On February 18, 2014, an Administrative Judge issued a Decision in which he determined that an individual’s access authorization should not be restored. In reaching this determination, the Administrative Judge found that, while the Individual had resolved security concerns under Criteria H and J regarding various alcohol-related arrests and a evaluative report from a DOE Psychologist diagnosing him as suffering from Alcohol-Related Disorder, the Individual had not resolved concerns under Criterion L regarding a February 2012 arrest for four criminal sexual offenses and for making differing statements regarding the incident that led to the arrest. At the hearing, the Individual’s therapist and the DOE Psychologist agreed that the Individual had been rehabilitated regarding his alcohol use disorder. However, the Individual failed to present sufficient evidence to the Administrative Judge that he, in fact, had been wrongly arrested for the criminal offenses or that the differing statements were a result of police misconduct. Because the felony arrests were relatively recent and potentially involved a felony offense, the Administrative Judge found that the Individual had failed to present sufficient evidence to resolve the Criterion L security concerns. Consequently, the Administrative Judge determined that the Individual’s access authorization should not be restored.
Steven J. Goering - Administrative Judge