CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-01511.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-01511.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-01511.h1

grantedMar 8, 2017· Hon. LeRoy F. Foreman· hearing

Summary

A U.S. citizen born in Pakistan was granted eligibility for a public trust position despite initial concerns under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence) and C (Foreign Preference). The Statement of Reasons cited that the applicant's mother-in-law, a Pakistani citizen, resided with him in the U.S., and that he had other family members who were Pakistani citizens and residents to whom he had sent money. Additionally, the applicant possessed a Pakistani visa. These allegations raised disqualifying conditions under Adjudicative Guidelines Paragraphs B2 and C1.

However, the judge applied mitigating conditions under Adjudicative Guidelines Paragraphs 8(a), 8(b), and 9(e). The applicant demonstrated that his family members in Pakistan were distant relatives with whom he had limited contact. Furthermore, his Pakistani visa was expired, which reduced concerns about foreign preference.

The judge ultimately found the applicant to be candid, sincere, and credible during the hearing, leading to the decision to grant his eligibility for the public trust position.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated that his family members in Pakistan are distant relatives and that he has limited contact with them.
The applicant's Pakistani visa was expired, reducing concerns about foreign preference.
The applicant was candid, sincere, and credible during the hearing.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ B2raisedForeign Influence
AG ¶ C1raisedForeign Preference

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)appliedThe Nature of the Applicant's Family Ties to Foreign Nationals Is Not Sufficient to Create a Security Concern.
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedThe Applicant Has Established a Long History of U.S. Citizenship and Ties to the U.S.
AG ¶ 9(e)appliedThe Applicant's Foreign Passport or Visa Is Expired.

Key Rule Quoted

“The whole-person concept requires consideration of the totality of the circumstances.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 4, 2015
Answer filed—
Hearing heldJan 12, 2017
Decision dateMar 8, 2017

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions for Foreign Influence Under Guideline B
Mitigating Conditions for Foreign Preference Under Guideline C
Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Determinations

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 family ties in Pakistan, including a mother-in-law who previously lived with him in the U.S. and distant relatives to whom he has sent money, did not pose a security risk. The applicant's ties to the U.S. were strong, with all immediate family members being U.S. citizens. The decision was granted in favor of the applicant, indicating that the foreign influence concerns were mitigated.

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant’s mother-in-law is a citizen of Pakistan who resides with him in the United States.	For Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Pakistan	Admitted	—	(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. (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk	Credited Deep U.S. Ties
1.b	Applicant has family members who are citizens and residents of Pakistan, to whom Applicant has sent money.	For Applicant	Extended Family in Foreign Country Extended Family	Pakistan	Admitted	—	(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. (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk	Credited Deep U.S. Ties
1.c	Applicant possesses a Pakistani visa.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Pakistan	Admitted	—	(e) promptly complied with reporting requirements	Claimed Foreign Passport Surrendered

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline C (Foreign Preference) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge addressed concerns regarding the applicant's foreign preference due to family ties in Pakistan and possession of a Pakistani visa. The applicant's ties were mitigated by his strong connections to the United States and the expiration of the visa, leading to a decision in favor of the applicant.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant’s mother-in-law is a citizen of Pakistan who resides with him in the United States and that Applicant has family members who are citizens and residents of Pakistan, to whom Applicant has sent money.	For Applicant	Foreign Benefits or Education	Admitted	—	(a) the foreign citizenship is not in conflict with U.S. national security interests (b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference (c) the individual has expressed a willingness to renounce the foreign citizenship that is in conflict with U.S. national security interests	Credited Family Ties to the U.s.
1.b	Applicant possesses a Pakistani visa.	For Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Admitted	—	(e) the exercise of the entitlements or benefits of foreign citizenship do not present a national security concern	Credited Visa Expired

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline C). 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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) [Redacted] ) ADP Case No. 15-01511 ) Applicant for Public Trust Position )

Appearances

For Government: Rhett Petcher, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se

03/08/2017 ______________

Decision

______________

Applicant submitted an Electronic Questionnaire for Investigations Processing (e- QIP) on November 22, 2013, seeking eligibility for a public trust position. On November 4, 2015, the Department of Defense (DOD) sent him a Statement of Reasons (SOR), citing trustworthiness concerns under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence) and C (Foreign Preference). DOD acted under DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); DOD Regulation 5200.2-R, Personnel Security Program (January 1987), as amended (Regulation); and the adjudicative guidelines (AG) implemented by DOD on September 1, 2006.

Applicant timely answered the SOR and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on November 30, 2016, and I conducted the hearing on January 12, 2017. Government Exhibits (GX) 1 through 3 were admitted in evidence without objection. Applicant testified, presented the testimony of one witness, and submitted Applicant’s Exhibits (AX) A through C, which were admitted without objection. DOHA received the transcript (Tr.) on January 19, 2017. After the record closed, I informed Department Counsel of my intent to issue a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor, and he did not object. The SOR alleges that Applicant’s mother-in-law is a citizen of Pakistan who resides with him in the United States and that Applicant has family members who are citizens and residents of Pakistan, to whom Applicant has sent money. It also alleges that Applicant possesses a Pakistani visa.

Applicant was born in Pakistan and became a U.S. citizen in 1997. His wife, parents, and three brothers are naturalized U.S. citizens and live in the United States. His three children are native-born U.S. citizens. He has infrequent contact with distant relatives in Pakistan, but he has sent them money for medical treatment and living expenses. He obtained a Pakistani visa to care for an uncle who was dying from cancer. He used his U.S. passport for the travel. The visa expired in August 2016.

About five years ago, Applicant’s mother-in-law came to the United States and lived with Applicant after her husband’s death until July 2016. She now lives with Applicant’s brother-in-law in the United States.

The mitigating conditions in AG ¶ 8(a), 8(b), 8(c) apply to Applicant’s family ties in Pakistan. Assuming without deciding that his Pakistani visa was comparable to a foreign passport, it is expired, and AG ¶ 9(e) is applicable.

I have weighed the evidence and given consideration to the whole-person concept. Applicant was candid, sincere, and credible at the hearing. I conclude that he has met his burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the interests of national security to grant him eligibility for a public trust position. The case is decided for Applicant.

LeRoy F. Foreman Administrative Judge