Summary
A 52-year-old U.S. citizen and senior software engineer was denied a security clearance under Guideline B, Foreign Influence, due to significant family ties and property ownership in China. The applicant's parents, both retired, and his sister, a structural engineer, are citizens and residents of China, with whom he maintains regular contact. His parents-in-law, also Chinese citizens and residents, include a retired university teacher and a retired chief engineer for a governmental agency, with whom he has less frequent contact.
A key concern was the applicant's purchase of an apartment in China for his parents in 2007, contributing $90,000 from his savings, with the deed registered in his name. This property ownership, along with his stated intent to travel to China annually, contributed to the disqualifying conditions. While the applicant argued his sister's employer was not a Chinese governmental agency and that the apartment purchase was a filial duty, these explanations did not sufficiently mitigate the security concerns.
The judge determined that the applicant's strong family connections and property in China created an unmitigated heightened risk of foreign exploitation. Despite the application of some mitigating conditions, the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to overcome the security concerns, resulting in the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant has strong family ties to China, creating a heightened risk of foreign exploitation.
- The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to mitigate the security concerns raised by his foreign connections.
- The applicant's ownership of property in China contributed to the disqualifying conditions under Guideline B.
Conditions Referenced
- 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.
- 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.The applicant's family ties to China are of sufficient magnitude to negate this mitigating condition.
- 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.This applies to the applicant's limited contact with a former coworker in China.
- B6rejectedThe 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.Insufficient information about the applicant's overall financial condition to assess the likelihood of conflict.
Key Rule Quoted
“The decision to deny a person a security clearance is not a determination of an applicant’s loyalty. Instead, it is a determination that an applicant has not met the strict guidelines the President has established for granting eligibility for access.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedJun 30, 2009
- Answer filedJul 11, 2009Applicant requested a decision without a hearing.
- Hearing held—Case decided on the written record.
- Decision dateOct 23, 2009
Cite For
- Foreign Influence Security Concerns Under Guideline B
- Impact of Family Ties to a Foreign Country on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Insufficient Evidence to Mitigate Foreign Influence Risks.