Energy.gov

On November 6, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a Decision in which she determined that an Individual’s access authorization should not be restored.  In reaching this determination, the Hearing Officer found that the Individual had not resolved the security concerns arising from his financial difficulties.  The Individual was questioned about his outstanding debts in 2006, 2009, and 2011 by the Local Security Office (LSO).  All three times, he asserted that he would rectify the situation.  In 2012, he still had nine outstanding collection accounts totaling $52.984 and seven unresolved c

On November 8, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which she concluded that an individual’s security clearance should be restored.  A Local Security Office (LSO) conducted a Personnel Security Interview of the individual to address concerns about the individual’s alcohol use.  A DOE consultant psychologist found that the individual suffers from Alcohol Dependence, in early full remission.   His behavior raised security concerns under Criteria H, J and L.  After conducting a hearing and evaluating the documentary and testimonial evidence, the Hearing Officer found that the ind

On November 6, 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 abuse of alcohol. The Hearing Officer further concluded that the individual’s six months of responsible behavior regarding alcohol were insufficient to demonstrate a sustained pattern of responsible use.

On November 5, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which he concluded that access authorization should not be granted to an individual.  A Local Security Office denied access authorization to the individual because she demonstrated financial irresponsibility through               (1) failing to file federal and state income taxes for seven years, Tax Year (TY) 2004 through TY 2010; (2) accruing unpaid federal tax liability of $37,619.37 and unpaid state tax liability of $6,885.00; and (3) claiming nine tax withholding allowances when she knew she should only claim one.

On November 2, 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.

On November 1, 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.  Specifically, she found that

On October 26, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which she concluded that an individual’s security clearance should not be granted .  A Local Security Office conducted a Personnel Security Interview of the individual to address concerns about the individual’s falsification and financial irresponsibility.  His behavior raised security concerns under Criteria F and 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.  Speci

On October 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 (LSO) suspended the individual’s security clearance because (1) a DOE consultant psychiatrist diagnosed the individual as suffering from Alcohol Abuse/Dependence, (2) the individual had been arrested four times on alcohol-related charges and had received substance abuse treatment, and (3) the individual had a history of criminal behavior, of financial irresponsibility, and of failing to keep commitments made to the LSO.

On October 25, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a Decision in which she determined that an Individual=s access authorization should not be granted.  In reaching this determination, the Hearing Officer found that the Individual had not resolved the security concerns arising from her personal conduct, criminal conduct, and financial difficulties.  The Individual resigned from a previous employment after being told she would be terminated because she had been caught stealing from a voluntary coffee fund and tardiness.  In addition, the Individual had seven criminal charges lodged against h

On October 25, 2012, an OHA Hearing Officer issued a decision in which he concluded the DOE should not grant an individual an access authorization.   A Local Security Office (LSO) raised certain concerns regarding (1) diagnoses by a DOE consultant psychologist (DOE Psychologist) that the individual suffered from Alcohol Dependence and Personality Disorder NOS; (2) the individual’s history of problematic alcohol use; (3) prior criminal conduct of the individual; (4) evidence of the individual’s financial irresponsibility; and (5) inconsistent information provided to DOE during the security