ISCR Case 14-03809.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 14-03809.h1

grantedMay 18, 2016· Hon. Michael H. Leonard· hearing

Summary

A 61-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen and program manager, originally from India, was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The Statement of Reasons cited his 88-year-old father and 84-year-old mother, both lifelong citizens and residents of India, as well as a 56-year-old sister who is also an Indian citizen and resident. Another sister, 58, is a U.S. citizen and resident but travels to India to care for their parents.

Additional concerns included a small bank account in India, co-owned with his wife and valued between $1,000 and $2,000, used to assist his parents. He also co-owns a bungalow in India with his wife and mother-in-law, valued between $50,000 and $60,000. These facts raised disqualifying conditions under Adjudicative Guidelines Paragraphs 7(a) and 7(b).

The judge applied mitigating conditions under Adjudicative Guidelines Paragraphs 8(a) and 8(b), finding that the applicant provided extensive evidence of good character and reliability, supported by colleague testimonials. He demonstrated strong ties to the U.S. through family, financial assets, and residency since 1979. His residency in India from 2004 to 2012 was for a spiritual journey, not to maintain foreign ties. Ultimately, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant provided extensive evidence of his good character and reliability, supported by testimonials from colleagues.
He demonstrated strong ties to the U.S. through his family, financial assets, and long-term residency since immigrating in 1979.
The applicant's primary motivation for residing in India from 2004 to 2012 was a spiritual journey, not a desire to maintain foreign ties.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with a Foreign Family MemberThe applicant's family ties to India raised concerns about potential foreign influence.
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to a Foreign CountryThe applicant's connections to India created a potential conflict of interest.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)appliedNature of Relationships with Foreign PersonsThe applicant's relationships with family in India were unlikely to create a conflict of interest.
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedMinimal Conflict of InterestThe applicant's deep ties to the U.S. outweighed his ties to India.

Key Rule Quoted

“The security clearance process is not a zero-risk program, because nearly every person presents some risk or concern.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 23, 2014
Answer filedFeb 9, 2015
Hearing heldJan 7, 2016
Decision dateMay 18, 2016

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
Importance of U.S. Ties in Security Clearance Determinations
Consideration of Personal Motivations in Foreign Travel and Residence

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
2.a	Applicant’s father, age 88, and mother, age 84, are both lifelong citizens of and residents in India.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Unknown	(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.	Credited Deep U.S. Ties
2.b	Applicant has two sisters in addition to his younger brother. One sister is 56 years old and she is a citizen of and a resident in India.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Unknown	(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.	Credited Deep U.S. Ties
2.c	Applicant’s other sister is 58 years old and she is a citizen of and a resident in the United States, although she travels back and forth to India to provide care for her parents.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Unknown	(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.	Credited Deep U.S. Ties
2.d	Applicant has a small bank account (worth about $1,000 to $2,000) in India co-owned by him and his wife that they use to help his parents, and a small bungalow in India (valued at about U.S. $50,000 to $60,000) co-owned by his wife and mother-in-law.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Unknown	(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.	Credited Deep U.S. Ties

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant’s father, age 88, and mother, age 84, are both lifelong citizens of and residents in India.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Unknown

(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.

Credited

Deep U.S. Ties

2.b

Applicant has two sisters in addition to his younger brother. One sister is 56 years old and she is a citizen of and a resident in India.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Unknown

(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.

Credited

Deep U.S. Ties

2.c

Applicant’s other sister is 58 years old and she is a citizen of and a resident in the United States, although she travels back and forth to India to provide care for her parents.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Unknown

(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.

Credited

Deep U.S. Ties

2.d

Applicant has a small bank account (worth about $1,000 to $2,000) in India co-owned by him and his wife that they use to help his parents, and a small bungalow in India (valued at about U.S. $50,000 to $60,000) co-owned by his wife and mother-in-law.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Unknown

(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.

Credited

Deep U.S. Ties

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

STATEMENT OF CASE

PROCEDURAL MATTERS

FINDINGS OF FACT

DISCUSSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES