CASEClearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-07286.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-07286.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-07286.h1

grantedJan 31, 2017· Hon. Robert E. Coacher· hearing

Summary

A security clearance was granted to a combat veteran despite concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) related to past marijuana use. The applicant self-reported using marijuana three times between January 2010 and August 2014 while holding a security clearance.

However, significant mitigating factors were presented. The applicant has not used drugs since 2014 and provided a sworn statement of intent not to use drugs in the future. The adjudicator determined that the infrequent nature of the past use and the unlikelihood of recurrence addressed the security concerns.

Ultimately, the judge concluded that the applicant's past conduct did not raise current doubts about his reliability or trustworthiness, leading to the granting of the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant self-reported infrequent marijuana use and has not used drugs since 2014.
He provided a sworn statement of intent not to use drugs in the future.
The circumstances of his past drug use were unlikely to recur.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedThe Drug Involvement Was Infrequent and Occurred Under Circumstances Unlikely to Recur.
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedThe Applicant Demonstrated a Clear Intent Not to Use Drugs in the Future.

Key Rule Quoted

“The concerns over Applicant’s infrequent marijuana use does not create doubt about his current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 16, 2016
Answer filedJul 12, 2016
Hearing heldJan 12, 2017
Decision dateJan 31, 2017Proposed summary disposition in Applicant’s favor on 01/18/2017.

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline H for Infrequent Drug Use
Consideration of a Sworn Statement of Intent Regarding Future Drug Use
Whole-person Concept in Evaluating Security Clearance Eligibility

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 H (Drug Involvement) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The applicant self-reported using marijuana three times between January 2010 and August 2014 while holding a security clearance. The judge found that the applicant's infrequent marijuana use occurred under circumstances unlikely to recur and concluded that the security concerns were mitigated, ultimately granting the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant self-reported using marijuana three times between January 2010 and August 2014 while holding a security clearance.	For Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Experimental	Admitted	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence	Documented Signed Intent with Revocation Clause
1.b–1.d	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified		—	—	—

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.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 15-07286 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

Appearances

For Government: Andrea Corrales, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

01/31/2017 ______________

Decision

______________

COACHER, Robert E., Administrative Judge:

On June 16, 2016, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline H, drug involvement. The action was taken under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the adjudicative guidelines (AG) implemented by the DOD on September 1, 2006.

Applicant responded to the SOR on July 12, 2016, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on September 28, 2016. The hearing was held as scheduled on January 12, 2017. On January 18, 2017, I proposed that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant self-reported using marijuana three times between January 2010 and August 2014 while holding a security clearance. Applicant credibly testified that he is an Army combat veteran with multiple deployments. He experienced domestic difficulties with two marriages and a long-term relationship. While working for a defense contractor and holding a security clearance, he smoked marijuana on three occasions when he was visiting his brother in another state. His brother is a disabled combat veteran who associated with an unsavory group of friends at the time. Applicant’s brother has since moved away from that location and no longer associates with those people. Applicant has not used any drugs since his last marijuana use in 2014 and does not associate with the former friends of his brother. He also provided a signed, sworn statement of intent not to use drugs in the future with the understanding that the consequences of future use would be automatic revocation of his clearance. Applicant’s admitted marijuana use is remote and happened under circumstances unlikely to recur. He also demonstrated his intent not to abuse drugs in the future. Based on the record evidence as a whole, I conclude that the security concerns are mitigated under the following mitigating conditions: AG ¶¶ 26(a) and 26(b).

The concerns over Applicant’s infrequent marijuana use does not create doubt about his current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information. In reaching this conclusion, I weighed the evidence as a whole and considered if the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that he met his ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant his eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

________________________ Robert E. Coacher Administrative Judge