Summary
A 52-year-old U.S. citizen and defense contractor, originally from China, was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The Statement of Reasons cited her family members residing in China, including her foster father, birth father, and three sisters, as creating a potential conflict of interest and risk of foreign influence. Additionally, she had acquired Australian citizenship and possessed an Australian passport after becoming a U.S. citizen.
Disqualifying conditions were raised under AG ¶ 10(a), AG ¶ 7(a), and AG ¶ 7(b). While mitigating conditions AG ¶ 11(e), AG ¶ 8(b), and AG ¶ 8(c) were applied, they were ultimately insufficient.
The denial was based on the significant family ties in China, which were deemed to create a potential for coercion and divided loyalties, especially given China's known targeting of U.S. citizens for sensitive information. Her previous possession of an Australian passport also raised unmitigated disqualifying conditions under Guideline C.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant has significant family ties in China, including a foster father and birth father, which create a potential for coercion and divided loyalties.
- China is known to target U.S. citizens for sensitive information, raising security concerns regarding the applicant's connections.
- The applicant's previous possession of an Australian passport raised disqualifying conditions under Guideline C.
Conditions referenced
- AG ¶ 10(a)raisedExercise of Foreign Citizenship Rights
- AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family Members
- AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to Foreign Persons Creating Conflict of Interest
- AG ¶ 11(e)appliedSurrender of Foreign Passport
- AG ¶ 8(b)rejectedMinimal Conflict of Interest Due to U.S. TiesWhile the applicant has strong ties to the U.S., her family connections in China create a significant potential for conflict.
- AG ¶ 8(c)rejectedCasual and Infrequent Contact with Foreign CitizensThe applicant maintains regular contact with her family in China, which cannot be considered casual.
Key rule quoted
“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedSep 27, 2016
- Answer filedSep 27, 2016
- Hearing heldDec 1, 2016
- Decision dateFeb 1, 2017
Cite for
- Security Concerns Related to Foreign Influence Due to Familial Ties in a Foreign Country
- Impact of Dual Citizenship on Security Clearance Eligibility
- The Necessity of Resolving Doubts in Favor of National Security