PSH-22-0140 In the Matter of Personnel Security Hearing

On March 16, 2023, an Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that an Individual should not be granted access authorization 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The DOE Local Security Office (LSO) discovered information regarding the Individual's failure to follow his employer's rules and procedures; his twenty - one instances of omitting information from the Questionnaire for National Security Positions (QNSP); his outstanding collection and charge-off accounts; and his history of more than twelve separate criminal charges spanning 2009 to 2021, mainly related to the unlawful operation or possession of a motor vehicle. Based on the above information, 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 E, Guideline F, and Guideline J of the Adjudicative Guidelines.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the AJ determined the following. The LSO appropriately invoked the above Guidelines based on the cited information. The AJ also concluded that the Individual did not put forth sufficient evidence to resolve the security concerns for the following reasons. As to Guideline E, there was no evidence that the Individual made efforts to correct the omissions throughout his QNSP before being confronted with the facts; there is no evidence in the record that his failure to cooperate, omission, or concealment was caused by advice from another individual; most of the conduct cited in the SSC was either admitted by the Individual or derived from reliable sources; and the record did not demonstrate that the conduct was minor or that the passage of time, the frequency of his conduct, the attendant circumstances, and the actions he has since taken mitigated the concerns.

Regarding the Guideline F, the conduct did happen long ago, and the record did not establish that his conduct was mitigated by its infrequency or any related circumstances because the Individual did not present persuasive evidence that he had resolved all of the collection and charge -off accounts. The record did not support a finding that his financial issues resulted from anything beyond the Individual's control. Similarly, the record did not demonstrate that the Individual had initiated and was adhering to a good-faith effort to repay each overdue creditor or otherwise resolve all of his debts.

Regarding Guideline J, the relative recency of a couple incidents and the preceding decade of similar conduct, including a 2019 charge for failure to appear, established a pattern that continued to reflect an unwillingness to comply with laws or regulations despite repeated consequences. Furthermore, his testimony indicated a present inability to acknowledge and take responsibility for his conduct and reflected a lack of candidness.

Accordingly, the AJ concluded that the Individual had not resolved the Guideline E, F, and J security concerns. (OHA Case No. PSH-22-0140, Thompson)