Summary
This case involved a 29-year-old aerospace engineer seeking a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The Statement of Reasons alleged marijuana use from approximately November 2009 to December 2015, including use after being granted a security clearance in February 2012. Disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 25(a) and AG ¶ 25(f) were raised.
The applicant admitted to infrequent marijuana use but demonstrated significant reform. He ceased use in 2015, self-reported his past drug involvement, and provided full disclosure. Evidence presented included a negative drug test, a favorable substance abuse evaluation, and a signed statement of intent to abstain from future drug use.
The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 26(a) and AG ¶ 26(b). It was determined that the applicant's past marijuana use was infrequent, occurred over a six-year period, and stopped well before the hearing. Crucially, his use did not occur while he had access to classified information. The judge concluded that the applicant posed no current security risk, and the security clearance was GRANTED.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant's marijuana use was infrequent and occurred over a six-year period.
- He stopped using marijuana in 2015, well before the hearing.
- He self-reported his marijuana use and provided full disclosure throughout the process.
- He presented evidence of no current substance abuse issues, including a negative drug test and a favorable evaluation.
- He provided a signed statement of intent to abstain from drug use in the future.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Substance Abuse
- AG ¶ 25(f)raisedAny Illegal Drug Use While Granted Access to Classified Information or Holding a Sensitive Position
- AG ¶ 26(a)appliedThe 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 Judgment
- 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 Abstinence
Key Rule Quoted
“It is well-established law that no one has a right to a security clearance.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 22, 2017
- Answer filedJul 5, 2017
- Hearing heldApr 11, 2018rescheduled due to government shutdown
- Decision dateAug 28, 2018
Cite For
- Mitigation of Past Drug Use Under Guideline H
- Importance of Self-reporting in Security Clearance Cases
- Evidence of Rehabilitation and Reform in Security Clearance Determinations