Summary
A 64-year-old defense contractor with a Ph.D. was denied a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) due to marijuana use while holding a clearance. The Statement of Reasons alleged the applicant used marijuana approximately four to six times a week from January 2015 to May 2015. This activity raised disqualifying conditions under Adjudicative Guidelines (AG) ¶ 25(a) and AG ¶ 25(f).
The applicant claimed medical necessity for the use and stated he had abstained since May 2015. However, the judge found these claims insufficient to mitigate the security concerns. While mitigating conditions AG ¶ 26(a) and AG ¶ 26(b) were considered, they were not applied effectively.
The denial was based on several factors: the applicant's consistent marijuana use while cleared, the fact that this use occurred after 30 years of holding a security clearance, indicating a disregard for federal law and employer policy, and the judge's determination that the applicant's claim of abstinence did not sufficiently demonstrate that recurrence was unlikely.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant used marijuana four to six times a week while holding a security clearance.
- The applicant's marijuana use occurred after 30 years of holding a security clearance, demonstrating a disregard for federal law and employer policy.
- The applicant's claim of abstinence was insufficient to convince the judge that recurrence was unlikely.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Substance Misuse
- AG ¶ 25(f)raisedAny Illegal Drug Use While Granted Access to Classified Information or Holding a Sensitive Position
- AG ¶ 26(a)rejectedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Happened Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur or Does Not Cast Doubt on the Individual's Current Reliability, Trustworthiness, or Good JudgmentInsufficient time has passed to determine if recurrence is unlikely.
- AG ¶ 26(b)appliedThe Individual Acknowledges His or Her Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse, Provides Evidence of Actions Taken to Overcome This Problem, and Has Established a Pattern of AbstinenceThe applicant provided a signed statement of intent to abstain but did not fully acknowledge the consequences of future misuse.
Key Rule Quoted
“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedAug 29, 2016
- Answer filedNov 10, 2016
- Hearing heldJan 18, 2018Rescheduled twice from June 21, 2017, and August 15, 2017.
- Decision dateApr 19, 2018
Cite For
- Disregard for Federal Law Regarding Drug Use Under Guideline H
- Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation and Abstinence From Drug Use
- Impact of Medical Marijuana Use on Security Clearance Eligibility