ISCR Case 15-07182.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-07182.h1

grantedMar 30, 2017· Hon. LeRoy F. Foreman· hearing

Summary

A 46-year-old U.S. citizen and linguist, originally from Tunisia, was granted a security clearance under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), having previously held a clearance from 2011 to 2015. The Statement of Reasons cited several concerns, including that his mother, sister, and two brothers are Tunisian citizens and residents. The applicant had sent his mother approximately $300 per month, a practice he ceased upon learning it raised security concerns. He communicates with his mother every 10-14 days, his sister every three or four months, and his brothers occasionally. His last visit to Tunisia was in April 2016 for about 32 days, and he holds no property or financial assets in Tunisia.

Disqualifying conditions under Guideline B, specifically AG ¶ 7(a) and AG ¶ 7(b), were raised. However, the judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 8(a), AG ¶ 8(b), and AG ¶ 8(c).

The clearance was granted because the applicant demonstrated strong ties to the U.S. through military service and education. He renounced his Tunisian citizenship and stopped sending money to his family once informed of security concerns. His credible testimony and positive character references further supported the decision, leading the judge to conclude that his foreign family ties did not pose a significant risk of foreign influence.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated strong ties to the U.S. through military service and education.
He renounced his Tunisian citizenship and ceased sending money to his family when informed of security concerns.
The applicant's credible testimony and positive character references supported his case.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family MembersThe applicant has family members residing in Tunisia, which poses a heightened risk of foreign influence.
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to Foreign PersonsThe applicant's family ties could create a potential conflict of interest.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)rejectedNature of Relationships with Foreign PersonsThe applicant's family ties were deemed significant enough to pose a risk.
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedMinimal Conflict of InterestThe applicant's deep and longstanding relationships in the U.S. mitigate potential conflicts.
AG ¶ 8(c)rejectedCasual and Infrequent ContactThe applicant's contact with family members was not considered casual.

Key Rule Quoted

“"Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines."”
— ISCR Case No. 01-20700 at 3 (App. Bd. Dec. 19, 2002)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 5, 2016
Answer filedJun 1, 2016
Hearing heldJan 10, 2017
Decision dateMar 30, 2017

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
Importance of Credible Character References in Security Clearance Cases
Impact of Military Service on Security Clearance Eligibility

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 mother, sister, and two brothers are citizens and residents of Tunisia.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Tunisia HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Credited Deep U.S. Ties
1.b	Applicant sent his mother money totaling about $300 per month as a matter of cultural tradition until he learned that it raised security concerns.	For Applicant	Financial Support to Foreign Relative Immediate Family	Tunisia HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	Claimed Severed Foreign Contact
1.c	Applicant talks to his mother every 10-14 days. He talks to his sister every three or four months. He talks to his brothers 'occasionally.'	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Tunisia HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Credited Deep U.S. Ties
1.d	Applicant has no property or financial assets in Tunisia.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Tunisia HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Credited Deep U.S. Ties
1.e	Applicant last visited his family in Tunisia in April 2016 and he stayed about 32 days.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Tunisia HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(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

1.a

Applicant's mother, sister, and two brothers are citizens and residents of Tunisia.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Tunisia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

Credited

Deep U.S. Ties

1.b

Applicant sent his mother money totaling about $300 per month as a matter of cultural tradition until he learned that it raised security concerns.

For Applicant

Financial Support to Foreign Relative

Immediate Family

Tunisia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

Claimed

Severed Foreign Contact

1.c

Applicant talks to his mother every 10-14 days. He talks to his sister every three or four months. He talks to his brothers 'occasionally.'

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Tunisia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

Credited

Deep U.S. Ties

1.d

Applicant has no property or financial assets in Tunisia.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Tunisia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

Credited

Deep U.S. Ties

1.e

Applicant last visited his family in Tunisia in April 2016 and he stayed about 32 days.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Tunisia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(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

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES