CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-00430 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 23-00430

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

Case Profile
Decision Date11/14/2023
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Mark W. Harvey
Government Counsel: Brian L. Farrell
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 29-year-old systems engineer who had previously served in the Army National Guard and held a security clearance. The adjudicative guidelines at issue were H (drug involvement and substance misuse) and J (criminal conduct), with allegations including past cocaine use and a public intoxication arrest. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) indicated concerns regarding the applicant's drug use from 2013 to 2019 and alleged falsification of security clearance applications regarding his drug history.
The applicant admitted to using cocaine on several occasions and to using Xanax without a prescription, but he denied any intent to falsify his security clearance applications. He explained that his omissions were due to oversight during the completion of the applications, which he attributed to being rushed. The applicant provided evidence of his positive character, including achievement awards and supportive statements from colleagues, emphasizing his commitment to safeguarding sensitive information.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that the security concerns under Guidelines H and J were mitigated and those under Guideline E were refuted. The judge found that the applicant had demonstrated a commitment to responsible behavior and had taken steps to address his past drug use, ultimately granting him eligibility for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · For Applicant
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · For Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · 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. 23-00430

grantedNov 14, 2023· Hon. Mark W. Harvey· hearing

Summary

A 29-year-old systems engineer and former Army National Guard member was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), H (Drug Involvement), and J (Criminal Conduct). The allegations stemmed from the applicant's past drug use and an arrest. Specifically, the applicant was alleged to have falsified material facts on a September 8, 2016 security clearance application regarding illegal drug use.

Further allegations included cocaine use from approximately March 2013 to May 2019, and the unauthorized use of Xanax in about June 2019. In the same month, the applicant was arrested and charged with public intoxication and possession of cocaine.

The judge ultimately granted the clearance, finding that the applicant's security concerns were mitigated. This decision was based on a demonstrated pattern of abstinence from drug use since 2019, credible evidence of rehabilitation including positive character references and employer awards, and the applicant's honest admissions and proactive disclosures regarding his past conduct.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated a pattern of abstinence from drug use since 2019.
He provided credible evidence of rehabilitation, including positive character references and awards from his employer.
The applicant's admissions and proactive disclosures about his past drug use were viewed favorably.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
AG ¶ 25(f)raisedIllegal Drug Use While Holding a Security Clearance
AG ¶ 31(b)raisedEvidence of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedBehavior Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedAcknowledgment of Drug Involvement and Actions Taken to Overcome It
AG ¶ 32(a)appliedTime Elapsed Since Criminal Behavior
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful Rehabilitation

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 29, 2023
Answer filedMay 25, 2023
Hearing heldSep 6, 2023
Decision dateNov 14, 2023

Cite For

Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Refutation of Personal Conduct Allegations Under Guideline E
Successful Rehabilitation and Character Evidence in Security Clearance Cases

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: granted

The judge found that the applicant did not deliberately falsify material facts regarding illegal drug use on his September 8, 2016 Security Clearance Application (SCA). The applicant's admissions and subsequent disclosures were credited, leading to a favorable outcome for the applicant under Guideline E.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.b	Applicant deliberately falsified material facts on his September 8, 2016 SCA in Section 23, concerning illegal use of drugs or drug activity.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATESELF-CORRECTED	Drug Involvement	Denied	—	(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted	Claimed Corrected Falsification Promptly
1.a	specific text not stated in this decision	For 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: granted

The judge found that the applicant used cocaine on five occasions from March 2013 to May 2019 and misused Xanax without a prescription in June 2019. Despite these admissions, the judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that the circumstances were consistent with national security and granted the applicant's eligibility for a security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant used cocaine with varying frequency from about March of 2013 to about May of 2019.	For Applicant	CocaineWHILE CLEARED	Frequent	Admitted	(f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	—	—
2.b	Applicant used the prescription medication Xanax without a prescription in about June 2019.	For Applicant	Benzodiazepine MisuseWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Admitted	(f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline H). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: granted

The judge found in favor of the applicant regarding the criminal conduct allegations. The applicant was arrested and charged with public intoxication and possession of cocaine in June 2019, but the charges were dismissed and his record was expunged after he completed a pretrial diversion program. The judge concluded that the applicant's conduct was not recent and that he had taken steps to address his substance use issues.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant was arrested and charged with public intoxication and possession of cocaine in about June 2019.	For Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Admitted	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline J). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.