You are here

Summary of Decisions - March 3, 2014 – March 7, 2014

March 7, 2014 - 8:34am

Addthis

Personnel Security (10 CFR Part 710)

On March 5, 2014, an Administrative Judge issued a decision in which he determined that an individual’s access authorization should not be restored. In reaching this determination, the Administrative Judge found that the individual had not resolved concerns regarding his misuse of a government issued credit card (GCC) and a false statement given to his supervisors concerning his misuse of his GCC. At the hearing, the individual presented the testimony of three supervisors and a team leader to prove that he had resolved his financial problems that led his misuse of the GCC and his overall good character. However, the individual failed to present sufficient evidence to totally resolve all concerns arising from his recent financial problems. Additionally, the Administrative Judge found that the individual had failed to present sufficient evidence to resolve his submission a false report as to the extent of his misuse of his GCC.  OHA Case No. PSH-13-0125 (Richard Cronin)

On March 6, 2014, an OHA Administrative Judge issued a decision in which she concluded that an individual’s access authorization should not be restored.  A Local Security Office (LSO) conducted a Personnel Security Interview of the individual to address concerns about his alcohol consumption, which arose because he appeared to work twice with a high Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) and admitted to being intoxicated 28 to 30 times in 2013 and driving while intoxicated ten times.  The LSO subsequently referred the individual to meet with a psychologist for an examination.  The DOE psychologist diagnosed the individual as alcohol dependent.  After conducting a hearing and evaluating the documentary and testimonial evidence, the Administrative Judge found that the individual did not mitigate the concerns with regard to his alcohol consumption and dependency.  Specifically, the individual has not yet established a pattern of abstinence as he last consumed alcohol just seven months prior to the hearing and began treatment for his dependency just five months prior to the hearing. Moreover, the Administrative Judge was concerned about the individual’s judgment as he admitted to driving while intoxicated on many occasions and appeared to work with a high BAC.  For these reasons, the Administrative Judge could not find that the individual resolved the security concerns related to his alcohol consumption and alcohol dependency.  OHA Case No. PSH-13-0132 (Shiwali Patel)

On March 4, 2014, an Administrative Judge determined that an individual should not be granted a security clearance.  In reaching this determination, the Administrative Judge found that the individual had not successfully addressed the DOE’s security concerns regarding his problematic use of alcohol. Specifically, the Administrative Judge concluded that the individual had not sufficiently mitigated the DOE’s concerns with derogatory information it received that the individual’s alcohol consumption exceeded established standards of normalcy and had in the past resulted in three DUIs and other alcohol-related arrests.  These facts led a DOE-consultant psychologist to diagnose him as suffering from Alcohol Abuse, to a degree that causes a significant defect in judgment or reliability.  He also concluded that the individual’s cavalier approach to complying with laws did not mitigate the DOE’s concerns regarding his criminal conduct.  OHA Case No. PSH-13-0121 (William M. Schwartz)

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal

On March 6, 2014, OHA issued a decision denying an Appeal filed by Bill Streifer of a FOIA determination issued by the Office of Science’s Chicago Office (OSC).  Mr. Streifer sought “all communications and documentation concerning Fritz J. Hansgirg’s U.S. Patent #2,156,851 which was in possession of the Argonne National Laboratory prior to November 21, 1942, when Urey and Gross[e] filed U.S. Patent #2,690,379” and “all documents that may shed light on how and when Urey and Grosse learned of, obtained, and utilized Fritz Hansgirg’s November 10, 1936, heavy water patent during the Trai[l], B.C. heavy water plant’s design stage.”  OSC found no responsive documents and Mr. Streifer challenged the adequacy of its search.  OHA determined, however, that OSC’s search for responsive documents was adequate and reasonably calculated to locate any responsive agency records.  Accordingly, OHA denied the Appeal.  OHA Case No. FIA-14-0015
 

Addthis