Summary
The applicant, a 47-year-old U.S. citizen and linguist for the U.S. Army, faced security concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct) due to his family ties in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He successfully mitigated these concerns by demonstrating a lack of contact with his foreign relatives and a strong commitment to his duties in the U.S. military, including returning to duty after being injured in a suicide bombing.
Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant’s parents and siblings are citizens of Afghanistan living in Afghanistan or Pakistan (1.a). Applicant has worked for the U.S. Army as a linguist for two-and-one-half years (1.b). His relatives do not know he is living and working in Afghanistan (1.c). An attack by a suicide bomber placed him in the hospital for a week (1.d). He was offered six months of convalescence leave, but returned to his unit in Afghanistan after one month (1.e). He has rebutted or mitigated the security concerns under foreign influence and personal conduct (1.f). The SOR alleges he deliberately omitted his foreign family members from that form (2.a).
The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 7(a), AG ¶ 7(b). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 8(a), AG ¶ 8(b), AG ¶ 8(c). The decision turned on the following: The applicant had no recent contact with his foreign family members, mitigating foreign influence concerns; He demonstrated strong ties to the U.S. through his immediate family and assets, indicating loyalty to the U.S; The applicant's commitment to his military duties, including returning to work after being injured, supported his case.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant had no recent contact with his foreign family members, mitigating foreign influence concerns.
- He demonstrated strong ties to the U.S. through his immediate family and assets, indicating loyalty to the U.S.
- The applicant's commitment to his military duties, including returning to work after being injured, supported his case.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family Members
- AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to Foreign Persons Creating Potential Conflict of Interest
- AG ¶ 8(a)appliedNature of Relationships with Foreign Persons Unlikely to Create Conflict
- AG ¶ 8(b)appliedMinimal Conflict of Interest Due to Strong U.S. Ties
- AG ¶ 8(c)appliedCasual and Infrequent Contact with Foreign Citizens
Key Rule Quoted
“An applicant with familial ties to a country, such as Afghanistan, bears a 'very heavy burden' in mitigating the foreign influence concern raised by their familial ties.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedNov 29, 2011
- Answer filedJan 7, 2012Applicant elected to proceed without a hearing.
- Hearing held—No hearing was held.
- Decision dateJun 14, 2012Decision issued by Administrative Judge.
Cite For
- Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Lack of Contact with Foreign Relatives
- Demonstrating Loyalty to the U.S. Through Military Service
- Consideration of Incomplete Interrogatories in Personal Conduct Evaluations