ISCR Case 17-03882.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-03882.h1

grantedSep 26, 2018· Hon. Carol G. Ricciardello· hearing

Summary

A 52-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, originally from Somalia, was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons cited that the applicant has a brother and three sisters who are citizens of Somalia, and a son who attended medical school in China. Additionally, the applicant had lived in Kenya as a refugee.

Concerns under Personal Conduct arose from alleged inconsistencies between the applicant’s 2007 and 2017 security questionnaires regarding past residencies and his brothers’ occupations. Specifically, the applicant had traveled back and forth to the United Arab Emirates, not resided there for three years, and visited Syria for nine days for dental treatment, which he omitted from his 2017 questionnaire. He credibly explained that his mother informed him of his brothers’ forced occupational changes in Somalia.

The judge determined that the applicant’s minimal ties to Somalia and China did not pose a significant risk. His explanations for the inconsistencies were found to be credible and supported by evidence. Ultimately, the applicant demonstrated strong loyalty to the United States, which outweighed any foreign influence concerns, leading to the decision to grant his security clearance as consistent with the national interest.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's ties to Somalia and China were found to be minimal and not a significant risk.
The applicant's explanations for inconsistencies in his background were credible and supported by evidence.
The applicant demonstrated a strong loyalty to the United States, outweighing any foreign influence concerns.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 16(a)rejectedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading InformationInsufficient evidence to conclude the applicant deliberately provided false or misleading information.
AG ¶ 16(b)rejectedPersonal Conduct That Raises Questions About JudgmentThe applicant credibly refuted the personal conduct security concerns.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 7(a)appliedThe Nature of the Foreign ContactsThe applicant's contacts with foreign countries were minimal.
AG ¶ 7(b)appliedThe Applicant's Family Ties to the Foreign CountryThe applicant had no significant family ties that posed a risk.
AG ¶ 7(e)appliedThe Applicant's CircumstancesThe applicant's circumstances and loyalty to the U.S. outweighed foreign influence concerns.
AG ¶ 8(a)appliedThe Applicant's Reliability and TrustworthinessThe applicant's reliability and trustworthiness were not in doubt.
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedThe Applicant's Good JudgmentThe applicant's good judgment was supported by the evidence.
AG ¶ 8(c)appliedThe Applicant's Ability to Protect Classified InformationThe applicant was deemed capable of protecting classified information.

Key Rule Quoted

“The concerns over Applicant’s foreign connections do not create doubt about his current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 23, 2018
Answer filedMar 12, 2018
Hearing heldAug 15, 2018
Decision dateSep 26, 2018Proposed summary disposition in favor of applicant.

Cite For

Minimal Foreign Influence Under Guideline B
Credibility of Applicant's Explanations for Inconsistencies
Loyalty to the United States Outweighing Foreign Ties

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 a brother and three sisters who are citizens of Somalia.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Somalia HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Claimed Other
1.b	Applicant has a son who attended medical school in China.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Claimed Other
1.c	Applicant has lived in Kenya as a refugee.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Kenya HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Claimed Other

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant has a brother and three sisters who are citizens of Somalia.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Somalia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

Claimed

Other

1.b

Applicant has a son who attended medical school in China.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Immediate Family

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

Claimed

Other

1.c

Applicant has lived in Kenya as a refugee.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Kenya

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

Claimed

Other

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	The SOR alleged inconsistencies between Applicant’s April 2007 electronic Questionnaire for Investigations Processing (e-QIP) and his 2017 counterintelligence focused security screening questionnaire (CFSSQ) regarding the location and times of his past residencies, and his brothers’ occupations.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant was not living in the United Arab Emirates for three years, but traveled back and forth for a period. He went to Syria for 9 days to receive dental treatment. He went there because the cost was considerably less expensive than in the United States. He listed this travel in his 2007 CFSSQ, but he forgot to list it in the 2017 CFSSQ.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—
2.c	He credibly explained that his mother told him his brothers’ occupations had changed. He explained that the Somalian government forces people to change jobs and fulfill different functions for the government or risk punishment. This was the situation with his brothers, who were forced to change occupations.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

The SOR alleged inconsistencies between Applicant’s April 2007 electronic Questionnaire for Investigations Processing (e-QIP) and his 2017 counterintelligence focused security screening questionnaire (CFSSQ) regarding the location and times of his past residencies, and his brothers’ occupations.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Employment History

Denied

—

2.b

Applicant was not living in the United Arab Emirates for three years, but traveled back and forth for a period. He went to Syria for 9 days to receive dental treatment. He went there because the cost was considerably less expensive than in the United States. He listed this travel in his 2007 CFSSQ, but he forgot to list it in the 2017 CFSSQ.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

2.c

He credibly explained that his mother told him his brothers’ occupations had changed. He explained that the Somalian government forces people to change jobs and fulfill different functions for the government or risk punishment. This was the situation with his brothers, who were forced to change occupations.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Employment History

Denied

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

DECISION

FOOTNOTES