ISCR Case 17-02862.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-02862.h1

deniedJan 17, 2018· Hon. Carol G. Ricciardello· hearing

Summary

A 34-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, originally from Afghanistan, was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The applicant has extensive family ties in Afghanistan, including his wife, children, parents, siblings, and in-laws, all of whom are citizens and residents there. He provides financial support to these family members, sending money for medical care and household expenses, and maintains frequent contact through visits and daily communication with his wife via social media.

Additionally, the applicant faced issues under Guideline E for personal conduct. He failed to disclose on his September 2016 e-QIP that he resigned in lieu of termination in March 2011 due to misconduct, and also failed to disclose a termination from employment in April 2015, also for misconduct. These omissions were compounded by prior disciplinary actions, including a verbal warning in October 2010 and a written warning in March 2011 for misconduct while employed by a contractor.

The judge determined that the applicant's significant family ties in Afghanistan raised concerns about foreign influence and potential coercion, while his financial support to family members created a potential conflict of interest. Furthermore, his deliberate failure to disclose past employment terminations and misconduct on his e-QIP undermined his credibility. The applicant failed to mitigate these concerns, resulting in the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has significant family ties in Afghanistan, which raises concerns of foreign influence and potential coercion.
The applicant deliberately failed to disclose past employment terminations and misconduct on his e-QIP, undermining his credibility.
The applicant's financial support to family members in Afghanistan creates a potential conflict of interest.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedForeign ContactsThe applicant has contact with family members in Afghanistan, creating a heightened risk of foreign exploitation.
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to Foreign EntitiesThe applicant's ties to Afghanistan may create a potential conflict of interest.

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 issuedSep 20, 2017
Answer filedOct 6, 2017
Hearing heldJan 17, 2018via MS Teams
Decision dateFeb 12, 2018

Cite For

Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Family Ties Under Guideline B
Failure to Disclose Employment Misconduct Under Guideline E
Credibility Issues Arising From Inconsistent Testimony Regarding Past Employment

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has numerous family members residing in Afghanistan, including his wife, children, parents, siblings, and in-laws, who are citizens and residents of Afghanistan.	Against Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	—	—
1.b	Applicant provides financial support to his family members in Afghanistan, including sending money to his mother for medical care and to his brother for household expenses.	Against Applicant	Financial Support to Foreign Relative Immediate Family	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	—	—
1.c	Applicant has frequent contact with his family in Afghanistan, including visits and daily communication with his wife through social media applications.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant has numerous family members residing in Afghanistan, including his wife, children, parents, siblings, and in-laws, who are citizens and residents of Afghanistan.

Against Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk

—

1.b

Applicant provides financial support to his family members in Afghanistan, including sending money to his mother for medical care and to his brother for household expenses.

Against Applicant

Financial Support to Foreign Relative

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk

—

1.c

Applicant has frequent contact with his family in Afghanistan, including visits and daily communication with his wife through social media applications.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant failed to disclose on his September 2016 e-QIP that he resigned in lieu of termination due to misconduct in March 2011.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant failed to disclose on his September 2016 e-QIP that he was terminated from his employment due to misconduct in April 2015.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	Applicant received a verbal warning in October 2010 and a written warning in March 2011 for misconduct while employed by a contractor.	Against Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant failed to disclose on his September 2016 e-QIP that he resigned in lieu of termination due to misconduct in March 2011.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Employment History

Denied

—

2.b

Applicant failed to disclose on his September 2016 e-QIP that he was terminated from his employment due to misconduct in April 2015.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Employment History

Denied

—

2.c

Applicant received a verbal warning in October 2010 and a written warning in March 2011 for misconduct while employed by a contractor.

Against Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Denied

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES