CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-01900 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 23-01900

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

Case Profile
Decision Date3/29/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Richard A. Cefola
Government Counsel: Andrew H. Henderson
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 23-year-old individual pursuing a Master's degree in Astronautical Engineering while employed by a defense contractor. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse). The core allegations included the applicant's admitted use of marijuana, psilocybin mushrooms, and LSD, with some use occurring after the submission of her Electronic Questionnaire for Investigations Processing (e-QIP).
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to using marijuana approximately 36-38 times from late 2019 until February 2023, as well as using psilocybin mushrooms twice and LSD once. She acknowledged her drug use but did not provide substantial evidence of rehabilitation or a significant change in behavior. Although she submitted a signed statement expressing her intent to abstain from future drug involvement, the administrative judge found that her recent drug use raised concerns about her reliability and trustworthiness.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that the evidence did not sufficiently mitigate the security concerns related to her drug involvement. The judge emphasized that the applicant's drug use was recent and that insufficient time had passed to demonstrate rehabilitation or a permanent change in behavior. Consequently, the applicant was denied eligibility for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- 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. 23-01900

deniedMar 29, 2024· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A 23-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) due to admitted drug use. The applicant acknowledged using marijuana from late 2019 until February 2023, approximately once a month, including one or two instances after submitting her e-QIP in December 2022.

Additionally, she admitted to using psilocybin mushrooms twice between October and December 2021, and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) once in July 2021. These admissions raised disqualifying conditions under Adjudicative Guidelines paragraphs 25(a) and 25(c).

The administrative judge determined that insufficient time had passed since her last admitted drug use to demonstrate rehabilitation or a permanent change in behavior. Consequently, the applicant's recent drug involvement raised concerns about her reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the denial of her eligibility for access to classified information.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using marijuana, psilocybin, and LSD, with marijuana use continuing after submitting her e-QIP.
Insufficient time had passed since her last admitted drug use to demonstrate rehabilitation or permanent behavioral change.
The applicant's recent drug use raised questions about her reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)appliedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)appliedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance

Key Rule Quoted

“The illegal use of controlled substances...can raise questions about an individual's reliability and trustworthiness, both because such behavior may lead to physical or psychological impairment and because it raises questions about a person's ability or willingness to comply with laws, rules, and regulations.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 16, 2023
Answer filedOct 26, 2023
Hearing heldJan 8, 2024
Decision dateMar 29, 2024

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Recent Drug Involvement
Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation Under Guideline H
Consideration of the Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions

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 on all allegations related to drug involvement. The applicant admitted to using marijuana, psilocybin mushrooms, and LSD, with marijuana use occurring as recently as February 2023, including after submitting her e-QIP. The judge concluded that the applicant's drug use was inconsistent with national security interests.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant admits using marijuana from about late in 2019 until February of 2023 at a rate of about once a month. She used marijuana once or twice after submitting her e-QIP in December of 2022.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Occasional	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
1.b	Applicant admits using psilocybin mushrooms twice, from about October 2021 until December of 2021.	Against Applicant	Psilocybin	Experimental	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
1.c	Applicant admits using lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), once in about July 2021.	Against Applicant	LSD	Experimental	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—

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.