PSH-20-0035 - In the Matter of Personnel Security Hearing

You are here

On July 13 2020, an Administrative Judge determined that an individual's access authorization under 10 C.F.R. Part 710 should not be granted. The Individual is employed by
a DOE contractor in a position that requires him to hold a DOE security clearance. In applying for his clearance, the Individual completed a Questionnaire for National Security
Positions (QNSP) in October 2018. In response to the QNSP's financial questions, the Individual indicated that, in the last seven years, he suffered financial difficulties. Specifically,
he noted that he was over 120 days delinquent on particular debts; particular unpaid bills had been turned over to collection agencies; and certain accounts had been charged off due to his failure to pay. Subsequently, the Local Security Office (LSO) asked the Individual to complete a Letter of Interrogatory (LOI), dated June 2019. The LSO determined that the
Individual had two outstanding charge off accounts totaling $29,955 and three medical collection accounts totaling $2,507. It additionally found that the Individual had engaged in
ten instances of criminal conduct, spanning over a decade. During the hearing, the Individual testified that he had settled with the creditor with regard to one charge off account, but he
had not yet resolved the remaining charge off account and did not feel that he was obligated to do so. With regard to his medical collection accounts, the Individual stated that he had
established a payment plan with the creditor for two of the accounts and showed proof of one payment, but he had not yet made contact with the creditor with regard to the remaining
medical collection account. Turning to his criminal conduct, the Individual acknowledged the truth of many of the incidences and attributed many of his criminal actions to his overuse of alcohol. The Administrative Judge ultimately determined that the Individual had not resolved the security concerns associated with Guideline F and Guideline J. Accordingly, she
concluded that the Individual's access authorization should not be granted. OHA Case No.PSH-20-0035 (Katie Quintana).