PSH-22-0059 - In the Matter of Personnel Security Hearing

On July 20,2022, an Administrative Judge determined that the Individual's access authorization should not be granted under 10 C.F.R. Part 710.  On September 29, 2020, the Individual signed and submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (QNSP) concerning his use of illegal drugs and controlled substances, the Individual disclosed that he had "socially experimented with [ tetrahydrocannabinol] THC" while in college in 2005 and used cannabidiol (CBD) oil containing a " small % of THC" for medicinal purposes in 2018.  The Individual checked boxes marked "no" to indicate that he had not illegally purchased any drug or controlled substance in the prior seven years, been ordered or advised to seek counseling or treatment for drug use, or ever voluntarily sought counseling or treatment due to drug use.

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) conducted a background investigation of the Individual. OPM's investigation revealed that the Individual had failed to disclose the full extent of his drug use, that he had illegally purchased CBD products containing THC, that he had voluntarily entered treatment for drug use, and that he underwent a substance abuse evaluation following his arrest for several offenses in 2018.  The local security office (LSO) issued the Individual a letter of interrogatory (LOI) concerning the information collected during the background investigation. In his response to the LOI, the Individual admitted that he had intentionally omitted information from the QNSP because he feared that he would be denied access authorization.

The LSO issued the Individual a letter notifying him that it possesses reliable information that created substantial doubt regarding his eligibility for access authorization.  Regarding Guideline E, the LSO cited that the individual deliberately omitted information concerning his use of illegal drugs, purchase of illegal drugs, and substance abuse treatment from the QNSP; and deliberately concealed or omitted information during an interview with the OPM investigator.

At the hearing, the Individual testified that his untruthfulness on the QNSP and in the interview with the investigator regarding the full extent of his drug use, as well as his failure to disclose his voluntary treatment were due to being very embarrassed and shameful. He also testified that he feared his application for access authorization would be denied.

The Administrative Judge concluded that the Individual has not satisfied any of the mitigating conditions under Guideline E, and was not convinced that he will proactively disclose derogatory information in the future if he perceives his own interests to be at risk. Therefore, the Administrative Judge determined that the Individual should not be granted access authorization. (OHA Case No . PSH-22-0059, Jenkins-Chapman)