Personnel Security (10 CFR Part 710)

On December 9, 2015, an OHA Administrative Judge issued a decision in which he determined that an individual’s DOE access authorization should not be restored.  The local security office (LSO) found that the individual had submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (QNSP), signed and dated on October 2, 2014, in which he stated that he did not have any outstanding financial delinquencies, when in fact he: (1) was behind in tax payments to the federal and state governments, (2) had two outstanding tax liens against him, (3) was subject to a wage garnishment, and (4) was over 120 days delinquent on a debt.  In addition, the individual had not filed his 2014 federal and state taxes, was delinquent in paying his state taxes for tax years 2008 and 2009, and had incurred two tax liens as a result.  The LSO also found that the individual $36,597 in arrears on his mortgage and foreclosure proceedings had been initiated against him.  At the hearing, the individual attempted to resolve or mitigate the security concerns about his financial responsibility, judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness raised by the information set forth in the summary of security concerns. However, the Administrative Judge found that the individual had not resolved the security concerns raised by his repeated and intentional failure to fully disclose his financial problems, his outstanding debts, and his dereliction of tax responsibilities.  OHA Case No. PSH-15-0075 (Steven L. Fine)

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal

On December 10, 2015, OHA issued a Decision and Order concerning a portion of a FOIA Appeal filed by Alex Wellerstein from a determination issued to him by the National Nuclear Security Administration. In his Appeal, Dr. Wellerstein challenged NNSA’s use of FOIA Exemptions 3 and 6 to withhold information from documents it found to be responsive to his FOIA request.  He also challenged the adequacy of NNSA’s search for responsive documents.  Because Exemption 3 was applied to withhold classified information, that portion of the Appeal was referred to the DOE Office of Classification for processing.  As for the remainder of his Appeal, OHA found the application of Exemption 6 to names of authors and recipients of 60-year-old reports to be inadequately justified and remanded that matter to NNSA for a new determination.  Likewise, as NNSA provided no explanation of its search and the appellant made a logical argument that additional responsive documents should exist regarding one category of its request, OHA remanded that issue to NNSA for a new search or a more complete explanation why additional responsive documents cannot be identified.  Accordingly, OHA remanded the Appeal in part and denied the remaining portions of the Appeal.  OHA Case No. FIA-15-0064