CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-02894 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-02894

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

Case Profile
Decision Date7/14/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Richard A. Cefola
Government Counsel: Aubrey M. De Angelis
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 36-year-old individual with a high school diploma and a history of service in the U.S. Army Reserve. The Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudication Facility issued a Statement of Reasons citing security concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The core allegations included a positive drug test for marijuana in April 2022 and a prior DUI conviction in 2017.
In her response to the Statement of Reasons, the applicant denied the drug test allegation, claiming she was never informed of the result, and admitted to the DUI conviction but asserted she had completed an alcohol rehabilitation program without providing supporting documentation. The administrative judge found that the applicant's denial of the drug test was not credible, as the government had provided evidence of the positive result. Additionally, the applicant did not demonstrate any mitigating factors for her drug involvement or criminal conduct, such as evidence of rehabilitation or a pattern of abstinence.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant on both allegations, concluding that the evidence raised significant doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness. The judge emphasized that the applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns related to her drug involvement and criminal conduct, ultimately denying her eligibility for a security clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- 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. 23-02894

deniedJul 14, 2025· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A 36-year-old divorced female, with a high school diploma and U.S. Army Reserve service, was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant denied testing positive for marijuana on a random urinalysis in April 2022 and also denied that this alleged drug involvement constituted criminal conduct. However, the administrative judge found that the positive marijuana test was established, raising disqualifying conditions under Guideline H.

Additionally, the applicant admitted to a 2017 arrest and subsequent guilty plea for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) of alcohol, which raised concerns under Guideline J. The judge determined that both the drug involvement and criminal conduct were significant issues.

Ultimately, the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or a consistent pattern of abstinence from drug use. These factors led the administrative judge to conclude that the applicant's reliability and trustworthiness were in doubt, resulting in the denial of her security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant tested positive for marijuana, establishing disqualifying conditions under Guideline H.
The applicant admitted to a DUI conviction in 2017, which raised concerns under Guideline J.
The applicant failed to provide evidence of rehabilitation or a pattern of abstinence from drug use.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)appliedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(b)appliedTesting Positive for an Illegal Drug
AG ¶ 31(a)appliedPattern of Minor Offenses
AG ¶ 31(b)appliedEvidence of Criminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 11, 2024
Answer filedMay 22, 2024
Hearing heldJul 14, 2025Decision issued on the same day.
Decision dateJul 14, 2025

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Based on Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Denial of Security Clearance Based on Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Importance of Demonstrating Rehabilitation and Abstinence in Security Clearance Cases

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 against the applicant regarding her positive drug test for marijuana, which occurred on April 23, 2022. This finding was based on the established conditions of substance misuse and testing positive for an illegal drug, leading to a denial of her security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant denies that she tested positive for marijuana on a random urinalysis test administered on April 23, 2022.	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Not Applicable	Denied	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug	—	—

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 allegations related to criminal conduct under Guideline J. The applicant was found to have pled guilty to Driving Under the Influence in 2017, which was deemed disqualifying, while the allegation regarding drug involvement was also ruled against the applicant.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant denies the drug involvement, noted above, as criminal conduct.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
2.b	Applicant admits that in 2017 she was arrested for, and subsequently pled guilty to, Driving Under the Influence of alcohol.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	Claimed Rehabilitation Evidence

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.