ISCR Case 12-00908.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 12-00908.h1

deniedAug 22, 2013· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 47-year-old linguist for a defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence), C (Foreign Preference), E (Personal Conduct), and F (Financial Considerations). The applicant has strong family ties in Pakistan, including two brothers and numerous in-laws, whom he contacts approximately twice a year and visits on various occasions.

A significant concern was the applicant's use of a Pakistani passport for travel to Pakistan in approximately 2004, 2007, and 2008, despite having naturalized as a U.S. citizen in December 2003 and obtaining a U.S. passport shortly thereafter. Additionally, the applicant failed to disclose this Pakistani passport, obtained in January 2001, on his September 2011 security clearance application, listing only an expired Pakistani passport.

Finally, the applicant faced financial difficulties, with over $65,000 in debt to eleven creditors. While evidence showed two debts were resolved, the applicant did not provide proof of payment for other delinquent debts. The judge concluded that the applicant's foreign contacts posed an unmitigated risk of exploitation, and he failed to address the government's concerns regarding foreign preference, personal conduct, and financial issues.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has strong foreign family ties in Pakistan, including two brothers and multiple in-laws, which create a risk of foreign influence.
The applicant used a Pakistani passport after becoming a naturalized U.S. citizen, indicating foreign preference.
The applicant intentionally omitted material facts regarding his foreign passport on his security clearance application, demonstrating a lack of candor.
The applicant has unresolved financial issues, with evidence of a history of not meeting financial obligations.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)appliedContact with Foreign Family Members
AG ¶ 7(b)appliedConnections to Foreign Persons Creating Potential Conflict of Interest
AG ¶ 10(a)raisedExercise of Foreign Citizenship Rights
AG ¶ 16(a)appliedDeliberate Omission of Relevant Facts
AG ¶ 19(a)appliedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)appliedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Key Rule Quoted

“An individual who demonstrates a foreign influence, has foreign connections, is dishonest and has financial problems may be prone to provide information or make decisions that are harmful to the interests of the United States.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 29, 2012
Answer filedOct 12, 2012Applicant elected to proceed without a hearing.
Hearing held—Determined on written record.
Decision dateAug 22, 2013

Cite For

Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Family Ties Under Guideline B
Foreign Preference Indicated by Use of a Foreign Passport Under Guideline C
Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Application Under Guideline E

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	The Applicant has two brothers who are citizens of and reside in Pakistan.	Against Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Pakistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
1.b	His parents-in-law, four sisters-in-law and three brothers-in-law are also citizens and residents of Pakistan.	Against Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Pakistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
1.c	He contacts them about twice a year.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Pakistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.a–3.b	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant has two brothers who are citizens of and reside in Pakistan.

Against Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Pakistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

—

1.b

His parents-in-law, four sisters-in-law and three brothers-in-law are also citizens and residents of Pakistan.

Against Applicant

In Law in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Pakistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

—

1.c

He contacts them about twice a year.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Pakistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

—

2.a–3.b

4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)

Against Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
2.a	The Applicant has traveled to Pakistan on various occasions to visit his relatives there.	Against Applicant	Foreign Voting	Denied	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country	—	—
2.b	The Applicant has used his Pakistani passport that he obtained on January 31, 2001, to travel to Pakistan in approximately 2004, 2007, and 2008, even though he had already become a naturalized United States citizen on December 11, 2003, and was issued a United States passport on December 22, 2003.	Against Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Admitted	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶10)

Mitigating applied (¶11)

Mitigation

2.a

The Applicant has traveled to Pakistan on various occasions to visit his relatives there.

Against Applicant

Foreign Voting

Denied

(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country

—

2.b

The Applicant has used his Pakistani passport that he obtained on January 31, 2001, to travel to Pakistan in approximately 2004, 2007, and 2008, even though he had already become a naturalized United States citizen on December 11, 2003, and was issued a United States passport on December 22, 2003.

Against Applicant

Foreign Passport Possession or Use

Admitted

(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for a security clearance because he intentionally falsified material aspects of his personal background during the clearance screening process.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
3.b	The Applicant completed a security clearance application dated September 19, 2011. Section 20B (6) of the application asks him if he has ever held or does he now hold a passport that was issued by a foreign government. The Applicant responded, “Yes,” and listed only his Pakistan passport valid from September 1995 through September 2000. He failed to disclose that he had also obtained a Pakistani passport on January 31, 2001.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for a security clearance because he intentionally falsified material aspects of his personal background during the clearance screening process.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Denied

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form

—

3.b

The Applicant completed a security clearance application dated September 19, 2011. Section 20B (6) of the application asks him if he has ever held or does he now hold a passport that was issued by a foreign government. The Applicant responded, “Yes,” and listed only his Pakistan passport valid from September 1995 through September 2000. He failed to disclose that he had also obtained a Pakistani passport on January 31, 2001.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Denied

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was indebted to each of the eleven creditors set forth in the SOR, in an amount totaling over $65,000. $65,000	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	Claimed Other
1.b	The applicant has not provided evidence to show that the delinquent debts set forth in allegations 1(b) have been paid.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	Claimed Other
1.c	The applicant has not provided evidence to show that the delinquent debts set forth in allegations 1(c) have been paid.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	Claimed Other
1.d–1.e	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant			—	—	—
1.f	The applicant provided a satisfaction of judgment he received concerning the debt listed in allegation 1(f).	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	Documented Debt Paid in Full
1.g	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
1.h	The credit report dated September 24, 2012, shows that the debt listed in 1(h) has been paid.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	Documented Debt Paid in Full
1.i–4.k	18 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (7 against, 11 for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant was indebted to each of the eleven creditors set forth in the SOR, in an amount totaling over $65,000.

$65,000

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

Claimed

Other

1.b

The applicant has not provided evidence to show that the delinquent debts set forth in allegations 1(b) have been paid.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

Claimed

Other

1.c

The applicant has not provided evidence to show that the delinquent debts set forth in allegations 1(c) have been paid.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

—

Claimed

Other

1.d–1.e

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)

Against Applicant

—

1.f

The applicant provided a satisfaction of judgment he received concerning the debt listed in allegation 1(f).

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

—

Documented

Debt Paid in Full

1.g

specific text not stated in this decision

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Unknown

—

1.h

The credit report dated September 24, 2012, shows that the debt listed in 1(h) has been paid.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

—

Documented

Debt Paid in Full

1.i–4.k

18 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (7 against, 11 for the applicant). (low confidence)

Mixed

—

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION