ISCR Case 14-05983.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 14-05983.h1

grantedJun 27, 2016· Hon. Arthur E. Marshall, Jr.· hearing

Summary

A 44-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, originally from China and employed as a senior electronic engineer, was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The Statement of Reasons cited his familial ties in China and possession of a Chinese passport.

Specifically, the applicant's parents, both in their mid-70s and retired, reside in China, as does his father-in-law, who is almost 90 and in poor health. There was no evidence connecting any of these relatives to the Chinese government or military. The applicant maintained infrequent contact with his parents via Skype and his wife spoke with her father monthly. He had no contact with other relatives or past friends in China. Additionally, the applicant renewed a Chinese passport in 2009, which was set to expire in March 2019.

The judge found that the applicant successfully mitigated these concerns. He expressed a clear willingness to renounce his Chinese passport, for which he had no need. Crucially, no evidence linked his family members in China to the Chinese government or military. The applicant also demonstrated strong ties to the United States through his established life and career, leading to the granting of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant expressed a willingness to renounce his Chinese passport and has no need for it.
There was no evidence that the applicant's family members in China are connected to the Chinese government or military.
The applicant has established a successful life and career in the United States, demonstrating strong ties to the country.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 10(a)(1)raisedPossession of a Current Foreign Passport
AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with a Foreign Family Member
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to a Foreign Person
AG ¶ 7(d)raisedSharing Living Quarters with a Foreign Person

Mitigating

AG ¶ 11(b)appliedWillingness to Renounce Dual Citizenship
AG ¶ 11(e)appliedPassport Has Been Surrendered or Invalidated
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedMinimal Conflict of Interest Due to Strong U.S. Ties

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 20, 2015
Answer filedMay 18, 2015Applicant admitted all allegations.
Hearing heldDec 8, 2015
Decision dateJun 27, 2016

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Preference Concerns Under Guideline C
Consideration of Familial Ties Under Guideline B
Impact of Strong U.S. Ties on Foreign Influence Assessments

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
2.a	Applicant’s mother and father remain citizens and residents of China. They are in their mid-70s and comfortably retired. There is no evidence suggesting either is connected with or dependent on the Chinese government or military. Applicant speaks with his parents through Skype every few weeks.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.b	Applicant’s father-in-law is retired, almost 90 years old, and in poor health. Many years ago, he was the chairman of a company. He speaks with his daughter about once a month by telephone. He has no plans to visit the United States. As with Applicant’s other relatives in China, there is no evidence suggesting he is connected with or dependent on the Chinese government or military.	For Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Immediate Family	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.c	Applicant has no contact with any cousins and maintains no relationships with past friends or associates. In sum, Applicant only has contact with four individuals in China. They have a general sense of the type of science Applicant studies, but they know no specifics about his job.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	China HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant’s mother and father remain citizens and residents of China. They are in their mid-70s and comfortably retired. There is no evidence suggesting either is connected with or dependent on the Chinese government or military. Applicant speaks with his parents through Skype every few weeks.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

—

2.b

Applicant’s father-in-law is retired, almost 90 years old, and in poor health. Many years ago, he was the chairman of a company. He speaks with his daughter about once a month by telephone. He has no plans to visit the United States. As with Applicant’s other relatives in China, there is no evidence suggesting he is connected with or dependent on the Chinese government or military.

For Applicant

In Law in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

—

2.c

Applicant has no contact with any cousins and maintains no relationships with past friends or associates. In sum, Applicant only has contact with four individuals in China. They have a general sense of the type of science Applicant studies, but they know no specifics about his job.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

China

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant renewed a passport from China in 2009 that is set to expire in March 2019.	For Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Admitted	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country	(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference (e) the exercise of the entitlements or benefits of foreign citizenship do not present a national security concern	Credited Willingness to Renounce Foreign Citizenship Credited Passport Has Been Surrendered or Invalidated

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶10)

Mitigating applied (¶11)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant renewed a passport from China in 2009 that is set to expire in March 2019.

For Applicant

Foreign Passport Possession or Use

Admitted

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

(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference

(e) the exercise of the entitlements or benefits of foreign citizenship do not present a national security concern

Credited

Willingness to Renounce Foreign Citizenship

Credited

Passport Has Been Surrendered or Invalidated

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