PSH-23-0075 - In the Matter of Personnel Security Hearing

On July 24, 2023, an Administrative Judge determined that an Individual should not be granted an access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The Individual completed an "Questionnaire for National Security Positions" (QNSP) form. In the QNSP, the Individual admitted having used marijuana during the prior seven years and to having been charged in July 1984 with Driving While Impaired (DWI). Subsequently, the Local Security Office (LSO) sent the Individual a Letter of Interrogatory (LOI) asking him, among other things, about his alcohol and drug consumption. In his response to the LOI, the Individual admitted to past cocaine, psilocybin, and peyote use in the 1970s and ending in 1980. The Individual also admitted having used marijuana intermittently, beginning in the 1970s, and escalating his use to a regular basis in 2017 until he stopped his use in April 2021.

The Individual was later referred for an examination to a DOE -contractor psychologist (DOE Psychologist).The DOE Psychologist found that indicated that the Individual habitually or binge consume alcohol to the point of impaired judgment. The DOE Psychologist's Report also found that the Individual had an emotional, mental, or personality condition or conditions that can impair judgment, stability, reliability, or trustworthiness.

The Individual presented testimony from his counsellor, his wife. The CEO of his company as well as his own testimony along with Peth tests that indicated that he had been abstinent for 2 months from alcohol and a report from his counselor indicating had underwent eight sessions with his counselor . After reviewing the testimony including the DOE Psychologist who found that the Individual's period of abstinence was too brief to conclude that the Individual had been rehabilitated from his prior alcohol misuse, the Administrative Judge found that the Individual had not resolved the Guideline G security concerns raised by his alcohol use.

With regard to the Guideline H security concerns arising from his prior illegal drug use, the Administrative Judge found that the passage of time had mitigated the Individual use of cocaine, psilocybin, and peyote. However, given the relative recency of Individual marijuana use and the lack of evidence in the record which would mitigate such use, the Administrative Judge found that the Guideline H security concerns raised by the Individual's prior marijuana use had not been resolved.

The Administrative Judge found that the Individual had mitigated the concerns under Guideline I . Specifically the Administrative Judge found that the DOE Psychologist had misinterpreted a significant fact used in his diagnosis of the Individual as having a mental condition. Consequently, after reviewing all the evidence the Administrative Judge found that the Guideline I concern raised by the DOE Psychologist's diagnosis of the Individual as having a mental condition had been resolved.

The Administrative Judge found that the Individual had not, at this time, offered sufficient evidence to conclude that the Guideline G and H security concerns had been resolved. Consequently, the Administrative Judge found that that the Individual's clearance should not be granted. (OHA Case No . PSH-23-0075, Cronin)