CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-00065 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 23-00065

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

Case Profile
Decision Date7/11/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Mark W. Harvey
Government Counsel: Aubrey M. De Angelis
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 24-year-old systems engineer employed by a Department of Defense (DOD) contractor. The adjudicative guidelines at issue were related to drug involvement and substance misuse, specifically Guideline H. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) outlined multiple allegations of the applicant's illegal drug use, including marijuana, cocaine, LSD, and the misuse of prescription medications such as Adderall and Xanax, occurring over several years.
In his response to the SOR, the applicant admitted to the allegations and provided some mitigating information. He acknowledged his past drug use, described it as unhealthy, and expressed a commitment to abstain from such behaviors in the future. He also highlighted his healthy lifestyle choices and passed a urinalysis test conducted by his employer. However, he did not provide a response to the File of Relevant Material (FORM) submitted by Department Counsel, which noted the absence of persuasive mitigation.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that the security concerns related to drug involvement and substance misuse were not mitigated. The judge emphasized that the applicant's admissions and lack of further evidence to demonstrate a change in behavior or a commitment to abstain from drug use did not sufficiently address the risks associated with granting a security clearance. Consequently, the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information was denied.
Guidelines Evaluated
- 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. 23-00065

deniedJul 11, 2023· Hon. Mark W. Harvey· hearing

Summary

A 24-year-old systems engineer was denied a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) due to extensive drug involvement and substance misuse. The Statement of Reasons detailed multiple instances of drug use, purchase, and sale. From about December 2019 to May 2022, the applicant used Adderall and Vyvanse without a prescription.

The applicant also engaged in the purchase, use, and sale of marijuana from about August 2013 to January 2022, and cocaine from about December 2019 to January 2022. Other reported instances included using and purchasing Xanax without a prescription in about November 2019, using LSD in about March 2019, and using nitrous oxide in about February 2018. These actions raised Disqualifying Conditions AG ¶ 25(a) and AG ¶ 25(c).

Despite the applicant acknowledging his drug history and expressing a desire to abstain, the judge found insufficient evidence of a long-term commitment to sobriety. The judge determined that the applicant's admissions and mitigating information did not adequately demonstrate a sustained commitment to abstinence, emphasizing the need for a longer track record to mitigate security concerns regarding reliability and trustworthiness. The security clearance was therefore denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had a history of extensive drug involvement and substance misuse, including illegal use of prescription medications and various controlled substances.
The applicant's admissions and mitigating information were insufficient to demonstrate a long-term commitment to abstinence from drug use.
The judge emphasized the need for a longer track record of abstinence to mitigate security concerns.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

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

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 (9th Cir. 1990)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 1, 2023
Answer filedFeb 16, 2023Requested decision without a hearing.
Hearing held—Decision made based on the record.
Decision dateJul 11, 2023

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Extensive Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation and Abstinence From Substance Misuse
Presumption Against Granting Security Clearance When Concerns Arise

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on all allegations related to drug involvement and substance misuse. The applicant admitted to using prescription medications without a prescription, as well as using and selling illegal substances, which raised significant security concerns.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant used the prescription medications Adderall and Vyvanse with varying frequency without a prescription from about December 2019 to about May 2022.	Against Applicant	Prescription Stimulant Misuse	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse Claimed Other
1.b	Applicant purchased, used, and sold marijuana with varying frequency from about August 2013 to about January 2022.	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse Claimed Other
1.c	Applicant used, purchased, and sold cocaine with varying frequency from about December 2019 to about January 2022.	Against Applicant	Cocaine	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse Claimed Other
1.d	Applicant used and purchased Xanax, which was not prescribed to him, in about November 2019.	Against Applicant	Benzodiazepine Misuse	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse Claimed Other
1.e	Applicant used lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) in about March 2019.	Against Applicant	LSD	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse Claimed Other
1.f	Applicant used nitrous oxide in about February 2018.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse Claimed Other

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.