ISCR Case 10-08257.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 10-08257.h1

grantedAug 25, 2011· Hon. Juan J. Rivera· hearing

Summary

This DOHA security clearance decision involved a 26-year-old master electrician, with concerns raised under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The Statement of Reasons alleged that the applicant illegally used marijuana in 1999, failed to disclose this use in security clearance applications from 1999 until 2008, and made a false statement during a March 2008 interview with a Government investigator. Specifically, it was noted that the applicant illegally experimented with marijuana in 1999 when he was 14 years old.

Disqualifying conditions under both guidelines were considered, including those related to illegal drug use and deliberate misrepresentation. However, several mitigating conditions were applied.

The judge ultimately granted the security clearance. This decision was based on findings that the applicant's 1999 marijuana use was temporally remote and infrequent. The applicant demonstrated reliability, sound judgment, and a commitment to comply with laws and regulations. Furthermore, the applicant's demeanor and credible testimony supported his claim of having used marijuana only once.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's 1999 marijuana use was deemed temporally remote and infrequent.
The applicant demonstrated reliability, judgment, and a commitment to comply with laws and regulations.
The applicant's demeanor and credible testimony supported his claims of only using marijuana once.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Drug Abuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Drug Possession
AG ¶ 16(e)raisedPersonal Conduct Creating Vulnerability
AG ¶ 16(g)raisedAssociation with Persons Involved in Criminal Activity

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)appliedThe Drug Involvement Was Infrequent and Remote
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedThe Individual Has Disassociated From Drug-using Associates
AG ¶ 17(c)appliedThe Individual Acknowledged the Behavior Was Improper
AG ¶ 17(d)appliedThe Individual Is Now a Responsible Person
AG ¶ 17(f)appliedThe Information Was Unsubstantiated
AG ¶ 17(g)appliedThe Individual Has Taken Steps to Reduce Vulnerability

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 29, 2011
Answer filedMay 16, 2011
Hearing heldJul 26, 2011Applicant testified and presented witnesses.
Decision dateAug 25, 2011

Cite For

Mitigation of Past Drug Use Under Guideline H Due to Time Elapsed
Credibility of Applicant's Testimony Regarding Drug Use
Application of Whole-person Concept in Security 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	Applicant illegally used marijuana in 1999.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances (d) acknowledged the behavior; counseling/positive steps taken (f) information was unsubstantiated or from a questionable source (g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt	—
2.b	Applicant failed to disclose in his security clearance applications that he illegally used marijuana from 1999 until 2008.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	(f) information was unsubstantiated or from a questionable source	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse
2.c	Applicant made a false statement during a March 2008 interview with a Government investigator.	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE	—	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	(f) information was unsubstantiated or from a questionable source	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse
2.d–2.e	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)	For Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant illegally used marijuana in 1999.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

—

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

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

(f) information was unsubstantiated or from a questionable source

(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt

—

2.b

Applicant failed to disclose in his security clearance applications that he illegally used marijuana from 1999 until 2008.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form

(f) information was unsubstantiated or from a questionable source

Claimed

Acknowledgment and Remorse

2.c

Applicant made a false statement during a March 2008 interview with a Government investigator.

For Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE

—

Denied

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

(f) information was unsubstantiated or from a questionable source

Claimed

Acknowledgment and Remorse

2.d–2.e

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant). (low confidence)

For Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant illegally experimented with marijuana in 1999, when he was 14 years old.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Experimental	Denied	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence	Credited Passage of Time

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant illegally experimented with marijuana in 1999, when he was 14 years old.

For Applicant

Marijuana

Experimental

Denied

(a) any substance misuse

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

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

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

Credited

Passage of Time

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

FOOTNOTES