PSH-22-0095 - In the Matter of Personnel Security Hearing

On October 24, 2022, an Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that an Individual should not be granted access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The DOE Local Security Office (LSO) discovered concerning information regarding the Individual's alcohol consumption. As a result of the information provided, the LSO instructed the Individual to undergo a psychiatric evaluation conducted by a DOE-consultant Psychiatrist (Psychiatrist). Subsequently, the LSO informed the Individual that it possessed reliable information that created substantial doubt regarding his eligibility to possess a security clearance because the derogatory information raised security concerns under Guideline G of the Adjudicative Guidelines.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the AJ determined that the LSO appropriately invoked Guideline G by citing the following. That the Psychiatrist concluded in his January 2022 report that the Individual met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), criteria for Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD), Mild, without adequate evidence of rehabilitation or reformation, and the Psychiatrist reported that the Individual's Phosphatidylethanol (PEth) test results were congruent with current heavy alcohol consumption. The Individual admitted in his November 2021 signed letter of interrogatory (LOI) that he had been consuming four to five alcohol beverages most days. Id. In 2008, the Individual was arrested and charged with Simple Assault/Domestic Violence and False Imprisonment, and he admitted to consuming alcohol prior to the arrest. Id. And, in 2005, the Individual was arrested and charged with Disorderly Conduct and admitted that he had consumed alcohol prior to this arrest

The AJ also concluded that the Individual did not put forth sufficient evidence to resolve the Guideline G security concerns for the following reasons. The record did not demonstrate that the Individual acknowledged his maladaptive alcohol use because, while he acknowledged that he had been diagnosed as meeting the criteria for AUD, he denied that he had a problem or issue with alcohol . Furthermore, although he had taken steps to address the concerns regarding his alcohol use, including adopting a healthier lifestyle, abstaining, attending EAP counseling, and attending AA, he had not established a pattern of abstinence in accordance with treatment recommendations for the following reasons. He had only been abstinent for approximately four months, which was significantly less than the year recommended by the Psychiatrist. A relatively short period of time had passed since the Individual changed his concerning pattern of alcohol consumption, which had persisted for several years as a part of the Individual's daily routine. The record regarding the wife's response to his efforts in AA was also concerning given the intertwined nature of his marital relationship and alcohol use. Additionally, he did not complete an IOP, attend aftercare, or complete a treatment program; and, while the Psychiatrist no longer recommended that the Individual complete an IOP, the Psychiatrist continued to recommend additional treatment to demonstrate reformation and rehabilitation of the Individual's AUD. Furthermore, while the Individual's counselor was more positive regarding the Individual's progress, the counselor similarly recommended continued counseling and did not provide a favorable opinion regarding the Individual's likelihood of relapse.

Accordingly, the AJ concluded that the Individual had not resolved the Guideline G security concerns . (OHA Case No. PSH-22-0095, Thompson III)