ISCR Case 12-09418.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 12-09418.h1

deniedApr 2, 2014· Hon. Paul J. Mason· hearing

Summary

A 45-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, originally from Afghanistan, was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The applicant maintained extensive familial ties in Afghanistan, including his 66-year-old mother, three brothers (ages 44, 40, and 32), a 42-year-old sister, three sisters-in-law (ages 42, 40, and 28), and an uncle. He contacted these family members with varying frequencies, from monthly to every six months, and provided approximately $11,000 in financial support to his family in Afghanistan between 1990 and the present.

The judge determined that these connections to family in a country with a poor human rights record and a history of terrorism posed a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, which the applicant failed to mitigate. Disqualifying conditions under Guideline B included the applicant's immediate family members being residents of a foreign country and the applicant's financial support to foreign nationals.

Additionally, the applicant's financial conduct raised concerns under Guideline E. He failed to disclose a May 2010 federal tax lien on his February 2012 e-QIP. Furthermore, a landlord obtained a $35,750 judgment against him after he broke a lease, though this judgment was later vacated due to ineffective service. These financial issues and a lack of candor regarding his business conduct raised questions about his reliability and trustworthiness, ultimately leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant's familial ties to Afghanistan, a country with known risks of terrorism, created a heightened risk of foreign exploitation.
The applicant failed to demonstrate that his loyalty to U.S. interests outweighed his ties to his family in Afghanistan.
The applicant's financial issues and lack of candor regarding his business conduct raised concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)appliedContact with Foreign Family Members
AG ¶ 7(b)appliedConnections to a Foreign Country Creating Potential Conflict of Interest
AG ¶ 16(c)appliedCredible Adverse Information Indicating Questionable Judgment
AG ¶ 16(d)appliedCredible Adverse Information Supporting a Whole-person Assessment of Untrustworthiness

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 issuedAug 20, 2012
Answer filedSep 13, 2012
Hearing held—Decided on administrative record.
Decision dateApr 2, 2014

Cite For

Heightened Risk of Foreign Exploitation Due to Familial Ties Under Guideline B
Questions of Reliability and Trustworthiness Under Guideline E
Impact of Unresolved Financial Issues on Security Clearance Eligibility

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 mother, a resident citizen of Afghanistan, is 66 years old. (SOR ¶ 1.a) She is an unemployed housewife whom Applicant contacts about once every two months.	Against Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Afghanistan 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 has three brothers who are resident citizens of Afghanistan. (SOR ¶ 1.b) His 44-year-old brother is an unemployed nurse that Applicant contacts about once a month. His 40-year-old brother operates a grocery store. Applicant contacts him about once every two months. His 32-year-old brother is a business contractor that Applicant contacts about once every two months.	Against Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Afghanistan 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 42-year-old sister is a resident citizen of Afghanistan. (SOR ¶ 1.c) She is an unemployed housewife that Applicant contacts about once every two months.	Against Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Afghanistan 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’s three sisters-in-law (married to his three brothers identified at SOR ¶ 1.b) are resident citizens of Afghanistan. (SOR ¶ 1.d) His 42-year-old sister-in-law is a teacher. He contacts her about once every three months. His 40-year-old sister-in-law is a housewife, and he contacts her about once every three months. Applicant’s 28-year-old sister-in-law is a housewife that he contacts once every three months.	Against Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Extended Family	Afghanistan 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 has an uncle, a resident citizen of Afghanistan, who is a truck driver. (SOR ¶ 1.e) Applicant contacts him about once every six months.	Against Applicant	Extended Family in Foreign Country Extended Family	Afghanistan 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	Between 1990 and the present, Applicant provided about $11,000 in financial support to his family in Afghanistan. (SOR ¶ 1.f).	Against Applicant	Financial Support to Foreign Relative Immediate Family	Afghanistan 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 mother, a resident citizen of Afghanistan, is 66 years old. (SOR ¶ 1.a) She is an unemployed housewife whom Applicant contacts about once every two months.

Against Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

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 has three brothers who are resident citizens of Afghanistan. (SOR ¶ 1.b) His 44-year-old brother is an unemployed nurse that Applicant contacts about once a month. His 40-year-old brother operates a grocery store. Applicant contacts him about once every two months. His 32-year-old brother is a business contractor that Applicant contacts about once every two months.

Against Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

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 42-year-old sister is a resident citizen of Afghanistan. (SOR ¶ 1.c) She is an unemployed housewife that Applicant contacts about once every two months.

Against Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

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’s three sisters-in-law (married to his three brothers identified at SOR ¶ 1.b) are resident citizens of Afghanistan. (SOR ¶ 1.d) His 42-year-old sister-in-law is a teacher. He contacts her about once every three months. His 40-year-old sister-in-law is a housewife, and he contacts her about once every three months. Applicant’s 28-year-old sister-in-law is a housewife that he contacts once every three months.

Against Applicant

In Law in Foreign Country

Extended Family

Afghanistan

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 has an uncle, a resident citizen of Afghanistan, who is a truck driver. (SOR ¶ 1.e) Applicant contacts him about once every six months.

Against Applicant

Extended Family in Foreign Country

Extended Family

Afghanistan

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

Between 1990 and the present, Applicant provided about $11,000 in financial support to his family in Afghanistan. (SOR ¶ 1.f).

Against Applicant

Financial Support to Foreign Relative

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

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	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant did not disclose his May 2010 federal tax lien on his February 2012 e-QIP.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant broke the lease and informed the landlord that he could keep the three-month deposit. The landlord filed a lawsuit and obtained a judgment for $35,750. The judgment was vacated on November 21, 2012, because Applicant had not been effectively served.	For Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant did not disclose his May 2010 federal tax lien on his February 2012 e-QIP.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Denied

—

2.b

Applicant broke the lease and informed the landlord that he could keep the three-month deposit. The landlord filed a lawsuit and obtained a judgment for $35,750. The judgment was vacated on November 21, 2012, because Applicant had not been effectively served.

For Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Admitted

—

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