Summary
The applicant, a 62-year-old with a master's degree in public policy, sought security clearance under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence) and C (Foreign Preference). She has significant ties to Turkey through her partner, a retired military officer from a U.S. ally, but demonstrated no conflict of interest or foreign preference. The judge granted her eligibility for access to classified information, citing her long-standing loyalty to the U.S. and professional integrity.
Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Partner is a citizen of Country C and a resident of Turkey. The SOR alleges that he is employed by the Government of Country C as a consultant working in Country D (1.a). Partner is a citizen of Country C and a resident of Turkey. The SOR alleges that he is employed by the Government of Country C as a consultant working in Country D (1.b). Applicant and Partner own a residence in Turkey that has a value of about $375,000 and a second residence in Turkey worth about $286,000 (1.c). Applicant and Partner own a residence in Turkey that has a value of about $375,000 and a second residence in Turkey worth about $286,000 (1.d). The SOR alleges that Applicant maintains three bank accounts in Turkey with total deposits of about $6,000 to $11,000 (1.e). Applicant has married friends who are citizens and residents of Country B and a third friend who is a citizen of Country C and a resident of Turkey (1.f). Applicant has married friends who are citizens and residents of Country B and a third friend who is a citizen of Country C and a resident of Turkey (1.g). This subparagraph incorrectly alleges that Applicant acquired 'legal permanent residency' in Turkey and has maintained her residency in Turkey for several years (2.a).
The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 7(a), AG ¶ 7(b), AG ¶ 7(e), AG ¶ 7(f). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 8(a), AG ¶ 8(b), AG ¶ 8(c), AG ¶ 8(f). The decision turned on the following: The applicant's long-standing relationships and loyalties in the U.S. mitigate foreign influence concerns; The applicant's financial interests in Turkey are minimal compared to her U.S. assets, reducing the risk of foreign influence; The applicant's professional integrity and character were supported by multiple positive references.
Why the applicant prevailed
- The applicant's long-standing relationships and loyalties in the U.S. mitigate foreign influence concerns.
- The applicant's financial interests in Turkey are minimal compared to her U.S. assets, reducing the risk of foreign influence.
- The applicant's professional integrity and character were supported by multiple positive references.
Conditions referenced
- AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Persons
- AG ¶ 7(b)raisedPotential Conflict of Interest
- AG ¶ 7(e)raisedShared Living Quarters
- AG ¶ 7(f)raisedSubstantial Foreign Interests
- AG ¶ 8(a)appliedNature of Relationships with Foreign Persons
- AG ¶ 8(b)appliedNo Conflict of Interest Due to U.S. Loyalties
- AG ¶ 8(c)appliedCasual and Infrequent Contact with Foreign Citizens
- AG ¶ 8(f)appliedValue of Foreign Interests Unlikely to Result in Conflict
Key rule quoted
“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedFeb 2, 2024
- Answer filedFeb 6, 2024
- Hearing heldJun 13, 2024via Microsoft Teams
- Decision dateJun 28, 2024
Cite for
- Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
- No Established Foreign Preference Under Guideline C
- Importance of Character References in Security Clearance Decisions