CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 15-05847.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 15-05847.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-05847.h1

grantedJan 17, 2017· Hon. Erin C. Hogan· hearing

Summary

A U.S. citizen, originally from Tunisia, was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The Statement of Reasons noted that the applicant's mother, six siblings, and in-laws are Tunisian citizens residing in Tunisia. Additionally, the applicant owned a condominium in Tunisia valued at $120,000.

To mitigate these concerns, the applicant surrendered his valid Tunisian passport to his employer's security department. He also demonstrated strong ties to the U.S., including long-term residence and family connections within the country. The judge found that the applicant's U.S. financial interests outweighed his foreign property, further reducing foreign influence concerns.

Ultimately, the favorable evidence presented by the applicant was deemed to outweigh the unfavorable evidence. Consequently, the applicant was granted eligibility for access to classified information.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant surrendered his valid Tunisian passport, mitigating foreign preference concerns.
Applicant demonstrated strong ties to the U.S. through family and long-term residence.
The value of his U.S. financial interests outweighed his foreign property, reducing foreign influence concerns.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedForeign Influence
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedForeign Influence
AG ¶ 7(e)raisedForeign Influence
AG ¶ 19(a)(1)raisedForeign Preference

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(b)appliedMitigating Conditions for Foreign Influence
AG ¶ 8(f)appliedMitigating Conditions for Foreign Influence
AG ¶ 11(e)appliedMitigating Conditions for Foreign Preference

Key Rule Quoted

“In reaching this conclusion, I weighed the evidence as a whole and considered if the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 5, 2016
Answer filedDec 5, 2016
Hearing heldDec 5, 2016
Decision dateJan 17, 2017

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Preference Through Surrender of Foreign Passport
Mitigation of Foreign Influence Through Strong U.S. Ties
Whole-person Concept in Evaluating Security Clearance Cases

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 influence concerns were mitigated due to his strong ties to the United States, including his U.S. citizen wife and children, and his lengthy employment history. Despite having family members in Tunisia, the applicant's financial interests in the U.S. outweighed any potential influence from his foreign ties, leading to a decision in his 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's mother, six siblings, and in-laws are citizens of and reside in Tunisia.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Tunisia	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	(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	Credited Deep U.S. Ties Claimed Foreign Assets Divested
1.b	Applicant owns a condominium in Tunisia valued at $120,000.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	Tunisia	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	(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	Credited Deep U.S. Ties Claimed Foreign Assets Divested

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 applicant mitigated concerns under Guideline C, foreign preference, by surrendering his valid Tunisian passport to his employer’s security department. The judge found that the applicant's actions demonstrated a commitment to renouncing foreign preference, leading to a favorable decision.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant mitigated concerns raised under Guideline C, foreign preference when he surrendered his valid Tunisian passport to his employer’s security department.	For Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Admitted	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country	(e) the exercise of the entitlements or benefits of foreign citizenship do not present a national security concern	Credited Surrender of Foreign Passport
1.b	specific text not stated in this decision	Unknown	Unspecified Foreign Preference	Unknown	—	—	—

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

APPEARANCES

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: ) ) [Name redacted] ) ISCR Case No. 15-05847 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

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

01/17/2017 ______________

DECISION

______________

HOGAN, Erin C., Administrative Judge:

Applicant submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (SF 86 Format) on December 23, 2014. On March 5, 2016, after reviewing the application and information gathered during a background investigation, the Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudications Facility, Fort Meade, Maryland, sent Applicant a Statement of Reasons (SOR), explaining it was unable to find that it was clearly consistent with the national interest to grant him eligibility for access to classified information.1 The SOR detailed the factual reasons for the action under the security guidelines known as Guideline B, Foreign Influence; and Guideline C, Foreign Preference. Applicant timely answered the SOR and requested a hearing.

On December 5, 2016, the hearing convened. Department Counsel offered two exhibits which were admitted without objection as Government Exhibits (Gov) 1 and 2. The Government also offered an administrative notice document which was marked as Administrative Notice Document I. Applicant testified and offered no exhibits. The record was held open to allow Applicant time to submit additional documents. On December 13, 2016. he timely submitted additional matters which were admitted without objection as Applicant Exhibits (AE) A (1 page), B (29 pages) and C (15 pages). At the close of the evidence and after reviewing all of the matters, on December 22, 2016, I proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Applicant did not object. Department Counsel had 10 days to consider the matter and provided written notice that Department Counsel did not object on December 22, 2016.

Applicant mitigated concerns raised under Guideline C, foreign preference when he surrendered his valid Tunisian passport to his employer’s security department. AG ¶ 19(a)(1) applied as a disqualifying condition. AG ¶ 11(e) mitigated the issue under Guideline C.

Applicant mitigated security concerns raised under Guideline B, foreign influence related to his mother, six siblings and in-laws being citizens of and residing in Tunisia. He also owned a condominium valued at $120,000. Disqualifying conditions AG ¶¶ 7(a), 7(b), and 7(e) apply. Foreign influence security concerns were mitigated because of Applicant’s long-standing ties within the United States. His wife and children are citizens of and reside in the United States. His children were born here. Applicant immigrated to Canada in 1989. In 1997, he moved to the United States on an H-1B visa. Applicant has lived in the United States for 20 years and became a U.S. citizen in 2004. He has worked for his current employer since 1997 and is held in high regard. The value of his U.S. financial interests is greater than the value of the condominium he owns in Tunisia. He cannot be influenced because of this property. Foreign Influence mitigating conditions AG ¶¶ 8(b) and 8(f) apply.

Applicant’s relationship with his mother, siblings and in-laws in Tunisia do not create doubt about his 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. Applicant has a lengthy favorable employment history with his employer. He has resided in the United States for 20 years. His wife and children are citizens and reside in the United States. Accordingly, I conclude that Applicant met his ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant him eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

CONCLUSION

In light of all of the circumstances presented by the record in this case, it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant Applicant eligibility for a security clearance. Eligibility for access to classified information is granted.

Erin C. Hogan Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This case is adjudicated under Executive Order 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry, signed by President Eisenhower on February 20, 1960, as amended, as well as Department of Defense Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program, dated January 2, 1992, as amended (Directive). In addition, the Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Information (AG), effective within the Defense Department on September 1, 2006, apply here. The AG were published in the Federal Register and codified in 32 C.F.R. § 154, Appendix H (2006). The AG replaced the guidelines found in Enclosure 2 to the Directive prior to September 1, 2006 and a copy of these guidelines was provided directly to the Applicant in this case.