Decisions were issued on: - Personnel Security
Office of Hearings and Appeals
October 25, 2024
minute read time
Access Authorization Not Granted; Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption)
On October 23, 2024, an Administrative Judge determined that an Individual should not be granted access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The Local Security Office received derogatory information regarding the Individual's previous hospitalization for a mental health condition. In January 2024, the Individual underwent a psychological evaluation with a DOE consultant psychologist (DOE Psychologist) who diagnosed the Individual with Unspecified Alcohol-Related Disorder and concluded that he engaged in frequent episodes of binge drinking. At the hearing, the Individual brought forth evidence that he had been abstinent from alcohol for six months, had completed a one -hour online course on alcohol education, underwent an additional psychological evaluation, and attended two appointments with his prescribing treatment provider. However, the Individual had not complied with the DOE Psychologist's recommendations for rehabilitation because he had not participated in a six week psychoeducational class on alcohol, and he had not attended weekly individual counseling sessions. Moreover, regarding reformation, the DOE Psychologist recommended the Individual achieve twelve months of abstinence, however, the Individual achieved only six months of abstinence . The Administrative Judge concluded that the Individual had not mitigated the concerns under Guideline G, and therefore, his access authorization should not be granted. (OHA Case No. PSH-24-0121, Balzon)
Access Authorization Not Restored; Guideline E (Personal Conduct); Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse); Guideline J (Criminal Conduct)
On October 23, 2024, an Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that an Individual's access authorization should not be restored under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The Individual was granted a security clearance in 2018. From March 2021 to November 2022, the Individual abused drugs as he felt pressured by his then-wife. He and his ex-wife separated in October 2022. In February 2023, the Individual submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (QNSP) as part of his five-year reinvestigation. In the 2023 QNSP, the Individual failed to report his drug use. In January 2024, the Individual self-reported that he had used controlled substances from March 2021 to November 2022, in part because his ex-wife had threatened to blackmail him. The DOE Local Security Office (LSO) found that the Individual's drug involvement, personal conduct, and criminal conduct created a substantial doubt regarding his eligibility to hold a security clearance. After the hearing, the AJ found, among other things, that the Individual (1) used drugs for a year and 8 months due to his ex-wife's influence, (2) separated from his ex-wife and discontinued his drug use, (3) continuously failed to report his drug use to the LSO for 2 years and 10 months, and (4) abstained from drug use for a year and 10 months. Accordingly, the AJ determined that the LSO appropriately invoked Guidelines E, H, and J and that the Individual put forth sufficient evidence to resolve the Guidelines H and J security concerns. However, the AJ also determined that there was insufficient evidence to find Guideline E mitigated. Accordingly, the AJ concluded that the Individual's access authorization should not be restored. (OHA Case No. PSH-24-0130, Fishman)
Access Authorization Not Granted; Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline I ( Psychological Conditions)
On October 25, 2024, an Administrative Judge determined that an Individual should not be granted access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The Individual submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions in which he disclosed having committed several alcohol -related offenses. The Individual subsequently disclosed in response to a letter of interrogatory that he had consumed alcohol to the point of intoxication multiple times weekly for several decades. The Individual met with a DOE-contracted psychologist (DOE Psychologist) who opined that the Individual habitually and binge consumed alcohol to the point of impaired judgment and met sufficient diagnostic criteria for diagnoses of Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD), Mild, and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), predominantly inattentive presentation, under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Text Revision. The DOE Psychologist recommended that Individual receive treatment for his ADHD, participate in an intensive outpatient program for alcohol treatment followed by aftercare for one year, and abstain from alcohol consumption throughout treatment. At the hearing, the Individual brought forth evidence that he was receiving treatment for ADHD, had abstained from alcohol for six months, and was receiving counseling to address the root causes of his alcohol misuse. The DOE Psychologist opined that the Individual had not obtained sufficient treatment for his AUD and that he was at risk of relapsing. The Administrative Judge concluded that the Individual had resolved the security concerns under Guideline I, but not the security concerns under Guideline G . Therefore, the Administrative Judge determined that the Individual should not be granted access authorization. (OHA Case No. PSH-24-0128, Harmonick)