PSH-22-0089 - - In the Matter of Personnel Security Hearing

On August 30, 2022, an Administrative Jude determined that the Individual's access authorization should not be restored under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The Individual is employed by a DOE contractor in a position that requires him to hold a security clearance. the Local Security Office (LSO) received potentially derogatory information regarding the Individual's alcohol consumption, personal conduct, and psychological condition. Regarding the Guideline E concerns, the LSO alleged that during the psychological evaluation on January 13, 2022, the Individual indicated that he had last consumed alcohol in September 2021. However, the (Phosphatidylethanol) PEth test results were "positive at a level of 737 ng/mL[,]" indicating "heavy alcohol use and confirmed evidence of regular, heavy drinking in the last three weeks before the test." The LSO also alleged that in the November 5, 2021, LOI, the Individual indicated that he last drank alcohol in January 2021, but he admitted during the psychological evaluation that he consumed alcohol in April or May 2021 and September 2021. With respect to Guideline G, the LSO alleged that: 1) the DOE Psychologist diagnosed the Individual with AUD, Severe, and without evidence of rehabilitation or reformation; 2) the Individual submitted to a PEth test in conjunction with the psychological evaluation, the results of which indicated "heavy alcohol use and confirmed evidence of regular, heavy drinking in the last three weeks [;]" and 3) the Individual was terminated from prior employment in October 2019 because he did not submit to a drug test, and "admitted that he had consumed two beers before his shift[.]" With respect to Guideline I, the LSO alleged that the DOE Psychologist determined that the Individual "has difficulty with tolerating shame about his lack of control over drinking which leads him to minimize and be less than forthcoming about his behavior." Further, the DOE Psychologist determined this behavior "calls into question his judgement, reliability, and trustworthiness."

At the hearing, the Individual, his girlfriend, and the DOE Psychologist testified. The evidence in the record established that the Individual had received treatment for his alcohol consumption on three different occasions from approximately April 2019 to August 2020 and participated in Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings approximately once a month. The Individual attributed his alcohol consumption to life-altering stressors, and he began consuming alcohol again in December 2020. The Individual stated in his November 2021 LOI that he last consumed alcohol in January 2021, but during his January 2022 psychological evaluation, he stated that he had also consumed alcohol in either April or May 2021 and again in September 2021. The DOE Psychologist diagnosed the Individual with Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD), Severe, and opined that the Individual had not shown adequate evidence of rehabilitation or reformation. She also opined in her January 28, 2022, Psychological Assessment ( report), that the Individual experiences "difficulty tolerating shame about his lack of control over drinking" which "leads him to minimize and be less than forthcoming about his behavior." The Individual's failure to be completely forthcoming "calls into question his judgement, reliability, and trustworthiness."

The Individual testified that he had been abstinent from alcohol since late May 2022, that he began attending AA meetings on a weekly basis in late June 2022, and that he was working on step 3 of the "twelve steps" with his sponsor. The Individual had also secured the services of a therapist and had attended two introductory sessions of therapy. The Individual voluntarily submitted to two PEth tests, one in late June 2022 and one in late July 2022. The June test was positive, but the July test was negative. He also indicated that he is able to identify his triggers and that he is able to cope with them using his support system and meditation. The Individual also admitted that he had been attempting to hide the amount of alcohol he was drinking from investigators but stated that his current statements regarding his alcohol consumption could be trusted. At the hearing, the DOE Psychologist opined that the Individual had not shown adequate evidence of rehabilitation or reformation. Further, she still held the opinion that the Individual continued to exhibit an emotional, mental, or personality condition (namely, his difficulty tolerating shame regarding his alcohol consumption) which could impair his reliability or judgement.

Regarding Guideline E, the record lacked any indication that the Individual attempted to correct the misrepresentations in question prior to being confronted with them. Further, the Individual's

misrepresentations were in the context of the current investigation and pertained to the very matter that posed some concern to the LSO, the Individual's alcohol consumption. The record was bereft of any indication that the stressors or circumstances that caused the misrepresentations had been eliminated by the therapy sessions, and further, there was no evidence that the therapy sessions had reduced or eliminated vulnerability to exploitation, manipulation, or duress. Accordingly, the Administrative Judge could not conclude that the Individual had mitigated the stated Guideline E concerns.

Regarding Guideline G, the Individual had not remained sober for three to six months, he had a previous history of treatment and relapse, the DOE Psychologist did not see adequate evidence of rehabilitation or reformation, and he had not shown a clear and established pattern of abstinence . Further, there was no indication that the Individual had been making satisfactory progress with his therapist. Accordingly, the Administrative Judge could not conclude that the Individual had mitigated the Guideline G concerns.

Regarding the Guideline E concerns, although the Individual had secured the services of a therapist, there was no indication which specific behavior, other than the Individual's maladaptive alcohol consumption, the therapy intended to address. Further, the Individual had attended only two sessions at the time of the hearing, and the record was bereft of any evidence that the Individual was complying with the treatment plan or that his prognosis was good. the DOE Psychologist also testified she still held the opinion that the Individual continued to exhibit an emotional, mental, or personality condition that could impair his reliability or judgement. There was no competent evidence in the record that indicated a recent opinion by a qualified mental health professional that suggests the condition was in remission or no longer existed. Additionally, there was no evidence in the record, from a mental health professional or otherwise, that indicated the Individual's shame "about his lack of control over drinking" and the resulting "less than forthcoming" behavior regarding his alcohol use was temporary or has since been resolved. Accordingly, the Administrative Judge could not conclude that the Individual had mitigated the Guideline E concerns. (OHA Case No. PSH-22-0089, Rahimzadeh)