ISCR Case 11-09910.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 11-09910.h1

grantedJun 17, 2013· Hon. Rita C. O'Brien· hearing

Summary

A 43-year-old U.S. citizen, originally from India, was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) due to his familial ties in India. The applicant's parents, a sister, her husband, and their two children are all citizens and residents of India. His father, a retired state government accounts officer, receives a monthly pension and is ill with cancer, prompting the applicant to send $400 to $500 monthly to two Indian bank accounts to assist with medical expenses. These accounts, initially holding $5,000 and $10,000, had decreased to between $400 and $600 each by the time of the hearing.

The applicant also owns an undeveloped lot in India, purchased in 2000 for approximately $10,000. While initially valued at $200,000 in his 2011 application, an appraisal later set its value at $125,000. He plans to sell this property in the future to fund his children's college education in the U.S. The applicant maintains regular contact with his parents weekly and his sister and brother-in-law monthly, visiting India every two to three years.

Despite these foreign ties, the judge found that the applicant's strong connections to the United States, including over 20 years of residency, U.S. citizenship for himself, his wife, and children, and substantial U.S. financial assets, mitigated the security concerns. The applicant credibly testified that his U.S. family is paramount and his foreign relatives hold no influence over his life. Consequently, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant has established strong ties to the United States, including citizenship and substantial financial assets.
The applicant credibly testified that his foreign family members do not influence his life decisions.
The nature of the applicant's relationships with his family in India is unlikely to create a conflict of interest.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

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

Mitigating

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(f)appliedValue of Foreign Interests Unlikely to Result in Conflict

Key Rule Quoted

“The mere possession of close family ties to persons in a foreign country is not, as a matter of law, disqualifying under Guideline B.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 14, 2013
Answer filedMar 8, 2013Applicant admitted all allegations.
Hearing heldJun 5, 2013
Decision dateJun 17, 2013

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
Importance of U.S. Ties in Foreign Influence Cases
Consideration of the Nature of Foreign Relationships in Security Clearance Decisions

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 parents are citizens and residents of India. His mother has always been a homemaker. His father, 75 years old, was a finance department accounts officer for a state government in India from 1961 to 1995. He has been retired for about 18 years, and is ill with cancer. He receives a monthly government pension. Applicant speaks with them once per week. His parents visited him in the United States twice, most recently in 2008. Applicant travels to India once every two or three years.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India 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	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S. (f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	—
1.b	Applicant’s sister, her husband, and their two children are citizens and residents of India. She is a homemaker, and her husband is a self-employed real estate agent. They have two sons. Applicant talks with his sister and brother-in-law about once per month, and with his nephews about once every two or three months.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India 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	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S. (f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	—
1.c	Applicant has two bank accounts in India. He keeps funds there to help his father pay for his cancer treatments. For the past four or five years, he has sent $400 to $500 monthly to the accounts. In his 2011 security clearance application, he listed the balances at $5,000 and $10,000. At the hearing, he said the balances have decreased to between $400 and $600 each.	For Applicant	Foreign Bank Account or Investment Financial or Property Interest	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	(f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	—
1.d	In April 2000, Applicant purchased an undeveloped lot in India for about $10,000. He thought he might build a house for his family in India, but he has not built on the property. When Applicant completed his security clearance application in March 2011, he estimated the value at $200,000. At the hearing, he stated he has had it appraised, and the value is $125,000. Unless he needs the funds for some unexpected event, he plans to sell the lot in the future to finance his children’s college educations in the United States.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	(f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	—
1.e	Applicant has strong ties to the United States, which weigh in his favor when evaluating the question of exploitation or potential conflicts of interest based on ties to India. He has established his life in the United States by living and working here for more than 20 years. He, his wife, and his children are U.S. citizens. He credibly testified that his family in the United States is more important to him, and that his foreign family members have no influence over his life.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	—
1.f	Applicant has ties to his family in India. He is in touch with them by telephone, and visits once every few years. He has assisted his father with funds for his medical treatment. However, Applicant has strong ties to the United States, which weigh in his favor when evaluating the question of exploitation or potential conflicts of interest based on ties to India.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	—
1.g	The mere possession of close family ties to persons in a foreign country is not, as a matter of law, disqualifying under Guideline B. However, if only one relative lives in a foreign country and an applicant has frequent, non-casual contacts with that relative, this factor alone is sufficient to create the potential for foreign influence and could potentially result in the compromise of classified information.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	—
1.h	Overall, the record evidence satisfies the doubts raised concerning Applicant’s suitability for a security clearance. For all these reasons, I conclude Applicant has mitigated the security concerns arising from the cited adjudicative guideline.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant’s parents are citizens and residents of India. His mother has always been a homemaker. His father, 75 years old, was a finance department accounts officer for a state government in India from 1961 to 1995. He has been retired for about 18 years, and is ill with cancer. He receives a monthly government pension. Applicant speaks with them once per week. His parents visited him in the United States twice, most recently in 2008. Applicant travels to India once every two or three years.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

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

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

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

—

1.b

Applicant’s sister, her husband, and their two children are citizens and residents of India. She is a homemaker, and her husband is a self-employed real estate agent. They have two sons. Applicant talks with his sister and brother-in-law about once per month, and with his nephews about once every two or three months.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

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

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

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

—

1.c

Applicant has two bank accounts in India. He keeps funds there to help his father pay for his cancer treatments. For the past four or five years, he has sent $400 to $500 monthly to the accounts. In his 2011 security clearance application, he listed the balances at $5,000 and $10,000. At the hearing, he said the balances have decreased to between $400 and $600 each.

For Applicant

Foreign Bank Account or Investment

Financial or Property Interest

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk

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

—

1.d

In April 2000, Applicant purchased an undeveloped lot in India for about $10,000. He thought he might build a house for his family in India, but he has not built on the property. When Applicant completed his security clearance application in March 2011, he estimated the value at $200,000. At the hearing, he stated he has had it appraised, and the value is $125,000. Unless he needs the funds for some unexpected event, he plans to sell the lot in the future to finance his children’s college educations in the United States.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk

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

—

1.e

Applicant has strong ties to the United States, which weigh in his favor when evaluating the question of exploitation or potential conflicts of interest based on ties to India. He has established his life in the United States by living and working here for more than 20 years. He, his wife, and his children are U.S. citizens. He credibly testified that his family in the United States is more important to him, and that his foreign family members have no influence over his life.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

—

1.f

Applicant has ties to his family in India. He is in touch with them by telephone, and visits once every few years. He has assisted his father with funds for his medical treatment. However, Applicant has strong ties to the United States, which weigh in his favor when evaluating the question of exploitation or potential conflicts of interest based on ties to India.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

—

1.g

The mere possession of close family ties to persons in a foreign country is not, as a matter of law, disqualifying under Guideline B. However, if only one relative lives in a foreign country and an applicant has frequent, non-casual contacts with that relative, this factor alone is sufficient to create the potential for foreign influence and could potentially result in the compromise of classified information.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

—

1.h

Overall, the record evidence satisfies the doubts raised concerning Applicant’s suitability for a security clearance. For all these reasons, I conclude Applicant has mitigated the security concerns arising from the cited adjudicative guideline.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

PROCEDURAL RULINGS

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON ANALYSIS

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES