PSH-21-0040 - In the Matter of Personnel Security Hearing

Personnel Security; Access Authorization Not Restored; Guideline E (Personal Conduct); Guideline F (Financial Considerations); Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption)

Office of Hearings and Appeals

June 24, 2021
minute read time

On June 24, 2021, an Administrative Judge determined that an individual's access authorization under   10 C.F.R. Part 710 should not be restored. The Individual is employed by a DOE contractor in a position that requires him to hold a DOE security clearance. As part of a reinvestigation for his security clearance, the Individual completed an Electronic Questionnaires for Investigations Processing (e-QIP) in October 2017. In response to the financial questions, the Individual indicated that he failed to file his 2015-2016 Federal and state income taxes. In response to questions regarding his police record, the Individual noted that he had been charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in September 2007 and with "domestic charges" in December 2011. In March 2018, the Individual underwent a Human Reliability Program (HRP) interview, and in early October 2018, the Individual self- reported that he had been arrested and charged with DUI. Subsequently, the Local Security Office (LSO), asked him to complete a Letter of Interrogatory (LOI). The Individual then underwent two Fitness for Duty (FFD) interviews on November 16, 2018 and November 29, 2018. Finally, in March 2019, the Individual was evaluated by a DOE consultant psychologist (Psychologist), who diagnosed the Individual with Alcohol Use Disorder, Mild, in early remission. The LSO informed the Individual that it possessed reliable information that created substantial doubt regarding the Individual's eligibility to hold a security clearance pursuant to Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline F (Financial Considerations), and Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) of the Adjudicative Guidelines. After considering the evidence in the record and testimony presented at the hearing, the Administrative Judge determined that the Individual had not resolved the security concerns associated with Guideline E, Guideline F, or Guideline G. Accordingly, she concluded that the Individual's access authorization should not be restored. OHA Case No. PSH-21-0040 (Katie Quintana).