August 14, 2018

Allegation Regarding the Oak Ridge Office Personnel Security Process

The Department of Energy has key roles and responsibilities in the personnel security clearance process.  The Office of Personnel Management conducts investigations for most of the Federal Government, but personnel security specialists from the Department request background investigations and use the investigative reports and Federal guidelines when making clearance adjudication determinations.  Once the Department suspends a clearance, the final decision to revoke or restore the suspended clearance is made by either a management decision or an administrative review hearing.  

We received an allegation that personnel security specialists at the Department’s Oak Ridge Office had conducted activities outside of the approved adjudication process during the adjudication of the complainant’s case.  The complainant’s security clearance was suspended in October 2014, an administrative review hearing was held in December 2015, and the complainant’s security clearance was restored in May 2016.  We initiated this inspection to determine the facts and circumstances surrounding the allegation that personnel security specialists at the Oak Ridge Office had conducted inappropriate investigative-type activities during the adjudication of the complainant’s case.  Our inspection was limited to this specific case, and we did not review other personnel security case files.

We substantiated the allegation, but we were unable to determine whether the inappropriate investigative-type activities resulted in any harm to the employee.  We found that personnel security specialists had conducted investigative-type activities that were not part of the normal adjudication process and not within their purview.  We could not determine the effect the inappropriate investigative-type activities had on the personnel security decision to suspend the complainant’s clearance.  However, we noted that the Office of Hearings and Appeals Administrative Judge determined that the Department had sufficient derogatory information that warranted the suspension of the complainant’s clearance.  Based on all of the evidence brought forth during the administrative review hearing, the Administrative Judge restored the clearance.  

We made recommendations aimed at improving the overall adjudication process at the Oak Ridge Office.  Management concurred with the report’s recommendations and indicated that corrective actions will be taken to address the issues identified in the report.  After the corrective actions are completed, we plan to consider performing a followup evaluation to ensure that the corrective actions are implemented and effective.

Topic: Management & Administration