ISCR Case 09-07242.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-07242.h1

deniedMar 24, 2011· Hon. Arthur E. Marshall, Jr.· hearing

Summary

A 49-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, originally from China, was denied a security clearance under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The Statement of Reasons cited several family ties to China, including his wife and son, who are Chinese citizens residing in the U.S., and his father, brother, and mother-in-law, who are all citizens and residents of China. The applicant also traveled to China in 2005 and maintained weekly contact with his father.

Disqualifying conditions under AG ¶ 7(a) and AG ¶ 7(b) were raised. While mitigating conditions under AG ¶ 8(a), AG ¶ 8(b), and AG ¶ 8(c) were applied, they were ultimately insufficient. The denial was based on the applicant's significant family ties in China, particularly his father, who was deemed vulnerable to coercion due to age and reliance on a Chinese government pension.

Additionally, the applicant's wife and son, despite residing in the U.S., are Chinese citizens who maintain contact with relatives in China, contributing to security concerns. The applicant's recent cessation of contact with his father was considered untested by time, leaving the potential for foreign influence significant. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant maintained significant family ties to China, including a father who is vulnerable to coercion due to his age and dependence on a Chinese government pension.
The applicant's wife and son, while residing in the U.S., are still citizens of China and maintain contact with relatives there, which raises security concerns.
The applicant's cessation of contact with his father was recent and untested by time, leaving potential for influence.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family Members
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to a Foreign Country Creating Potential Conflict of Interest

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)rejectedNature of Relationships with Foreign Persons Unlikely to Create Conflict
AG ¶ 8(b)rejectedMinimal Conflict of Interest Due to Strong U.S. Ties
AG ¶ 8(c)rejectedCasual and Infrequent Contact with Foreign Citizens

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 23, 2010
Answer filedAug 26, 2010Applicant admitted allegations and requested a hearing.
Hearing heldNov 2, 2010Hearing postponed from October 21, 2010.
Decision dateMar 24, 2011

Cite For

Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Family Ties Under Guideline B
Impact of Foreign Citizenship of Family Members on Security Clearance
The Significance of Recent Cessation of Contact with Foreign Relatives in Security Determinations

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 wife is a citizen of China and a resident of the United States.	Against Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.b	Applicant’s son is a citizen of China and a resident of the United States.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.c	Applicant’s father is a citizen and resident of China.	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 (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.d	Applicant maintains weekly contact with his father in China.	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 (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.e	Applicant’s brother is a citizen and resident of China.	For 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 (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.f	Applicant’s mother-in-law is a citizen and resident of China.	Against Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Immediate Family	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—
1.g	Applicant traveled to China in 2005.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant’s wife is a citizen of China and a resident of the United States.

Against Applicant

Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen

Immediate Family

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.b

Applicant’s son is a citizen of China and a resident of the United States.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Immediate Family

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.c

Applicant’s father is a citizen and resident of China.

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.d

Applicant maintains weekly contact with his father in China.

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.e

Applicant’s brother is a citizen and resident of China.

For 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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.f

Applicant’s mother-in-law is a citizen and resident of China.

Against Applicant

In Law in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

1.g

Applicant traveled to China in 2005.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

—

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES