CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-02612 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 22-02612

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

Case Profile
Decision Date12/19/2023
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Edward W. Loughran
Government Counsel: Tara R. Karoian
Applicant's Counsel: Jason R. Wareham
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 32-year-old employee of a defense contractor, applying for a security clearance for the first time. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline H, which pertains to drug involvement and substance misuse. The core allegations included the applicant's past use of marijuana, cocaine, MDMA, and LSD, with specific instances of use occurring from 2015 to 2021.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to his past drug use but asserted that he ceased all illegal drug use by February 2022. He provided evidence of his efforts to mitigate the concerns, including a signed statement of intent to abstain from drug use, a substance abuse evaluation indicating no current issues, and testimonials regarding his job performance and character. The applicant emphasized his commitment to a drug-free lifestyle, particularly in light of his marriage and plans for a family.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, granting eligibility for access to classified information. The judge concluded that the applicant had successfully mitigated the security concerns by demonstrating a significant period of abstinence from illegal drug use and a credible commitment to maintaining that abstinence. The judge found that the applicant's past behavior no longer cast doubt on his reliability and trustworthiness, aligning with the mitigating conditions outlined in the adjudicative guidelines.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · For 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. 22-02612

grantedDec 19, 2023· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A 32-year-old defense contractor was granted a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) despite allegations of past possession and use of marijuana, cocaine, MDMA, and LSD. The administrative judge considered Disqualifying Conditions AG ¶ 25(a) and AG ¶ 25(c) but ultimately applied Mitigating Conditions AG ¶ 26(a) and AG ¶ 26(b).

The decision to grant the clearance was based on several factors. The applicant ceased all illegal drug use in February 2022 and has maintained abstinence since that time. He provided credible evidence of rehabilitation, including a signed statement affirming his intent to abstain from drug use.

Furthermore, the applicant's full disclosure of his past drug use during the security clearance process significantly bolstered his credibility, demonstrating a commitment to honesty and rehabilitation. The judge concluded that the infrequent nature of the past drug use and the applicant's demonstrated commitment to abstinence warranted a favorable decision.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant ceased all illegal drug use in February 2022 and has not used drugs since then.
He provided credible evidence of rehabilitation, including a signed statement of intent to abstain from drug use.
The applicant's full disclosure of past drug use during the security clearance process bolstered his credibility.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Happened Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedThe Individual Acknowledges His or Her Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse, Provides Evidence of Actions Taken to Overcome This Problem, and Has Established a Pattern of Abstinence

Key Rule Quoted

“The illegal use of controlled substances, to include the misuse of prescription and non-prescription drugs, and the use of other substances that cause physical or mental impairment or are used in a manner inconsistent with their intended purpose can raise questions about an individual’s reliability and trustworthiness.”
— AG ¶ 24

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 29, 2023
Answer filedApr 6, 2023
Hearing heldNov 14, 2023
Decision dateDec 19, 2023

Cite For

Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Importance of Full Disclosure in Security Clearance Applications
Commitment to Abstain From Drug Use as a Mitigating Factor

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

Posture: HearingDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant possessed and used marijuana, cocaine, MDMA, and LSD but concluded that the applicant has abstained from illegal drug use for an appropriate period and that such use is unlikely to recur. The decision was granted, indicating that the applicant's past drug involvement no longer casts doubt on his reliability and trustworthiness.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant possessed and used marijuana, cocaine, MDMA, and LSD.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Frequent	Admitted	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (c) prescription abuse followed a prolonged illness and has since ended	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse Documented Abstinence Period Documented
1.b–1.f	5 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed	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.