ISCR Case 08-00912.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-00912.h1

grantedJun 29, 2009· Hon. David M. White· hearing

Summary

A 24-year-old human resource representative was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The allegations stemmed from her past cannabis use during her teenage years and an admitted falsification on her June 20, 2007, e-QIP regarding prior drug use.

Specifically, the applicant abused cannabis once in 2000, several times in 2002 and 2003, and regularly over a two-month period in 2004, with her then-boyfriend providing the drugs. Her only possession was that required for use. Disqualifying conditions H.25(a), H.25(c), and H.25(g) were raised.

However, the judge applied mitigating conditions H.26(a), H.26(b), E.17(a), E.17(b), and E.17(c). The applicant demonstrated a clear intent to abstain from drugs, supported by a signed statement and a negative drug test. She also provided substantial evidence of maturation and responsible behavior, including disassociating from drug-using contacts. Her past drug use was infrequent and occurred several years prior, leading the judge to conclude that her past conduct was unlikely to recur and her current reliability was established.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated a clear intent not to abuse drugs in the future, supported by a signed statement of intent and a negative drug test.
She provided substantial evidence of her maturation and responsible behavior since her past drug use, including disassociating from drug-using contacts.
The applicant's past drug use occurred several years ago and was infrequent, which mitigated concerns about her current reliability.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

H.25(a)raisedDrug Abuse
H.25(c)raisedIllegal Drug Possession
H.25(g)rejectedIllegal Drug Use After Clearance GrantedThe applicant's 2007 incident was unintentional and did not constitute illegal drug use.

Mitigating

H.26(a)appliedBehavior Occurred Long Ago
H.26(b)appliedDemonstrated Intent Not to Abuse Drugs
E.17(a)appliedPrompt Good-faith Efforts to Correct Omission
E.17(b)appliedOmission Due to Improper Advice
E.17(c)appliedMinor Offense or Time Passed

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of the national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 16, 2008
Answer filedJan 7, 2009Requested determination without a hearing.
Hearing heldApr 22, 2009Hearing rescheduled due to applicant's request.
Decision dateJun 29, 2009

Cite For

Mitigation of Past Drug Use Under Guideline H
Impact of Parental Advice on Security Clearance Applications
Demonstrated Intent to Abstain From Drug Use as a Mitigating Factor Under Guideline H

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	Applicant admittedly falsified her answer concerning prior drug use when completing her June 20, 2007, e-QIP.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATESELF-CORRECTED	Other	Admitted	—	(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted (b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully (c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances (d) acknowledged the behavior; counseling/positive steps taken (e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation	Credited Corrected Falsification Promptly Credited Explanation of Omission Credible Claimed Other
2.b	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant admittedly falsified her answer concerning prior drug use when completing her June 20, 2007, e-QIP.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATESELF-CORRECTED

Other

Admitted

—

(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted

(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully

(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances

(d) acknowledged the behavior; counseling/positive steps taken

(e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation

Credited

Corrected Falsification Promptly

Credited

Explanation of Omission Credible

Claimed

Other

2.b

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant abused cannabis one time in 2000, several times in 2002 and 2003, and regularly over a two-month period in 2004 with her then-boyfriend who provided the drugs and encouraged her participation.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Frequent	Admitted	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence	Documented Abstinence Period Documented Documented Signed Intent with Revocation Clause
1.b	Her only possession was that necessarily required to use the drugs, so no additional security concerns are supported under AG ¶ 25(c).	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant abused cannabis one time in 2000, several times in 2002 and 2003, and regularly over a two-month period in 2004 with her then-boyfriend who provided the drugs and encouraged her participation.

For Applicant

Marijuana

Frequent

Admitted

—

(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur

(b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence

Documented

Abstinence Period Documented

Documented

Signed Intent with Revocation Clause

1.b

Her only possession was that necessarily required to use the drugs, so no additional security concerns are supported under AG ¶ 25(c).

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

Denied

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

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