CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-00994 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-00994

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

Case Profile
Decision Date3/5/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Darlene Lokey Anderson
Government Counsel: Aubrey M. De Angelis
Applicant's Counsel: Dustin P. Cantwell
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 31-year-old Systems Engineer/Software Engineer who sought a security clearance in connection with his employment. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The core allegations included the applicant's admission of past marijuana use and a subsequent false statement regarding illegal drug use on a security clearance application.
Key facts established during the proceedings included the applicant's admission to using marijuana from 2010 to 2021 and a specific incident in May 2023 where he consumed a gummy that he believed contained THC. The applicant initially denied any illegal drug use on a later security clearance application, which was contradicted by his prior admissions. He explained that he aimed to remain consistent with his previous application and did not intend to deceive the government. Witnesses, including his current and former supervisors, testified to his strong work ethic and character, supporting his case for a security clearance.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that while there were disqualifying factors related to drug involvement and personal conduct, the applicant's overall character, work performance, and lack of malicious intent in his misstatements mitigated the concerns. The judge emphasized the importance of considering the applicant's entire history and the context of his actions, ultimately determining that he was suitable for a security clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- 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. 24-00994

deniedMar 5, 2025· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 31-year-old Systems Engineer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The applicant admitted to using marijuana from January 2010 to January 2021, and again in May 2023, while already possessing a security clearance.

A key issue was the applicant's false statements on his October 5, 2023, security clearance application regarding his illegal drug use. Although he admitted to past marijuana use, his denial of more recent use was found to undermine his credibility and trustworthiness.

The denial was based on the applicant providing false information about his drug use, his recent marijuana use while holding a security clearance, and his lack of transparency during the investigation. These factors collectively raised significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the denial of his security clearance application.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant provided false information regarding his drug use on his security clearance application.
The applicant's recent marijuana use while holding a security clearance raised significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant's lack of transparency and credibility during the investigation contributed to the denial of his application.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

HraisedDrug Involvement and Substance Misuse
EraisedPersonal Conduct

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 15, 2024
Answer filedSep 15, 2024
Hearing heldFeb 13, 2025
Decision dateMar 5, 2025

Cite For

Issues of Credibility and Reliability in Security Clearance Determinations
Impact of False Statements on Security Clearance Applications
Consideration of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H and Personal Conduct 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 provided false information regarding his illegal drug use on his security clearance application. The applicant's lack of candor during the investigation and failure to disclose his marijuana use were significant concerns that led to the denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant provided false information about his illegal drug use on his October 5, 2023, security clearance application.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	—	—	—

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 used marijuana from January 2010 to January 2021, and again in May 2023, while holding a security clearance. The applicant's lack of honesty regarding his drug use and the circumstances surrounding it contributed to the denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant used marijuana from January 2010 to January 2021, and then in May 2023, while possessing a security clearance.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—

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.