The individual is employed by a Department of Energy (DOE) contractor and has held a security clearance at the request of his employer since 1998. DOE terminated his clearance in 2005, and then reinstated it in 2007 after a favorable psychiatric evaluation. In July 2010, the individual’s wife filed a restraining order against him. He reported the incident to the local security office (LSO) and the LSO conducted a personnel security interview (PSI) with the individual in August 2010. The PSI did not resolve the security concerns and the individual agreed to be evaluated by a DOE consultant-psychiatrist. In November 2010, a DOE consultant-psychiatrist (DOE psychiatrist) interviewed the individual and concluded that the individual met the criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), as set forth in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, Text Revised (DSM-IV-TR), and that he suffered from an illness or mental condition which causes or may cause a significant defect in his judgment or reliability.2 TheLSO suspended his access authorization and then informed the individual how to proceed to resolve the derogatory information that had created a doubt regarding his eligibility for access authorization. Notification Letter (December 2010). The Notification Letter stated that the derogatory information regarding the individual falls within the purview of 10 C.F.R. § 710.8 (h) and (l) (Criteria H and L).3 As for Criterion H, the Notification Letter referred specifically to: (1) the diagnosis of the DOE psychiatrist that the individual suffers from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), an illness or mental condition which causes or may cause a significant defect in judgment or reliability; and (2) a July 2010 diagnosis by his treating psychologist that he suffers from BPD. As regards Criterion L, DOE noted that: (1) the individual admitted in his August 2010 PSI that he had contacted his spouse in violation of an active restraining order against him, and (2) he admitted in a November 2010 psychiatric evaluation that, in violation of the restraining order, he contacted his spouse every two weeks and had visited her at her place of employment three weeks prior to the evaluation. Notification Letter. According to the LSO, this tends to show that he has engaged in unusual conduct or is subject to circumstances which furnish reason to believe that he is not reliable or trustworthy. In a letter to DOE Personnel Security, the individual exercised his right under Part 710 to request a hearing in this matter. 10 C.F.R. § 710.21(b). The Director of OHA appointed me as Hearing Officer in this case. After conferring with the individual and the appointed DOE counsel, 10 C.F.R. § 710.24, I set a hearing date. At the hearing the individual, who was represented by counsel, testified on his own behalf and also called seven witnesses. DOE counsel called the DOE psychiatrist as a witness. The transcript taken at the hearing shall be hereinafter cited as ATr.@ Various documents that were submitted by the parties during this proceeding constitute exhibits to the hearing transcript and shall be cited as AEx.@ DOE exhibits are numbered, and the individual’s exhibits are lettered.