ISCR Case 09-07472.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-07472.h1

deniedJul 1, 2009· Hon. Arthur E. Marshall, Jr.· hearing

Summary

A 49-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The denial stemmed from the applicant's admitted past marijuana use and cultivation while already holding a security clearance. Specific allegations included using marijuana at a high school reunion in 2005 and approximately a dozen additional times before marijuana was discovered in his basement in October 2005.

Furthermore, the applicant was charged with possession of a controlled substance following the discovery and admitted to cultivating marijuana plants, moving them from his garden to his basement for drying. He also failed to disclose his 2004 marijuana use on his security clearance application. While the applicant demonstrated a commitment to abstain from illegal drugs since 2005 and had a supportive fiancée, these mitigating factors were not sufficient.

The denial was based on the applicant's admitted use and cultivation of marijuana while holding a clearance, which raised significant questions about his judgment and reliability. Additionally, a delay of over two years in reporting these drug-related incidents to security personnel indicated a lack of candor and compliance with security obligations.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using and cultivating marijuana while holding a security clearance, which raised significant concerns about his judgment and reliability.
The applicant delayed reporting his drug-related incidents to security personnel for over two years, indicating a lack of candor and compliance with security obligations.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Drug Abuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Drug Possession, Including Cultivation
AG ¶ 16(c)raisedCredible Adverse Information in Several Adjudicative Areas

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(b)(4)appliedA Signed Statement of Intent with Automatic Revocation of Clearance for Any Violation
AG ¶ 26(a)rejectedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Happened Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
AG ¶ 17(e)rejectedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Mitigate the Security Concerns

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 14, 2010
Answer filedJun 24, 2010
Hearing heldOct 6, 2010
Decision dateNov 15, 2010

Cite For

Serious Breach of Trust Due to Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Lack of Candor in Reporting Adverse Incidents Under Guideline E
The Importance of Timely Disclosure of Incidents Affecting 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.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant used and cultivated marijuana while holding a security clearance.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
2.b	Applicant did not note marijuana use in 2004 on his SCA.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Other	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant used and cultivated marijuana while holding a security clearance.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern

—

2.b

Applicant did not note marijuana use in 2004 on his SCA.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Other

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	The applicant used marijuana at his high school reunion in 2005 and about a dozen more times before his marijuana was discovered in his basement in October 2005.	For Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Occasional	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia (g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue	(b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence (b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence (b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence	—
1.b	The applicant did not disclose his marijuana use in 2004 on his security clearance application.	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED	Unspecified	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	The applicant was charged with possession of a controlled substance after the marijuana was discovered in his basement.	For Applicant	Drug Diagnosed DisorderWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	The applicant cultivated marijuana plants in his garden and moved them to his basement for drying.	For Applicant	Drug Possession with IntentWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

The applicant used marijuana at his high school reunion in 2005 and about a dozen more times before his marijuana was discovered in his basement in October 2005.

For Applicant

MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED

Occasional

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia

(g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue

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

—

1.b

The applicant did not disclose his marijuana use in 2004 on his security clearance application.

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED

Unspecified

Admitted

—

1.c

The applicant was charged with possession of a controlled substance after the marijuana was discovered in his basement.

For Applicant

Drug Diagnosed DisorderWHILE CLEARED

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.d

The applicant cultivated marijuana plants in his garden and moved them to his basement for drying.

For Applicant

Drug Possession with IntentWHILE CLEARED

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

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