Energy.gov

The Individual is a contractor employee at a DOE facility. Exhibit (Ex.) 10 at 3. The Local Security Office (LSO) discovered that the Individual failed to list a 2004 Driving Under the Influence (DUI) arrest in a Questionnaire for National Security Positions form completed in October 2011. Ex. 10 at 10.

OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which he determined that an Individual’s DOE security clearance should be restored. The Individual had been caught viewing pornography on a DOE workplace computer.

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 drank to intoxication once a week and had been diagnosed as suffering from Alcohol Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified, which raised security concerns under Criteria H and J.

The individual is employed by a DOE contractor in a position that requires him to hold a DOE security clearance. For more than seven years, the individual has experienced financial difficulties, which resulted in the Local Security Office (LSO) conducting three personnel security interviews with him. In March 2012, the LSO sent a letter (Notification Letter) to the individual advising him that it possessed reliable information that created a substantial doubt regarding his eligibility to hold a security clearance.

The individual is employed at a DOE facility where his work requires him to have an access authorization. In December 2011, as part of a background investigation, the Local Security Office (LSO) conducted a Personnel Security Interview (PSI) of the individual to address his alcohol use. In addition to the PSI, the LSO requested the individual’s medical records and recommended a psychiatric evaluation of the individual by a DOE consultant psychiatrist (DOE psychiatrist).

The individual is an employee of a DOE contractor and an applicant for an access authorization. To address concerns related to the individual’s past use of alcohol and marijuana, other prior criminal conduct, and certain discrepancies in the record regarding the individual’s conduct, a Local Security Office (LSO) summoned the individual for an interview (PSI) with a personnel security specialist on August 29, 2011. Exhibit 10. After the PSI, the LSO determined that derogatory information existed that cast into doubt the individual’s eligibility for access authorization.

The individual works for a Department of Energy (DOE) contractor and holds a DOE access authorization, now in suspension. During 2009 through 2011, the individual used hydrocodone other than as directed and was consuming increasing amounts of alcohol. In October 2011, he voluntarily admitted himself into a substance abuse program at a local hospital. Upon discharge from the hospital, a psychologist diagnosed the individual with alcohol and opioid dependence.

The Individual is employed by a DOE contractor and has held a DOE access authorization since 1980. DOE Exhibit (Ex.) 6. In October 2006, after reviewing the Individual’s credit report during a routine reinvestigation in connection with her security clearance, the Local Security Office (LSO) requested that the Individual participate in a Personnel Security Interview (PSI) in order to discuss concerns raised by the Individual’s finances. DOE Ex. 14. The Individual’s security clearance was continued at that time. DOE Ex. 6.

The individual is employed in a position that requires him to maintain a DOE access authorization, which he had been granted. See Ex. 3 at 1. On an August 2011 Questionnaire for National Security Positions (QNSP), the individual disclosed a June 2007 vehicle repossession and a March 2010 wage garnishment for $2,000 that stemmed from a debt to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Ex. 4 at 8. He also disclosed a 2011 citation for No Proof of Registration. Id. at 7.

In October 2011, pursuant to an investigation, the Local Security Office obtained the Individual’s credit report. The credit report indicated that the Individual had a number of accounts either in collection or which were charged off. Exhibit (Ex.) 13 at 1-6. Consequently, the DOE facility’s Local Security Office (LSO) conducted a personnel security interview (PSI) with the Individual in January 2012. Ex. 19. The 2012 PSI failed to resolve the security concerns due to the Individual’s excessive indebtedness.