CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 25-00067 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 25-00067

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

Case Profile
Decision Date9/9/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Darlene Lokey Anderson
Government Counsel: Aubrey M. De Angelis
Case Summary
clearance since the age of 21, the administrative judge found that Applicant's repeated false statements regarding his drug use on multiple security clearance applications raised significant concerns under Guideline H, Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse, and Guideline E, Personal Conduct. The Statement of Reasons outlined allegations of marijuana use from 2012 to 2024, including instances while employed in sensitive positions.
During the hearing, Applicant admitted to using marijuana on several occasions but denied specific allegations regarding the frequency and context of his use. He claimed confusion about the legality of marijuana use in relation to his security clearance and asserted that he believed he was in a "don't ask, don't tell" environment. Despite his assertions of mitigating factors, such as his consistent job performance and lack of prior security violations, the judge noted that Applicant had not established a clear pattern of abstinence or taken sufficient steps to address his drug use.
The administrative judge ruled against Applicant, concluding that the evidence did not sufficiently mitigate the security concerns raised by his drug involvement and dishonesty. The judge emphasized the importance of trust and reliability in maintaining a security clearance, stating that Applicant's actions undermined the confidence necessary for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- 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. 25-00067

deniedSep 9, 2025· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 31-year-old Electrical Engineer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The denial stemmed from the applicant's repeated marijuana use while holding a security clearance and his provision of false information on multiple security clearance applications regarding this drug use.

Specific allegations included providing false answers on applications, failing to report marijuana use while cleared, and demonstrating conduct that raised questions about his willingness to comply with regulations. The applicant's credibility was also questioned due to repeated dishonesty. Disqualifying conditions cited included those related to personal conduct and drug involvement.

The judge determined that the applicant's intermittent marijuana use while cleared showed a lack of judgment, and his false statements on applications indicated a pattern of dishonesty. Ultimately, the applicant failed to provide credible evidence of rehabilitation or a commitment to future abstinence from drug use, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant used marijuana intermittently while holding a security clearance, demonstrating a lack of judgment and responsibility.
The applicant provided false answers on multiple security clearance applications regarding his drug use, indicating a pattern of dishonesty.
The applicant failed to present credible evidence of rehabilitation or a commitment to abstain from drug use in the future.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedSubstance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
AG ¶ 25(f)raisedIllegal Drug Use While Holding a Security Clearance
AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission or Falsification
AG ¶ 16(d)raisedCredible Adverse Information

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”
— AG ¶ 2(b)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 27, 2025
Answer filedMay 21, 2025
Hearing heldAug 13, 2025
Decision dateSep 9, 2025

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Pattern of Dishonesty Affecting Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline E
Importance of Truthful Responses on Security Clearance Applications

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: denied

The judge found against the applicant on all allegations under Guideline E, concluding that the applicant provided false answers regarding drug use on security clearance applications, failed to report marijuana use while holding a security clearance, exhibited immaturity that raised questions about compliance with laws and regulations, and demonstrated a lack of credibility due to repeated dishonesty. The application for security clearance was denied.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant provided false answers on security clearance applications regarding drug use.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant failed to report marijuana use while holding a security clearance.	Against Applicant	Failure to Report Required InformationFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	Applicant's conduct shows immaturity and raises questions about his ability or willingness to comply with laws, rules, and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	—	—	—
2.d	Applicant's credibility remains in question due to repeated dishonesty.	Against Applicant	Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations	—	Denied	—	—	—

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: denied

The judge found that the applicant used marijuana on numerous occasions, including while holding a security clearance and employed in a sensitive position. The applicant's conduct was deemed irresponsible and raised concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness, leading to a denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant used marijuana on numerous occasions, and at times while employed in a sensitive position, one which required a security clearance.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Frequent	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant used marijuana while holding a security clearance and while employed in a sensitive position.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—

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.