Personnel Security (10 CFR Part 710)

On June 9, 2015, an OHA Administrative Judge issued a decision in which she concluded that an individual’s access authorization should not be restored.  A Local Security Office (LSO) conducted a Personnel Security Interview (PSI) of the individual to address concerns under Criterion L regarding her financial irresponsibility.  After conducting a hearing and evaluating the evidence, the Administrative Judge concluded that the individual did not sufficiently mitigate the DOE’s concerns.   The individual’s financial problems were recent and they were in part caused by her willingness to help others financially by loaning them money and in part by purchasing unnecessary things while she already had outstanding debts.   By time of the hearing, the individual did not have any savings and the Administrative Judge was not convinced that the individual’s financial problems would not recur as she stated in her 2010 PSI that she would stop providing financial support to others, but continues to provide some support to her mother.  Furthermore, the individual did not yet establish a pattern of financial responsibility as she recently filed her Petition for Chapter 13 Bankruptcy (October 2014) and already missed a payment to the Trustee.  For these reasons, the Administrative Judge could not find that the individual resolved the security concerns related to her financial irresponsibility.  OHA Case No. PSH-15-0019 (Shiwali Patel)

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeals

On June 9, 2015, OHA denied a FOIA Appeal filed by National Review from a determination issued to it by the DOE Office of Information Resources. In the Appeal, the Appellant challenged the denial of its request for expedited processing. OHA found, however, that the denial of expedited processing was appropriate. OHA Case No. FIA-15-0030

On June 12, 2015, OHA issued a decision denying an Appeal from a FOIA determination issued by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). In the Appeal, Mr. Greg Marlowe challenged a determination by NNSA not to expedite the processing of his FOIA request. The FOIA provides that expedited processing is to be offered only when the requester demonstrates a “compelling need” or when otherwise determined by the agency. OHA concluded that Mr. Marlowe did not demonstrate a compelling need, and therefore denied the Appeal.  OHA Case No. FIA-15-0028