CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-00248 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 23-00248

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

Case Profile
Decision Date11/13/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Darlene Lokey Anderson
Government Counsel: Jeff A. Nagel
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 26-year-old Systems Engineer with a Bachelor’s degree in Aerospace Engineering. He sought a security clearance after previously holding one while working for the military and later for a defense contractor. The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals issued a Statement of Reasons citing concerns under Guideline H, Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse, and Guideline E, Personal Conduct. The allegations included the applicant's illegal use of controlled substances, including marijuana, MDMA (ecstasy), and LSD, as well as providing false information on his security clearance applications regarding his drug use.
During the hearing, the applicant admitted to the allegations, acknowledging a ten-year history of illegal drug use, including daily marijuana use until May 2021 and multiple instances of using MDMA and LSD. He explained that his drug use stemmed from peer influence and admitted to using these substances while holding a security clearance. Although he claimed to have stopped using drugs in February 2023, he did not report his drug use to his employer's security office. The applicant's performance reviews indicated he was a reliable and effective employee, but he did not present sufficient evidence to mitigate the security concerns raised.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that none of the mitigating factors applied. The judge emphasized that the applicant's illegal drug use occurred while he held a security clearance and that he had provided false information on his applications. The judge determined that the applicant's recent drug use and lack of credible evidence of rehabilitation raised significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness, ultimately denying his request for a security clearance.
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. 23-00248

deniedNov 13, 2023· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 26-year-old Systems Engineer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The applicant had a ten-year history of illegal drug use, from approximately 2012 to at least 2022, which included daily marijuana use from 2012 until May 2021. He also admitted to using MDMA on 13 occasions and LSD on six occasions during this period.

Further, the applicant deliberately failed to disclose his drug use and purchases on two security clearance applications, admitting he lied to conceal the extent of his involvement. These actions raised disqualifying conditions related to questionable judgment and the use of controlled substances.

The administrative judge found that the applicant's admitted use of illegal substances while holding a security clearance, coupled with his deliberate dishonesty on security clearance applications, demonstrated poor judgment, unreliability, and a lack of candor. These factors led to the denial of his security clearance eligibility, emphasizing the importance of compliance with laws and regulations for individuals in sensitive positions.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using illegal substances, including marijuana and MDMA, while holding a security clearance.
The applicant deliberately lied on two security clearance applications regarding his drug use, demonstrating a lack of candor and poor judgment.
The applicant's recent drug use and failure to report it to his employer raised significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

H.24raisedDrug Involvement and Substance Misuse
E.15raisedPersonal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the government predicated upon trust and confidence.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 28, 2023
Answer filedJul 5, 2023
Hearing heldOct 11, 2023
Decision dateNov 13, 2023

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Illegal Drug Use While Holding a Clearance
Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Applications
Poor Judgment and Unreliability as Disqualifying Factors for Security Clearance Eligibility

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 that the applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, which raised concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness. The applicant's admissions regarding his illegal drug use and failure to disclose this information on security clearance applications contributed to the negative findings. Ultimately, the judge ruled against the applicant on the personal conduct allegations.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant has engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, which can raise questions about an individual’s reliability and trustworthiness.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	—	—

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 has a ten-year history of illegal drug involvement, including the use of MDMA, LSD, and marijuana. The applicant admitted to using marijuana daily almost every week from 2012 until May 2021 and to using illegal substances while holding a security clearance. The application for clearance was denied due to unresolved drug involvement and personal conduct concerns.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has used controlled substances that cause physical or mental impairment or are used in a manner inconsistent with their intended purpose.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED	Unspecified	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant has a ten-year history of illegal drug involvement, including the use and purchase of MDMA (ecstasy), LSD, and marijuana on various occasions from about 2012 until at least 2022.	Against Applicant	MDMA	Frequent	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant used marijuana daily, almost every week from 2012 until May 2021.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant further admitted that he has also used illegal mind-altering substances such as MDMA (ecstasy) on 13 separate occasions, and LSD on six separate occasions, during the period from 2012 until at least January 2022.	Against Applicant	MDMA	Frequent	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	Applicant further admitted that he has also used illegal mind-altering substances such as MDMA (ecstasy) on 13 separate occasions, and LSD on six separate occasions, during the period from 2012 until at least January 2022.	Against Applicant	LSD	Frequent	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant deliberately failed to disclose his use and purchase of illegal drugs discussed above.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	Applicant deliberately lied on two of his security clearance applications concerning his use and purchase of illegal drugs, as he did not want the Government to know the true extent of his illegal drug involvement.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—

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.