CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-00764 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 22-00764

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

Case Profile
Decision Date3/1/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Marc E. Curry
Government Counsel: Aubrey M. DeAngelis
Case Summary
favor of the Applicant. However, the failure to disclose his drug involvement in the 2011 application raised significant concerns regarding his reliability and trustworthiness.
The administrative judge ruled that the Applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns related to his drug involvement, specifically under Guideline H. The judge noted the Applicant's long history of marijuana use, including his admission of using it habitually up until shortly before his interview, and his expressed intent to potentially continue using it in the future. The judge found that these factors triggered disqualifying conditions that outweighed any mitigating circumstances. Consequently, the judge denied the Applicant's request for a security clearance, emphasizing the importance of compliance with federal law and the need for trustworthiness in individuals granted access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · 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. 22-00764

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

Summary

A 34-year-old married man and former U.S. Navy member was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The denial stemmed from his admitted history of marijuana use and related issues on his security clearance application.

Specifically, the applicant was alleged to have a history of marijuana use, to have failed to disclose drug involvement on a security clearance application, and to have underreported his marijuana use on another application. Furthermore, he was alleged to intend to continue using marijuana in the future. Disqualifying conditions under AG ¶ 25(a), AG ¶ 25(c), and AG ¶ 25(g) were raised, while mitigating conditions under AG ¶ 26(a) and AG ¶ 17(b) were considered.

The denial was primarily based on the applicant's longstanding and habitual marijuana use, which raised concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness. His expressed intent to continue using marijuana and his nonchalant attitude toward its legality under federal law were critical factors in the decision.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant successfully mitigated concerns related to personal conduct by demonstrating candor in his disclosures about marijuana use.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
AG ¶ 25(g)raisedExpressed Intent to Continue Drug Involvement

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedBehavior Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's use of a prescription painkiller not prescribed to him occurred under extreme circumstances.
AG ¶ 17(b)rejectedAdvice of Legal CounselThe applicant's explanation regarding advice from his recruiter did not fully mitigate the falsification of his security clearance application.

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 2, 2022
Answer filedJun 13, 2022
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateMar 1, 2023

Cite For

Denial Based on Habitual Drug Use Under Guideline H
Mitigation of Personal Conduct Concerns Under Guideline E
Importance of Compliance with Federal Drug Laws 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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant had falsified a security clearance application by failing to disclose drug involvement, but also found that the applicant's underreporting of marijuana use did not generate a security concern. Ultimately, the applicant's eligibility for a security clearance was denied due to unresolved concerns regarding drug involvement and substance misuse.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant falsified a security clearance application by failing to disclose drug involvement.	For 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	—	—
2.b	Applicant failed to disclose drug use on a security clearance application.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.c	Applicant underreported marijuana use on a security clearance application.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to Disclose	Drug Involvement	Denied	—	—	—

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 against the applicant regarding his history of marijuana use, which was characterized as longstanding and habitual. Although the applicant expressed no current intention to use marijuana, the judge concluded that the applicant's past behavior and failure to unequivocally stop using marijuana raised security concerns, leading to a denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has a history of drug involvement, specifically marijuana use.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
1.b	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Unknown	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant intends to continue using marijuana in the future.	For Applicant	Stated Intent to Use Again	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—
1.d–1.f	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified		—	—	—

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.