Personnel Security Hearing (PSH)
Access Authorization Denied; Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption)
On December 7, 2022, an Administrative Judge determined that the Individual's access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710 should not be granted. In 1999, the Individual was arrested for Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). In 2018, the Individual enrolled in an Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP) for alcohol treatment. However, the Individual did not complete the IOP and resumed consuming alcohol shortly after leaving the program.
During the hearing, the Individual testified that she had abstained from alcohol use since June 2022. The Individual also testified that she regularly attends Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings, works with an AA sponsor, and is working through AA's Twelve-Step program. However, the Individual tested positive for alcohol use approximately two weeks before the hearing and had, on two occasions, provided false information concerning her alcohol consumption during her background investigation. In addition, the DOE Psychologist opined that the Individual did not show evidence of rehabilitation or reformation because she did not complete an IOP or attend AA for twelve months and had not shown that she has been abstaining from alcohol use for a sufficient period of time.
Accordingly, the Administrative Judge found the Individual did not resolve the security concerns under Guideline G and the Individual's access authorization should not be granted. (OHA Case No. PSH-22- 0131, Fine)
Access Authorization Not Granted; Guideline I (Psychological Conditions)
On December 8, 2022, an Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that the Individual's access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710 should not be granted. The Individual was evaluated by a DOE Psychologist after investigators uncovered information about the Individual's history of committing domestic violence. The DOE Psychologist diagnosed him with borderline personality disorder. After reviewing the DOE Psychologist's report of the evaluation, concerns were raised that the Individual's mental health condition might interfere with his judgment, trustworthiness, or reliability.
At the hearing, the Individual was unable to recall the domestic violence incidents he had been involved in. He presented evidence that he was being treated by a psychologist for therapy and was taking medication for PTSD and depression. The DOE presented evidence that the Individual was being undertreated for his diagnosis and that the Individual did not appear bothered by hearing that he had committed violent acts against family members. The DOE Psychologist opined that the Individual still possessed a psychological condition that could affect his judgment, trustworthiness, and reliability. The Administrative Judge did not find sufficient evidence that the Individual had mitigated the Guideline I security concern and, therefore, concluded that the Individual's access authorization should not be granted. (OHA Case No. PSH-22-0100, Martin)
Access Authorization Restored; Guideline G
On December 9, 2022, an Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that the Individual's access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710 should be restored. The Individual informed a local security office (LSO) that he had been hospitalized for alcohol intoxication on two occasions. At the LSO's request, the Individual was evaluation by a DOE-contracted Psychiatrist who found that the Individual met the criteria for Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD).
After conducting a hear, the AJ found that the Individual had shown that he has attended and completed an IOP, obtained Individual and group counseling, and had been an actively engaged participant in AA for the past ten months. The Individual had also provided evidence, in the form of his own testimony, which the AJ found to be credible, and laboratory results, showing that he has abstained from using alcohol for the past ten months. Since these actions convinced the Psychiatrist that the Individual had complied with his treatment recommendations and had shown that he is reformed and rehabilitated from his AUD. The AJ therefore find that the Individual had mitigated the security concerns raised by the Individual's AUD and hospitalizations.
The Administrative Judge therefore concluded that the Individual's access authorization should be restored. (OHA Case No. PSH-22-0107, Fine)