CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-01023 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-01023

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

Case Profile
Decision Date7/31/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionSee the appeal decision (Case ISCR Case No. 24-01023) →
Participants
Judge: Mark W. Harvey
Government Counsel: Carroll J. Connelley
Applicant's Counsel: Grant Couch
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 31-year-old engineer employed by a government contractor, who had previously worked for the Navy and held a security clearance for over five years. The Department of Defense's Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline H (drug involvement and substance misuse) and Guideline E (personal conduct). The core allegations included the applicant's admission to using marijuana while holding a security clearance and falsifying information on his security clearance application regarding illegal drug use.
The applicant admitted to using marijuana on several occasions in 2020 and 2021, attributing this behavior to a lapse in judgment during the COVID-19 pandemic. He provided a negative drug test in May 2025 and completed a course on marijuana awareness. However, he also admitted to falsifying his security clearance application by denying any illegal drug use while holding a clearance. The applicant explained that his omission was due to fear and a misunderstanding of the severity of the situation at the time of completing the application.
The administrative judge ruled that the concerns under Guideline H were mitigated due to the applicant's proactive steps to address his past drug use, including abstaining from drugs and completing a relevant course. However, the judge found that the concerns under Guideline E were not mitigated, primarily due to the applicant's falsification of his security clearance application. Consequently, the judge denied the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information, emphasizing the importance of honesty and reliability in maintaining national security.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · 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. 24-01023

deniedJul 31, 2025· Hon. Mark W. Harvey· hearing

Summary

In ISCR Case No. 24-01023, a 31-year-old engineer was denied a security clearance primarily due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), despite mitigating factors related to Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The applicant admitted to using marijuana with varying frequency from approximately 2020 through 2021 while holding a security clearance and occupying a sensitive position.

Crucially, the applicant also admitted to falsifying an answer on his July 18, 2023, Security Clearance Application (SCA) regarding his past marijuana use. This falsification was a central issue, raising a disqualifying condition under Guideline E.

While the judge applied mitigating conditions for the drug involvement, the intentional falsification on the SCA was deemed to undermine the applicant's trustworthiness and reliability. Consequently, the judge determined that the personal conduct issues were not sufficiently mitigated, leading to the denial of eligibility for access to classified information.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to falsifying information on his security clearance application regarding marijuana use.
The judge determined that the applicant's intentional falsifications undermined his trustworthiness and reliability.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 16(a)appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedBehavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Happened Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedAcknowledges Drug Involvement and Has Established a Pattern of Abstinence

Key Rule Quoted

“Once a concern arises regarding an Applicant’s security clearance eligibility, there is a strong presumption against the grant or maintenance of a security clearance.”
— Dorfmont v. Brown, 913 F. 2d 1399, 1401 (9th Cir. 1990)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 26, 2024
Answer filedDec 10, 2024
Hearing heldMay 29, 2025
Decision dateJul 31, 2025

Cite For

Falsification of Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Presumption Against Granting Security Clearance When Concerns Arise

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 against the applicant on the allegation of falsifying an answer regarding marijuana use on his July 18, 2023 SCA. The applicant admitted to the falsification, which was a significant concern under Guideline E.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant falsified an answer on his July 18, 2023 SCA regarding his marijuana use.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern (f) violation of a written commitment made as a condition of employment	—	—

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 with varying frequency from about 2020 through about 2021 while holding a security clearance. Although the applicant admitted to this use, the judge credited his abstinence from marijuana since the summer of 2021 and concluded that the security concerns were mitigated. However, the overall disposition of the case was denied due to other allegations.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant used marijuana with varying frequency from about 2020 through about 2021 while in a sensitive position, one in which he held a security clearance.	For Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Occasional	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse

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.