CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 08-01980.a3 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 08-01980.a3

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date10/29/2009
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionsSee the hearing decision (Case 08-01980) →See the hearing decision (Case 08-01980.h3) →See the hearing decision (Case 08-01980.h2) →See the hearing decision (Case 08-01980.a1) →See the hearing decision (Case 08-01980.h1) →
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Michael Y. Ra'anan, Jean E. Smallin, James E. Moody
Government Counsel: James B. Norman
Case Summary
The applicant in this case sought a security clearance but faced concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), Guideline C (Foreign Preference), and Guideline M (Use of Information Technology Systems). The core allegations in the Statement of Reasons included the applicant's possession of a valid Israeli passport and his failure to demonstrate that he had relinquished it, which raised security concerns regarding foreign preference.
Key facts established during the proceedings indicated that the applicant was born in Israel, became a U.S. citizen in 1980, and had strong familial ties to Israel, including a mother and two brothers who were Israeli citizens. Although the applicant expressed a willingness to renounce his Israeli citizenship and surrender his passport, he did not take the necessary steps to do so before the hearing. The administrative judge noted that the applicant had ample time to address the concerns regarding his foreign passport but failed to take action, which ultimately led to the conclusion that he did not meet his burden of proof for mitigation.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant under Guideline C, affirming that the applicant's continued possession of a valid foreign passport was inconsistent with national security interests. The judge found that the applicant's inaction in surrendering the passport, despite being given the opportunity to do so, supported the decision to deny the security clearance. The ruling was subsequently affirmed by the Appeal Board, which found no harmful error in the judge's decision-making process.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline BForeign Influence · For Applicant
- Guideline CForeign Preference · Against Applicant
- Guideline MUse of Information Technology · For Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-01980.a3

deniedOct 29, 2009· Hon. Michael Y. Ra'anan· hearing

Summary

A security clearance was denied to an applicant who held dual citizenship with the United States and Israel. The denial was based on concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), Guideline C (Foreign Preference), and Guideline M (Use of Information Technology).

The primary issue stemmed from the applicant's failure to relinquish his Israeli passport, which raised a disqualifying condition under Guideline C. Although the applicant expressed a willingness to renounce his Israeli citizenship, he did not take timely action to surrender his passport. The record was held open for two weeks to allow him to do so, but no action was taken.

The judge determined that the applicant's inaction was insufficient to mitigate the security concerns, despite the application of mitigating conditions FMC 11(b) and FMC 11(e). Consequently, the security clearance was denied, and this decision was affirmed on appeal.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to demonstrate that he had relinquished his foreign passport, which raised security concerns under Guideline C.
The applicant did not take action to surrender his passport during the two weeks the record was held open for him to do so.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

CFC 10(a)raisedForeign Preference Disqualifying ConditionApplicant renewed his Israeli passport on at least two occasions after becoming an American citizen.

Mitigating

FMC 11(b)rejectedForeign Preference Mitigating ConditionThe applicant expressed a willingness to renounce dual citizenship but did not take action to surrender his passport.
FMC 11(e)rejectedForeign Preference Mitigating ConditionThe applicant's passport was not surrendered to the cognizant security authority.

Key Rule Quoted

“The burden was on Applicant to mitigate the foreign preference concerns not the government or his security office.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 14, 2008
Answer filed—
Hearing heldMar 24, 2009
Decision dateOct 29, 2009Decision affirmed on appeal.

Cite For

Failure to Relinquish Foreign Passport Under Guideline C
Burden of Proof for Mitigation Lies with the Applicant
Consideration of Foreign Preference in Security Clearance Decisions

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.