CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 19-03208 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 19-03208

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

Case Profile
Decision Date5/1/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Marc E. Curry
Government Counsel: Mark D. Lawton
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 28-year-old sheet metal worker who had held a security clearance since 2015. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guideline H (drug involvement), Guideline J (criminal conduct), and Guideline E (personal conduct). The core allegations included the applicant's history of drug and alcohol-related arrests, his past use of marijuana, and falsifications in his security clearance application regarding his drug use.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to the allegations, including his marijuana use from 2011 to 2018, which led to two arrests, and a DUI incident in 2017. He acknowledged that he had underreported his drug use on his security clearance application and expressed regret for his past behavior, attributing it to immaturity. The applicant claimed to have ceased marijuana use since December 2018 and significantly reduced his alcohol consumption. However, he continued to use marijuana for a month after submitting his application, despite stating he would not use it again.
The administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's security clearance, concluding that he failed to mitigate the security concerns. The judge noted that while the applicant had not used marijuana in over four years, his prior use while holding a security clearance and the subsequent falsification of his application raised significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness. The judge found that the seriousness of the applicant's past misconduct outweighed any positive inferences from the passage of time since his last drug use.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · Against Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · 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. 19-03208

deniedMay 1, 2023· Hon. Marc E. Curry· hearing

Summary

A 28-year-old married man with a child was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), H (Drug Involvement), and J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a history of drug and alcohol-related arrests, past marijuana use, and falsifications on his security clearance application.

Specifically, the applicant was arrested and charged with misdemeanor possession of marijuana in June 2014. In 2016, he was again arrested and charged with misdemeanor possession of marijuana after an officer observed an expired inspection sticker and then a mason jar containing marijuana in his vehicle.

The applicant intentionally falsified his 2018 security clearance application by underreporting his marijuana use and denying any use while possessing a security clearance. Despite claiming future abstinence, he continued to use marijuana for a month after completing the application. The administrative judge concluded that the applicant failed to mitigate these security concerns, leading to the denial of his clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had a history of drug and alcohol-related arrests that raised significant security concerns.
He falsified his security clearance application by underreporting his marijuana use and denying use while holding a clearance.
The applicant continued to use marijuana for a month after completing the application, contradicting his claims of future abstinence.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 24raisedDrug Involvement and Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 30raisedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 15raisedPersonal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 21, 2020
Answer filedSep 15, 2021
Hearing heldJan 10, 2023via videoteleconference
Decision dateMay 1, 2023

Cite For

Denial of Clearance Due to Unresolved Drug and Alcohol-related Issues
Impact of Falsifications on Security Clearance Eligibility
Consideration of Personal Conduct in Security Clearance Decisions

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 that the applicant intentionally falsified his security clearance application by underreporting his marijuana use and denying its use while holding a security clearance. The applicant's conduct raised significant security concerns that were not mitigated, leading to a decision against the applicant on Guideline E.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant intentionally falsified a 2018 security clearance application by underreporting his marijuana use and denying ever using it while possessing a security clearance.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
3.b	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

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's past use of marijuana, along with his drug and alcohol-related arrests and falsifications in his security clearance application, raised significant security concerns that he failed to mitigate. The decision was ultimately denied due to the seriousness of the applicant's conduct, including continued marijuana use while holding a security clearance and misrepresentation on his application.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant’s drug and alcohol-related arrests, his past use of marijuana, and his security clearance application falsifications generate security concerns that he failed to mitigate.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse Claimed Abstinence Period Documented
1.b	Specifically, in June 2014, he was arrested and charged with misdemeanor possession of marijuana.	Against Applicant	Drug Distribution or Dealing	Not Applicable	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse	—	—
1.c	In 2016, a police officer pulled over Applicant’s automobile when he noticed that his inspection sticker had expired.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	After noticing a small mason jar filled with marijuana, the officer arrested Applicant and charged him with misdemeanor possession of marijuana.	Against Applicant	Drug Distribution or Dealing	Not Applicable	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline H). 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: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the criminal conduct allegations, citing a history of marijuana and alcohol-related arrests. The applicant's failure to mitigate security concerns related to his drug use and DUI led to the denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant has a history of marijuana and alcohol-related arrests.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
2.b–2.d	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant		—		—	—	—

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.