ISCR Case 09-05812.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-05812.h1

deniedSep 20, 2011· Hon. Jennifer I. Goldstein· hearing

Summary

A 43-year-old U.S. citizen, originally from India, was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The judge determined that the applicant's strong familial connections and financial interests in India created a heightened risk of foreign influence. Specifically, the applicant had contact with foreign family members and maintained substantial business, financial, or property interests in India, which could subject him to foreign exploitation or create a conflict of interest.

Additionally, the applicant's personal conduct raised significant concerns regarding his reliability. He falsified material facts on two separate security clearance applications. On a June 16, 2010, Questionnaire For National Security Positions, he falsely stated he had not held an active foreign passport in the last seven years, despite having an active Indian passport issued in 2000 that was destroyed shortly before the application. Similarly, on a May 6, 2009, Questionnaire for Sensitive Positions, he misrepresented the status of his foreign passport, failing to disclose the active Indian passport.

These falsifications undermined his trustworthiness. While some mitigating conditions were considered, the judge ultimately found that the applicant's familial ties to India and his lack of candor on security clearance applications were sufficient grounds for denial. The applicant's financial interests in India, though not deemed significant, did not alleviate the primary concerns regarding foreign influence.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant's familial ties to India created a heightened risk of foreign influence.
The applicant falsified material facts on security clearance applications, undermining his trustworthiness.
The applicant's financial interests in India, while not significant, did not mitigate the overarching concerns regarding his familial ties.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)appliedContact with Foreign Family Members
AG ¶ 7(b)appliedConnections to Foreign Persons Creating Potential Conflict of Interest
AG ¶ 7(d)appliedSharing Living Quarters with a Person Creating Heightened Risk
AG ¶ 7(e)appliedSubstantial Business or Financial Interest in a Foreign Country
AG ¶ 16(a)appliedDeliberate Omission or Falsification of Relevant Facts

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(f)appliedValue of Foreign Financial Interests Unlikely to Result in Conflict

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 9, 2011
Answer filedMar 25, 2011
Hearing heldMay 24, 2011
Decision dateSep 20, 2011

Cite For

Heightened Risk of Foreign Influence Due to Familial Ties Under Guideline B
Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Consideration of Foreign Financial Interests 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.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	contact with a foreign family member, business or professional associate, friend, or other person who is a citizen of or resident in a foreign country if that contact creates a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion;	Against Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
1.b	connections to a foreign person, group, government, or country that create a potential conflict of interest between the individual's obligation to protect sensitive information or technology and the individual's desire to help a foreign person, group, or country by providing that information;	Against Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.c	sharing living quarters with a person or persons, regardless of citizenship status, if that relationship creates a heightened risk of foreign inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion;	Against Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk	—	—
1.d	a substantial business, financial, or property interest in a foreign country, or in any foreign-owned or foreign-operated business, which could subject the individual to heightened risk of foreign influence or exploitation.	Against Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	—	—
1.e–1.l	8 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (2 against, 6 for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

contact with a foreign family member, business or professional associate, friend, or other person who is a citizen of or resident in a foreign country if that contact creates a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion;

Against Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

—

1.b

connections to a foreign person, group, government, or country that create a potential conflict of interest between the individual's obligation to protect sensitive information or technology and the individual's desire to help a foreign person, group, or country by providing that information;

Against Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.c

sharing living quarters with a person or persons, regardless of citizenship status, if that relationship creates a heightened risk of foreign inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion;

Against Applicant

Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen

Immediate Family

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk

—

1.d

a substantial business, financial, or property interest in a foreign country, or in any foreign-owned or foreign-operated business, which could subject the individual to heightened risk of foreign influence or exploitation.

Against Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk

—

1.e–1.l

8 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (2 against, 6 for the applicant). (low confidence)

Mixed

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	You falsified material facts on a Questionnaire For National Security Positions, dated June 16, 2010, in response to “17.d. In the last 7 years, have you ha[d] an active passport that was issued by a foreign government.” You answered “No”, whereas in truth, you deliberately failed to list that you had an active Indian passport issued in October 25, 2000 that was destroyed on June 7, 2010.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATESELF-CORRECTED	Other	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	You falsified material facts on a Questionnaire for Sensitive Positions electronically transmitted on May 06, 2009, in response to “20B-6. Ever Held/Hold [F]oreign Passport.”; You responded that you surrendered your foreign passport to the Indian Consulate at the time of your previous security clearance. Passport cancelled because you received US citizenship, the Indian passport has been cancelled/surrendered after you received citizenship: whereas in truth, you deliberately failed to list that you had an active Indian passport issued in October 25, 2000.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATESELF-CORRECTED	Other	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

You falsified material facts on a Questionnaire For National Security Positions, dated June 16, 2010, in response to “17.d. In the last 7 years, have you ha[d] an active passport that was issued by a foreign government.” You answered “No”, whereas in truth, you deliberately failed to list that you had an active Indian passport issued in October 25, 2000 that was destroyed on June 7, 2010.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATESELF-CORRECTED

Other

Denied

—

2.b

You falsified material facts on a Questionnaire for Sensitive Positions electronically transmitted on May 06, 2009, in response to “20B-6. Ever Held/Hold [F]oreign Passport.”; You responded that you surrendered your foreign passport to the Indian Consulate at the time of your previous security clearance. Passport cancelled because you received US citizenship, the Indian passport has been cancelled/surrendered after you received citizenship: whereas in truth, you deliberately failed to list that you had an active Indian passport issued in October 25, 2000.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATESELF-CORRECTED

Other

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