CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 21-02800 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 21-02800

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

Case Profile
Decision Date8/28/2024
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Nichole L. Noel
Government Counsel: William H. Miller
Case Summary
Applicant was a 41-year-old pipefitter who had worked on a federal contract since 2007 and had been granted access to classified information since 2004. The Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) on April 15, 2022, citing concerns under the drug involvement and substance misuse, criminal conduct, and personal conduct guidelines. The allegations included the applicant's failure to disclose his history of marijuana use, misuse of prescription medications, and a prior criminal incident involving an altercation with his ex-wife.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to a history of marijuana use and misuse of prescription drugs, including Percocet and Suboxone, but contended that he believed his legal use of marijuana was permissible due to his medical marijuana card. He also provided evidence of his compliance with treatment for substance use and demonstrated efforts to reduce his medication dosage. The administrative judge found that the applicant had mitigated the concerns under the criminal conduct guideline and resolved the allegations regarding falsification and drug use in his favor, ultimately granting him a security clearance. The judge concluded that the applicant's actions were consistent with the national interest, considering his compliance with treatment and lack of further criminal conduct.
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. 21-02800

grantedAug 28, 2024· Hon. Nichole L. Noel· hearing

Summary

A 41-year-old pipefitter's security clearance, initially challenged under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), H (Drug Involvement), and J (Criminal Conduct), was ultimately granted. The Department of Defense had raised concerns regarding the applicant's past conduct, including allegations of falsifying material facts on two Electronic Questionnaires for Investigations Processing (e-QIPs) dated August 7, 2020, and December 20, 2011. Specifically, the applicant failed to disclose marijuana use between 2019 and August 2020 while holding a security clearance. Additionally, the applicant was arrested for and convicted of second-degree assault in November 2019, receiving probation before judgment.

The judge found that the applicant successfully mitigated these issues. Key factors in the decision included the applicant's demonstrated compliance with substance use treatment and the absence of any current substance abuse or criminal behavior. The judge also determined that the applicant's misunderstanding of federal drug laws was genuine, indicating no intent to deceive.

Based on these mitigating factors, the judge concluded that the applicant had resolved the concerns related to criminal conduct, falsification, and drug use. Consequently, the applicant's security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated compliance with treatment for substance use issues.
There was no evidence of current substance abuse or criminal behavior.
The applicant's misunderstanding of federal drug laws was genuine and did not indicate intent to deceive.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Drug Use
AG ¶ 31(b)raisedCriminal Conduct

Mitigating

AG ¶ 32(a)appliedTime ElapsedThe criminal behavior occurred five years ago and is unlikely to recur.
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedSuccessful RehabilitationThe applicant completed court-ordered counseling and has no further incidents.
AG ¶ 25(f)appliedNo Intent to Continue MisuseThe applicant ceased marijuana use upon realizing it could affect his clearance.

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 15, 2022
Answer filed—
Hearing heldSep 12, 2023Hearing reconvened in person after initial hearing via Microsoft Teams.
Decision dateAug 28, 2024

Cite For

Mitigation of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Resolution of Falsification Allegations Under Guideline E
Consideration of State Law in Drug Use Under Guideline H

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: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant failed to disclose his marijuana use while holding a security clearance. However, the judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that he did not intentionally conceal his behavior and that the personal conduct concerns were mitigated.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant failed to disclose his marijuana use between 2019 and August 2020 while holding a security clearance.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	—	(f) information was unsubstantiated or from a questionable source	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: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge found in favor of the applicant regarding allegations of drug involvement and substance misuse. The applicant's use of marijuana was deemed not intentional in violation of federal law or his responsibilities as a clearance holder, and the judge concluded that the applicant did not intend to conceal his behavior.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	You falsified material facts on an Electronic Questionnaires for Investigations Processing (e-QIP), executed by you on or about August 7, 2020, in response to 'Section 23 – Illegal use of Drugs or Drug Activity . . . Have you EVER illegally used or been involved with a drug or controlled substance while possessing a security clearance?' You answered, 'No' and thereby deliberately failed to disclos	For Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Occasional	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	You falsified material facts on an Electronic Questionnaires for Investigations Processing (e-QIP), executed by you on or about December 20, 2011, in response to 'Section 23 – Illegal use of Drugs or Drug Activity . . . In the last seven (7) years, have you ever illegally used any drugs or controlled substances. . . . have you intentionally engaged in the misuse of prescription drugs, regardless o	For Applicant	Prescription Opioid MisuseWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—
1.c–1.d	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant	Prescription Opioid MisuseWHILE CLEARED	Unspecified		—	—	—

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: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge found in favor of the applicant regarding the criminal conduct allegation of second degree assault, which resulted in a conviction and probation before judgment. The applicant demonstrated rehabilitation and did not intend to conceal his behavior, leading to a granted decision.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	In November 2019, Applicant was arrested for and convicted of, second degree assault and sentenced to probation before judgment.	For Applicant	Assault or Battery	Convicted	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.