Personnel Security (10 CFR Part 710)

On June 7, 2016, an Administrative Judge issued a decision restoring an individual’s access authorization. In reaching this determination, the Administrative Judge found that the individual had resolved security concerns under Criteria H, and J regarding an evaluative report issued by a DOE psychologist indicating that the individual suffered from Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode, Moderate, (Major Depressive Disorder) and Alcohol Use Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (Alcohol Use Disorder). The issuance of the report was triggered by an incident where the individual had an altercation with his ex-girlfriend while intoxicated. The individual presented testimony from an Employee Assistance Program Counselor and a psychologist from whom he sought treatment. Additionally, the individual submitted documentary evidence regarding his completion of an alcohol awareness program and attendance at Alcoholic Anonymous. The DOE psychologist, after reviewing all of the testimony, found that the individual no longer suffered from Major Depressive Disorder and had shown adequate rehabilitation from his Alcohol Use Disorder.  Accordingly, the Administrative Judge determined that the individual had resolved the Criteria H and J concerns raised by the DOE psychologist’s diagnoses and that the individual’s access authorization should be restored.  OHA Case No. PSH-16-0015 (Richard Cronin)   

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal

On June 08, 2016, OHA granted in part a FOIA Appeal filed by the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (Appellant) from a determination issued to it by the Office of Information Resources (OIR). The Appellant’s FOIA request sought certain records relating to the DOE’s development of energy efficiency standards for manufactured homes. In its determination, the OIR withheld certain information as nonresponsive and withheld other information under Exemptions 5 and 6 of the FOIA. In the Appeal, the Appellant challenged certain redactions by OIR under the deliberative process privilege of Exemption 5. The Appellant also asserted that OIR had neglected to make a determination on an attachment to a March 26, 2010, email, released by OIR. OHA found that OIR had properly withheld the Exemption 5 information, which consisted of a spreadsheet calculating the costs of a proposed rule, under the deliberative process privilege because the material was both predecisional and deliberative. However, OHA found that it was necessary for OIR to make a determination regarding the attachment referenced in the March, 26, 2010, email. Accordingly, OHA remanded the matter to OIR so that it could determine whether to release that attachment.  OHA Case No. FIA-16-0031

Application for Exception

On June 8, 2016, OHA issued a decision denying an Application for Exemption or Exception filed by Fluke Corporation (Fluke).