Energy.gov

On December 6, 2012, a Hearing Officer determined that an individual should be granted a security clearance. In reaching this determination, the Hearing Officer found that the individual had successfully addressed the DOE’s security concerns regarding his alcohol consumption.

On November 29, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which he determined that an individual’s DOE access authorization should not be restored.  The Individual had been charged with committing a sexual battery.  Although the Individual had testified that a jury had acquitted him of this charge, the Individual did not provide any documentation that he had been acquitted.   Nor had the Individual presented sufficient evidence to resolve the concerns raised by his conduct.  The Individual had also intentionally provided misleading information during a personnel security interview.

On November 29, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a Decision in which she concluded that an individual’s suspended DOE access authorization should be restored.  A DOE Operations Office suspended the individual’s security clearance and referred him to administrative review under 10 C.F.R.

hOn November 29, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which he determined that the DOE should not restore an individual’s access authorization.  As security concerns under 10 CFR Part 710, a Local Security Office cited the individual’s omission of numerous debts in answer to questions regarding his finances on Questionnaire for National Security Positions (QNSP), information omitted from a March 2006 response by the individual to a Letter of Interrogatory (LOI), and the individual’s history of financial difficulties.  The Hearing Officer found the individual’s omission of info

On November 26, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which he concluded that an individual’s security clearance should not be restored. A Local Security Office suspended the individual’s security clearance because the individual demonstrated financial irresponsibility through his current delinquent debts and charged off debts, and his inability or unwillingness to live within his means. His behavior raised security concerns under Criterion L.

On November 21, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which she concluded that an individual’s security clearance should not be restored. A Local Security Office conducted a Personnel Security Interview of the individual to address concerns about the individual’s financial irresponsibility. His behavior raised security concerns under Criterion L. After conducting a hearing and evaluating the documentary and testimonial evidence, the Hearing Officer found that the individual had not presented sufficient evidence to resolve these security concerns.

On November 16, 2012, a Hearing Officer determined that an individual’s security clearance should not be restored. In reaching this determination, the Hearing Officer found that the individual had not successfully addressed the DOE’s security concerns regarding his finances. Specifically, the Hearing Officer concluded that the individual’s four months of responsible financial behavior were insufficient to demonstrate a sustained pattern of responsibility given an eight year pattern of irresponsible spending.

On November 16, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a Decision in which she concluded that an individual should be granted DOE access authorization. A DOE Operations Office referred an applicant for a security clearance to administrative review under 10 C.F.R. Part 710, citing as security concerns issues pertaining to the individual’s use of alcohol, including the opinion of a DOE consultant-psychiatrist that the individual was a user of alcohol habitually to excess. The individual requested a hearing before an OHA Hearing Officer.

On November 15, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a Decision in which she determined that an Individual’s access authorization should be restored. In reaching this determination, the Hearing Officer found that the Individual had resolved the security concerns arising from his alcohol use. The Individual was diagnosed by a DOE psychologist with Alcohol-Related Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified. In addition, the Individual had five alcohol-related incidents in his past, including a positive Breath Alchol Test (BAT) in March 2012.

On November 15, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which he concluded that an individual should be granted authorization access.