ISCR Case 16-00080.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 16-00080.h1

grantedAug 11, 2017· Hon. LeRoy F. Foreman· hearing

Summary

A 53-year-old self-employed U.S. citizen, originally from Egypt, was granted a security clearance under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) raised concerns regarding the applicant's foreign ties, including a brother, three sisters, and a mother-in-law who are citizens and residents of Egypt. Additionally, the SOR noted two brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law who are Egyptian citizens residing in Saudi Arabia, and the applicant's maintenance of a bank account in Egypt.

Disqualifying conditions under Guideline B were considered, specifically concerning immediate family members who are foreign citizens and residents, and the potential for foreign influence. However, the decision applied mitigating conditions, acknowledging that the foreign contacts were not agents of a foreign power and that the applicant's ties to the foreign country were minimal.

The judge determined that the applicant's deep and longstanding relationships and loyalties within the United States outweighed the potential risks. Key factors included his lack of financial interests in Egypt, a U.S. net worth of approximately $700,000, and strong community involvement with positive character references. Ultimately, the applicant's security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated deep and longstanding relationships and loyalties in the United States.
He has no financial interests in Egypt and a net worth of approximately $700,000 in the U.S.
The applicant's community involvement and positive character references supported his case.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family MembersThe applicant has family members in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, creating a heightened risk of foreign influence.
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedPotential Conflict of InterestThe applicant's family ties could create a potential conflict of interest.
AG ¶ 7(e)notedShared Living Quarters
AG ¶ 7(f)notedSubstantial Business Interests in a Foreign Country

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)rejectedNature of Relationships with Foreign PersonsThe unsettled nature of U.S.-Egypt relations and terrorist activity precluded a finding that a situation requiring a choice between interests was unlikely.
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedNo Conflict of InterestThe applicant's ties to the U.S. outweighed his foreign connections.
AG ¶ 8(c)rejectedCasual and Infrequent ContactThe applicant did not overcome the presumption that contacts with immediate family members are not casual.

Key Rule Quoted

“"The United States has a compelling interest in protecting and safeguarding classified information from any person, organization, or country that is not authorized to have access to it, regardless of whether that person, organization, or country has interests inimical to those of the United States."”
— ISCR Case No. 02-11570 at 5 (App. Bd. May 19, 2004)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 31, 2016
Answer filedJun 23, 2016
Hearing heldApr 26, 2017
Decision dateAug 11, 2017

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline B
Importance of U.S. Ties in Foreign Influence Cases
Consideration of Family Ties 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	The SOR alleges that Applicant’s brother is a citizen and resident of Egypt.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Egypt 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	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	—
1.b	The SOR alleges that three sisters are citizens and residents of Egypt.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Egypt HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(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	—
1.c	The SOR alleges that the mother-in-law is a citizen and resident of Egypt.	For Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Egypt 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	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	—
1.d	The SOR alleges that he maintains a bank account in Egypt.	For Applicant	Foreign Bank Account or Investment Financial or Property Interest	Egypt HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(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	—
1.e	The SOR alleges that he has two brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law who are citizens of Egypt residing in Saudi Arabia.	For Applicant	Extended Family in Foreign Country Extended Family	Saudi Arabia HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(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	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

The SOR alleges that Applicant’s brother is a citizen and resident of Egypt.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Egypt

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

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

—

1.b

The SOR alleges that three sisters are citizens and residents of Egypt.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Egypt

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

(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

—

1.c

The SOR alleges that the mother-in-law is a citizen and resident of Egypt.

For Applicant

In Law in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Egypt

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

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

—

1.d

The SOR alleges that he maintains a bank account in Egypt.

For Applicant

Foreign Bank Account or Investment

Financial or Property Interest

Egypt

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

(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

—

1.e

The SOR alleges that he has two brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law who are citizens of Egypt residing in Saudi Arabia.

For Applicant

Extended Family in Foreign Country

Extended Family

Saudi Arabia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

(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

—

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