CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-02463 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 22-02463

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

Case Profile
Decision Date12/5/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Robert E. Coacher
Government Counsel: Jeff A. Nagel
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 34-year-old systems manager for a federal contractor, who sought a security clearance but faced allegations under Guideline H (drug involvement and substance misuse) and Guideline F (financial considerations). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) outlined concerns regarding the applicant's long history of marijuana use, including admissions of illegal possession and a positive drug test in 2009, as well as failures to timely file federal and state income tax returns for multiple years.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to the allegations under Guideline H, acknowledging his marijuana use from 2006 until February 2022, and partially admitted to the financial allegations, claiming he was unaware of some late filings. He testified that he had filed his tax returns but did not provide sufficient documentation to support his claims. The administrative judge found that the applicant's recent marijuana use, coupled with his lack of a definitive commitment to abstain from future use, raised significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness. Additionally, the judge noted that the applicant's financial issues were not adequately mitigated by his explanations.
Ultimately, the administrative judge ruled against the applicant, denying his eligibility for a security clearance. The decision emphasized that the applicant's ongoing substance misuse and unresolved financial issues posed a risk to national security, and the evidence presented did not sufficiently mitigate these concerns.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · 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. 22-02463

deniedDec 5, 2023· Hon. Robert E. Coacher· hearing

Summary

A 34-year-old systems manager was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The applicant admitted to using and purchasing marijuana from June 2006 to about December 2022, with further admitted use in August 2023. This history included testing positive for illegal drugs in 2009, which prevented Air Force enlistment, and police citations for illegal possession of drug paraphernalia around 2010 and marijuana in June 2018. The June 2018 citation also led to his resignation as a police dispatcher in lieu of termination.

Regarding financial considerations, the applicant failed to timely file federal income tax returns for 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2021, and state income tax returns for 2021. These issues raised questions about his financial responsibility.

The judge found insufficient evidence of rehabilitation or intent to cease drug use, leading to doubts about the applicant's reliability and trustworthiness. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using and purchasing marijuana from 2006 to 2022, including recent use in August 2023.
The applicant failed to timely file federal income tax returns for 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2021, raising concerns about financial responsibility.
The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or intent to cease drug use.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(b)raisedTesting Positive for an Illegal Drug
AG ¶ 19(f)raisedFailure to File or Fraudulently Filing Tax Returns

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)rejectedBehavior Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's recent marijuana use and ambivalence about future use do not support mitigation.
AG ¶ 20(g)rejectedArrangements with Tax AuthorityThe applicant failed to provide sufficient documentation to corroborate claims of timely tax filings.

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 28, 2022
Answer filedJan 23, 2023
Hearing heldSep 14, 2023
Decision dateDec 5, 2023

Cite For

Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation Under Guideline H
Recent Drug Use Impacting Security Clearance Eligibility
Failure to Timely File Tax Returns as a Disqualifying Condition Under Guideline F

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 F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on financial considerations under Guideline F, specifically regarding the failure to timely file federal and state income tax returns. The applicant's claims of unawareness and extensions were not sufficient to mitigate the concerns raised by the delinquent filings.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
2.a	failed to timely file his federal income tax returns for tax years 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2021	Against Applicant	Tax Filing Failure	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Other
2.b	failed to timely file his state income tax returns for tax year 2021	Against Applicant	Tax Filing Failure	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Other

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

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on all allegations related to drug involvement, specifically regarding his long-term use and purchase of marijuana, as well as his positive drug test and citations for drug paraphernalia and marijuana possession. The applicant's history of marijuana use raised concerns about his reliability and judgment, leading to a denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	used and purchased marijuana, at various times, from June 2006 to about December 2022	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
1.b	tested positive for illegal drugs in 2009, preventing him from enlisting in the U.S. Air Force	Against Applicant	Drug Test Failure	Not Applicable	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
1.c	was cited by police for illegal possession of drug paraphernalia in about 2010	Against Applicant	Drug Possession with Intent	Not Applicable	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
1.d	was cited by police for illegal possession of marijuana in June 2018	Against Applicant	Drug Possession with Intent	Not Applicable	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
1.e	resigned from his position as a police dispatcher in lieu of termination, because of his June 2018 citation for illegal possession of marijuana	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
1.f	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Unknown	—	—	—

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.