ISCR Case 08-09338.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-09338.h1

deniedSep 8, 2009· Hon. Michael H. Leonard· hearing

Summary

A 48-year-old principal systems engineer and U.S. citizen was denied a security clearance under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) due to extensive family ties in China, an authoritarian country. The applicant's parents and sister are Chinese citizens and residents, with whom he maintains regular contact. His parents are retired university professors receiving pensions, and his sister works for a U.S.-headquartered company. The applicant and his wife, also born in China and a naturalized U.S. citizen, own two apartments in China valued at approximately $175,000, purchased for his parents' use.

The applicant's wife became a U.S. citizen in 2000, losing her Chinese citizenship, and her immediate family, including her U.S. citizen mother, resides in the U.S. In 2008, the applicant, his wife, and children visited China, where he attended a school reunion with former classmates, with whom he has had no contact since. Despite strong recommendations from coworkers attesting to his good character, integrity, and adherence to rules, the judge found these factors insufficient to mitigate the foreign influence concerns.

The denial was based on the applicant's significant family connections in China, which were deemed exploitable and presented a heightened risk of foreign exploitation. The judge concluded that the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to alleviate the security concerns associated with these relationships.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has significant family ties to China, creating a heightened risk of foreign exploitation.
The applicant did not present sufficient evidence to mitigate the security concerns related to foreign influence.
The applicant's relationships with family members in China were deemed exploitable in a foreign influence context.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

B2appliedContact with a Foreign Family Member, Business, or Professional Associate, Friend, or Other Person Who Is a Citizen of or a Resident in a Foreign Country If That Contact Creates a Heightened Risk of Foreign Exploitation, Inducement, Manipulation, Pressure, or Coercion.
B3appliedA Substantial Business, Financial, or Property Interest in a Foreign Country, or in Any Foreign-owned or Foreign-operated Business, Which Could Subject the Individual to Heightened Risk of Foreign Influence or Exploitation.

Mitigating

B1rejectedThe Nature of the Relationships with Foreign Persons, the Country in Which These Persons Are Located, or the Positions or Activities of Those Persons in That Country Are Such That It Is Unlikely the Individual Will Be Placed in a Position of Having to Choose Between the Interests of a Foreign Individual, Group, Organization, or Government and the Interests of the U.S.
B3appliedContact or Communication with Foreign Citizens Is so Casual and Infrequent That There Is Little Likelihood That It Could Create a Risk for Foreign Influence or Exploitation.
B6appliedThe Value or Routine Nature of the Foreign Business, Financial, or Property Interests Is Such That They Are Unlikely to Result in a Conflict and Could Not Be Used Effectively to Influence, Manipulate, or Pressure the Individual.

Key Rule Quoted

“the clearly consistent standard indicates that security clearance determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials.”
— Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 10, 2009
Answer filedMar 8, 2009
Hearing heldJun 15, 2009
Decision dateSep 8, 2009

Cite For

Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
Heightened Risk of Foreign Exploitation Due to Family Ties
Insufficient Evidence to Mitigate Foreign Influence Risks

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 mother and father are citizens of and residents in China. Applicant has regular contact with them via telephone calls. Both parents are former professors at a Chinese university. Both retired in the 1990s after more than 30 years of work. And both receive a pension based on their decades-long employment.	Against Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
1.b	Applicant’s sister is a citizen of and a resident in China. Applicant has less contact with his sister, perhaps once a year, via telephone calls. His sister is employed as a sales representative for a company that is headquartered in the U.S.	Against Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
1.c	In the summer of 2008, Applicant and his wife and children traveled to China to visit his family and attend the Olympics. While there, Applicant attended a school reunion and had contact with 20 to 30 former classmates. Applicant described the event as a rare occasion because he has had little to no contact with them for many years. He has had no contact with his former classmates since returning from the trip.	For Applicant	Friend in Foreign Country Friend	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk	—
1.d	Applicant’s wife, like him, was born in China and lost her Chinese citizenship by operation of Chinese nationality law when she became a U.S. citizen in 2000. She obtained her first U.S. passport in July 2000, and she has used it for all foreign travel, including travel to China. Also, like her husband, she worked as an assistant professor in China for several years in the 1980s. Her immediate family, to include her mother, lives in the U.S. Her father is deceased. Her mother is a U.S. citizen. She is now employed as a software engineer for a large bank.	For Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	China	Denied	—	—	—
1.e	Applicant and his wife own two apartments in China, and the apartments have an approximate value of about $175,000. Applicant has not lived in the apartments, he does not intend to do so, and he does not plan to live in China. He bought the apartments for his parents to live in. He bought the first apartment in 2004. The apartment was on the sixth floor and the building lacked an elevator, which presented problems as his parents aged. So, in 2008, Applicant bought another apartment on the second floor with an elevator. His parents contributed money to the purchase of both apartments, and Applicant estimates that about one-fourth of the equity belongs to them. The first apartment is vacant, and Applicant is in the process of selling it. He may transfer ownership of the second apartment to his parents, but doing so will require a trip to China as the transaction must be done in person.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	—
1.f	Applicant appears to be a law-abiding person of good character. Three former or current coworkers submitted letters of recommendation on Applicant’s behalf. These individuals vouch for Applicant’s integrity, honesty, trustworthiness, work ethic, professional expertise, and willingness to follow rules. To that end, Applicant completed numerous training courses for his current employment. The courses included subjects such as conflicts of interest, disclosure of material information, information assurance, and security.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—	Unknown	(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant’s mother and father are citizens of and residents in China. Applicant has regular contact with them via telephone calls. Both parents are former professors at a Chinese university. Both retired in the 1990s after more than 30 years of work. And both receive a pension based on their decades-long employment.

Against Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

—

1.b

Applicant’s sister is a citizen of and a resident in China. Applicant has less contact with his sister, perhaps once a year, via telephone calls. His sister is employed as a sales representative for a company that is headquartered in the U.S.

Against Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

—

1.c

In the summer of 2008, Applicant and his wife and children traveled to China to visit his family and attend the Olympics. While there, Applicant attended a school reunion and had contact with 20 to 30 former classmates. Applicant described the event as a rare occasion because he has had little to no contact with them for many years. He has had no contact with his former classmates since returning from the trip.

For Applicant

Friend in Foreign Country

Friend

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

—

1.d

Applicant’s wife, like him, was born in China and lost her Chinese citizenship by operation of Chinese nationality law when she became a U.S. citizen in 2000. She obtained her first U.S. passport in July 2000, and she has used it for all foreign travel, including travel to China. Also, like her husband, she worked as an assistant professor in China for several years in the 1980s. Her immediate family, to include her mother, lives in the U.S. Her father is deceased. Her mother is a U.S. citizen. She is now employed as a software engineer for a large bank.

For Applicant

Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen

Immediate Family

China

Denied

—

1.e

Applicant and his wife own two apartments in China, and the apartments have an approximate value of about $175,000. Applicant has not lived in the apartments, he does not intend to do so, and he does not plan to live in China. He bought the apartments for his parents to live in. He bought the first apartment in 2004. The apartment was on the sixth floor and the building lacked an elevator, which presented problems as his parents aged. So, in 2008, Applicant bought another apartment on the second floor with an elevator. His parents contributed money to the purchase of both apartments, and Applicant estimates that about one-fourth of the equity belongs to them. The first apartment is vacant, and Applicant is in the process of selling it. He may transfer ownership of the second apartment to his parents, but doing so will require a trip to China as the transaction must be done in person.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence

—

1.f

Applicant appears to be a law-abiding person of good character. Three former or current coworkers submitted letters of recommendation on Applicant’s behalf. These individuals vouch for Applicant’s integrity, honesty, trustworthiness, work ethic, professional expertise, and willingness to follow rules. To that end, Applicant completed numerous training courses for his current employment. The courses included subjects such as conflicts of interest, disclosure of material information, information assurance, and security.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

Unknown

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

PROCEDURAL MATTERS

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES