ISCR Case 04-07769.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 04-07769.h1

grantedJan 23, 2006· Hon. Thomas M. Crean· hearing

Summary

A 29-year-old software engineer for a defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The Statement of Reasons detailed a history of illegal drug use between 1997 and 2003, including marijuana, cocaine, ecstasy, oxycontin, and hydrocodone. Specific allegations included using cocaine at least 30 times, ecstasy approximately 25 times, and hydrocodone about 50 times. The applicant was also arrested in October 2000 for conspiracy to sell a controlled substance, though charges were dismissed, and she associated with a drug-using boyfriend until late 2004.

The judge found that the applicant successfully mitigated these security concerns. She ceased all illegal drug use in June 2003 and has maintained sobriety since. The applicant actively sought therapy and made significant lifestyle changes, including ending associations with drug users, to avoid future drug involvement.

Her credible testimony and positive evaluations from her therapist further supported her case. Based on these mitigating factors, the judge determined that the security concerns related to her past drug involvement and personal conduct were resolved, and the security clearance was GRANTED.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant stopped using illegal drugs in June 2003 and has not used them since.
She sought therapy and made significant lifestyle changes to avoid drug use.
The applicant's credible testimony and positive evaluations from her therapist supported her case.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A8.1.2.1raisedAny Drug Abuse
E2.A8.1.2.2raisedIllegal Drug Possession
E2.A5.1.2.1raisedReliable, Unfavorable Information Provided by Associates
E2.A5.1.2.5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations
E2.A5.1.3.6raisedAssociation with Persons Involved in Criminal Activity

Mitigating

E2.A8.1.3.1appliedThe Drug Involvement Was Not Recent
E2.A8.1.3.3appliedA Demonstrated Intent Not to Abuse Any Drugs in the Future
E2.A5.1.3.5appliedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion
E2.A5.1.3.7appliedAssociation with Persons Involved in Criminal Activities Has Ceased

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the security guidelines contained in the Directive.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 14, 2005
Answer filedJun 28, 2005
Hearing heldNov 30, 2005
Decision dateJan 23, 2006

Cite For

Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Personal Conduct Considerations Under Guideline E
Importance of Lifestyle Changes and Therapy in Security Clearance Cases

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–2.b	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a–2.b

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

For Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Used marijuana on two occasions while in college from January 1997 to December 1998.	For Applicant	Marijuana	Experimental	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Used cocaine at least 30 times from the summer 1998 to the summer 2003.	For Applicant	CocaineWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	—	(a) behavior happened long ago / infrequent / unlikely to recur (b) acknowledges involvement; evidence of action; established abstinence (c) prescription abuse followed a prolonged illness and has since ended	Documented Rehabilitation Evidence
1.c	Purchased and used ecstasy approximately 25 times from April 2000 until June 2002.	For Applicant	MDMA	Frequent	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	Used oxycontin without a prescription approximately five times from June 2001 to January 2002.	For Applicant	Prescription Opioid Misuse	Occasional	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	Purchased and used hydrocodone contrary to medical directions approximately 50 times from April 2000 until March 2002.	For Applicant	Prescription Opioid Misuse	Frequent	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	Was arrested in October 2000 for conspiracy to sell a controlled substance; charges were dismissed.	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug InvolvementRelated Misconduct	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	Admitted associating with a boyfriend who used drugs until she broke off the relationship at the end of 2004.	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

Used marijuana on two occasions while in college from January 1997 to December 1998.

For Applicant

Marijuana

Experimental

Admitted

—

1.b

Used cocaine at least 30 times from the summer 1998 to the summer 2003.

For Applicant

CocaineWHILE CLEARED

Regular

Admitted

—

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

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

(c) prescription abuse followed a prolonged illness and has since ended

Documented

Rehabilitation Evidence

1.c

Purchased and used ecstasy approximately 25 times from April 2000 until June 2002.

For Applicant

MDMA

Frequent

Admitted

—

1.d

Used oxycontin without a prescription approximately five times from June 2001 to January 2002.

For Applicant

Prescription Opioid Misuse

Occasional

Admitted

—

1.e

Purchased and used hydrocodone contrary to medical directions approximately 50 times from April 2000 until March 2002.

For Applicant

Prescription Opioid Misuse

Frequent

Admitted

—

1.f

Was arrested in October 2000 for conspiracy to sell a controlled substance; charges were dismissed.

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug InvolvementRelated Misconduct

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.g

Admitted associating with a boyfriend who used drugs until she broke off the relationship at the end of 2004.

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

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

SYNOPSIS

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES