Summary of Decisions - April 26, 2021 - April 30, 2021

Personnel Security Hearing 

Personnel Security; Access Authorization Restored; Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption)

On April 29, 2021, an Administrative Judge determined that the Individual's access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710 should be restored. The Individual is employed by a DOE contractor in a position that requires him to hold a DOE security clearance. The Local Security Office (LSO) received potentially derogatory information regarding the Individual's alcohol consumption. Under Guideline G, the LSO alleged that (1) the DOE Psychologist diagnosed the Individual with Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD), Moderate, without adequate evidence of rehabilitation or reformation; (2) in April 2018, a physician evaluated the Individual for an injury at his work site and detected the smell of alcohol on the Individual's breath during the evaluation; (3) in October 2017, a coworker reported to the Individual's manager that he suspected the Individual was under the influence of alcohol at work, and the Individual subsequently admitted to consuming alcohol the night before reporting to work; and (4) in September 2014, a coworker reported to a manager that he suspected the Individual was under the influence of alcohol at work, and the Individual subsequently admitted to consuming alcohol on the night prior to reporting to work.

At the hearing, the Individual testified as to how his alcohol consumption had changed from when he previously consumed alcohol heavily when he used to live with his brother. He indicated that when he lived with his brother, their idea of having a "good time" involved alcohol use. However, when he moved into a separate residence with his girlfriend in April 2018, he began decreasing his alcohol consumption in response to the fact that she expressed concerns about his alcohol use. He admitted that on past occasions he had tried on his own to stay sober, but usually his sobriety would last for only short periods of a month, and ultimately those efforts proved unsuccessful.

Regarding his mitigation efforts, the Individual indicated that after receiving the Summary of Security Concerns in February 2020, he met with an EAP counselor who referred him to an Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP) that he ultimately completed. The Individual acknowledged that he is an alcoholic and testified that he has been sober since his last consumption of alcohol on February 17, 2020. He asserted that as of the date of the hearing, he has been sober for 413 days. The individual further testified that he intends to remain sober by maintaining total abstinence. He asserted that he has complied with treatment recommendations by completing his IOP program and submitting copies of urine and breathalyzer tests. He also participates in Aftercare group meetings once per week. The DOE Psychologist testified that the Individual has complied with her recommendations by working with a counselor who specializes in substance abuse counseling. She also credited the Individual for his completion of his IOP program. The DOE Psychologist stated that while the Individual has been abstinent for over a year, she took issue with the lack of PEth tests in the record, specifically that the only PEth test in the record at the time of the hearing was a test result from ten months prior to the hearing. She opined that if the Individual could submit a new PEth test after the hearing and which reflected a negative test result, then "that would be sufficient to demonstrate his rehabilitation."

After the hearing, the Individual submitted post-hearing evidence to further support his mitigation efforts. He submitted a PEth test that he took on the same date as the hearing after the hearing ended. He also submitted the test result for that PEth test, which was negative for alcohol use. Based on the testimony and evidence from the Individual as well as the testimony of the DOE Psychologist, the Administrative Judge concluded that the Individual had satisfied the requirements to successfully demonstrate that he had resolved the security concerns under Guideline G. The Administrative Judge therefore concluded that the Individual's access authorization should be restored. OHA Case   No.   PSH-21-0021 ( Kimberly Jenkins-Chapman).

Personnel Security; Access Authorization Granted; Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse); Guideline J (Criminal Conduct)

On April 30, 2021, an Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that an Individual should be granted access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The Individual is employed by a DOE contractor in a position that requires a security clearance. As part of the application for access authorization, the Individual completed a Questionnaire for National Security Positions form in which she disclosed her prior illegal drug use and drug-related arrests. As a result, the DOE LSO requested that the Individual receive a psychiatric evaluation. Afterward, the DOE-consultant psychiatrist provided a report that included his opinion that the Individual met the DSM-5 criteria for Stimulant Use Disorder Amphetamine, Type - Severe, in sustained remission. The DOE subsequently suspended the Individual security clearance process, citing security concerns under Guidelines H and J of the Adjudicative Guidelines.

At the hearing, the Individual did not dispute the DOE's allegations but rather provided documents and witness testimony to resolve the security concerns. At the conclusion of the hearing, the AJ determined that the DOE appropriately invoked Guidelines H and J, and the Individual succeeded in resolving the security concerns for the following reasons. First, the AJ determined the Individual acknowledged her illegal drug use; provided evidence of actions taken to overcome her problem by, among other things, attending Narcotics Anonymous, church, and several faith-based revival weekends and disassociating from former friends who used drugs; and established seven years of abstinence. Second, the AJ determined that the Individual had successfully rehabilitated from her past criminal conduct by demonstrating a seven year period without recurrence of criminal activity, successful completion of job training, obtainment of a GED and associate's degree, a good employment record, and constructive community involvement. Accordingly, the AJ concluded that the Individual should be granted access authorization. OHA Case No. PSH-21-0013 (James P. Thompson III).