PSH-22 -0079 - In the Matter of Personnel Security Hearing

On July 12, 2022, an Administrative Judge determined that the Individual's access authorization should not be granted 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 derogatory information regarding the Individual's personal conduct, drug use, criminal conduct, and financial irresponsibility. Regarding Guideline E, the LSO cited the Individual's failure to fully disclosed derogatory information on the Questionnaire for Security Positions (QNSP) or during a May 2021 interview, her years-long patter of unlawful drugs use, continued association with persons using drugs.  Regarding Guideline F, the LSO cited her extensive delinquent debts, failure to make timely rent payments, and failure to comply with payment plans to resolve her unpaid debts. The LSO relied on the Individual use of marijuana and methamphetamine, her admission to having used and sold illegal drugs, misuse of prescription drugs and arrest for illegal drug possession to support the Guideline H concerns.  Finally, the LSO cited the Individual's lengthy history of illegal drug use, her use of illegal drugs and misuse of prescription medication in violation of the terms of her probation, and her purchase and sale of illegal drugs.

Regarding the Guidelines E, H, and J concerns, the Judge found that the Individual mitigated those concerns.  She has turned her life around.  She no longer associates with persons who use illegal drugs and has ceased all drug use herself. The Judge found that the omissions on the QNSP were inadvertent and given the Individual's substantial number of debts, it was not unreasonable that she had forgotten some.  Most importantly, the Individual has stopped using illegal drugs, completed a court-ordered drug treatment program, and currently attends Alcoholics Anonymous.  The Individual has shown successful rehabilitation from the Guideline J concerns by her mitigation of the Guideline H concerns and her abstinence, but also by her achievement of her college degree and constructive community involvement. Therefore, the Individual was able to demonstrate that she had fully resolved the security concerns arising under Guidelines E, H, and J.

However, the Judge could not find that she has mitigated the Guideline F concerns regarding her financial irregularities.  The Individual has a years -long pattern of failing to meet her financial obligations. She has made minimal progress towards resolving the outstanding debts despite her steady employment, and in fact supports her second husband while he is completing his education . She still carries substantial outstanding debt. Accordingly, the Individual was not able to demonstrate that she had fully resolved the security concerns arising under Guideline F. (OHA Case No. PSH-22-0079, Fishman)