CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-02211 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-02211

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

Case Profile
Decision Date8/27/2025
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Richard A. Cefola
Government Counsel: John B. Renehan
Applicant's Counsel: Alan V. Edmunds
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 42-year-old defense contractor who sought a security clearance after submitting his Electronic Questionnaire for Investigations Processing (e-QIP) on April 13, 2023. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) on February 28, 2025, citing security concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse) and later amended to include Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The core allegations included the applicant's admitted use of illegal substances while employed in a sensitive position.
During the hearing, the applicant admitted to using cocaine and hallucinogenic mushrooms at a party in July 2023 and using marijuana on four occasions, including twice in June 2016 and twice in August 2023. He expressed regret for his actions and provided evidence of his commitment to abstain from future drug use, including signing a Statement of Intent and utilizing a Continuous Automatic Pressure (CAP) machine for his sleep apnea. The applicant denied any intent to falsify information during his interviews, asserting that his statements were consistent and credible.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that he had mitigated the security concerns related to both drug involvement and personal conduct. The judge found that the applicant's past drug use was infrequent and not of present security significance, and his credible testimony indicated no willful falsification of facts. The decision emphasized the importance of the whole-person concept, considering the applicant's overall conduct and circumstances, ultimately determining that he was eligible for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · For 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. 24-02211

grantedAug 27, 2025· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

This case concerns a 42-year-old defense contractor who was granted a security clearance despite allegations under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The Statement of Reasons detailed several admissions by the applicant, including using cocaine and hallucinogenic mushrooms once in July 2023 while in a sensitive position. Additionally, the applicant admitted to using marijuana twice in June 2016 and twice in August 2023, stating it was to treat sleep apnea.

The applicant denied falsifying facts during a June 4, 2024 interview regarding his marijuana use. The administrative judge ultimately found no willful falsification in the applicant's statements.

Key mitigating factors led to the clearance being granted. The applicant demonstrated a commitment to abstain from future drug use by signing a Statement of Intent. He also provided credible testimony and evidence of rehabilitation, including taking drug courses and using a CPAP machine for his sleep apnea. Based on these factors, the applicant was granted eligibility for access to classified information.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated a commitment to abstain from future drug use by signing a Statement of Intent.
The applicant provided credible testimony and evidence of rehabilitation, including taking drug courses and using a CPAP machine for sleep apnea.
The judge found no willful falsification in the applicant's statements during the security interview.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25 (a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25 (f)raisedIllegal Drug Use While Holding a Sensitive Position

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26 (a)appliedBehavior Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 26 (b)appliedAcknowledgment of Drug Involvement and Established Pattern of Abstinence

Key Rule Quoted

“The administrative judge’s overarching adjudicative goal is a fair, impartial, and commonsense decision.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 28, 2025
Answer filedApr 4, 2025
Hearing heldJul 23, 2025continued until August 14, 2025
Decision dateAug 27, 2025

Cite For

Mitigating Factors for Past Drug Use Under Guideline H
Credibility of Applicant's Testimony Regarding Personal Conduct
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 E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant did not falsify facts during an interview regarding his past marijuana use. The applicant's past drug involvement was deemed infrequent and not of present security significance, leading to a conclusion that the applicant mitigated the personal conduct concerns. The outcome was granted in favor of the applicant.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant denies that he falsified facts during a June 4, 2024, interview, when he admitted using marijuana twice in June 2016, and twice again in August 2023.	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE	—	Denied	—	(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted (f) information was unsubstantiated or from a questionable source	—

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: granted

The judge found that the applicant had a history of drug use, including cocaine and hallucinogenic mushrooms in July 2023, and marijuana use in June 2016 and August 2023. However, the judge concluded that the applicant's past, infrequent drug involvement was not of present security significance, leading to a decision to grant the security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant admits that in July of 2023, on one occasion, at a party more than two years ago, he used cocaine and hallucinogenic mushrooms, while employed in a sensitive position.	For Applicant	Drug Use During ClearanceWHILE CLEARED	Experimental	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur	—
1.c	Applicant admits that twice in June 2016, more than nine years ago, and twice in August 2023, about two years ago, he used marijuana to treat his sleep apnea.	For Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Occasional	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur	Claimed Substance Treatment Completed

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.