CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 16-00940.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 16-00940.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 16-00940.h1

grantedAug 11, 2017· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A U.S. citizen applicant with extensive overseas work experience for defense contractors was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The Statement of Reasons cited his marriage in 2014 to a Thai citizen, with whom he has a U.S. citizen child. His wife resides with her parents on their family farm in Thailand, where the applicant sends financial support, some of which was used to purchase livestock.

The applicant delayed filing a visa application for his wife due to his job requiring extensive global travel, making it impractical for her to accompany him, and preferring she remain with her support system in Thailand. The adjudicator considered the totality of the applicant's ties to Thailand, including the nature of its government, human rights record, relationships with China and the U.S., and terrorism risk.

Ultimately, the judge found that the applicant's strong, longstanding relationships and loyalties in the United States outweighed his ties to Thailand. There was no direct connection between his in-laws and the Thai government, and the applicant demonstrated an ability to resolve potential conflicts of interest in favor of the United States. Consequently, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's longstanding relationships and loyalties in the United States outweighed his ties to Thailand.
There was no direct connection between the applicant's in-laws and the Thailand government.
The applicant demonstrated that he could resolve any potential conflicts of interest in favor of the United States.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedForeign Influence
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedForeign Influence

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)appliedU.S. Ties
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedU.S. Ties

Key Rule Quoted

“The concerns over Applicant’s foreign connections do not create doubt about his current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 12, 2017
Answer filedOct 25, 2016
Hearing heldJul 12, 2017
Decision dateAug 11, 2017Proposed summary disposition in favor of applicant.

Cite For

Weighing Foreign Influence Against U.S. Ties Under Guideline B
Application of Mitigating Conditions AG ¶ 8(a) and 8(b)
Consideration of Whole-person Concept 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.

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 related to his ties to Thailand were outweighed by his strong connections to the United States. The applicant's marriage to a Thai citizen and his support for her did not create a conflict of interest, as he was expected to prioritize U.S. interests. The decision concluded that granting the applicant security clearance was consistent with national interest.

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant is a native-born U.S. citizen who has spent much of the last ten-plus years living and working overseas for defense contractors. He met his wife, a citizen of Thailand, while on vacation in Thailand. They married in 2014. They have a child who is a U.S. citizen. Applicant’s wife lives on her family’s farm in Thailand with her parents.	For Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	Thailand	Denied	—	(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.	—
1.b	Applicant sends his wife support, part of which she used to buy livestock for the farm. Those animals have since been sold or eaten.	For Applicant	Financial Support to Foreign Relative Immediate Family	Thailand	Denied	—	(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.	—
1.c	Applicant delayed filing a visa application for his wife while she was pregnant and his child was very young. His job requires extensive travel throughout the world, and she cannot be with him on his travels. It was better to leave her in Thailand with her support system.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	Thailand	Denied	—	(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.	—
1.d	I considered the totality of Applicant’s ties to Thailand. I also considered the nature of the Thailand government, its human rights record, its relationships with China and the United States, and the risk of terrorism.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Thailand	Denied	—	(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.	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline B). 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: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 16-00940 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )

For Government: Gatha Manns, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Leon J. Schachter, Esq.

08/11/2017 ______________

DECISION

______________

LOUGHRAN, Edward W., Administrative Judge:

On September 12, 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of Reasons to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline B, foreign influence.1 Applicant responded to the SOR on October 25, 2016, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to another administrative judge on March 13, 2017, and reassigned to me on June 7, 2017. The hearing was held as scheduled on July 12, 2017. On August 8, 2017, I proposed to the parties that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. Department Counsel did not object.

Applicant is a native-born U.S. citizen who has spent much of the last ten-plus years living and working overseas for defense contractors. He met his wife, a citizen of Thailand, while on vacation in Thailand. They married in 2014. They have a child who is a U.S. citizen. Applicant’s wife lives on her family’s farm in Thailand with her parents. Other extended family members live in close proximity to the farm. None of Applicant’s in-laws have any direct connection to the Thailand government. Applicant sends his wife support, part of which she used to buy livestock for the farm. Those animals have since been sold or eaten. Applicant delayed filing a visa application for his wife while she was pregnant and his child was very young. His job requires extensive travel throughout the world, and she cannot be with him on his travels. It was better to leave her in Thailand with her support system. His wife’s visa and alien registration application was submitted in June 2017. She will immigrate to the United States with their child as soon as her visa is approved.

I considered the totality of Applicant’s ties to Thailand. I also considered the nature of the Thailand government, its human rights record, its relationships with China and the United States, and the risk of terrorism. AG ¶¶ 7(a) and 7(b) have been raised by the evidence. However, Applicant’s ties to Thailand are outweighed by his deep and longstanding relationships and loyalties in the United States. I find that it is unlikely Applicant will be placed in a position of having to choose between the interests of the United States and the interests of Thailand. There is no conflict of interest, because Applicant can be expected to resolve any conflict of interest in favor of the United States. AG ¶¶ 8(a) and 8(b) are applicable.

The concerns over Applicant’s foreign connections 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. Accordingly, I conclude that he met his ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant his eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided for Applicant.

________________________ Edward W. Loughran Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

1 This case is adjudicated under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the adjudicative guidelines, which became effective on June 8, 2017.