Summary of Decisions - May 16, 2022 - May 20, 2022

Personnel Security Hearing (PSH)

Access Authorization Restored; Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption)

On May 16, 2022, an Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that an Individual's access authorization should be restored under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The DOE Local Security Office (LSO) discovered derogatory information regarding the Individual's alcohol use, which prompted the LSO to request that the Individual be evaluated by a DOE -consultant psychologist ("Psychologist"). Subsequently, the LSO informed the Individual that it possessed reliable information that created substantial doubt regarding his eligibility to possess a security clearance because derogatory information raised security concerns under Guideline G of the Adjudicative Guidelines.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the AJ determined that the LSO appropriately invoked Guideline G by citing that the Psychologist's opinion that the Individual engaged in the heavy consumption of alcohol by either binging or drinking significant amounts on a frequent basis, by citing the Psychologist's opinion that the Individual met the diagnosis criteria for Unspecified Alcohol -Related Disorder (AUD), and by citing that in May 2020 the Individual consumed six beers prior to his arrest for Battery Against a Household Member (no great bodily harm).

The AJ also concluded the Individual had resolved the Guideline G security concerns for the following reasons. The Individual acknowledged his pattern of maladaptive alcohol use and  put forth evidence of the actions that he has taken to overcome the problem, including abstaining from alcohol; enlisting the continuing support of his wife; successfully completing an Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP), an anger management course, and a marriage counseling course; and participating in individual counseling, an aftercare treatment program, and his employer's two -year abstinence and recovery program. The Individual was therefore participating in both counseling and a treatment program. The IOP was the Individual's first alcohol-related treatment, and he has no history of relapse . Furthermore, the Individual demonstrated a clear and established pattern of abstinence in accordance with treatment recommendations by exceeding the Psychologist's recommendations for reformation and rehabilitation, making satisfactory progress in his counseling and treatment programs, and receiving a very good prognosis.

Accordingly, the AJ concluded that the Individual had resolved the Guideline G security concerns . OHA Case No. PSH-22-0033 (James P. Thompson III)

 Access Authorization Restored; Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption)

On May 17, 2022, an Administrative Jude determined that the Individual's access authorization should be restored under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The Individual is employed by a DOE contractor in a position that requires her to hold a security clearance. the Local Security Office (LSO) received potentially derogatory information regarding the Individual's alcohol consumption. The LSO alleged that in April 2021, the Individual was arrested and charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and other related charges. The LSO further alleged that a DOE Psychologist evaluated the Individual and opined in a report that the Individual habitually or binge consumes alcohol to the point of experiencing impaired judgement. Further, as a result of impairment or intoxication, the Individual is placed in a position of compromised judgement or reliability.

At the hearing, the Individual, her counselor, her Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) sponsor, her husband, and the DOE Psychologist testified. The testimony and the evidence in the record revealed that the Individual acknowledged her maladaptive alcohol use and sought counseling and joined her local AA chapter the same month she received the DOE Psychologist's report. Further, she began abstaining from alcohol in September 2021 and entered a plea agreement to dispose of the charges recounted in the Notification Letter. Among other things, the agreement required her to submit to drug and alcohol tests. All tests were negative. The Individual enjoyed a strong support system in her family and her sponsor, and experienced benefits from sobriety, like an improvement in her marriage and weight loss. She engaged in hobbies that did not include alcohol consumption and was appropriately engaging in counseling and AA meetings. At the hearing, the DOE Psychologist indicated that the Individual had complied with the recommendations he had made in his report, and as a result, showed adequate evidence of rehabilitation and reformation. Accordingly, he felt the Individual had a good prognosis. The counselor's assessment was consistent with that of DOE Psychologist's, in that the counselor confirmed that the Individual has implemented the DOE Psychologist's recommendations, and further, he opined that the Individual has a low risk of relapse. Based on the evidence, the Administrative Judge concluded that the Individual had mitigated Guideline G concerns. (OHA Case No. PSH-22-0045, Rahimzadeh)

Access Authorization Not Restored; Guideline G  (Alcohol Consumption), Guideline E (Personal Conduct)

On May 19, 2022, an Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that the Individual's access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710 should not be restored. The Individual had been diagnosed with Alcohol Use Disorder, Severe, after being hospitalized for a liver disorder caused by her excessive alcohol consumption. The Individual took the appropriate actions to address her AUD, enrolling in an inpatient treatment program (ITP), attending frequent Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings, obtaining an AA sponsor, working the AA's Twelve Step Program, undergoing individual psychotherapy, and attending an intensive outpatient program (IOP). Despite these actions, the Individual suffered a relapse just four months prior to the hearing. (Evidence in the record suggested that she may have suffered a second relapse just two months prior to the hearing). The AJ found that four months of sobriety was not a sufficient period to demonstrate a clear and established pattern of abstinence to mitigate the significant security concerns raised by the Individual's AUD, Severe, especially given her recent history of relapse.

The Individual had failed to timely report her enrollment in in the ITP to her local security office and her employer as required by Department of Energy Orders. When taking disability leave to attend the ITP, she merely indicated that she was attending to a medical issue. The AJ found that when the Individual testified about her failure to report her in -patient treatment for AUD in a timely manner, she tried to rationalize that behavior instead of acknowledging her lapse in judgment.  The AJ found that this testimony suggested that the Individual's judgment remained flawed.

During a interview with a DOE Psychiatrist, the Individual had admitted using alcohol during working hours. The AJ found that this behavior was clearly symptomatic of her AUD and noted the Individual had not shown that she has been reformed or rehabilitated from her AUD.  Moreover, the AJ found, the way the Individual tried to rationalize this behavior during her hearing testimony rather than acknowledge its problematic nature indicated her judgment remained flawed. (OHA Case No. PSH- 22-0049, Fine)