Personnel Security (10 CFR Part 710)

On March 17, 2016, an Administrative Judge issued a decision in which he found that an individual’s access authorization should not be restored. In reaching this determination, the Administrative Judge found that the individual had not resolved security concerns under Criteria G and L regarding a number of security infractions for mishandling classified information. The individual presented testimony and documentary evidence establishing that with regard to several of the incidents, the individual had not actually violated security rules. However, the individual admitted the accuracy of allegations regarding several past security rule violations. Thus, the Administrative Judge found that while the individual had not, in fact, committed several of the alleged security rule violations, a number of the remaining violations, occurring since 2010, were not mitigated. Additionally, the individual had a number of other security rule violations, during the period 1993-2009, which remain relevant to assessing the pattern of the individual’s more recent violations. After reviewing all of the evidence, the Administrative Judge found that the individual had not presented sufficient evidence to resolve the concerns raised by his many security incidents. Consequently, the Administrative Judge found that the individual’s security clearance should not be restored.  OHA Case No. PSH-15-0076 (Richard Cronin)  

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal

On March 18, 2016, OHA denied a Freedom of Information Act Appeal filed by Wynship Hillier from a determination issued by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) of the Department of Energy.  In the Appeal, the Appellant challenged the adequacy of the search. OHA found, however, that NNSA had conducted a search reasonably calculated to uncover the materials sought by the Appellant.  OHA Case No. FIA-16-0021