CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-02585 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 22-02585

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

Case Profile
Decision Date6/28/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Mark W. Harvey
Government Counsel: Rhett E. Petcher
Applicant's Counsel: Joseph Goff, Jr.
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 24-year-old graduate student pursuing a master's degree in electrical engineering, who also worked as a testing and design engineer for a defense contractor. The Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guidelines H (drug involvement and substance misuse) and E (personal conduct). The core allegations included the applicant's past marijuana use from 2017 to 2021 and his intentions regarding future use.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to using marijuana occasionally during the specified period but denied the extent of use alleged in the SOR. He claimed to have used marijuana approximately 10 times, while an Office of Personnel Management (OPM) interview suggested a higher frequency of 36 to 40 times. The applicant provided mitigating information, stating he ceased marijuana use due to health concerns and the need to pass drug tests for employment. He also submitted a signed statement of intent to abstain from drug use in the future.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that the security concerns were not mitigated. The judge noted the applicant's admissions regarding past use and his equivocal statements about future intentions, which raised doubts about his reliability and judgment. The judge emphasized the importance of trust and confidence in individuals with access to classified information, ultimately determining that granting the applicant a security clearance was not clearly consistent with national security interests.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · 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. 22-02585

deniedJun 28, 2023· Hon. Mark W. Harvey· hearing

Summary

A 24-year-old graduate student and defense contractor was denied a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The denial stemmed from his admitted marijuana use and subsequent misrepresentations on his security clearance application (SCA).

The applicant used marijuana with varying frequency from approximately September 2017 to October 2021, admitting to 36 to 40 instances of use during this period. However, on his April 9, 2022 SCA, he minimized this history, stating he had used marijuana approximately 10 times total over the previous seven years. This discrepancy raised significant concerns about his candor and credibility.

Further undermining his reliability were inconsistent statements regarding future drug use. While he initially stated on his SCA that he did not intend to use marijuana again due to negative experiences, he later indicated an intent to use it in the future. The judge found that these admissions and inconsistencies prevented a finding of rehabilitation, leading to the denial of access to classified information.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using marijuana 36 to 40 times from 2017 to 2021, which raised significant security concerns.
The applicant minimized his marijuana use on his security clearance application, indicating a lack of candor and credibility.
Inconsistent statements regarding future marijuana use further undermined the applicant's reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
AG ¶ 25(g)raisedExpress Intent to Continue Drug Involvement
AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission or Falsification

Key Rule Quoted

“Once a concern arises regarding an applicant’s security clearance eligibility, there is a strong presumption against the grant or maintenance of a security clearance.”
— Dorfmont v. Brown, 913 F. 2d 1399, 1401 (9th Cir. 1990)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 22, 2022
Answer filedJan 17, 2023
Hearing heldApr 11, 2023
Decision dateJun 28, 2023

Cite For

Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Impact of Drug Involvement on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline H
Credibility Issues Arising From Inconsistent Statements Regarding Drug Use

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 against the applicant on allegations of personal conduct related to marijuana use. The applicant minimized his marijuana use on his security clearance application and made statements about his future intentions regarding drug use that were deemed not candid. The personal conduct concerns were not mitigated, leading to a denied outcome.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.b	Applicant minimized the extent of his marijuana use on his April 9, 2022 SCA when he said that he used marijuana approximately 10 times total during the previous seven years.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern (g) association with persons involved in criminal activity	—	—
2.c	He said on his SCA that he did not intend to use marijuana in the future due to paranoia and lack of feeling in control of personal actions.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern (g) association with persons involved in criminal activity	—	—
2.a	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 used marijuana with varying frequency from September 2017 to October 2021 and expressed an intent to use marijuana in the future. The decision was denied based on these findings, indicating that the applicant's drug involvement raised security concerns that were not mitigated.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant used marijuana with varying frequency from about September 2017 to about October 2021.	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Occasional	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia (g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse
1.b	He intends to use marijuana in the future.	Against Applicant	Stated Intent to Use Again	Not Applicable	Denied	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia (g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue	—	—

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.