PSH-22-0105 - In the Matter of Personnel Security Hearing

On September 28, 2022, an Administrative Judge determined that an individual's access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710 should be denied. The Individual is employed by a DOE contractor in a position that requires him to hold a security clearance. In completing a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (QNSP) in June 2021, the Individual disclosed that he had twice previously been charged with "driving under the influence of alcohol" ( DUI), once in 2001 and once in 2005. Subsequently, the Individual completed a Letter of Interrogatory (LOI) in August 2021 and was evaluated by a DOE consultant psychologist (Psychologist) in November 2021. The Psychologist opined that the Individual "habitually (multiple times a month) consumes alcohol to a serious level of intoxication, beyond that which has been found to impair judgment." The Psychologist recommended that the Individual abstain from alcohol for 12 months. At the hearing, the Individual testified that, following the psychological evaluation, he limited his alcohol consumption to one to two drinks per sitting. The Individual additionally testified that, in April 2022, he began abstaining from alcohol as he became busy in other areas of his life. Although the Individual had enrolled in an alcohol rehabilitation program, he had not yet completed the program, and he had only been abstinent for approximately four months at the time of the hearing. The Individual stated that he had additionally been attending Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) on a weekly basis; however, at the hearing, the Psychologist indicated that AA would not provide the best support for the Individual as the Individual saw himself as different from the other attendees. Although the Psychologist ultimately testified that he was satisfied with the steps the Individual had taken to address the habitual consumption of alcohol to a serious level of intoxication, due to the recency of the Individual's abstinence from alcohol, as well as the fact that he had not completed his alcohol rehabilitation program, the Administrative Judge could not find that the Individual had sufficiently mitigated the security concerns associated with Guideline G. After considering the evidence in the record and the testimony presented at the hearing, the Administrative Judge determined that the Individual had not resolved the security concerns associated with Guideline G and Guideline E. Accordingly, she concluded that the Individual's access authorization should be denied. OHA Case No. PSH-22-0105 (Katie Quintana)