ISCR Case 08-04776.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-04776.h1

grantedSep 14, 2009· Hon. Robert J. Tuidar· hearing

Summary

A 26-year-old U.S. citizen and assistant engineer sought to reinstate his security clearance, which had been revoked due to concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The applicant's parents, both U.S. citizens, work for a U.S.-based 501(C)(4) Christian Order in Hong Kong, an organization registered in Hong Kong and with the State Administration of Foreign Experts Affairs of the PRC. The applicant's brother, a minor, accompanied their parents to Hong Kong and attended international schools, but never participated in their work. The applicant communicates with his parents every two to three months and is sensitive about their religious activities in the PRC, believing all foreign work there is sensitive.

The applicant's paternal aunt and uncle are Hong Kong residents and citizens. The applicant last saw his uncle in Hong Kong in late 2006/early 2007 and at his U.S. wedding in July 2007, but has not seen his aunt in seven years. The applicant's travel to Hong Kong has been limited to trips in 1999 and for two weeks in late 2006/early 2007, during which he also visited the PRC for sightseeing.

The judge ultimately granted the clearance, finding that the applicant mitigated the security concerns. This decision was based on the applicant demonstrating that his parents, U.S. citizens, have no foreign citizenship and maintain strong U.S. ties. Additionally, the applicant's limited travel to Hong Kong, lack of foreign financial interests, strong community ties, and positive character references supported the reinstatement.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant successfully demonstrated that his parents, U.S. citizens, have no foreign citizenship and maintain strong ties to the U.S.
The applicant's limited travel to Hong Kong and lack of foreign financial interests reduced the risk of foreign influence.
The applicant's strong community ties and positive character references supported his case for reinstatement.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 6raisedForeign Influence

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8appliedMitigating ConditionsThe applicant's family members are U.S. citizens, and he has limited contact with foreign entities.
AG ¶ 8(a)appliedMitigating Condition 1The applicant has demonstrated a strong commitment to the U.S. and has no foreign financial interests.
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedMitigating Condition 2The applicant's parents regularly return to the U.S. and have no adverse interactions with foreign authorities.

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the revised adjudicative guidelines (AG).”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 22, 2008
Answer filedFeb 16, 2009
Hearing heldMay 19, 2009
Decision dateSep 14, 2009

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
Importance of U.S. Citizenship of Family Members in Security Clearance Cases
Consideration of Community Ties and Character References in 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	Applicant is a U.S. citizen by birth.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	— HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Brother (2) was a minor when he accompanied his parents to Hong Kong and attended international schools while there. He has never participated in his parents’ work.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Hong Kong HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant’s parents work for and derive their salaries from a U.S. based Christian Order, a 501(C)(4) organization. The Christian Order is a non-profit organization and is registered in Hong Kong and with the State Administration of Foreign Experts Affairs of the PRC. As such, their work is recognized by the local Chinese government. Applicant is not aware of his parents ever being harassed by the authorities while posted in Hong Kong.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family GOVT-AFFILIATED	Hong Kong HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant stated he is sensitive and discreet about his parents’ religious activities in the PRC. He believes all work by foreigners is sensitive in the PRC. This, he believes, even applies to non-profit organizations whose work is recognized and supported by the local government. It is also his belief that his parents need to be sensitive in all aspects of their work in order to avoid any misunderstandings with the Chinese authorities.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other GOVT-AFFILIATED	PRC HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	Brother (2) was a minor when he accompanied his parents to Hong Kong and attended international schools while there. He has never participated in his parents’ work.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Hong Kong HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant communicates with his parents typically by telephone “every two to three months.”	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Hong Kong HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	Applicant’s paternal aunt and uncle are residents and citizens of Hong Kong. Applicant last saw his paternal uncle while vacationing in Hong Kong when visiting his parents during December 2006 through January 2007. His paternal uncle also attended his wedding in July 2007 in the U.S. Applicant has not seen his paternal aunt in the last seven years.	For Applicant	Extended Family in Foreign Country Extended Family	Hong Kong HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—
1.h	Applicant’s travel to Hong Kong has been limited. He went there in 1999, and more recently for two weeks in December 2006 and January 2007. During his visit to Hong Kong, he visited the PRC for several days. His most recent trip consisted of sightseeing with his family in various locations in Southeastern PRC, and spending the holidays with his family and then fiancée.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	PRC HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant is a U.S. citizen by birth.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Immediate Family

—

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

1.b

Brother (2) was a minor when he accompanied his parents to Hong Kong and attended international schools while there. He has never participated in his parents’ work.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Hong Kong

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.c

Applicant’s parents work for and derive their salaries from a U.S. based Christian Order, a 501(C)(4) organization. The Christian Order is a non-profit organization and is registered in Hong Kong and with the State Administration of Foreign Experts Affairs of the PRC. As such, their work is recognized by the local Chinese government. Applicant is not aware of his parents ever being harassed by the authorities while posted in Hong Kong.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

GOVT-AFFILIATED

Hong Kong

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.d

Applicant stated he is sensitive and discreet about his parents’ religious activities in the PRC. He believes all work by foreigners is sensitive in the PRC. This, he believes, even applies to non-profit organizations whose work is recognized and supported by the local government. It is also his belief that his parents need to be sensitive in all aspects of their work in order to avoid any misunderstandings with the Chinese authorities.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

GOVT-AFFILIATED

PRC

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

1.e

Brother (2) was a minor when he accompanied his parents to Hong Kong and attended international schools while there. He has never participated in his parents’ work.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Hong Kong

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.f

Applicant communicates with his parents typically by telephone “every two to three months.”

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Hong Kong

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

1.g

Applicant’s paternal aunt and uncle are residents and citizens of Hong Kong. Applicant last saw his paternal uncle while vacationing in Hong Kong when visiting his parents during December 2006 through January 2007. His paternal uncle also attended his wedding in July 2007 in the U.S. Applicant has not seen his paternal aunt in the last seven years.

For Applicant

Extended Family in Foreign Country

Extended Family

Hong Kong

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

1.h

Applicant’s travel to Hong Kong has been limited. He went there in 1999, and more recently for two weeks in December 2006 and January 2007. During his visit to Hong Kong, he visited the PRC for several days. His most recent trip consisted of sightseeing with his family in various locations in Southeastern PRC, and spending the holidays with his family and then fiancée.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

PRC

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

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

PROCEDURAL RULINGS

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES