ISCR Case 15-01200.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-01200.h1

grantedJun 20, 2016· Hon. Philip S. Howe· hearing

Summary

A naturalized U.S. citizen, originally from India, was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The Statement of Reasons detailed several allegations, including the applicant's frequent contact with family members in India, some of whom hold Indian citizenship. Specifically, the applicant's brother-in-law works as a maintenance manager at an Indian government research facility.

Further concerns arose from the applicant's wife and first-born child, who were born in India and are Indian citizens. The applicant also owns property in India, purchased in 2002 for $20,000 and now valued at approximately $80,000, which is managed by his sister for her economic benefit. These factors raised disqualifying conditions related to foreign influence and potential exploitation.

However, the judge applied several mitigating conditions. The applicant has resided in the U.S. since 1998 and became a naturalized citizen in 2010, demonstrating strong ties to the country over 18 years. The applicant's connections to the U.S. were deemed stronger than his familial ties to India. Additionally, the applicant expressed a willingness to sell his property in India to address security concerns, ultimately leading to the clearance being granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant has lived in the U.S. since 1998 and became a naturalized citizen in 2010.
The applicant's connections to the U.S. are stronger than his familial ties to India after 18 years.
The applicant expressed willingness to sell his property in India to alleviate security concerns.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family Members
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to Foreign Persons Creating Potential Conflict of Interest
AG ¶ 7(d)raisedSharing Living Quarters with Foreign Nationals
AG ¶ 7(e)raisedSubstantial Property Interest in a Foreign Country

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)appliedNature of Relationships with Foreign Persons Unlikely to Create Conflict
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedMinimal Conflict of Interest Due to Strong U.S. Ties
AG ¶ 8(f)appliedValue of Foreign Property Unlikely to Result in Conflict

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 22, 2015
Answer filedSep 17, 2015Applicant admitted allegations.
Hearing held—Case decided on written record.
Decision dateJun 20, 2016

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Based on Strong U.S. Ties
Consideration of the Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions
Impact of Familial Relationships on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline B

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 has contact with his oldest and younger brothers, father-in-law, and sister on a frequent basis. His brother-in-law has infrequent contact with Applicant. However, there is family contact.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	(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.	—
1.b	Applicant has familial connections to his siblings and his wife’s family in India. His brother-in-law works as a maintenance manager at an Indian government research facility.	For Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Immediate Family GOVT-AFFILIATED	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(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.	—
1.c	Applicant lives with his family in the United States, including his wife and first-born child who were born in India and are citizens of that country.	For Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk	(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.	—
1.d	Applicant owns property in India currently worth about $80,000 that he bought in 2002 for $20,000. This property he owns, and that is managed by his sister for her economic benefit, places Applicant at a heightened risk of foreign influence or exploitation.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	India HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	(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.	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant has contact with his oldest and younger brothers, father-in-law, and sister on a frequent basis. His brother-in-law has infrequent contact with Applicant. However, there is family contact.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(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.

—

1.b

Applicant has familial connections to his siblings and his wife’s family in India. His brother-in-law works as a maintenance manager at an Indian government research facility.

For Applicant

In Law in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

GOVT-AFFILIATED

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(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.

—

1.c

Applicant lives with his family in the United States, including his wife and first-born child who were born in India and are citizens of that country.

For Applicant

Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen

Immediate Family

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk

(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.

—

1.d

Applicant owns property in India currently worth about $80,000 that he bought in 2002 for $20,000. This property he owns, and that is managed by his sister for her economic benefit, places Applicant at a heightened risk of foreign influence or exploitation.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

India

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk

(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.

—

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

FOOTNOTES