CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-01207 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 23-01207

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

Case Profile
Decision Date12/14/2023
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionSee the appeal decision (Case ISCR Case No. 23-01207) →
Participants
Judge: Darlene Lokey Anderson
Government Counsel: Andrew H. Henderson
Applicant's Counsel: Todd A. Hull
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 28-year-old individual employed as a Lead Artificial Intelligence Architect with a defense contractor, seeking a security clearance. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guideline H, Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse, and Guideline E, Personal Conduct. The allegations included a history of illegal drug use, specifically marijuana and cocaine, which raised questions about the applicant's reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant admitted to using marijuana and THC products from approximately June 2012 until June 2019, including regular use during college and graduate school. He also acknowledged using cocaine on two occasions between 2016 and 2018. However, he claimed to have ceased all illegal drug use since June 2019, after realizing the implications for his career in the defense industry. The applicant provided evidence of his commitment to sobriety, including a signed statement of intent to abstain from illegal drug use and a voluntary drug test. He expressed remorse for not fully disclosing his drug history on security clearance applications, attributing the omissions to errors rather than intentional concealment.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that he had demonstrated sufficient evidence of rehabilitation and a commitment to a drug-free lifestyle. The judge noted the applicant's strong work performance, positive character references, and the absence of any illegal drug use since 2019. The decision emphasized the importance of the applicant's current professional conduct and personal integrity, ultimately determining that any doubts regarding his eligibility for a security clearance should be resolved in favor of national security.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · For Applicant
- 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. 23-01207

grantedDec 14, 2023· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 28-year-old Lead Artificial Intelligence Architect, holding dual Master's degrees, was granted a security clearance despite allegations under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The government raised concerns regarding his past use of controlled substances and questionable judgment, citing disqualifying conditions H.25.a, H.25.c, E.16.a, and E.16.b.

However, the decision to grant the clearance was based on several mitigating factors. The applicant demonstrated significant personal growth and provided evidence of complete abstinence from illegal drug use since June 2019, along with a commitment to a drug-free lifestyle. He also submitted a signed statement of intent to abstain from drugs.

Further supporting the favorable outcome, the applicant presented evidence of professional advancement, including promotions and positive performance evaluations. These actions and the passage of time since his last drug use led to the application of mitigating conditions H.26.a, H.26.b, and E.17.d, ultimately resulting in the granting of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant has abstained from illegal drug use since June 2019 and has shown a commitment to a drug-free lifestyle.
He provided evidence of personal and professional growth, including promotions and positive performance evaluations.
The applicant acknowledged his past drug use and took steps to mitigate concerns, including submitting a signed statement of intent to abstain from drugs.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

H.25.araisedSubstance Misuse
H.25.craisedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
E.16.araisedDeliberate Omission of Relevant Facts
E.16.braisedProviding False or Misleading Information

Mitigating

H.26.aappliedBehavior Happened Long Ago or Unlikely to Recur
H.26.bappliedAcknowledgment of Drug Involvement and Pattern of Abstinence
E.17.dappliedAcknowledgment of Behavior and Positive Steps Taken

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 23, 2023
Answer filedSep 1, 2023
Hearing heldNov 1, 2023
Decision dateDec 14, 2023

Cite For

Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H Due to Abstinence and Personal Growth
Consideration of Personal Conduct Issues in Light of Applicant's Remorse and Corrective Actions
The Importance of Full Disclosure in Security Clearance Applications.

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 engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, which raised concerns about reliability and trustworthiness. However, the Applicant successfully mitigated these concerns by demonstrating a commitment to abstaining from illegal drug use and understanding the implications of his past behavior. The outcome was favorable for the Applicant.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant has engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, which can raise questions about an individual’s reliability and trustworthiness.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	—	(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted	Claimed Other

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 had a history of using marijuana and cocaine but has abstained from illegal drug use since June 2019. The Applicant demonstrated a commitment to a drug-free lifestyle and mitigated the concerns regarding drug involvement and substance misuse, leading to a favorable decision.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant has used controlled substances that cause physical or mental impairment or are used in a manner inconsistent with their intended purpose.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Occasional	Admitted	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence	Documented Abstinence Period Documented Documented Acknowledgment and Remorse

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.