CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-01064 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 24-01064

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

Case Profile
Decision Date1/15/2025
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Darlene Lokey Anderson
Government Counsel: Andrew H. Henderson
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 39-year-old Production Lead Electrical Engineer employed by a defense contractor, seeking a security clearance. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guideline H, Drug Involvement and Substance Abuse, and Guideline J, Criminal Conduct. The allegations included a history of illegal drug use, specifically marijuana from 1998 to January 2023, and a prior incident of cocaine use in 2006, which resulted in disciplinary action while he was in the Army.
During the hearing, the applicant admitted to his past drug use but asserted that he ceased using marijuana in January 2023, coinciding with his employment and the need for a security clearance. He explained that he had used marijuana for anxiety and pain management following a severe spinal injury but had since transitioned to using Tylenol and exercise for pain relief. The applicant provided character references from colleagues and supervisors, highlighting his integrity, work ethic, and adherence to security protocols.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that he had demonstrated significant rehabilitation and a commitment to maintaining a drug-free lifestyle. The judge noted the applicant's positive personal and professional changes, including his decision to stop using marijuana and his proactive approach to managing his health and career. The judge emphasized the importance of the applicant's character references and overall reliability, ultimately determining that granting the security clearance aligned with national security interests.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · For Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · 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. 24-01064

grantedJan 15, 2025· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 39-year-old married male with an Associate's degree was granted a security clearance despite a history of drug involvement and criminal conduct, specifically under Guideline H and Guideline J. The government alleged the applicant used controlled substances, including marijuana from 1989 through 2023 and cocaine in 2006, and purchased marijuana from 2007 through 2016, raising concerns about reliability and trustworthiness.

Disqualifying conditions were raised, but the administrative judge applied several mitigating conditions. The applicant demonstrated significant personal growth and responsibility following a life-altering accident in 2014. He discontinued all illegal drug use and established a pattern of abstinence since January 2023.

The decision to grant the clearance was based on the applicant's demonstrated rehabilitation, including strong character references and evidence of his commitment to a drug-free lifestyle. The judge found that the applicant successfully mitigated the concerns related to his past drug involvement and criminal conduct.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated significant personal growth and responsibility after a life-altering accident.
He discontinued illegal drug use and established a pattern of abstinence since January 2023.
The applicant provided strong character references and evidence of rehabilitation.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedPattern of Minor Offenses
AG ¶ 31(b)raisedEvidence of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedBehavior Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedAcknowledgment and Actions Taken to Overcome Drug Involvement
AG ¶ 32(a)appliedTime Elapsed Since Criminal Behavior
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful Rehabilitation

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 20, 2024
Answer filedSep 11, 2024
Hearing heldOct 29, 2024
Decision dateJan 15, 2025

Cite For

Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Mitigation of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Evaluations

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: HearingDecided: granted

The judge found that the Applicant had a history of marijuana use but concluded that he had mitigated the concerns regarding drug involvement and substance misuse. The Applicant stopped using marijuana upon starting his current employment and demonstrated significant personal growth and positive character references, leading to the granting of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant has used controlled substances that cause physical or mental impairment or are used in a manner inconsistent with their intended purpose, which can raise questions about an individual’s reliability and trustworthiness.	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Unknown	—	—	—

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: granted

The judge found that the applicant engaged in criminal conduct related to drug use, specifically marijuana and cocaine, but ultimately ruled in favor of the applicant. The applicant demonstrated significant personal growth and a commitment to abstaining from drug use, which mitigated the concerns regarding his criminal conduct.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant engaged in criminal conduct, in violation of state and Federal laws, when he used marijuana from 1989 through 2023, and when he purchased marijuana from 2007 through 2016. His use of cocaine in 2006, was also in violation of state and Federal law.	For Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure	—

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.