CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-00363 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-00363

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

Case Profile
Decision Date6/9/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Edward W. Loughran
Government Counsel: John B. Renehan
Case Summary
the individual applies for a security clearance.
The applicant, a 53-year-old defense contractor with a military background, faced security concerns under Guidelines E (personal conduct), H (drug involvement and substance misuse), and J (criminal conduct) as outlined in the Statement of Reasons issued by the Department of Defense. The core allegations included his past use of marijuana and THC products, which he admitted occurred between 2015 and December 2022, and his failure to disclose this usage on security clearance applications, believing it was permissible due to state law.
During the proceedings, the applicant refuted the allegations under Guideline E but did not successfully mitigate the concerns under Guidelines H and J. He acknowledged his marijuana use but argued that it was infrequent and did not impact his responsibilities. The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that his past drug use while holding a security clearance raised significant questions about his reliability and trustworthiness. The judge emphasized the importance of compliance with federal law regarding drug use, ultimately denying the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · 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. 24-00363

deniedJun 9, 2025· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A 53-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant admitted to past marijuana use while holding a security clearance, which violated federal law. This conduct raised questions about his judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.

Although the applicant did not intentionally falsify his answer regarding marijuana use, he expressed an intent to continue using marijuana in social settings. This indicated a lack of commitment to abstain from future drug involvement and substance misuse.

The judge found insufficient evidence of rehabilitation or intent to abstain from future use, despite the application of mitigating conditions related to the passage of time and the nature of the conduct. Consequently, the applicant was denied eligibility for access to classified information.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to past marijuana use while holding a security clearance.
The applicant expressed intent to continue using marijuana in social settings, indicating a lack of commitment to abstain.
The applicant's drug involvement raised substantial questions about his judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
AG ¶ 25(f)rejectedIllegal Drug Use While Granted Access to Classified InformationThe judge found insufficient evidence that the applicant's marijuana use occurred while he was granted access to classified information.
AG ¶ 31(b)appliedEvidence of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)rejectedBehavior Unlikely to RecurThe applicant did not eliminate the possibility of future marijuana use.
AG ¶ 26(b)rejectedAcknowledgment of Drug Involvement and Evidence of Actions Taken to Overcome the ProblemThe applicant failed to provide a signed statement of intent to abstain from drug use.

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 issuedJun 6, 2024
Answer filedJun 21, 2024
Hearing heldApr 22, 2025
Decision dateJun 9, 2025

Cite For

Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation Under Guideline H
Lack of Commitment to Abstain From Drug Use Under Guideline J
Refutation of Personal Conduct Concerns Under Guideline E

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 E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant did not intentionally falsify his answer regarding marijuana use. However, the overall eligibility for a security clearance was denied due to concerns about the applicant's marijuana use while holding a sensitive position.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant did not intentionally falsify his answer regarding marijuana use.	For Applicant	Falsification Security Form	—	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—

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

The judge found that the applicant possessed and used marijuana in violation of federal law and expressed intent to continue drug involvement. The decision to deny the applicant's security clearance was based on these findings, particularly noting the use of marijuana while holding a sensitive position.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant possessed and used marijuana in violation of federal law.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug (g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue	—	—
1.b	Applicant expressed intent to continue drug involvement and substance misuse.	Against Applicant	Stated Intent to Use Again	Not Applicable	Denied	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug (g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue	—	—

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: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant's criminal conduct raised significant concerns regarding his judgment and reliability, particularly due to his marijuana use while holding a security clearance. The application for clearance was denied based on these findings.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant's criminal conduct raises questions about his judgment and reliability.	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 (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—

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.