CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-02224 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-02224

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

Case Profile
Decision Date9/27/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Robert E. Coacher
Government Counsel: Mark D. Lawton
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 29-year-old programmer analyst for a defense contractor who sought 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 J (criminal conduct), while also addressing financial considerations under Guideline F. The core allegations included the applicant's admitted use of marijuana, hallucinogenic mushrooms, and THC during periods when he was employed in a sensitive position, as well as his failure to timely file federal income tax returns for 2020 and 2021.
The applicant admitted to the drug use allegations but provided varying accounts of the specifics and timing of his substance use. He denied the financial allegations, claiming he forgot to file his tax returns, but ultimately acknowledged that his 2020 and 2021 returns were filed late. The administrative judge found that the applicant had mitigated the financial concerns related to his 2022 tax return, which was filed within the allowable period, but did not sufficiently mitigate the concerns under Guidelines H and J due to the nature and timing of his drug use.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that the evidence did not sufficiently alleviate the security concerns regarding his drug use and criminal conduct. The judge emphasized the importance of reliability and trustworthiness in individuals granted access to classified information, ultimately determining that the applicant's past behavior raised significant doubts about his current reliability and judgment.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · For 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. 23-02224

deniedSep 27, 2024· Hon. Robert E. Coacher· hearing

Summary

A 29-year-old programmer analyst was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), Guideline H (Drug Involvement), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant admitted to using marijuana from approximately August 2016 to January 2023, hallucinogenic mushrooms from June 2020 to November 2021, and THC from May 2022 to January 2023, including while in a sensitive position. These drug use allegations were also considered criminal conduct.

Additionally, the applicant failed to file federal income tax returns for 2020, 2021, and 2022. While some mitigating conditions were applied regarding financial considerations, the judge determined these were insufficient.

The denial was based on the applicant's admitted drug use, a failure to demonstrate a sufficient pattern of abstinence, and the late filing of tax returns, which collectively raised doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness. The judge concluded that the applicant did not adequately mitigate the security concerns.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to drug use, including marijuana and hallucinogenic mushrooms, which raised security concerns under Guidelines H and J.
The applicant failed to establish a sufficient pattern of abstinence from drug use, leading to doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant's late filing of tax returns indicated a lack of responsibility, despite mitigating factors under Guideline F.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 31(b)raisedCriminal Conduct

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(a)appliedBehavior Occurred Long AgoThe applicant's late tax filings were attributed to forgetfulness and he has since filed the returns.
AG ¶ 20(g)appliedArrangements with Tax AuthorityThe applicant filed his 2022 tax return within the extension period and was not penalized.

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 11, 2023
Answer filedDec 21, 2023
Hearing held—Case decided on the written record.
Decision dateSep 27, 2024

Cite For

Insufficient Pattern of Abstinence From Drug Use Under Guideline H
Failure to Timely File Tax Returns Under Guideline F
Impact of Drug Involvement on Security Clearance Eligibility 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 F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant failed to file his federal income tax returns for the years 2020 through 2022, which raised financial concerns under Guideline F. However, the judge ultimately ruled in favor of the applicant regarding this allegation, indicating that the applicant mitigated the concerns related to his financial considerations.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant failed to file his 2020 through 2022 federal income tax returns, as required.	For Applicant	Tax Filing Failure	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Other

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline F). 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: denied

The judge found against the applicant on allegations of drug involvement, specifically the use of marijuana and hallucinogenic mushrooms while employed in a sensitive position. The applicant admitted to the drug use but failed to mitigate the security concerns associated with this behavior, resulting in a denied security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant used marijuana from about August 2016 to about January 2023; used hallucinogenic mushrooms from about June 2020 to about November 2021; and used THC from about May 2022 to about January 2023, while employed in a sensitive position.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse	—	—
2.b–2.c	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (1 against, 1 for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed	Unspecified Drug Involvement	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: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the criminal conduct allegations related to drug use. The applicant admitted to using marijuana, THC, and hallucinogenic mushrooms while employed in a sensitive position, which contributed to the denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	All drug use allegations were cross-alleged as criminal conduct.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—

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.