CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-01676 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-01676

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

Case Profile
Decision Date11/13/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Richard A. Cefola
Government Counsel: Cynthia Ruckno
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 30-year-old employee of a defense contractor, applying for a security clearance for the first time. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse). The core allegations included the applicant's long-term use of marijuana, including usage while holding a security clearance, and a positive drug test result.
The applicant admitted to purchasing and using marijuana from October 2009 to December 2024, including during the period he held a security clearance. He acknowledged testing positive for marijuana through a hair follicle test but denied any future intent to use marijuana, stating that his job was more important. However, he had previously indicated an intention to continue using marijuana. The applicant did not provide any evidence of rehabilitation or a commitment to abstain from drug use.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he did not mitigate the security concerns related to his drug use. The judge noted that while there was no evidence of marijuana use after December 2024, the applicant's long history of drug involvement, particularly while holding a sensitive position, raised significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness. Consequently, the judge denied the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information, emphasizing the paramount importance of national security in such determinations.
Guidelines Evaluated
- 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. 24-01676

deniedNov 13, 2025· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A 30-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) due to extensive marijuana use over approximately 15 years. The applicant admitted to purchasing and using marijuana from about October 2009 to about December 2024. This included using marijuana while holding a security clearance and a sensitive position from about June 2024 to December 2024.

Further, the applicant tested positive for marijuana during a hair follicle test. While the applicant stated in his Answer to the Statement of Reasons that he would not use marijuana in the future, the judge found insufficient evidence of rehabilitation or a firm commitment to abstain from drug use.

The decision cited disqualifying conditions related to drug involvement, including the frequency and recency of use, and use while holding a security clearance. Although mitigating conditions were considered, the judge ultimately determined that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient mitigation, leading to the denial of the security clearance based on national security concerns.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Applicant admitted to using marijuana for approximately 15 years, including while holding a security clearance.
Applicant tested positive for marijuana during a hair follicle test.
The judge found no evidence of rehabilitation or a commitment to abstain from drug use.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(b)raisedTesting Positive for an Illegal Drug
AG ¶ 25(f)raisedIllegal Drug Use While Granted Access to Classified Information
AG ¶ 25(g)raisedExpressed Intent to Continue Drug Involvement

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)rejectedBehavior Happened so Long Ago or InfrequentlyThe judge found the applicant's drug use recent and ongoing.
AG ¶ 26(b)rejectedAcknowledgment of Drug Involvement and Evidence of Actions Taken to Overcome This ProblemThe applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or a commitment to abstain.

Key Rule Quoted

“[A]ny doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 7, 2025
Answer filedMar 24, 2024Requested decision based on written record.
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateNov 13, 2025

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Extensive Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation in Drug-related Cases
Importance of Compliance with Federal Drug Laws in Security Clearance Determinations

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant had a long history of marijuana use, including while holding a security clearance. The applicant tested positive for marijuana during a hair follicle test. Despite the applicant's claim of no future intent to use marijuana, the judge concluded that granting eligibility for a security clearance was not consistent with the national interest, resulting in a denial of the application.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant admitted having purchased and used marijuana from about October 2009 to about December 2024, a period of about 15 years.	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	He also admitted to using marijuana while having a security clearance and holding a sensitive position, from about June 2024 till December 2024.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Appellant admitted to testing positive for marijuana during a hair follicle test.	Against Applicant	Drug Test Failure	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	In his Answer to the SOR, Appellant denied he was going to use marijuana in the future.	Against Applicant	Stated Intent to Use Again	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	Claimed Other
1.e	specific text not stated in this decision	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.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.