CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-01417 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-01417

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

Case Profile
Decision Date6/30/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Darlene Lokey Anderson
Government Counsel: John B. Renehan
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 24-year-old single male with a Bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering, employed by a defense contractor. He sought a security clearance but faced allegations under Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) due to his history of illegal drug use, including marijuana, cocaine, mushrooms, and Adderall without a prescription. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) indicated that his drug use raised concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to using marijuana daily from high school through college and purchasing it from friends and dispensaries. He also acknowledged using other illegal drugs intermittently. However, he claimed to have stopped using drugs after receiving a job offer and stated that he had been drug-free for 1 year and 9 months at the time of the hearing. He provided letters of recommendation from his employer, highlighting his strong work ethic and integrity, but these letters did not address his drug use history.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that the mitigating factors did not sufficiently address the security concerns raised by his past drug use. The judge noted that the applicant's history of substance misuse and criminal conduct indicated poor judgment and unreliability, which were incompatible with the trust required for a security clearance. The decision emphasized the importance of protecting national security and the need for individuals in such positions to demonstrate consistent reliability and good judgment.
Guidelines Evaluated
- 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. 24-01417

deniedJun 30, 2025· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 24-year-old Mechanical Engineer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant admitted to using marijuana, cocaine, mushrooms, and Adderall, which raised questions about their judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.

Specifically, the applicant's use of controlled substances was inconsistent with their intended purpose and continued even after becoming aware of an employer's drug-free policy and the requirement to pass a drug test for employment. This history of illegal drug use formed the basis for the disqualifying conditions cited.

Despite the applicant's recent efforts to abstain from drug use, the administrative judge determined that this cessation was insufficient to establish a sustained pattern of good judgment and reliability. Consequently, the applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns, leading to the denial of security clearance eligibility.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had a history of illegal drug use, including marijuana, cocaine, mushrooms, and Adderall, which raised concerns about reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant's drug use continued even after being aware of his employer's drug-free policy and the need to pass a drug test for employment.
The applicant's recent cessation of drug use was insufficient to demonstrate a sustained pattern of good judgment and reliability.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 24raisedDrug Involvement and Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 30raisedCriminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who applies for access to classified information seeks to enter into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 9, 2024
Answer filedOct 15, 2024
Hearing heldJun 11, 2025
Decision dateJun 30, 2025

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Denial of Security Clearance Due to Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation and Good Judgment for Security Clearance Eligibility

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: denied

The judge found that the applicant has a history of using controlled substances, including marijuana, cocaine, and mushrooms, which raises concerns about reliability and trustworthiness. The applicant's recent cessation of drug use was noted, but the judge concluded that more time is needed to demonstrate a sustained positive pattern of conduct, resulting in a denial of the security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has used controlled substances that cause physical or mental impairment or are used in a manner inconsistent with their intended purpose.	Against 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: denied

The judge found that the Applicant engaged in criminal activity related to drug use and purchases, which raised concerns about his judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness. The ruling was against the Applicant, indicating that he failed to mitigate the security concerns associated with his criminal conduct.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant has engaged in criminal activity that creates doubt about a person’s judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—

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.