ISCR Case 02-24638.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-24638.h1

grantedJul 20, 2007· Hon. Christopher Graham· hearing

Summary

A 43-year-old armed security officer for a federal contractor was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence), C (Foreign Preference), E (Personal Conduct), and J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons detailed several allegations, including the applicant's family ties in Morocco, his past dual citizenship, false answers on a security clearance application, and an erroneous criminal charge.

Specifically, the applicant's father and three brothers are Moroccan citizens and residents, though he has rare contact with them. His mother and two other brothers are U.S. citizens residing in the U.S. While the applicant previously held dual citizenship, he formally renounced his Moroccan citizenship and surrendered his passport and ID card to the Moroccan Embassy on March 22, 2007. He had traveled to Morocco in March 1999 and December 2000 but has not returned since.

The applicant also faced allegations of personal and criminal conduct for failing to list a past employer, four brothers, and two children on his security clearance application, as well as his past travel to Morocco. Additionally, he was arrested on May 14, 1995, for an embezzlement charge, which was later determined to be erroneous and expunged on February 14, 2005. Ultimately, the clearance was granted, as the applicant renounced his Moroccan citizenship, the criminal charge was expunged, and his family in Morocco has no ties to the Moroccan government.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant renounced Moroccan citizenship and surrendered his passport.
The erroneous criminal charge was expunged, mitigating concerns about criminal conduct.
The applicant's family members in Morocco do not have ties to the Moroccan government, reducing foreign influence concerns.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A2.1.2.1raisedForeign Influence - Family Ties to a Foreign Country
E2.A2.1.2.2raisedForeign Preference - Dual Citizenship
E2.A2.1.3.1raisedCriminal Conduct - False Answers on Security Clearance Application

Mitigating

E2.A2.1.3.1appliedForeign Influence - Mitigating Circumstances
E2.A2.1.3.2appliedForeign Preference - Renunciation of Foreign Citizenship
E2.A2.1.3.3appliedCriminal Conduct - Expungement of Charges

Key Rule Quoted

“The mere possession of family ties with a person in a foreign country is not, as a matter of law, disqualifying under Guideline B.”
— ISCR Case No. 98-0419 (April 30, 1999)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 10, 2004
Answer filedApr 21, 2004
Hearing heldApr 25, 2007
Decision dateJul 20, 2007

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Family Ties in a Friendly Country
Impact of Expunged Criminal Charges on Security Clearance Decisions
Application of the Whole Person Concept in Security Clearance Evaluations

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's father and three brothers are citizens and residents of Morocco.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Morocco HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant's mother lives in the U.S., as do two brothers who are U.S. citizens.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	—	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant has rare contact with his father or brothers in Morocco.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	—	Denied	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant's parents and siblings are citizens and residents of Morocco.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Morocco HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.e	There is no evidence to indicate they are involved in any 'intelligence work' for the Moroccan Government, and they have no 'official ties' to the Moroccan Government.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	—	Denied	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant renounced his Moroccan citizenship and surrendered his Moroccan passport.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—	Denied	—	—	—
1.g	Applicant has a son who is a citizen of the United States currently residing in the U.S.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	—	Denied	—	—	—
1.h	Applicant traveled to Morocco in March 1999 and December 2000, and has not returned since.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Morocco	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant's father and three brothers are citizens and residents of Morocco.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Morocco

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.b

Applicant's mother lives in the U.S., as do two brothers who are U.S. citizens.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Immediate Family

—

Denied

—

1.c

Applicant has rare contact with his father or brothers in Morocco.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Immediate Family

—

Denied

—

1.d

Applicant's parents and siblings are citizens and residents of Morocco.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Morocco

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.e

There is no evidence to indicate they are involved in any 'intelligence work' for the Moroccan Government, and they have no 'official ties' to the Moroccan Government.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Immediate Family

—

Denied

—

1.f

Applicant renounced his Moroccan citizenship and surrendered his Moroccan passport.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

Denied

—

1.g

Applicant has a son who is a citizen of the United States currently residing in the U.S.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Immediate Family

—

Denied

—

1.h

Applicant traveled to Morocco in March 1999 and December 2000, and has not returned since.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Morocco

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant exercised a dual citizenship with Morocco and the United States.	For Applicant	Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	On March 22, 2007, he delivered a letter to the Embassy of Morocco in which he renounced his citizenship and surrendered his passport and Moroccan ID card.	For Applicant	Failure to Renounce or Surrender Foreign Status	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶10)

Mitigating applied (¶11)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant exercised a dual citizenship with Morocco and the United States.

For Applicant

Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application

Admitted

—

2.b

On March 22, 2007, he delivered a letter to the Embassy of Morocco in which he renounced his citizenship and surrendered his passport and Moroccan ID card.

For Applicant

Failure to Renounce or Surrender Foreign Status

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
4.a	Applicant falsely answered several questions on a security clearance application.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Denied	—	—	—
4.b	He failed to list that he had been employed in a retail store from 1994 to 1995.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	—	—	—
4.c	He only listed his parents, failing to list his four brothers, one child residing in Morocco, and one child living in the United States.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Foreign Contacts or Interests	Denied	—	—	—
4.d	He failed to list his travel to Morocco in 1999 and 2000.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

4.a

Applicant falsely answered several questions on a security clearance application.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Denied

—

4.b

He failed to list that he had been employed in a retail store from 1994 to 1995.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Employment History

Denied

—

4.c

He only listed his parents, failing to list his four brothers, one child residing in Morocco, and one child living in the United States.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Foreign Contacts or Interests

Denied

—

4.d

He failed to list his travel to Morocco in 1999 and 2000.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	SOR subparagraph 3.a. alleged his arrest on May 14, 1995, for a charge of embezzlement, a felony. The charge was nolle prosequi. Subsequently, it was determined that the charge was made in error, and all police and court records filed were ordered expunged on February 14, 2005.	For Applicant	Theft or Larceny	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	The government alleged criminal conduct under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 for making false answers on his security clearance application.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

3.a

SOR subparagraph 3.a. alleged his arrest on May 14, 1995, for a charge of embezzlement, a felony. The charge was nolle prosequi. Subsequently, it was determined that the charge was made in error, and all police and court records filed were ordered expunged on February 14, 2005.

For Applicant

Theft or Larceny

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Denied

—

3.b

The government alleged criminal conduct under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 for making false answers on his security clearance application.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

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

SYNOPSIS

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES

APPEARANCES