CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-02220 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 22-02220

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

Case Profile
Decision Date9/15/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Robert E. Coacher
Government Counsel: Tara R. Karoian
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 38-year-old individual employed by a federal contractor since March 2020, with prior service in the U.S. Army from 2008 to 2012. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guidelines J (criminal conduct), E (personal conduct), and F (financial considerations). The core allegations included multiple arrests for marijuana possession, a felony conviction for drug possession, and failure to file federal and state income tax returns from 2013 to 2019, along with outstanding debts.
The applicant admitted to most allegations, including his history of marijuana use and possession, as well as his failure to file tax returns. He denied providing false information on his security clearance applications, claiming misunderstanding of the questions. The applicant asserted that he ceased drug use after his 2017 felony arrest and intended to resolve his financial issues, but he did not provide evidence of any actions taken to address his debts or tax filings.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he failed to mitigate the government's security concerns. The judge noted the pattern of criminal conduct, the applicant's ongoing probation status, and the lack of evidence demonstrating rehabilitation or resolution of financial issues. The decision emphasized that the applicant's history raised doubts about his judgment and trustworthiness, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · 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. 22-02220

deniedSep 15, 2023· Hon. Robert E. Coacher· hearing

Summary

A 38-year-old federal contractor and U.S. Army veteran was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines J (Criminal Conduct), E (Personal Conduct), and F (Financial Considerations). The denial stemmed from a history of drug-related offenses, including multiple charges for marijuana possession between 2004 and 2017, and a felony charge for possession of dangerous drugs in April 2017. The applicant admitted to using marijuana from 2003 to 2017 and selling illegal drugs in 2017.

Further issues included providing false information on two separate security clearance applications in July 2008 and February 2021 regarding illegal drug use. Financially, the applicant failed to timely file federal and state income tax returns from 2013 to 2019 and was indebted on six delinquent accounts totaling approximately $11,976.

The judge determined that the applicant's admitted drug involvement, including felony possession, and his failure to meet tax obligations demonstrated poor judgment and a lack of compliance. The applicant did not present evidence of rehabilitation or efforts to resolve his financial issues, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to multiple drug-related offenses, including felony possession of dangerous drugs.
The applicant failed to file federal and state income tax returns for several years, indicating poor judgment and lack of compliance with financial obligations.
The applicant did not provide evidence of rehabilitation or efforts to resolve his financial issues.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 30raisedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 15raisedPersonal Conduct
AG ¶ 18raisedFinancial Considerations

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”
— AG ¶ 2(b)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 9, 2022
Answer filedJan 5, 2023
Hearing held—Decided on the written record.
Decision dateSep 15, 2023

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Failure to Comply with Financial Obligations Under Guideline F
Lack of Candor in Personal Conduct Under Guideline E

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 several personal conduct allegations related to drug use and falsification of security clearance applications. The applicant admitted to using marijuana and selling illegal drugs, which raised concerns about his judgment and compliance with rules and regulations. Ultimately, the applicant was denied eligibility for a security clearance due to these issues.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant used marijuana on various occasions between 2003 and 2017.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant provided false information on his July 2008 security clearance application regarding illegal drug use.	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	Applicant sold illegal drugs in 2017.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	—	—
2.d	Applicant provided false information on his February 2021 security clearance application regarding illegal drug use.	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE	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 F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant failed to timely file his federal and state income tax returns for the years 2013-2019 and was indebted on six delinquent accounts totaling approximately $11,976. As a result, the judge ruled against the applicant on all allegations under Guideline F, concluding that the financial issues raised were not mitigated.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant failed to timely file his 2013-2019 federal income tax returns as required.	Against Applicant	Tax Filing Failure	Admitted	—	—	—
3.b	Applicant failed to file his 2013-2019 state income tax returns as required.	Against Applicant	Tax Filing Failure	Admitted	—	—	—
3.c	Applicant was indebted on six delinquent accounts totaling approximately $11,976. $11,976	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
3.d–3.h	5 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 F). 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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on all allegations under Guideline J, which included multiple charges of marijuana possession from 2004 to 2017, culminating in a felony charge. The applicant admitted to the allegations but did not provide sufficient mitigation to overcome the concerns raised by his criminal conduct. As a result, the application for a security clearance was denied.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was charged with marijuana possession in March 2004.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant was charged with marijuana possession in November 2012.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Charged Not Convicted	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant was charged with marijuana and Xanax possession in October 2013.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	In April 2017, he was charged with felony possession of dangerous drugs, including marijuana.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—

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.