CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 97-0726.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 97-0726.h1denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 97-0726.h1

deniedMar 23, 1998· Hon. Joseph Testan· hearing

Summary

A 41-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) due to a positive methamphetamine test in May 1997. Following this test, the applicant chose to enter an 18-month drug treatment program in June or July 1997, rather than face termination. However, the applicant did not clarify how this program was completed in less than a year.

The denial was primarily based on two factors. First, the applicant tested positive for methamphetamine use on two separate occasions. Second, the applicant consistently denied any methamphetamine or illegal drug use, despite the corroborating test results.

This continued denial undermined the applicant's credibility and led the judge to conclude there was no basis to believe the applicant had reformed or would abstain from future drug use. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant tested positive for methamphetamine use on two separate occasions.
The applicant's continued denial of drug use undermined his credibility and suggested a lack of reform.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

H1raisedAny Drug Abuse

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 28, 1997
Answer filedNov 17, 1997Applicant elected for a written record determination.
Hearing heldMar 17, 1998Case received by the Administrative Judge.
Decision dateMar 23, 1998

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Credibility Issues Arising From Denial of Drug Use Despite Positive Test Results
Lack of Mitigating Factors for Drug Abuse 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.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline H (Drug Involvement) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The applicant tested positive for methamphetamine use in May 1997, which he consistently denied. Despite entering a drug treatment program, the judge found no mitigating factors applicable. The judge concluded that the applicant's illegal drug use reflected adversely on his judgment and trustworthiness, leading to a denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	In May 1997, applicant tested positive for methamphetamine use on a company administered drug test.	Against Applicant	MethamphetamineWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Denied	(a) any substance misuse	—	—
1.b	Applicant was given the choice of entering an eighteen month drug treatment program or being terminated. He chose the drug treatment program and entered it in June or July 1997.	Against Applicant	Treatment FailureWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Denied	(a) any substance misuse	—	—
1.c	He did not, however, explain how he completed an eighteen month program in less than a year.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED	Unspecified	Denied	(a) any substance misuse	—	—
1.d	Because applicant continues to maintain that he has never used methamphetamine or any other illegal drug, notwithstanding the aforementioned test results, there is no basis upon which to conclude he has reformed and will not use methamphetamine in the future.	Against Applicant	Stated Intent to Use AgainWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Denied	(a) any substance misuse	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline H). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

DATE: March 23, 1998 In Re: ------------------------- SSN: ------------ Applicant for Security Clearance ISCR Case No. 97-0726 DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE JOSEPH TESTAN

FOR GOVERNMENT Melvin A. Howry, Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Pro Se

STATEMENT OF CASE

On October 28, 1997, the Defense Office Of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA), pursuant to Executive Order 10865 and Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Directive), dated January 2, 1992, issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) (copy appended) to (Applicant), which detailed reasons why DOHA could not make the preliminary affirmative finding under the Directive that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for applicant and recommended referral to an Administrative Judge to determine whether clearance should be denied or revoked. Applicant responded to the SOR in writing on November 17, 1997, and elected to have his case determined on a written record in lieu of a hearing. Department Counsel submitted the Government's written case on or about February 6, 1998. Applicant filed a response to the Government's written case on March 10, 1998. The case was received by the undersigned Administrative Judge on March 17, 1998.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Applicant is a forty-one year old employee of a defense contractor. He received a DoD security clearance in October 1995. In May 1997, applicant tested positive for methamphetamine use on a company administered drug test. Applicant told his employer that the results of the drug test had to be wrong because he had never used illegal drugs, and asked that the sample he provided be tested by a different laboratory. As a result of applicant's request, the sample was tested by a different laboratory, and it too came back positive for methamphetamine use. Applicant was given the choice of entering an eighteen month drug treatment program or being terminated. He chose the drug treatment program and entered it in June or July1997. In his March 10, 1988 response to the Government's written case, applicant stated that he has "satisfactory (sic) completed" the drug treatment program. He did not, however, explain how he completed an eighteen month program in less than a year. Applicant tested negative for drug use in July, August and September 1997.

POLICIES

Enclosure 2 of the Directive sets forth the Adjudication Policy (divided into Disqualifying Factors and Mitigating Factors) which must be followed by the Administrative Judge. Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact, the following Disqualifying Factors and Mitigating Factors are applicable: DRUG INVOLVEMENT Disqualifying Factors: 1. Any drug abuse Mitigating Factors: None.

CONCLUSION

Applicant has consistently denied using methamphetamine in May 1997, or at any other time. If the sample applicant provided had not tested positive for methamphetamine at two different laboratories, he would be in a much better position to argue that the test results were wrong. However, because it is highly unlikely that two laboratories would make the same mistake, I must conclude that the test results were valid and that applicant must have used methamphetamine on at least one occasion in or around May 1997. This illegal drug use, particularly after he received a DOD security clearance, reflects adversely on applicant's judgment, reliability and trustworthiness, and strongly suggests that he cannot be relied upon to safeguard classified information. Because applicant continues to maintain that he has never used methamphetamine or any other illegal drug, notwithstanding the aforementioned test results, there is no basis upon which to conclude he has reformed and will not use methamphetamine in the future. For this reason, Criterion H is found against applicant.

FORMAL FINDINGS

PARAGRAPH 1: AGAINST THE APPLICANT

DECISION

In light of all the circumstances presented by the record in this case, it is not clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for applicant. ____________________________ Joseph Testan Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

97-0726.h1 file:///usr.osd.mil/...yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/97-0726.h1.html[7/2/2021 4:03:43 PM] 97-0726.h1 file:///usr.osd.mil/...yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/97-0726.h1.html[7/2/2021 4:03:43 PM]