CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-01400 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-01400

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

Case Profile
Decision Date6/17/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionSee the appeal decision (Case ISCR Case No. 24-01400) →
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Roger C. Wesley
Government Counsel: John G. Hannink
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 40-year-old employee of a defense contractor seeking a security clearance. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under the adjudicative guidelines for personal conduct, criminal conduct, and drug involvement and substance abuse. The core allegations included the applicant's failure to disclose past offenses related to drugs and alcohol, multiple arrests and convictions for drug and alcohol-related offenses, and a history of methamphetamine use.
The applicant admitted to the allegations outlined in the SOR, which included a series of criminal offenses from 2005 to 2014, primarily related to alcohol and drug use. She acknowledged her past use of methamphetamine and her attendance at a drug rehabilitation program but provided no documentation or evidence of rehabilitation efforts. The applicant attributed her omissions in the electronic questionnaire to unintentional oversight, but the administrative judge found her claims of forgetfulness to be implausible given the seriousness and frequency of her offenses.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that she did not mitigate the concerns regarding her personal conduct, criminal conduct, and drug involvement. The judge emphasized that the applicant's history raised significant doubts about her judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness, which are critical factors in determining eligibility for access to classified information. Consequently, the applicant's request for a security clearance was denied.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · For 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. 24-01400

deniedJun 17, 2025· Hon. Roger C. Wesley· hearing

Summary

A 40-year-old defense contractor employee was denied security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline H (Drug Involvement), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant's Statement of Reasons detailed a history of criminal conduct, drug use, and falsification of information on security questionnaires.

Specifically, the applicant was alleged to have falsified her May 9, 2023, e-QIP by failing to disclose past drug and alcohol offenses. This included a 2009 burglary and felony possession of drug paraphernalia charges, as well as past methamphetamine use and voluntary attendance at a drug rehabilitation center. The applicant also admitted to using methamphetamine and other illegal drugs between 2006 and April 2014, and faced multiple arrests and charges for alcohol and drug use violations between September 2005 and November 2014, many of which resulted in convictions, sentencing, and probation.

While the applicant demonstrated some mitigation through rehabilitation efforts, these were not deemed sufficient to overcome the extensive history of criminal offenses, deliberate falsifications on security questionnaires, and past drug use. The overall pattern of behavior led to the denial of eligibility for access to classified information.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had a lengthy history of criminal offenses, including multiple arrests and convictions, which raised security concerns.
The applicant's omissions and falsifications on security questionnaires were deemed deliberate and indicative of questionable judgment.
The applicant's past drug use and criminal conduct were not sufficiently mitigated by her rehabilitation efforts.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 30appliedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 15appliedPersonal Conduct
AG ¶ 25appliedDrug Involvement

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedDrug Involvement
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedDrug Involvement
AG ¶ 17(a)appliedPersonal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for access to classified information may only be granted "upon a finding that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to do so."”
— Exec. Or. 10865

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 10, 2024
Answer filedSep 14, 2024Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateJun 17, 2025

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to a Pattern of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Deliberate Omissions on Security Questionnaires Under Guideline E
Mitigation of Drug Involvement Through Rehabilitation Efforts Under Guideline H

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on allegations of falsification related to her electronic questionnaires, specifically for failing to disclose past offenses involving drugs and alcohol. However, the judge credited the applicant for her abstinence from illegal drugs and her voluntary attendance at a drug rehabilitation program, but ultimately concluded that the personal conduct concerns were not mitigated, resulting in a denied clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a	falsified her electronic questionnaires for Investigations processing (e-QIP) of May 9, 2023, by deliberately failing to disclose her past offenses involving drugs and alcohol	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
1.b	her 2009 burglary and felony possession of drug paraphernalia charges	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
1.c	her voluntary attendance of a drug rehabilitation center associated with her previous methamphetamine use	For Applicant	Falsification Security Form	—	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Other
1.d	her past use of methamphetamines	For Applicant	Falsification Security Form	—	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Other

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant used methamphetamine and other illegal drugs from 2006 to April 2014. Although the applicant admitted to the allegations, the judge concluded that the applicant's past drug use was mitigated by her abstinence for over nine years and her lack of association with individuals involved in illegal drugs. However, the overall outcome was a denial of eligibility for access to classified information.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
3.a	used methamphetamine and other illegal drugs alleged under Guideline E between 2006 and April 2014	For Applicant	Methamphetamine	Regular	Admitted	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur	Credited Abstinence Period Documented

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 all allegations related to criminal conduct under Guideline J. The applicant had multiple arrests and convictions for alcohol and drug-related offenses, which were not mitigated by any substantial evidence of rehabilitation or corrective actions taken after her last conviction in November 2014.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	was arrested and charged on multiple occasions between September 2005 and November 2014 with alcohol and drug use violations	Against Applicant	Multiple Arrests Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
2.b	most of her charges resulted in convictions, sentencing, and probation; while some were dismissed	Against Applicant	Multiple Arrests Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—

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.