ISCR Case 13-00535.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 13-00535.h1

grantedMar 11, 2014· Hon. Thomas M. Crean· hearing

Summary

A 57-year-old linguist for U.S. Forces in Afghanistan was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) related to family ties in Afghanistan. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) detailed several relatives with past or present connections to the Afghan government or public service. These included a cousin who was a director in the Ministry of Finance from 2003 to 2012, and an uncle who served as a law advisor for the Ministry of Justice from 1945 to 2009.

Other relatives cited in the SOR included an uncle who was a provincial governor from 1948 to 1973, and the applicant's father, who was a senator in the Afghan Parliament until 1970. Additionally, one brother, a U.S. resident and Afghan citizen, served as a District Attorney in Afghanistan from 1972 to 1978, while another brother, a U.S. citizen and resident, was a police officer in Afghanistan from 1968 to 1978. A sister also served as a teacher in Afghanistan from 1974 to 1978.

The judge found that the applicant's minimal and infrequent contact with these distant relatives, combined with his strong ties to the United States as a citizen for over 27 years, sufficiently mitigated the security concerns. The applicant's loyalty to the U.S. was deemed sufficient, and the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's family members in Afghanistan are distant relatives with minimal contact.
The applicant has strong ties to the United States, having been a citizen for over 27 years.
The applicant's loyalty to the U.S. was deemed sufficient to mitigate potential foreign influence.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family MembersContact with a cousin and uncle in Afghanistan raised concerns of potential coercion.
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to Foreign PersonsFamily ties to individuals associated with the Afghan government created a potential conflict of interest.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)appliedNature of RelationshipsThe applicant's relationships with foreign family members were unlikely to create a conflict of interest.
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedMinimal Conflict of InterestThe applicant's loyalty to the U.S. was strong enough to mitigate any potential conflict.
AG ¶ 8(c)appliedCasual ContactThe applicant's contact with foreign relatives was infrequent and casual.

Key Rule Quoted

“The mere existence of foreign relationships and contacts is not sufficient to raise the above disqualifying conditions.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 29, 2013
Answer filedSep 23, 2013
Hearing held—Decided on the written record.
Decision dateMar 11, 2014

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
Importance of Strong U.S. Ties in Security Clearance Cases
Evaluation of Familial Relationships in the Context of National Security Risks

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 SOR alleges that Applicant has a cousin who is a citizen and resident of Afghanistan.	For Applicant	Cohabitation with Foreign National Extended Family	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	The SOR alleges that Applicant’s cousin was employed as a director in the Afghanistan Ministry of Finance from 2003 until 2012.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Extended Family GOVT-AFFILIATED	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	The SOR alleges that Applicant’s uncle was a law advisor for the Afghanistan Ministry of Justice from 1945 until 2009.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Extended Family GOVT-AFFILIATED	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	The SOR also alleges that his uncle is a citizen and resident of Afghanistan.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Extended Family	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	The SOR alleges that Applicant’s brother is a citizen of Afghanistan residing in the United States who served as a District Attorney in Afghanistan from 1972 until 1978.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.f	The SOR alleges that another of Applicant’s brothers is a citizen and resident of the United States. He had been employed as a police officer in Afghanistan from 1968 until 1978.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.g	The SOR also alleges that Applicant’s sister served as a teacher in Afghanistan from 1974 until 1978.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	—	—	—
1.h	The SOR alleges that Applicant’s father was a senator in the Afghan Parliament until 1970.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—
1.i	The SOR alleges that Applicant’s uncle was a provincial governor in Afghanistan from 1948 until 1973.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Extended Family GOVT-AFFILIATED	Afghanistan HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

The SOR alleges that Applicant has a cousin who is a citizen and resident of Afghanistan.

For Applicant

Cohabitation with Foreign National

Extended Family

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.b

The SOR alleges that Applicant’s cousin was employed as a director in the Afghanistan Ministry of Finance from 2003 until 2012.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Extended Family

GOVT-AFFILIATED

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.c

The SOR alleges that Applicant’s uncle was a law advisor for the Afghanistan Ministry of Justice from 1945 until 2009.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Extended Family

GOVT-AFFILIATED

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

1.d

The SOR also alleges that his uncle is a citizen and resident of Afghanistan.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Extended Family

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

1.e

The SOR alleges that Applicant’s brother is a citizen of Afghanistan residing in the United States who served as a District Attorney in Afghanistan from 1972 until 1978.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.f

The SOR alleges that another of Applicant’s brothers is a citizen and resident of the United States. He had been employed as a police officer in Afghanistan from 1968 until 1978.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.g

The SOR also alleges that Applicant’s sister served as a teacher in Afghanistan from 1974 until 1978.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

—

1.h

The SOR alleges that Applicant’s father was a senator in the Afghan Parliament until 1970.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

—

1.i

The SOR alleges that Applicant’s uncle was a provincial governor in Afghanistan from 1948 until 1973.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Extended Family

GOVT-AFFILIATED

Afghanistan

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION