ISCR Case 12-02065.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 12-02065.h1

grantedOct 8, 2014· Hon. Claude R. Heiny II· hearing

Summary

A 31-year-old U.S. citizen and DoD contractor was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), Guideline D (Sexual Behavior), and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons cited his ownership of a condominium in Thailand and the presence of extended family members who are Thai citizens and residents, some with ties to the Thai government. Additionally, between 2008 and 2011, the applicant purchased sex from foreign nationals in foreign countries.

The judge determined that the applicant's foreign ties and past behavior were sufficiently mitigated. Specifically, his foreign relatives were not deemed a heightened risk due to infrequent and casual contact. His significant financial and family connections within the United States were found to outweigh any concerns related to his foreign property ownership.

Furthermore, the applicant's past sexual behavior was considered unlikely to recur and did not negatively reflect on his current reliability. Consequently, the foreign influence, sexual behavior, and personal conduct security concerns were mitigated, and eligibility for access to classified information was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's foreign relatives do not create a heightened risk of foreign exploitation due to infrequent and casual contact.
The applicant's significant financial ties and family connections in the U.S. outweigh concerns related to his foreign property ownership.
The applicant's past sexual behavior was deemed unlikely to recur and did not reflect negatively on his current reliability.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

B.7.araisedContact with Foreign Family Members
D.13.araisedSexual Behavior of a Criminal Nature
D.13.craisedSexual Behavior That Causes Vulnerability to Coercion

Mitigating

B.8.aappliedNature of Relationships with Foreign Persons
B.8.bappliedMinimal Conflict of Interest Due to Strong U.S. Ties
B.8.cappliedCasual and Infrequent Contact with Foreign Citizens
D.14.bappliedBehavior Occurred Long Ago and Unlikely to Recur

Key Rule Quoted

“"Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of the national security."”
— Directive, Enclosure 2 ¶ 2(b)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 6, 2014
Answer filedFeb 14, 2014Applicant waived right to a hearing.
Hearing held—
Decision dateOct 8, 2014

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Infrequent Contact with Foreign Relatives
Rebuttable Presumption of Strong U.S. Ties Outweighing Foreign Interests
Past Sexual Behavior Mitigated by Time and Lack of Recurrence

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 owns a condominium in Thailand.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	Thailand	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. (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk (f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	Claimed Other
1.b	He has extended family members who are citizens and residents of Thailand, some of whom work or have worked for the government of Thailand.	For Applicant	Extended Family in Foreign Country Extended Family GOVT-AFFILIATED	Thailand	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. (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk	Claimed Other
1.c	Applicant's foreign relatives and past criminal conduct are no longer a security concern.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Thailand	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. (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk	Claimed Other
1.d	The ownership of a condominium in Thailand, when balanced against his financial interests in the United States, does not pose a security concern.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	Thailand	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. (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk (f) foreign interests are minimal and could not be used to influence	Claimed Other
1.e	The foreign influence, sexual behavior, and personal conduct security concerns are mitigated.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—	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. (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk	Claimed Other
1.f	Eligibility for access to classified information is granted.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Other

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant owns a condominium in Thailand.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

Thailand

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.

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

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

Claimed

Other

1.b

He has extended family members who are citizens and residents of Thailand, some of whom work or have worked for the government of Thailand.

For Applicant

Extended Family in Foreign Country

Extended Family

GOVT-AFFILIATED

Thailand

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.

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

Claimed

Other

1.c

Applicant's foreign relatives and past criminal conduct are no longer a security concern.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Thailand

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.

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

Claimed

Other

1.d

The ownership of a condominium in Thailand, when balanced against his financial interests in the United States, does not pose a security concern.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

Thailand

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.

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

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

Claimed

Other

1.e

The foreign influence, sexual behavior, and personal conduct security concerns are mitigated.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

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.

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

Claimed

Other

1.f

Eligibility for access to classified information is granted.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

Admitted

—

Claimed

Other

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶13)	Mitigating applied (¶14)	Mitigation
2.a	Between 2008 and 2011, he purchased sex from foreign nationals in foreign countries.	For Applicant	Prostitution or Solicitation	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶13)

Mitigating applied (¶14)

Mitigation

2.a

Between 2008 and 2011, he purchased sex from foreign nationals in foreign countries.

For Applicant

Prostitution or Solicitation

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

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

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES