[6450-01-P]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 710
[EHSS-RM-20-PACNM]
RIN 1992-AA64
Procedures for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Matter or Special
Nuclear Material
AGENCY: Office of Health, Safety, and Security, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) publishes a final rule to amend its
regulations, which set forth the policies and procedures for resolving questions
concerning eligibility for DOE access authorizations. The final rule expands the scope of
the rule to include individuals applying for or in positions requiring eligibility to hold a
sensitive position; updates and adds clarity, including by deleting obsolete references
throughout the rule for consistency with national policies and DOE practices; and updates
references to DOE officials and offices.
DATES: This rule is effective [INSERT DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF
PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracy L. Kindle, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Departmental Personnel Security, (202) 586-3249,
officeofdepartmentalpersonnelsecurity@hq.doe.gov, or Christina Pak, Office of the
General Counsel, (202) 586-4114, christina.pak@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction and Background
II. Summary of Final Rule
III. Section-by-Section Analysis

IV. Regulatory Review
V. Congressional Notification
VI. Approval by the Office of the Secretary of Energy
I.

Introduction and Background
DOE is publishing this final rule to update and clarify DOE’s policies and procedures

for determining eligibility for access authorizations. The current rule implements the
requirement in Executive Order (E.O.) 12968, Access to Classified Information, that
agencies promulgate regulations to provide review proceedings to individuals whose
eligibility for access to classified information is denied or revoked.
The current rule has not been substantively updated since 2016 (81 FR 71331, Oct.
17, 2016). Since then, as various Executive orders, Security Executive Agent Directives,
and the Federal Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine were issued and amended, DOE has
gained additional implementation experience under the current rule, so proposed
revisions to update and clarify provisions in the rule became appropriate.
On January 31, 2024, DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to
propose the updating of part 710 (89 FR 6025). The NOPR proposed amending the
existing rule to: (1) expand the scope of the current rule to include individuals applying
for or in positions requiring eligibility to hold a sensitive position; (2) incorporate
requirements of Security Executive Agent Directive (SEAD) 9, Appellate Review of
Retaliation Regarding Security Clearances and Access Determinations, which provides
appeal rights to both Federal and contractor employees; (3) update hearing procedures to
more accurately reflect current practices; (4) update references to DOE offices and
officials to reflect new titles and organizational names; (5) remove appendix A, SEAD 4,
National Security Adjudicative Guidelines (June 8, 2017); (6) revise and add definitions
for certain terms; and (7) make minor updates to improve clarity and delete obsolete
references.

DOE had a 30-day comment period inviting public comments on the proposed
regulatory changes, and no public comments were received.
II.

Summary of Final Rule
As described, DOE’s revisions to the existing rule are identical to those proposed in

the NOPR. The final rule: (1) expands the scope of the current rule to include individuals
applying for or in positions requiring eligibility to hold a sensitive position; (2)
incorporates requirements of Security Executive Agent Directive (SEAD) 9, Appellate
Review of Retaliation Regarding Security Clearances and Access Determinations, which
provides appeal rights to both Federal and contractor employees; (3) updates hearing
procedures to more accurately reflect current practices; (4) updates references to DOE
offices and officials to reflect new titles and organizational names; (5) removes appendix
A, SEAD 4, National Security Adjudicative Guidelines (June 8, 2017); (6) revises and
adds definitions for certain terms; and (7) makes minor updates to improve clarity and
delete obsolete references.
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
DOE amends title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 710 as follows:
1. The part heading of this part is amended to add, “OR ELIGIBILITY TO HOLD A
SENSITIVE POSITION” at the end to reflect the expanded scope of the rule, as
explained in paragraph 4.
2. The authority section of this part is amended to add a reference to E.O. 13467.
Context for this change is explained in paragraph 4.
3. In § 710.1, “Purpose,” § 710.1(a) is amended to add at the end “or eligibility to
hold a sensitive position pursuant to Executive Order 13467 (Reforming Processes
Related to Suitability for Government Employment, Fitness for Contractor
Employees, and Eligibility for Access to Classified National Security Information),”
to reflect the change to the scope of the rule, as explained in paragraph 4. Section

710.1(b) is amended to add after the citation for E.O. 10865, “Executive Order 13467,
73 FR 38103 (June 30, 2008) as amended” and to add “or successor directive” after
the reference to SEAD 4.
4. In § 710.2 “Scope,” a new paragraph is added to make the provisions of the rule
applicable to an individual’s eligibility to hold a sensitive position. This change
clarifies that, except when specifically noted, any provision that applies to
determinations of eligibility for access to classified information or special nuclear
matter also applies to determinations of eligibility to hold a sensitive position.
Conforming changes are also made in § 710.2.
In 2017, E.O. 13467, Reforming Processes Related to Suitability for Government
Employment, Fitness for Contractor Employees, and Eligibility for Access to
Classified National Security Information, was amended by E.O. 13764 to make the
provisions of E.O. 12968 that apply to eligibility for access to classified information
to also apply to eligibility to hold a sensitive position regardless of whether or not that
sensitive position requires access to classified information.
The term “sensitive position” is defined in E.O. 13467, as amended, to mean any
position within or in support of a Federal department or agency, the occupant of
which could bring about, by virtue of the nature of the position, a material adverse
effect on national security regardless of whether the occupant has access to classified
information and regardless of whether the occupant is an employee, military service
member, or contractor.
The scope of 10 CFR part 710 applied only to individuals who require eligibility
for access to classified information and special nuclear materials and did not address
individuals who require eligibility to hold a sensitive position where an access
authorization is not a requirement of the position.

Expanding the applicability of this rule to individuals applying for or in positions
requiring eligibility to hold a sensitive position, who do not require an access
authorization, brings DOE into compliance with E.O. 13467, as amended.
5. Existing § 710.3, “Reference,” is deleted in its entirety because appendix A,
SEAD 4, National Security Adjudicative Guidelines (June 8, 2017), is removed as
explained in paragraph 22.
6. In § 710.4, “Policy,” § 710.4(a) is amended to add at the end “or eligibility to hold
a sensitive position,” and § 710.4(b) is amended to add “or eligibility to hold a
sensitive position” after “access authorization” to reflect the change to § 710.2
“Scope.”
7. In § 710.5, “Definitions,” there are a number of new or amended definitions.
The term “Continuous Vetting” is added to reflect recent national policies under
Trusted Workforce (TW) 2.0, as explained in paragraph 8.
The term “Local Director of Security” is amended by removing the references to
“Chicago” and “Oak Ridge,” and adding “for the Office of Science (SC), the
individual designated in writing by the Deputy Director for Operations,” removing
the references to Richland and Savannah River and adding “for the Office of
Environmental Management (EM), the individual(s) designated in writing by the
Senior Advisor, or delegee, adding an “s” after “individual” in the reference to the
National Nuclear Security Administration, and adding “Security” in the title of the
Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. These changes reflect new titles and
organization name changes since the last changes to this rule.
The term “Manager” is amended by removing the references to the Chicago
Operations Office, the Oak Ridge Operations Office, and the “Director, Office of
Headquarters Security Operations”. “Manager” is changed by adding “(to include the
Office of River Protection)” in the reference to “Richland,” adding “for the Office of

Environmental Management (EM), the individuals(s) designated in writing by the
Senior Advisor, or delegee, adding “for the Office of Science (SC), the individual
designated in writing by the Deputy Director for Operations,” adding “Security” in
the title of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, and adding “Director, Office of
Headquarters Security Vetting” in place of “Director, Office of Headquarters Security
Operations”. These changes reflect new titles and organization name changes.
The term “Sensitive Position” is added to reflect the expansion of the scope of the
rule to apply to individuals applying for or in sensitive positions, consistent with E.O.
13467, as amended, as explained in paragraph 4.
8. In § 710.6, “Cooperation by the individual,” § 710.6(a)(1) is amended to add
“continuous vetting” after “reinvestigation.” The Director of National Intelligence
and the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, pursuant to their
responsibilities as Executive Agents under E.O. 13467, as amended, launched the
“Trusted Workforce 2.0” initiative to transform Federal personnel vetting programs.
One of the changes included a transition from traditional periodic reinvestigations to
government-wide continuous vetting. Paragraph (a)(1) also deletes “interviews” and
adds in its place “consultations” for consistency with current DOE terminology. It
also deletes “investigative activities” and adds in its place “actions” for consistency
with current DOE terminology. The last sentence of paragraph (a)(1) is also amended
to add the language “for incumbents” before “any access authorization then in effect
may be administratively withdrawn” to clarify that the term “administratively
withdrawn” applies to incumbents while “administratively terminated” applies to
applicants. Paragraph (c) is amended to delete the words “his/her” and add in their
place the word “their” for consistency with other DOE policies.

9. Section 710.7(d) is amended to delete “reports of investigation” and add in its
place “investigative results report” for consistency with DOE and other Federal
agency practices.
10. Section 710.8(a) is amended by removing references to an “interview” wherever
it occurs and adding, in their place references to a “consultation” for consistency with
current DOE terminology.
11. Section 710.9(e) is amended to reflect the requirements in SEAD 9, Appellate
Review of Retaliation Regarding Security Clearances and Access Determinations. In
2022, the Director of National Intelligence issued SEAD 9, which established an
appellate review process for employees who seek to appeal an adverse final agency
determination with respect to alleged retaliatory action(s) taken by an employing
agency affecting the employees’ security clearance or access determination as a result
of protected disclosures. SEAD 9 clarified that the agency review and appeal rights
were available to both Federal and contractor employees. Therefore, paragraph (e) is
amended to remove the words, “if the individual is a Federal employee,” and add
language to address the appeal rights under SEAD 9. Paragraphs (e) and (f) are
amended to delete the words, “his/her,” and add in their place the word “their” for
consistency with other DOE policies.
12. Section 710.20 is amended to remove the word “interview” and add in its place
the word “consultation” for consistency with current DOE terminology.
13. Section 710.21 is amended to delete from it the words “his/her” and add in their
place the word “their” for consistency with other DOE policies. Paragraph (c)(1) is
amended to add a requirement for the Manager to provide a copy of SEAD 4 or
successor directive as part of the notification letter. Since appendix A, which
currently contains SEAD 4, has been removed, this amendment would ensure that an
individual going through administrative review under this part will receive a copy of

the applicable adjudicative standards. Paragraph (c)(2) is amended to remove the
words, “For Federal employees only”, and add language to reflect the requirements in
SEAD 9, Appellate Review of Retaliation Regarding Security Clearances and Access
Determinations, which extended appeal rights beyond Federal employees to include
Federal contractors, as detailed in the explanation of changes to § 710.9(e), in
paragraph 11.
14. Section 710.22(c)(4) is amended to clarify that the 30 days provided to the
individual for requesting review of the Manager’s initial decision is subject to any
extensions granted by the Director under paragraph (c)(3).
15. Section 710.25(c) is amended to delete the words “his/her” and add in their place
the words “their” for consistency with other DOE policies. Paragraph (e) is amended
to delete language stating that hearings will normally be held at or near a DOE
facility unless determined otherwise by the Administrative Judge and also to delete
that the hearing location will be selected for all the participants’ convenience.
Paragraph (f) is amended to add language to clarify that conferences may be
conducted by telephone, video teleconference, or other means as directed by the
Administrative Judge. These changes to paragraphs (e) and (f) are made in order to
conform to current agency practice.
16. Section 710.26(a) is amended to delete the words “his/her” and add in their place
the words “their” for consistency with other DOE policies. Paragraph (d) is amended
to delete language that requires the proponent of a witness to conduct the direct
examination of their witness. This change is made because if an individual is
represented by counsel, the individual’s counsel will often conduct the direct
examination of the individual’s witnesses. However, when the individual is not
represented by counsel, the individual may choose to allow DOE counsel to conduct
the direct examination of the individual’s witnesses. This change would align the

regulation with current DOE practices, which provides the individual with flexibility
in the conduct of direct examinations. In addition, the language in § 710.26(d),
“[w]henever reasonably possible, testimony shall be given in person,” will be deleted
to reflect the current practice that testimony is normally given live via video
teleconference and not in-person.
17. Section 710.27(b) is amended to delete the word “handicapped” and add in its
place the word “prejudiced” to reflect updated terminology.
18. Section 710.28(a)(4) is amended to delete the words “his/her” and add in their
place the words “their” for consistency with other DOE policies.
19. Section 710.29(c) is amended to delete the words “his/her” and add in their place
the word “their” to reflect updated terminology for consistency with other DOE
policies.
20. In § 710.31, paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(6) are amended to correct
typographical errors made in the last substantive revision to this regulation.
Specifically, paragraphs (b)(4) and (5) are amended to delete the language
“provisions of § 710.31(2)” and add, in their place, “provisions of § 710.31(b)(2)”
since § 710.31(2) does not exist in the rule and the correct reference should be to
paragraph (b)(2), which describes the actions to be taken depending on whether a
reconsideration request is approved. Paragraph (b)(6) is amended to delete the
language “paragraphs (f) or (g)” and add, in their place, “paragraph (b)(4) or (5)”.
There are no paragraphs (f) and (g) in § 710.31 and paragraph (b)(6) should reference
§§ 710.31(b)(4) and (5), which describe the actions to be taken based on whether an
individual is found to be eligible for access authorization. Paragraph (b)(6) is also
amended to delete the language “set forth in paragraph (d)” and add, in its place, “set
forth in paragraph (b)(2)” for the same reason explained previously. This change is

made because there is no § 710.31(d) in the rule. The correct reference should be to §
710.31(b)(2).
21. Appendix A to Part 710 – SEAD 4, National Security Adjudicative Guidelines
(June 8, 2017) is deleted in its entirety. On October 17, 2016, DOE removed its
adjudicative criteria from the regulation in order to rely solely on the national security
adjudicative guidelines (81 FR 71331). As part of that rule, DOE added the entire
text of the national security adjudicative guidelines to the regulation as appendix A.
The intent behind adding appendix A was to provide the maximum transparency and
notice to the public as to the applicable adjudicative criteria in determining eligibility
for access to classified information. On December 4, 2017, this regulation was
updated to include the latest version of the national security adjudicative guidelines,
SEAD 4, which was issued by the Director of National Intelligence. Future updates
to the National Security Adjudicative Guidelines are likely and DOE believes
retaining appendix A, which may not reflect the latest updated version due to the time
it takes to amend a regulation, may cause confusion to the public as to which version
of the guidelines applies to their eligibility determination. Therefore, DOE is
removing appendix A, SEAD 4, National Security Adjudicative Guidelines (June 8,
2017), and requiring that a copy of the applicable guidelines be provided to
individuals as part of the notification letter, as stated in § 710.21(c)(1).
IV. Regulatory Review
A. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
This final rule has been determined not to be a “significant regulatory action”
under E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993) as
supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review,” 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011) and amended by E.O. 14094, “Modernizing
Regulatory Review”, 88 FR 21879 (April 11, 2023). Accordingly, this final rule is not

subject to review under the E.O. by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
B. Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the promulgation of new
regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 12988, "Civil Justice Reform," 61 FR 4729
(February 7, 1996), imposes on Executive agencies the general duty to adhere to the
following requirements: (1) eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations
to minimize litigation; and (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather
than a general standard and promote simplification and burden reduction. With regard to
the review required by section 3(a), section 3(b) of E.O. 12988 specifically requires that
Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) clearly
specifies the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal
law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct while
promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any;
(5) adequately defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting
clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General.
Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988 requires Executive agencies to review regulations in light of
applicable standards in section 3(a) and section 3(b) to determine whether they are met or
it is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the required review
and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, this regulation meets the relevant
standards of E.O. 12988.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation of an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule that by law must be proposed for public
comment, unless the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required by

E.O. 13272, “Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,” (67 FR
53461, August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003,
to ensure that the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly considered
during the rulemaking process (68 FR 7990). DOE has made its procedures and policies
available on the Office of the General Counsel’s Web site at www.gc.doe.gov.
DOE has reviewed this rule under the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
and the procedures and policies published on February 19, 2003. This rule amends
procedures that apply to the determination of eligibility of individuals for access to
classified information and access to special nuclear material. This rule applies to
individuals, and does not apply to “small entities,” as that term is defined in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. In addition, as stated previously, DOE has no discretion in
adopting the national policies; it is the national policies themselves that impose any
impact on affected individuals. As a result, this rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, DOE certifies that this rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, and, therefore, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required, and DOE has not prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis for this
rulemaking. DOE’s certification and supporting statement of factual basis will be
provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for
review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose a collection of information requirement subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
E. National Environmental Policy Act
DOE has determined that this rule is covered under the Categorial Exclusion
found in DOE’s National Environmental Policy Act regulations at paragraph A5 of

appendix A to subpart D, 10 CFR part 1021, which applies to a rulemaking that amends
an existing rule or regulation and that does not change the environmental effect of the
rule or regulation being amended. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor
an environmental impact statement is required.
F. Executive Order 13132
E.O. 13132, “Federalism”, 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999), imposes certain
requirements on agencies formulating and implementing policies or regulations that
preempt State law or that have federalism implications. Agencies are required to
examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would limit
the policymaking discretion of the States and carefully assess the necessity for such
actions. DOE has examined this rule and has determined that it does not preempt State
law and, if adopted, would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. No further action is
required by E.O. 13132.
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104─4) generally requires
Federal agencies to examine closely the impacts of regulatory actions on State, local, and
Tribal governments. Subsection 101(5) of title I of that law defines a Federal
intergovernmental mandate to include any regulation that would impose upon State,
local, or Tribal governments an enforceable duty, except a condition of Federal assistance
or a duty arising from participating in a voluntary Federal program. Title II of that law
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, other than to the
extent such actions merely incorporate requirements specifically set forth in a statute.
Section 202 of that title requires a Federal agency to perform a detailed assessment of the

anticipated costs and benefits of any rule that includes a Federal mandate which may
result in costs to State, local, or Tribal governments, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year (adjusted annually for inflation). 2 U.S.C. 1532(a) and
(b). Section 204 of that title requires each agency that proposes a rule containing a
significant Federal intergovernmental mandate to develop an effective process for
obtaining meaningful and timely input from elected officers of State, local, and Tribal
governments. 2 U.S.C. 1534. The rule expands the scope of the current rule with respect
to individuals covered, makes updates and clarifications for consistency with national
polices and DOE practices, updates references to DOE officials and offices, and makes
minor updates to improve clarity and delete obsolete references. The rule would not
result in the expenditure by State, local or Tribal governments in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Accordingly, no assessment or
analysis is required under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
H. Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999
(Pub. L. 105-277), requires Federal agencies to issue a Family Policymaking Assessment
for any rule that may affect family well-being. This rule would not have any impact on
the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment.
I. Executive Order 13211
E.O. 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use,” 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to
prepare and submit to, OMB, a Statement of Energy Effects for any significant energy
action. A “significant energy action” is defined as any action by an agency that
promulgates or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final rule, and that: (1) is a
significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866, or any successor order, and (2) is likely to

have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, or (3) is
designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a significant energy action. For any
proposed significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed statement of any
adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be
implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use. This regulatory action would not have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy and is therefore not a
significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy
Effects.
J. Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001
The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C.
3516, note) provides for agencies to review most disseminations of information to the
public under guidelines established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued
by OMB.
OMB’s guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002), and DOE’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed this
rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has concluded that it is consistent with
applicable policies in those guidelines.
V.

Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the promulgation of

this rule prior to its effective date. The report will state that the rule does not meet the
criteria set forth in 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
VI. Approval by the Office of the Secretary of Energy
The Secretary of Energy has approved issuance of this final rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 710

Administrative practice and procedure, Classified information, Government
contracts, Government employees, Nuclear energy.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on July 12, 2024, by Jennifer
Granholm, Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register
Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format
for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This
administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication
in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC on July 18, 2024.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer,
U.S. Department of Energy.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, DOE amends part 710 of title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 710—PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR ACCESS
TO CLASSIFIED MATTER AND SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL OR
ELIGIBILTY TO HOLD A SENSITIVE POSITION
1. The authority citation for part 710 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2165, 2201, 5815, 7101, et seq., 7383h-l; 50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.;
E.O. 10865, 3 CFR 1959-1963 comp., p. 398, as amended, 3 CFR Chap. IV; E.O. 13526,
3 CFR 2010 Comp., pp. 298-327 (or successor orders); E.O. 12968, 3 CFR 1995 Comp.,
p. 391; E.O. 13467, 3 CFR 2008 Comp., p. 196.
2. Revise the part 710 heading to read as set forth above.
3. Revise § 710.1 to read as follows:
§ 710.1 Purpose.
(a) This part establishes the procedures for determining the eligibility of
individuals described in § 710.2 for access to classified matter or special nuclear material,
pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, or for access to national security information
in accordance with E.O. 13526 (Classified National Security Information), or eligibility
to hold a sensitive position pursuant to E.O. 13467 (Reforming Processes Related to
Suitability for Government Employment, Fitness for Contractor Employees, and
Eligibility for Access to Classified National Security Information).
(b) This part implements: E.O. 12968, 60 FR 40245 (August 2, 1995), as
amended; E.O. 13526, 75 FR 707 (January 5, 2010) as amended; E.O. 10865, 25 FR 1583
(February 24, 1960), as amended; E.O. 13467, 73 FR 38103 (June 30, 2008) as amended;
and the National Security Adjudicative Guidelines, issued as SEAD 4, by the Director of
National Intelligence on December 10, 2016, or successor directive.
4. Revise § 710.2 to read as follows:

§ 710.2 Scope.
(a) The procedures outlined in this part apply to determinations of eligibility for
access authorization or eligibility to hold a sensitive position for:
(1) Employees (including consultants) of, and applicants for employment with,
contractors and agents of the DOE;
(2) Access permittees of the DOE and their employees (including consultants) and
applicants for employment;
(3) Employees (including consultants) of, and applicants for employment with,
the DOE; and
(4) Other persons designated by the Secretary of Energy.
(b) To the extent the procedures in this part apply to determinations of eligibility
for access to classified information or special nuclear material, they shall also apply to
determinations of eligibility to hold a sensitive position, except as specifically noted.
§ 710.3 [Removed and Reserved]
5. Remove and reserve § 710.3.
6. Revise § 710.4 to read as follows:
§ 710.4 Policy.
(a) It is the policy of DOE to provide for the security of its programs in a manner
consistent with traditional American concepts of justice and fairness. To this end, the
Secretary has established procedures that will afford those individuals described in §
710.2 the opportunity for administrative review of questions concerning their eligibility
for access authorization or eligibility to hold a sensitive position.
(b) It is also the policy of DOE that none of the procedures established for
determining eligibility for access authorization or eligibility to hold a sensitive position
shall be used for an improper purpose, including any attempt to coerce, restrain, threaten,
intimidate, or retaliate against individuals for exercising their rights under any statute,

regulation or DOE directive. Any DOE officer or employee violating, or causing the
violation of this policy, shall be subject to appropriate disciplinary action.
7. Amend § 710.5 by:
a. Adding in alphabetical order the definition for “Continuous vetting”;
b. Revising the definitions for “Local Director of Security” and “Manager”; and
c. Adding in alphabetical order the definition for “Sensitive position”.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
§ 710.5 Definitions.
*

*

*

*

*

Continuous vetting means reviewing the background of an individual described in
§ 710.2(a)(1) through (4) at any time to determine whether that individual continues to
meet applicable requirements for access authorization or a sensitive position.
*

*

*

*

*

Local Director of Security means the individual with primary responsibility for
safeguards and security at the Idaho Operations Office; for the Office of Environmental
Management (EM), the individual(s) designated in writing by the Senior Advisor, or
delegee; for the Office of Science (SC), the individual designated in writing by the Deputy
Director for Operations; for Naval Reactors, the individual(s) designated under the
authority of the Director, Security Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program; for the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the individual(s) designated in writing by the
Chief, Defense Nuclear Security; and for DOE Headquarters cases the Director, Office of
Headquarters Personnel Security Operations.
Manager means the senior Federal official at the Idaho, Richland (to include the
Office of River Protection) Operations Offices; for the Office of Environmental
Management, the individual(s) designated in writing by the Senior Advisor, or delegee;
for the Office of Science (SC), the individual designated in writing by the Deputy

Director for Operations; for Naval Reactors, the individual designated under the authority
of the Director, Security Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program; for the NNSA, the
individual designated in writing by the NNSA Administrator or Deputy Administrator;
and for DOE Headquarters cases, the Director, Office of Headquarters Security Vetting.
*

*

*

*

*

Sensitive position means any position within or in support of a department or
agency, the occupant of which could bring about, by virtue of the nature of the position, a
material adverse effect on the national security, regardless of whether the occupant has
access to classified information, and regardless of whether the occupant is an employee, a
military service member, or a contractor. Sensitive positions for the purpose of this part
only include individuals designated by DOE in non-critical sensitive, critical sensitive or
special sensitive positions.
*

*

*

*

*

8. Amend § 710.6 by:
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1); and
b. In paragraph (c), in the first sentence, removing the words “his/her” and
adding in their place the word “their”.
The revision reads as follows:
§ 710.6 Cooperation by the individual.
(a)(1) It is the responsibility of the individual to provide full, frank, and truthful
answers to DOE's relevant and material questions, and when requested, to furnish or
authorize others to furnish information that the DOE deems pertinent to the individual's
eligibility for access authorization. This obligation to cooperate applies when completing
security forms, during the course of a personnel security background investigation,
reinvestigation or continuous vetting, and at any stage of DOE’s processing of the
individual's access authorization request, including but not limited to, personnel security

consultations, DOE-sponsored mental health evaluations, and other authorized DOE
actions under this part. The individual may elect not to cooperate; however, such refusal
may prevent DOE from reaching an affirmative finding required for granting or
continuing the access authorization. In this event, for incumbents any access
authorization then in effect may be administratively withdrawn or, for applicants, further
processing may be administratively terminated.
*

*

*

*

*

§ 710.7 [Amended]
9. Amend § 710.7, in paragraph (d), by removing the words “reports of
investigation” and adding in their place the words “investigative results report”.
10. Amend § 710.8, in paragraph (a), by revising the first sentence to read as
follows:
§ 710.8 Action on derogatory information.
(a) If a question arises as to the individual’s access authorization eligibility, the
Local Director of Security shall authorize the conduct of a consultation with the
individual, or other appropriate actions and, on the basis of the results of such
consultation or actions, may authorize the granting of the individual’s access
authorization. *

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

11. Amend § 710.9 by:
a. Revising paragraph (e); and
b. In paragraph (f), in the second sentence, removing the words “his/her” and
adding in their place the word “their”.
The revision reads as follows:
§ 710.9 Suspension of access authorization.
*

*

*

*

*

(e) Written notification to the individual shall include notification that if the
individual believes that the action to suspend their access authorization was taken as
retaliation against the individual for having made a protected disclosure, as defined in
Presidential Policy Directive 19, Protecting Whistleblowers with Access to Classified
Information, or any successor directive issued under the authority of the President, the
individual may submit a request for review of this matter directly to the DOE Office of
the Inspector General. Such a request shall have no impact upon the continued
processing of the individual's access authorization eligibility under this part. If the
individual receives an adverse final agency determination in response to such request, the
individual may submit an appeal of that decision to the Director of National Intelligence,
in accordance with the Security Executive Agent Directive 9, Appellate Review of
Retaliation Regarding Security Clearances and Access Determinations, or to the
Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, in accordance with Intelligence
Community Directive 120, Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection.
*

*

*

*

*

§ 710.20 [Amended]
12. Amend § 710.20 by removing the word “interview” and adding in its place
the word “consultation”.
13. Amend § 710.21 by:
a. In paragraphs (b)(7) and (b)(12)(iii), removing the words “his/her” and adding
in their place the word “their”; and
b. Revising paragraphs (c)(1) and (2).
The revisions read as follows:
§ 710.21 Notice to the individual.
*

*

*

*

*

(c)

*

*

*

(1) Include a copy of this part and SEAD 4, National Security Adjudicative
Guidelines, or successor directive; and
(2) Indicate that if the individual believes that the action to process the individual
under this part was taken as retaliation against the individual for having made a protected
disclosure, as defined in Presidential Policy Directive 19, Protecting Whistleblowers with
Access to Classified Information, or any successor directive issued under the authority of
the President, the individual may submit a request for review of this matter directly to the
DOE Office of the Inspector General. Such a request shall have no impact upon the
continued processing of the individual's access authorization eligibility under this part. If
the individual receives an adverse final agency determination in response to such request,
the individual may submit an appeal of that decision to the Director of National
Intelligence, in accordance with the SEAD 9, Appellate Review of Retaliation Regarding
Security Clearances and Access Determinations, or to the Inspector General of the
Intelligence Community, in accordance with Intelligence Community Directive 120,
Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection.
14. Amend § 710.22 by revising paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:
§ 710.22 Initial decision process.
*

*

*

*

*

(c)

*

*

*

(4) That if the written request for a review of the Manager’s initial decision by
the Appeal Panel is not filed within 30 calendar days of the individual’s receipt of the
Manager’s letter, or by the date to which the Director has granted an extension, the
Manager’s initial decision in the case shall be final and not subject to further review or
appeal.
15. Amend § 710.25 by:

a. In paragraph (c), removing the words “his/her” and adding in their place the
word “their”; and
b. Revising paragraphs (e) and (f).
The revisions read as follows:
§ 710.25 Appointment of Administrative Judge; prehearing conference;
commencement of hearings.
*

*

*

*

*

(e) The Administrative Judge shall determine the day, time, and place for the
hearing and shall decide whether the hearing will be conducted via video
teleconferencing. In the event the individual fails to appear at the time and place
specified, without good cause shown, the record in the case shall be closed and returned
to the Manager, who shall then make an initial determination regarding the eligibility of
the individual for DOE access authorization in accordance with § 710.22(a)(3).
(f) At least 7 calendar days prior to the date scheduled for the hearing, the
Administrative Judge shall convene a prehearing conference for the purpose of discussing
stipulations and exhibits, identifying witnesses, and disposing of other appropriate
matters. The conference may be conducted by telephone, video teleconference, or other
means as directed by the Administrative Judge.
*

*

*

*

*

16. Amend § 710.26 by:
a. In paragraph (a), removing wherever they appear the words “his/her” and
adding in their place the word “their”; and
b. Revising paragraph (d).
The revision reads as follows:
§ 710.26 Conduct of hearings.
*

*

*

*

*

(d) DOE Counsel shall assist the Administrative Judge in establishing a complete
administrative hearing record in the proceeding and bringing out a full and true disclosure
of all facts, both favorable and unfavorable, having a bearing on the issues before the
Administrative Judge. The individual shall be afforded the opportunity of presenting
testimonial, documentary, and physical evidence, including testimony by the individual
in the individual's own behalf. All witnesses shall be subject to cross-examination, if
possible.
*

*

*

*

*

§ 710.27 [Amended]
17. Amend § 710.27, in paragraph (b), in the second sentence, by removing the
word “handicapped” and adding in its place the word “prejudiced”.
§ 710.28 [Amended]
18. Amend § 710.28, in paragraph (a)(4), by removing the words “his/her” and
adding in their place the word “their”.
§ 710.29 [Amended]
19. Amend § 710.29, in paragraph (c), in the first sentence, by removing the
words “his/her” and adding in their place the word “their”.
20. Amend § 710.31 by revising paragraphs (b)(4) through (6) to read as follows:
§ 710.31 Reconsideration of access eligibility.
*

*

*

*

*

(b)

*

*

*

(4) If, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the Manager
determines the individual is eligible for access authorization, the Manager shall grant
access authorization.
(5) If, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the Manager
determines the individual remains ineligible for access authorization, the Manager shall

so notify the Director in writing. If the Director concurs, the Director shall notify the
individual in writing. This decision is final and not subject to review or appeal. If the
Director does not concur, the Director shall confer with the Manager on further actions.
(6) Determinations as to eligibility for access authorization pursuant to paragraph
(b)(4) or (5) of this section may be based solely upon the mitigation of derogatory
information which was relied upon in a final decision to deny or to revoke access
authorization. If, pursuant to the procedures set forth in paragraph (b)(2) of this section,
previously unconsidered derogatory information is identified, a determination as to
eligibility for access authorization must be subject to a new Administrative Review
proceeding.
Appendix A to Part 710 [Removed]
21. Remove appendix A.
[FR Doc. 2024-16136 Filed: 7/22/2024 8:45 am; Publication Date: 7/23/2024]