Summary
The applicant, a 52-year-old defense contractor, sought a security clearance under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence), C (Foreign Preference), and E (Personal Conduct). Despite a history of alcohol-related offenses and a marriage to a Syrian citizen, the applicant successfully mitigated concerns by demonstrating a lack of foreign influence and a commitment to responsible conduct. The judge granted the security clearance, finding that the applicant's ties to Syria did not pose a security risk.
Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), Guideline C (Foreign Preference), and Guideline E (Personal Conduct), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant's wife is a citizen of Syria (2.a). Applicant's mother-in-law and father-in-law are native-born citizen-residents of Syria (2.b). Applicant's wife has one brother and five sisters, all of whom are Syrian citizens (2.c). Four of Applicant's wife's sisters reside in Syria, and the remaining sister and brother reside in Kuwait (2.d). Applicant's wife's family is well known in their hometown in Syria (2.e). While neither parent nor any sibling has ever had any affiliation with the Syrian government, the siblings have worked for the government as teachers (2.f). The SOR alleges Applicant deliberately failed to disclose several aspects of his police record in Section 23 thereof (1.b).
The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 14, AG ¶ 6, AG ¶ 8. The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 17, AG ¶ 20, AG ¶ 19. The decision turned on the following: The applicant demonstrated that his foreign connections did not pose a security risk due to the nature of his wife's family's affiliations; The applicant's history of personal conduct issues was mitigated by his long-term employment and compliance with drug testing; The applicant provided credible testimony and evidence to support his claims of responsible behavior and lack of foreign influence.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated that his foreign connections did not pose a security risk due to the nature of his wife's family's affiliations.
- The applicant's history of personal conduct issues was mitigated by his long-term employment and compliance with drug testing.
- The applicant provided credible testimony and evidence to support his claims of responsible behavior and lack of foreign influence.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 14raisedPersonal ConductThe applicant had a history of alcohol-related offenses and failed to disclose all incidents on his security clearance application.
- AG ¶ 6raisedForeign InfluenceThe applicant's marriage to a Syrian citizen and connections to her family raised concerns about foreign influence.
- AG ¶ 8raisedForeign PreferenceThe applicant's ties to Syria and his wife's citizenship raised questions about foreign preference.
- AG ¶ 17appliedPersonal ConductThe applicant's long-term employment and compliance with drug testing mitigated concerns about his past conduct.
- AG ¶ 20appliedForeign InfluenceThe applicant's family ties to Syria did not indicate a risk of coercion or influence.
- AG ¶ 19appliedForeign PreferenceThe applicant's actions demonstrated a lack of foreign preference despite his marriage.
Key Rule Quoted
“"The security clearance decision is not a determination of an applicant's character, but rather a determination of whether an applicant's conduct raises a security concern that is not mitigated by the evidence presented."”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedNov 6, 2009
- Answer filedDec 30, 2009
- Hearing heldApr 12, 2011
- Decision dateJun 24, 2011
Cite For
- Mitigation of Personal Conduct Issues Under Guideline E
- Evaluation of Foreign Influence Under Guideline B
- Consideration of Foreign Preference in Security Clearance Determinations Under Guideline C