Summary
The applicant, a 45-year-old single male with advanced degrees, sought to retain his security clearance despite allegations of drug involvement and personal conduct. He admitted to using marijuana and visiting legal brothels in the Netherlands and Mexico while holding a security clearance. The judge found that the applicant's past conduct was infrequent, occurred several years ago, and he demonstrated a commitment to abstaining from such behavior in the future, leading to a decision to grant the security clearance.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant admitted visiting prostitutes in legal brothels both in Mexico and the Netherlands. The visits in Mexico occurred several times between 2008 and 2009. The visits in the Netherlands occurred during the trips he made to that country in 2008 and 2011 (2.a). The Government also alleges that Applicant’s conduct in purchasing and using marijuana while holding a Top Secret security clearance is cognizable under this paragraph (2.b). The Government alleges in this paragraph that Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he purchased and used marijuana while holding a security clearance (1.a).
The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions H.25.a, H.25.c, H.25.g, E.16.c, E.16.e. The judge applied mitigating conditions H.26.a, H.26.b, E.17.c, E.17.d, E.17.e. The decision turned on the following: The applicant's drug use was infrequent and occurred four years prior to the decision; He demonstrated a credible intent not to use drugs in the future and disassociated from drug-using associates; The applicant's admissions about his conduct were transparent and known to friends, mitigating concerns about personal conduct.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant's drug use was infrequent and occurred four years prior to the decision.
- He demonstrated a credible intent not to use drugs in the future and disassociated from drug-using associates.
- The applicant's admissions about his conduct were transparent and known to friends, mitigating concerns about personal conduct.
Conditions Referenced
- H.25.araisedAny Drug Abuse
- H.25.craisedIllegal Drug Possession, Including Purchase
- H.25.graisedAny Illegal Drug Use After Being Granted a Security Clearance
- E.16.craisedCredible Adverse Information in Several Adjudicative Issue Areas
- E.16.eraisedPersonal Conduct That Creates a Vulnerability to Exploitation
- H.26.aappliedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Happened Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur
- H.26.bappliedA Demonstrated Intent Not to Abuse Any Drugs in the Future
- E.17.cappliedThe Offense Is so Minor, or so Much Time Has Passed, or the Behavior Is so Infrequent
- E.17.dappliedThe Individual Has Acknowledged the Behavior and Taken Other Positive Steps
- E.17.eappliedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Exploitation
Key Rule Quoted
“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedSep 27, 2014
- Answer filedDec 30, 2014
- Hearing held—Decision made without a hearing.
- Decision dateOct 28, 2015
Cite For
- Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H Due to Infrequent Use and Time Elapsed
- Consideration of Personal Conduct in the Context of Legal Activities Abroad
- Whole-person Assessment in Security Clearance Determinations.