Loading case…

Summary

The applicant, a 25-year-old dual citizen of Taiwan and the United States, sought a security clearance under Guidelines B (foreign influence) and C (foreign preference). The applicant's father resides and works in China for over half the year, raising security concerns regarding foreign influence. The applicant's attempts to mitigate these concerns were deemed insufficient, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant’s father, a citizen and resident of Taiwan, works and resides in the People’s Republic of China (China) for more than six months each year (2.a). Applicant’s mother and sister are dual citizens of the United States and Taiwan (2.b). Applicant is a dual citizen of Taiwan and the United States. He became a naturalized United States citizen on December 13, 2005, and he obtained a United States passport on January 25, 2006. He registered with the United States Selective Service System in August 2001. He has voted in United States elections but not in Taiwanese elections. Applicant is willing to renounce his Taiwanese citizenship, but has not done so because he believes it is a long and complicated process and might have the undesired effect of causing him to be conscripted into the Taiwanese military to serve the mandatory military service required of all Taiwanese men (1.a). Applicant renewed his Taiwanese passport in 2005. That passport expired in May 2008, and has now been destroyed and surrendered to his employer. Applicant used his Taiwanese passport to enter and exit Taiwan during his 2006 visit to Taiwan despite the fact that he was a United States citizen and had obtained a United States passport at the time. He used the Taiwanese passport because he did not have to obtain a visa by so doing and to minimize the risk he would be involuntarily conscripted into the Taiwanese military during the visit (1.b).

The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions DC 7(a), DC 7(d), DC 10(a). The judge applied mitigating conditions MC 8(a), MC 8(b), MC 11(a), MC 11(b). The decision turned on the following: The applicant's father has divided residence and employment between Taiwan and China, creating a heightened risk of foreign exploitation; The applicant failed to demonstrate that his relationship with his father would not lead to divided loyalties or foreign influence; The applicant's use of a Taiwanese passport after becoming a U.S. citizen indicated a preference for foreign citizenship.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

• The applicant's father has divided residence and employment between Taiwan and China, creating a heightened risk of foreign exploitation.
• The applicant failed to demonstrate that his relationship with his father would not lead to divided loyalties or foreign influence.
• The applicant's use of a Taiwanese passport after becoming a U.S. citizen indicated a preference for foreign citizenship.

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

“No one has a right to a security clearance and the clearly consistent standard indicates that security clearance determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials.”

Procedural Posture

• SOR issuedDec 8, 2008
• Answer filedDec 31, 2008
• Hearing heldApr 28, 2009
• Decision dateJun 22, 2009

Cite For

• Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Family Ties in China
• Foreign Preference Indicated by Use of a Foreign Passport
• Insufficient Mitigation of Security Concerns Related to Foreign Family Members