CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 17-04246.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 17-04246.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-04246.h1

grantedJul 24, 2018· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A 56-year-old U.S. citizen and defense contractor, originally from Egypt, was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The Statement of Reasons cited her birth in Egypt to Egyptian parents, three siblings residing in Egypt, and land she received from her father in Egypt before immigrating. Additionally, one sibling performs administrative work for the Egyptian police. These facts raised disqualifying conditions related to foreign influence.

However, the judge applied several mitigating conditions. The applicant demonstrated strong ties and loyalties to the United States, including a U.S.-citizen child and a deceased U.S.-citizen husband. She credibly asserted that she would not succumb to coercion from foreign entities.

Her commitment to the U.S. was further evidenced by the value of her U.S. assets and her stated intention to sell her property in Egypt. Ultimately, the judge determined that her strong connections and loyalties to the United States outweighed the foreign influence concerns, leading to the decision to grant her security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant has strong ties and loyalties to the United States, including a U.S.-citizen child and a deceased husband who was a U.S. citizen.
Applicant credibly stated she would not succumb to coercion from foreign entities.
The value of Applicant's U.S. assets and her intention to sell her property in Egypt demonstrate her commitment to the U.S.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedForeign Influence
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedForeign Influence
AG ¶ 7(f)raisedForeign Influence

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)appliedTies to the U.S.
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedMitigating Circumstances
AG ¶ 8(f)appliedWhole-person Concept

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 12, 2018
Answer filedJan 20, 2018
Hearing heldJul 10, 2018
Decision dateJul 24, 2018Proposed summary disposition in Applicant’s favor on July 20, 2018.

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline B
Weighing Foreign Influence Against U.S. Ties
Whole-person Concept 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.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline B (Foreign Influence) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant's foreign connections to Egypt raised security concerns under Guideline B, but ultimately determined that her ties to the United States outweighed these concerns. The applicant's relationships and loyalties in the U.S. were deemed strong enough to mitigate the risks associated with her foreign ties, leading to a decision in her favor.

U.S. ties the decision noted: Naturalized U.S. Citizen · U.S. Spouse or Partner · U.S. Children · U.S. Home or Property · U.S. Career or Business

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was born in Egypt to Egyptian parents.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Egypt 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 (f) substantial foreign business, financial, or property interests	(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. (f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	Claimed Deep U.S. Ties
1.b	Applicant has six surviving siblings, three of whom are citizens and residents of Egypt.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Egypt 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 (f) substantial foreign business, financial, or property interests	(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. (f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	Claimed Deep U.S. Ties
1.c	Applicant's father gave land in Egypt to her before she immigrated to the United States.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	Egypt 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 (f) substantial foreign business, financial, or property interests	(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. (f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	Claimed Deep U.S. Ties
1.d	One of Applicant’s siblings performs administrative work for the police in Egypt.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family GOVT-AFFILIATED	Egypt 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 (f) substantial foreign business, financial, or property interests	(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. (f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	Claimed Deep U.S. Ties

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline B). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

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

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 17-04246 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Jeff A. Nagel, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

07/24/2018 ______________

DECISION

______________

LOUGHRAN, Edward W., Administrative Judge:

On January 12, 2018, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline B, foreign influence.1 Applicant responded to the SOR on January 20, 2018, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on May 8, 2018. The hearing was held as scheduled on July 10, 2018. On July 20, 2018, I proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant is a 56-year-old employee of a defense contractor. She was born in Egypt to Egyptian parents. She worked at the U.S. Embassy in Egypt and met a U.S. citizen who she married in 1993. She immigrated to the United States in 1993, and she became a U.S. citizen in 1998. She served in the U.S. military from 1994 until she was honorably discharged in 2004. Her husband passed away. She remarried another native-born U.S. citizen, but they divorced. She has a U.S.-citizen child.

Applicant’s parents and one of her siblings are deceased. She has six surviving siblings. One of her siblings is a U.S. citizen and resident. He holds a top secret security clearance. Another sibling is a citizen and resident of the United Kingdom. A third sibling lives in Canada. Applicant has three siblings who remain citizens and residents of Egypt. Her oldest sibling is retired and plans to join her daughter (Applicant’s niece) who has immigrated to the United States. One of Applicant’s siblings performs administrative work for the police in Egypt.

Applicant’s father gave land in Egypt to her before she immigrated to the United States. The current value of the land and house on the property is about $200,000. Applicant intends to sell the property because she does not plan to return to Egypt to live. She estimates her U.S. assets at $400,000. She credibly stated that she would not succumb to any attempt by a foreign government, intelligence or security service, or terrorist organization to blackmail or coerce her.

I considered the totality of Applicant’s ties to Egypt. I also considered the nature of that government, its human rights record, and the risk of terrorism in that country. The disqualifying conditions under AG ¶¶ 7(a), 7(b), and 7(f) have been raised by the evidence. However, Applicant’s ties to Egypt are outweighed by her relationships and loyalties in the United States. I find that it is unlikely she will be placed in a position of having to choose between the interests of the United States and the interests of Egypt. There is no conflict of interest, because Applicant can be expected to resolve any conflict of interest in favor of the United States. The mitigating conditions under AG ¶¶ 8(a), 8(b), and 8(f) are applicable.

The concerns over Applicant’s foreign connections do not create doubt about her current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information. In reaching this conclusion, I weighed the evidence as a whole and considered if the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence. I also gave due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that she met her ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant her eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

________________________ Edward W. Loughran Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This case is adjudicated under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the adjudicative guidelines (AG), which became effective on June 8, 2017.