CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 21-01361 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 21-01361

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

Case Profile
Decision Date5/6/2022
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Elizabeth M. Matchinski
Government Counsel: Mary Margaret Foreman
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 41-year-old electrical engineer who sought a security clearance after previously holding one while employed by the U.S. government from May 2006 to July 2011. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guideline H regarding the applicant's drug involvement and substance misuse, specifically his past marijuana use from October 2003 to May 2020, including after his government employment.
The applicant admitted to using marijuana recreationally during college and acknowledged that he resumed its use after resigning from his government job. He claimed to have abstained from marijuana while employed by the government and stated that his post-employment use was sporadic. Despite his assertions of no future intent to use marijuana, the administrative judge found that the evidence presented did not sufficiently mitigate the concerns regarding his reliability and judgment.
The administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's security clearance, concluding that the applicant's past marijuana use, particularly after his government employment, raised significant doubts about his ability to adhere to the standards required for security clearance eligibility. The judge noted that the applicant's evidence of intent to abstain from future use was insufficient to alleviate the security concerns outlined in the SOR.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · For 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. 21-01361

deniedMay 6, 2022· Hon. Elizabeth M. Matchinski· hearing

Summary

A 41-year-old electrical engineer was denied a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) due to past marijuana use. The applicant used marijuana with varying frequency from October 2003 to May 2020, including after receiving a Department of Defense security clearance in July 2006. However, the applicant did abstain from marijuana use during a five-year period of U.S. government employment.

The administrative judge identified disqualifying conditions related to the applicant's drug involvement, specifically citing concerns about reliability and trustworthiness. While a mitigating condition for past drug use was considered, it was not sufficient to overcome the judge's concerns.

The denial was based on the applicant's resumption of marijuana use after leaving government employment, which raised doubts about his reliability. Furthermore, insufficient evidence was presented to demonstrate a current intention to abstain from marijuana use. Ultimately, the judge concluded that granting the clearance was not consistent with national security interests.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant resumed marijuana use after leaving government employment, raising concerns about reliability.
Insufficient evidence was provided to demonstrate a current intention to abstain from marijuana use.
The applicant's past use and lack of evidence of current abstinence led to doubts about his trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)notedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(b)rejectedAcknowledgment of Drug Involvement and Actions Taken to Overcome the ProblemThe applicant's disassociation from drug-using friends was insufficient to mitigate concerns due to his past use.

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 1, 2021
Answer filedOct 15, 2021Requested decision on the written record.
Hearing held—Decision made on the written record.
Decision dateMay 6, 2022

Cite For

Insufficient Evidence of Current Abstinence Under Guideline H
Reliability Concerns Due to Past Drug Use
Disassociation From Drug-using Associates as a Mitigating Factor Under AG ¶ 26(b)

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 H (Drug Involvement) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant used marijuana with varying frequency from approximately October 2003 to May 2020, including after being granted a DOD security clearance in July 2006. The applicant's marijuana use was deemed potentially disqualifying, leading to a decision against the applicant on this allegation, while the allegation regarding not using marijuana while working for the U.S. government was found for the applicant.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant used marijuana with varying frequency from approximately October 2003 to about May 2020, including after he was granted a DOD security clearance in July 2006.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Frequent	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse	—	—
1.b	Applicant did not use marijuana while working for the U.S. government.	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Denied	—	—	—

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.