Decisions were issued on: - Personnel Security - FOIA Appeal
Office of Hearings and Appeals
May 31, 2024
minute read time
FOIA Appeal (FIA)
FOIA Appeal; Appeal Dismissed in Part and Denied in Part; Adequacy of Search, Exemption 7(C)
On May 28, 2024, the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) dismissed in part and denied in part a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) appeal filed by Christopher Hicks (Appellant) concerning a request made to the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Inspector General (OIG) for records related to OIG's investigation of a complaint filed by Appellant. OIG withheld recordings of investigative interviews in their entirety and provided Appellant with records redacted pursuant to Exemption 7(C) to avoid disclosure of the identities of investigative personnel, witnesses, and other identifiable persons . On appeal, Appellant alleged that OIG had not conducted adequate searches for responsive records and that OIG was not entitled to assert Exemption 7(C) to withhold the records. OIG decided to conduct additional searches for records responsive to portions of Appellant's request. With respect to the records withheld by OIG pursuant to Exemption 7(C), OHA concluded that the named individuals had a significant privacy interest in the nondisclosure of their identities in connection with the investigation and that Appellant had failed to identify a public interest in disclosure that outweighed these privacy interests. Therefore, OHA dismissed as moot Appellant's appeal as it pertained to the portions of the request for which OIG had agreed to perform additional searches and denied the appeal in all other respects. (OHA Case No. FIA-24-0025)
FOIA; Appeal Granted
On May 30, 2024, the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) granted in part the Freedom of Information (FOIA) Appeal filed by the Business Insider (Appellant) from a determination letter issued by the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Public Information (OPI). On appeal, the Appellant challenged the decision to issue a Glomar response pursuant to Exemption 4. After reviewing the determination letter, we determined that OPI did not provide a sufficiently specific "explanation of how the exemption applies to the record withheld" as required by 10 C.F.R. § 1004.7(c)(1). Therefore, we grant the appeal and remand to OPI to issue a new determination letter. (OHA Case No. FIA-24-0024)
Personnel Security Hearing (PSH)
Access Authorization Not Restored; Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption), Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Abuse), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct)
On May 30, 2024, an Administrative Judge determined that an Individual's access authorization should not be restored under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. A record search as part of the continuous evaluation of the Individual's eligibility for access authorization revealed that she had not disclosed that she was arrested and charged with battery in 2021. During the adjudication of the Individual's continued eligibility for access authorization following this discovery, the Individual revealPSH-24-0031ed that she had also failed to report using cocaine, misusing prescription medication, and having been admitted to a hospital for mental health reasons in 2022. Following an evaluation, a DOE-contracted psychiatrist opined that the Individual habitually consumed alcohol to the point of impaired judgment. Following a hearing, the Administrative Judge concluded that the security concerns raised by the local security office under Guidelines G and H were resolved, but those raised under Guidelines E and J were unresolved. Therefore, the Administrate Judge determined that the Individual's access authorization should not be restored. (OHA Case No. /node/4841864, Harmonick)