ISCR Case 17-02493.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-02493.h1

deniedMar 15, 2018· Hon. Marc E. Curry· hearing

Summary

A 30-year-old engineer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The denial stemmed primarily from recent marijuana use, which occurred less than two years prior and after the applicant had already been granted a security clearance. The applicant's argument that he was unaware marijuana use posed a security concern in a state where it is legal was given minimal weight, as his employer had explicitly informed him that such use was incompatible with his position.

While the applicant had a history of prescription drug abuse related to adolescent surgeries, this issue was considered mitigated due to the passage of nearly ten years since the last abuse and the unique circumstances of its origin. His heaviest marijuana use also occurred a decade ago during high school and early college, becoming increasingly sporadic thereafter.

Despite these mitigating factors, and the applicant's current understanding with friends who use marijuana that he does not partake, the judge found the most recent marijuana use too close in time to adequately resolve security concerns. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Applicant's last use of marijuana occurred less than two years ago after being granted a security clearance.
The applicant's contention of misunderstanding the legality of marijuana use was deemed minimally probative given employer's clear prohibition against it.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

H.25(a)raisedAny Substance Misuse
H.25(f)raisedAny Illegal Drug Use While Granted Access to Classified Information or Holding a Sensitive Position

Mitigating

H.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 JudgmentApplicant's last marijuana use was too recent to conclude that he has mitigated the security concern.
H.26(b)rejectedThe 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's recent marijuana use undermined his claims of established abstinence.

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”
— AG ¶ 2(b)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 7, 2017
Answer filedAug 30, 2017
Hearing held—Decision made on written record.
Decision dateMar 15, 2018

Cite For

Recent Marijuana Use After Clearance Grant as a Disqualifying Factor
Insufficient Mitigation Due to Recency of Drug Use
Importance of Employer's Drug Policy Compliance in Clearance Decisions

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

specific text not stated in this decision

Against Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant’s abuse of prescription drugs and use of marijuana, including one episode of marijuana use after the grant of a security clearance, triggers the application of the following disqualifying conditions under AG ¶ 25: (a) any substance misuse; and (f) any illegal drug use while granted access to classified information or holding a sensitive position.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	—	—
1.b	Applicant’s heaviest marijuana use occurred ten years ago when he was in high school and during his first two years of college. It has become increasingly sporadic since then. After graduating from college, he became a full-time employee of his current employer where he had previously been interning. His most recent use of marijuana, however, occurred less than two years ago after the grant of a security clearance.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Frequent	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	—	—
1.c	Applicant contends that he was unaware that marijuana use posed a security concern in a state where it is legal. This contention has minimal probative value given that his employer told him unequivocally that marijuana use was incompatible with the job. Under these circumstances, Applicant’s last use of marijuana is too recent to conclude that he has mitigated the security concern.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Frequent	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	—	—
1.d	Applicant’s prescription drug abuse occurred after he was over-prescribed drugs to ameliorate the pain related to multiple oral surgeries that he underwent as an adolescent. After he recovered from the surgeries, he stockpiled the extra pills, and began using them for their euphoric side effects. Once he began experiencing negative side effects, he stopped using them. He has not abused any prescription drugs in nearly ten years and has no intent to do so in the future. The passage of time since the last abuse and the unique circumstances surrounding his introduction to prescription pain medication, render the likelihood of recurrence unlikely.	For Applicant	Prescription Opioid Misuse	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	(c) prescription abuse followed a prolonged illness and has since ended	—
1.e	Applicant continues to associate with friends who use marijuana. He has an understanding with them that he does not use marijuana and so they do not offer him any.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Occasional	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant’s abuse of prescription drugs and use of marijuana, including one episode of marijuana use after the grant of a security clearance, triggers the application of the following disqualifying conditions under AG ¶ 25: (a) any substance misuse; and (f) any illegal drug use while granted access to classified information or holding a sensitive position.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED

Unspecified

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position

—

1.b

Applicant’s heaviest marijuana use occurred ten years ago when he was in high school and during his first two years of college. It has become increasingly sporadic since then. After graduating from college, he became a full-time employee of his current employer where he had previously been interning. His most recent use of marijuana, however, occurred less than two years ago after the grant of a security clearance.

Against Applicant

MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED

Frequent

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position

—

1.c

Applicant contends that he was unaware that marijuana use posed a security concern in a state where it is legal. This contention has minimal probative value given that his employer told him unequivocally that marijuana use was incompatible with the job. Under these circumstances, Applicant’s last use of marijuana is too recent to conclude that he has mitigated the security concern.

Against Applicant

MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED

Frequent

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position

—

1.d

Applicant’s prescription drug abuse occurred after he was over-prescribed drugs to ameliorate the pain related to multiple oral surgeries that he underwent as an adolescent. After he recovered from the surgeries, he stockpiled the extra pills, and began using them for their euphoric side effects. Once he began experiencing negative side effects, he stopped using them. He has not abused any prescription drugs in nearly ten years and has no intent to do so in the future. The passage of time since the last abuse and the unique circumstances surrounding his introduction to prescription pain medication, render the likelihood of recurrence unlikely.

For Applicant

Prescription Opioid Misuse

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

(c) prescription abuse followed a prolonged illness and has since ended

—

1.e

Applicant continues to associate with friends who use marijuana. He has an understanding with them that he does not use marijuana and so they do not offer him any.

Against Applicant

MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED

Occasional

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES