of lack of candor in her SF 86 and during her OPM interview. The applicant admitted to the allegations but failed to mitigate the concerns regarding her honesty and reliability.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant lacked candor in her SF 86 and during her OPM interview.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Admitted	—	—	—

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant was a recreational substance abuser whose substance of choice was marijuana, which she used while holding an interim security clearance. The applicant admitted to purchasing marijuana and using it frequently over a 20-year period, with some use occurring while cleared. The judge concluded that the applicant's conduct raised significant security concerns, leading to a denial of her security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was a recreational substance abuser whose substance of choice was tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), known as marijuana - a Schedule I Controlled Substance.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant acknowledged that during the times of her admitted usage, she purchased the marijuana.	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant used marijuana while possessing an interim security clearance which granted her access to classified and sensitive information.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—

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.