SECURITY DENIALS AND_REVOCATIONS
During the course of the job there were 22 cases in which formal
denials of clearance were received from the Manager, Atomic Energy
Commission, Santa Fe Operations Office. In these cases, the men concerned were removed from the Jobsite as directed by. the Manager,
Santa Fe Operations Office. Some were removed immediately and others
were permitted to remain until the completion of their contracts or
until a specified date.
Other security undesirables were disposed of variously. If, prior
to the departure of the man from the United States, derogatory information was discovered (usually as a result of the file checks), he was
not considered for hire and the case was discontinued, There were 367
cases of this type. In 63 other cases men had been sent to Jobsite on
apparently favorable "P" approval checks, and later during the FBI investigation it was developed that serious derogatory information existed, These cases presented a troublesome problem in that it was necessary under current directives to remove the men from Jobsite without
revealing that their removal was in any way due to security considerations,

Some of these employees were discharged for bad conduct or poor
work performance on the job; others were removed because of falsification of the personnel security questionnaires or job applications; and
others quit voluntarily for normal reasons, There remained however a
relatively large number whose work performance and conduct were above
reproach and who were, in fact, badly needed at the Jobsite, In the
cases of these men, Hoomes & Narver felt that their removal would not
be justified, and, in addition, removal of men with excellent job performance in the face of an obvious need for their services might have
resulted in legal repercussions.
At the security meeting of January 6, 1950, this situation was exhaustively explored, and it was decided by the AEC security representatives that in the absence of a formal security denial employees might
remain at the Jobsite until their contract expired or until the security
limiting date, whichever occurred earlier, They were not to be rehired

without a full "Q"°clearance.

This solution was extremely helpful,

By the time the limiting date was reached, the status of the Jobsite work was such that the remaining men in the above category could

be surplused without impairment of the job and without indication that
their removal was for security reasons.

of 31, left the Jobsite on April 2, 1951.

The last of these men, a group

Throughout the entire operation there were no known cases of serious

security violations either at the Jobsite or at other Holmes & Narver

installations, One "Q" cleared individual was removed from the Jobsite
and his clearance revoked as a precautionary measure based on the de-

velopment of serious derogatory information after the granting of the
clearance, and another was surplused because of loose talk in letters
to a person in the United States. The information leading to these
actions was discovered by the Holmes & Narver Security Division and
forwarded to the AEC,

7-14 RETURN TO DOE/NV TECHNICAL INFORMATION
RESOURCE CENTER

Select target paragraph3