Summary of Decisions - September 15, 2014 – September 19, 2014

Personnel Security (10 CFR Part 710)

On September 15, 2014, an OHA Administrative Judge issued a decision in which he concluded that an individual’s security clearance should not be restored.  During a periodic re-investigation of the individual, a local security office (LSO) received adverse financial information about the individual, regarding income tax matters and delinquent accounts (including his mortgage). The LSO suspended the individual’s access authorization due to security concerns arising under Criterion L. As of the date of the hearing, the individual had filed past due federal and state income tax returns, but had delinquent federal and state debt for multiple years; had seven collection accounts aggregating $2,764; had not paid his home mortgage, real estate taxes or insurance (while continuing to live in the home) for eight years (aggregate mortgage debt in excess of $500,000 on a home with a fair market value of $159,000) and presented a budget showing monthly negative cash flow in the amount of $485 (and no housing expenses). The Administrative Judge held that, in these circumstances, the individual had demonstrated a clear, consistent and sustained pattern of financial irresponsibility which had not been abated and, therefore, the individual had not mitigated the security concerns arising under Criterion L.  OHA Case No. PSH-14-0063 (Wade M. Boswell)

On September 18, 2014, an OHA Administrative Judge (AJ) issued a decision in which she concluded that the DOE should not restore an individual’s suspended DOE access authorization.  A DOE Operations Office referred the individual to administrative review, citing as security concerns the individual’s outstanding delinquent federal taxes and other debts and issues pertaining to his overall pattern of financial irresponsibility, as well as his omission of certain required information on a security questionnaire.  After conducting a hearing, convened at the individual’s request, and evaluating all relevant evidence, the AJ concluded that the individual had mitigated the security concerns raised by his omissions on the security questionnaire.  In that regard, the AJ found that the individual’s omissions were not intentional, but rather were attributable to confusion about what information was required.  However, the AJ further determined that the individual had not resolved the security concerns raised by his pattern of financial irresponsibility.  In this regard, the AJ found that, although the individual had made progress in righting his finances, he remained in a precarious financial position as of the date of the hearing.  Therefore, the AJ was unable to conclude that the individual’s financial difficulties were in the past and unlikely to recur such that they did not cast doubt on his current reliability, trustworthiness or good judgment.  Accordingly, the AJ found that the DOE should not restore the individual’s suspended security clearance.  OHA Case No. PSH-14-0065 (Diane DeMoura)

On September 16, 2014, an OHA Administrative Judge issued a decision in which he determined that an individual’s request for a DOE access authorization should not be granted. The individual had been diagnosed by a DOE psychologist with Alcohol Abuse.  At the hearing, the individual unsuccessfully attempted to show that his alcohol consumption was “under control.”  The Administrative Judge found that the DOE psychologist’s diagnosis of Alcohol Abuse was well supported by the record and hearing testimony.  Moreover, the Administrative Judge found that the individual had not received sufficient treatment, developed sufficient insight into his Alcohol Abuse, or used alcohol in a responsible manner for a sufficient period of time, to establish reformation or rehabilitation from his Alcohol Abuse.  Accordingly, the Administrative Judge found that the individual has not mitigated the security concerns raised by his Alcohol Abuse.  OHA Case No. PSH-14-0062 (Steven L. Fine)

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal

On September 19, 2014, OHA issued a decision denying an Appeal from a FOIA determination issued by the Office of Information Resources (OIR).  The Appellant, Tim Hadley, appealed a determination by OIR on his re-submitted FOIA Request after it was previously remanded by OHA on August 11, 2014. OHA had denied the Appellant’s earlier FOIA Request on all grounds pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 4, except with respect to some withheld information that may have been revealed on recovery.gov.  Thus, upon remand, OIR reviewed the information on recovery.gov and re-released two documents, disclosing the names of vendors that were initially withheld after OIR discovered that it was available on recovery.gov.  Thus, OHA concluded that OIR complied with its order in its decision of August 11, 2014 and denied the Appeal.  OHA Case No. FIA-14-0052