CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-01241 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-01241

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

Case Profile
Decision Date4/3/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Carol G. Ricciardello
Government Counsel: Mark D. Lawton
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 36-year-old individual who sought a security clearance after being employed by a federal contractor since September 2022. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) on August 2, 2023, citing concerns under Guideline H (drug involvement and substance misuse), Guideline E (personal conduct), and Guideline J (criminal conduct). The core allegations included the applicant's history of marijuana use, which he admitted occurred frequently from December 2018 to May 2022, culminating in his termination from a previous job due to a positive drug test.
The applicant acknowledged his marijuana use and the circumstances surrounding it, including obtaining marijuana from a medical dispensary and using it to manage depression. However, he did not provide evidence of a prescription or any mitigating actions, such as participation in drug treatment programs. He failed to respond to the government's request for further information after receiving the FORM, which limited the evidence available for consideration.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he did not sufficiently mitigate the security concerns related to his drug involvement and personal conduct. The judge emphasized the importance of compliance with federal law regarding drug use and noted that the applicant's admissions and lack of evidence demonstrating a change in behavior or intent to abstain from drug use raised significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness. Consequently, the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information was denied.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · Against Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · 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. 23-01241

deniedApr 3, 2024· Hon. Carol G. Ricciardello· hearing

Summary

A 36-year-old federal contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement), Guideline E (Personal Conduct), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant admitted to frequent marijuana use from December 2018 to May 2022, which included use after being terminated from a previous position for a positive drug test.

The judge determined that the applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns related to drug involvement and criminal conduct. Specifically, the applicant did not provide evidence of rehabilitation or abstinence from drug use after May 2022. Furthermore, the applicant did not respond to requests for updated information regarding his drug use, which raised additional concerns about his reliability and compliance with federal law.

The applicant's continued association with marijuana use and lack of demonstrated rehabilitation led to the denial of his security clearance, as it raised significant questions about his reliability and trustworthiness. The applicant did not admit or deny the Guideline E allegations.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using marijuana frequently from December 2018 to May 2022, including after being terminated for a positive drug test.
He did not provide evidence of rehabilitation or abstinence from drug use after May 2022.
The applicant failed to respond to requests for updated information regarding his drug use, raising concerns about his reliability and compliance with federal law.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 24raisedDrug Involvement and Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 15raisedPersonal Conduct
AG ¶ 30raisedCriminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 2, 2023
Answer filedAug 10, 2023Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
Hearing held—Decision made on the written record.
Decision dateApr 3, 2024

Cite For

Failure to Demonstrate Rehabilitation From Drug Use Under Guideline H
Impact of Personal Conduct on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline E
Criminal Conduct Implications Related to Drug Use Under Guideline J

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant failed to mitigate security concerns related to drug involvement and substance misuse. The applicant admitted to using marijuana frequently from December 2018 to May 2022, including a positive drug test that led to termination from employment. The decision to deny the application for a security clearance was based on the applicant's failure to provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or change in circumstances.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant failed to mitigate the Guideline H, drug involvement and substance misuse security concerns.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant did not admit or deny the Guideline E allegations.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Unknown	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant failed to mitigate the Guideline J, criminal conduct security concerns.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Unknown	—	—	—

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.