CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-02395 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 22-02395

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

Case Profile
Decision Date4/10/2025
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Robert J. Tuider
Government Counsel: Adrienne M. Driskill
Applicant's Counsel: Alan V. Edmunds
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 32-year-old cyber security specialist employed by a defense contractor since May 2019, seeking a security clearance. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guidelines H (drug involvement and substance misuse), J (criminal conduct), M (use of information technology), G (alcohol consumption), and E (personal conduct). The SOR outlined the applicant's history of drug use, including marijuana, cocaine, and methamphetamine, as well as a DUI conviction and various traffic infractions.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to a history of drug use primarily during his teenage years and early twenties, but he asserted that he had ceased such activities since moving to a different state in 2015. He provided evidence of negative drug tests and a clinical assessment indicating no current substance abuse issues. The applicant also acknowledged his DUI conviction but demonstrated compliance with probation requirements. He denied ongoing alcohol misuse, explaining that his drinking was limited and responsible.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that he had successfully mitigated the security concerns raised in the SOR. The judge found the applicant credible and noted his proactive steps to address past behaviors, including his cessation of drug use and compliance with legal requirements. The judge determined that granting the security clearance was consistent with the national interest.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · For Applicant
- Guideline GAlcohol Consumption · For Applicant
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · For Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · For Applicant
- Guideline MUse of Information Technology · 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. 22-02395

grantedApr 10, 2025· Hon. Robert J. Tuider· hearing

Summary

A 32-year-old cyber security specialist was granted a security clearance despite concerns raised under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), G (Alcohol Consumption), H (Drug Involvement), J (Criminal Conduct), and M (Use of Information Technology). Disqualifying conditions were noted under AG ¶ 25(a), AG ¶ 31(b), and AG ¶ 22(a).

However, the judge applied several mitigating conditions, including AG ¶ 26(a), AG ¶ 26(b), AG ¶ 26(d), AG ¶ 32(a), AG ¶ 32(d), AG ¶ 23(a), AG ¶ 23(b), AG ¶ 23(d), AG ¶ 17(c), AG ¶ 17(d), and AG ¶ 17(e). The decision to grant the clearance was based on the applicant's significant positive changes.

These changes included a demonstrated pattern of abstinence from drugs and alcohol, evidenced by multiple negative drug tests. The applicant successfully completed probation for a DUI conviction and has had no alcohol-related incidents in six years. Furthermore, his professional performance and character references highlighted a strong commitment to reliability and trustworthiness, ultimately outweighing past issues.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated a clear pattern of abstinence from drugs and alcohol, supported by multiple negative drug tests.
He successfully completed probation for a DUI conviction and has not had any alcohol-related incidents in six years.
The applicant's professional performance and character references indicated a strong commitment to reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 31(b)raisedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 22(a)raisedAlcohol-related Incidents

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedDrug Involvement
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedDrug Involvement
AG ¶ 26(d)appliedDrug Involvement
AG ¶ 32(a)appliedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 23(a)appliedAlcohol Consumption
AG ¶ 23(b)appliedAlcohol Consumption
AG ¶ 23(d)appliedAlcohol Consumption
AG ¶ 17(c)appliedPersonal Conduct
AG ¶ 17(d)appliedPersonal Conduct
AG ¶ 17(e)appliedPersonal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 4, 2023
Answer filedJun 1, 2023
Hearing heldAug 28, 2023
Decision dateApr 10, 2025

Cite For

Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Successful Rehabilitation From Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Evidence of Responsible Alcohol Consumption Under Guideline G

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.