CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-01152 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 22-01152

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

Case Profile
Decision Date10/18/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Mark W. Harvey
Government Counsel: Tara R. Karoian
Applicant's Counsel: Sean D. Rogers
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 45-year-old employee of a large defense contractor who sought a security clearance. The adjudicative guidelines at issue were under Guideline H, concerning drug involvement and substance misuse. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleged that the applicant had a history of illegal drug use, including marijuana, psilocybin, ecstasy, and cocaine, with varying frequencies over several years.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to some of the allegations in the SOR, including his past use of marijuana and psilocybin, while denying that his drug use constituted a current pattern or habitual behavior. He provided mitigating information, including negative drug test results and a lack of diagnosis for substance use disorder. The applicant also expressed regret for his past decisions and pledged to remain drug-free, acknowledging the implications of any future drug use on his security clearance.
The administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information, concluding that the security concerns related to his drug involvement were not sufficiently mitigated. The judge emphasized the importance of maintaining national security and the high level of trust required for individuals with access to classified information, ultimately determining that the applicant had not met the necessary criteria for a security clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · For 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. 22-01152

deniedOct 18, 2024· Hon. Mark W. Harvey· hearing

Summary

A 45-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) due to a history of illegal drug use. The Statement of Reasons detailed the applicant's use of marijuana from approximately August 1994 to at least December 2023, and psilocybin from about August 1997 to at least December 2023. Additionally, the applicant used ecstasy from around August 1998 to at least April 2018, and cocaine from approximately August 2000 to at least September 2018.

The denial was based on the applicant's admitted and recent use of marijuana and psilocybin, which extended to December 2023. The judge determined that these actions demonstrated a lack of the reliability and trustworthiness required for individuals with access to national security information.

Specifically, the judge cited Disqualifying Conditions AG ¶ 25(a), AG ¶ 25(c), and AG ¶ 25(f). Despite the presence of some mitigating factors, the judge concluded that the applicant's continued drug use raised significant concerns, leading to the denial of the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using marijuana and psilocybin, with recent use occurring as late as December 2023.
The judge found that the applicant's decisions to use illegal drugs indicated a lack of the qualities expected of those with access to national secrets.
The applicant's history of drug use raised concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
AG ¶ 25(f)rejectedIllegal Drug Use While Holding a Sensitive PositionIt is unclear whether the applicant's position during the time of drug use was a 'sensitive position'.

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, 1401 (9th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 905 (1991)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 9, 2024
Answer filedApr 5, 2024Applicant requested a hearing.
Hearing heldAug 15, 2024
Decision dateOct 18, 2024

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Recent Drug Use Under Guideline H
Importance of Demonstrating a Pattern of Abstinence From Drug Use
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: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant regarding his use of marijuana and psilocybin, while finding for the applicant concerning his use of ecstasy and cocaine. The overall decision was to deny the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information due to concerns about his drug involvement.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant used marijuana with varying frequency from about August 1994 to at least December 2023.	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Frequent	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Voluntary Disclosure Before Confrontation
1.b	Applicant used psilocybin with varying frequency from about August 1997 to at least December 2023.	Against Applicant	Psilocybin	Frequent	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Voluntary Disclosure Before Confrontation
1.c	Applicant used ecstasy with varying frequency from about August 1998 to at least April 2018.	For Applicant	MDMA	Occasional	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Voluntary Disclosure Before Confrontation
1.d	Applicant used cocaine with varying frequency from about August 2000 to at least September 2018.	For Applicant	Cocaine	Occasional	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Voluntary Disclosure Before Confrontation

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.