ISCR Case 07-18488.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 07-18488.h1

grantedJan 16, 2009· Hon. Joseph Testan· hearing

Summary

A naturalized U.S. citizen, born in Italy, was granted a security clearance despite significant ties to Italy, which raised concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The applicant has resided in Italy since 1981, is married to an Italian citizen, and has extensive family in Italy, including parents, siblings, and children who are dual U.S. and Italian citizens. Allegations included her marriage to an Italian citizen, substantial financial interests in Italy, and voting in Italian elections since 1984.

Further concerns were raised regarding her potential use of foreign citizenship to protect financial interests and acceptance of foreign benefits. However, these were mitigated by several factors. The applicant received a strong endorsement from a senior U.S. official attesting to her loyalty and trustworthiness.

Additionally, the close alliance between the U.S. and Italy helped mitigate the concerns related to her foreign ties. The applicant also demonstrated a long-standing commitment to her role supporting U.S. interests abroad. Ultimately, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant received a strong endorsement from a senior U.S. official regarding her loyalty and trustworthiness.
The applicant's ties to Italy were mitigated by the close alliance between the U.S. and Italy.
The applicant demonstrated a long-standing commitment to her role supporting U.S. interests abroad.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7.araisedContact with Foreign Family Members
AG ¶ 7.braisedConnections to Foreign Persons
AG ¶ 7.draisedSharing Living Quarters with a Foreign National
AG ¶ 10.araisedExercising Rights of Foreign Citizenship
AG ¶ 10.araisedVoting in a Foreign Election
AG ¶ 10.araisedAccepting Benefits From a Foreign Country

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8.arejectedNature of Relationships with Foreign PersonsThe applicant did not demonstrate that her relationships would not create a conflict of interest.
AG ¶ 8.brejectedMinimal Conflict of InterestThe applicant's ties to Italy were deemed significant enough to raise concerns.
AG ¶ 8.crejectedCasual and Infrequent Contact with Foreign CitizensThe applicant's relationships were not casual or infrequent.

Key Rule Quoted

“"Any doubt as to whether access to classified information is clearly consistent with national security will be resolved in favor of the national security."”
— Directive, Paragraph E2.2.2.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 15, 2008
Answer filedJul 31, 2008
Hearing held—Applicant represented herself.
Decision dateJan 16, 2009

Cite For

Consideration of Foreign Influence Under Guideline B
Evaluation of Foreign Preference Under Guideline C
Importance of Endorsements From Senior Officials in Security Clearance Determinations.

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 marriage to an Italian citizen raises obvious concerns under the first three disqualifying conditions.	For Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	Italy	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant’s large financial interests in Italy raises concerns under the fourth disqualifying condition.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	Italy	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant’s parents are United States citizens. They have resided in Italy since 1981. Applicant’s three siblings are dual citizens of the United States and Italy and reside in Italy. At least two of her siblings have lived in Italy since 1981. Applicant’s three children are dual citizens of the United States and Italy and reside in Italy. Applicant’s mother-in-law and siblings-in-law are citizens and residents of Italy.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Italy	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant has voted in Italian elections since 1984.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Italy	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant’s marriage to an Italian citizen raises obvious concerns under the first three disqualifying conditions.

For Applicant

Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen

Immediate Family

Italy

Admitted

—

1.b

Applicant’s large financial interests in Italy raises concerns under the fourth disqualifying condition.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

Italy

Admitted

—

1.c

Applicant’s parents are United States citizens. They have resided in Italy since 1981. Applicant’s three siblings are dual citizens of the United States and Italy and reside in Italy. At least two of her siblings have lived in Italy since 1981. Applicant’s three children are dual citizens of the United States and Italy and reside in Italy. Applicant’s mother-in-law and siblings-in-law are citizens and residents of Italy.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Italy

Admitted

—

1.d

Applicant has voted in Italian elections since 1984.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Italy

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
10.a	Voting in a foreign election	For Applicant	Foreign Voting	Admitted	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country (b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S. (c) failure to use a U.S. passport when entering or exiting the U.S.	—	—
10.a	Accepting educational, medical, retirement, social welfare, or other such benefits from a foreign country	For Applicant	Foreign Benefits or Education	Unknown	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country (b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S. (c) failure to use a U.S. passport when entering or exiting the U.S.	—	—
10.a	Using foreign citizenship to protect financial or business interests in another country	For Applicant	Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application	Unknown	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country (b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S. (c) failure to use a U.S. passport when entering or exiting the U.S.	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶10)

Mitigating applied (¶11)

Mitigation

10.a

Voting in a foreign election

For Applicant

Foreign Voting

Admitted

(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country

(b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S.

(c) failure to use a U.S. passport when entering or exiting the U.S.

—

10.a

Accepting educational, medical, retirement, social welfare, or other such benefits from a foreign country

For Applicant

Foreign Benefits or Education

Unknown

(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country

(b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S.

(c) failure to use a U.S. passport when entering or exiting the U.S.

—

10.a

Using foreign citizenship to protect financial or business interests in another country

For Applicant

Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application

Unknown

(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country

(b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S.

(c) failure to use a U.S. passport when entering or exiting the U.S.

—

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION