CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 01-23263.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 01-23263.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 01-23263.h1

grantedJun 11, 2003· Hon. Joseph Testan· hearing

Summary

A 36-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, originally from Taiwan, was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The Statement of Reasons cited that his mother, a brother, and a sister are citizens and residents of Taiwan. Additionally, an oldest brother is a citizen of Taiwan and a permanent resident of Canada, and the applicant has a high school friend who is a citizen and resident of Taiwan. These conditions raised a disqualifying concern regarding foreign influence.

However, the judge applied mitigating conditions, noting that the applicant formally relinquished his Taiwanese citizenship in 2002. Crucially, it was determined that his immediate family members residing in Taiwan were not in a position to be exploited by the Taiwanese government.

The applicant's overall conduct further demonstrated a strong allegiance to the United States. Based on these factors, the judge concluded that the security risks were mitigated, and the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant formally relinquished his Taiwanese citizenship in 2002.
His immediate family members in Taiwan are not in a position to be exploited by Taiwan.
The applicant's conduct indicated his allegiance to the United States.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A2.1.2.1raisedImmediate Family Member Is a Citizen or Resident of a Foreign Country.

Mitigating

E2.A2.1.3.1appliedImmediate Family Member Is Not an Agent of the Foreign Power or in a Position to Be Exploited.
E2.A2.1.3.3notedContact with Foreign Citizens Are Casual and Infrequent.

Key Rule Quoted

“The Government has established a prima facie case under Guideline B.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 22, 2003
Answer filedFeb 18, 2003
Hearing heldMay 1, 2003
Decision dateJun 11, 2003

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline B Regarding Foreign Influence
Rebuttal of Prima Facie Case Concerning Foreign Family Ties
Consideration of Applicant's Actions Demonstrating Allegiance to the U.S.

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline B (Foreign Influence) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant's immediate family members in Taiwan are not in a position to be exploited by Taiwan, mitigating concerns about foreign influence. The applicant's allegiance to the United States was affirmed, and his security clearance was granted.

U.S. ties the decision noted: Naturalized U.S. Citizen · U.S. Spouse or Partner · U.S. Children · U.S. Home or Property · U.S. Career or Business · Intent to Remain in U.S.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant's mother, as well as a brother and sister, are citizens and residents of Taiwan.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Taiwan	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	Claimed Other
1.b	Applicant has a friend from high school who is a citizen and resident of Taiwan.	For Applicant	Friend in Foreign Country Friend	Taiwan	Denied	—	(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk	Claimed Other
1.c	Applicant's oldest brother is a citizen of Taiwan and a permanent resident of Canada.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Taiwan	Denied	—	—	Claimed Other

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline B). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

DATE: June 11, 2003

In Re:

-----------------------

SSN: -----------

Applicant for Security Clearance

ISCR Case No. 01-23263

DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE

JOSEPH TESTAN

SYNOPSIS

Applicant became a naturalized United States citizen in 2000. He formally relinquished his Taiwanese citizenship in 2002. His three immediate family members remaining in Taiwan are not in a position to be exploited by Taiwan in a way that could force applicant to choose between loyalty to these family members and his loyalty to the United States. Clearance is granted.

STATEMENT OF CASE

On January 22, 2003, the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA), pursuant to Executive Order 10865 and Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Directive), dated January 2, 1992, (as administratively reissued on April 20, 1999), issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to applicant which detailed reasons why DOHA could not make the preliminary affirmative finding under the Directive that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for applicant and recommended referral to an Administrative Judge to determine whether clearance should be denied or revoked.

Applicant responded to the SOR in writing on February 18, 2003. The case was assigned to the undersigned on March 14, 2003. A Notice of Hearing was issued on March 26, 2003, and the hearing was held on May 1, 2003. The transcript was received on May 9, 2003.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Applicant is 36 years of age. He is employed as an engineer by a defense contractor.

Applicant was born and raised in Taiwan. After earning an undergraduate degree at a Taiwanese university, he served two years of mandatory service in the Taiwanese military. In 1991, following his completion of military service, he moved to the United States to attend graduate school. He became a permanent United States resident in 1996, and became a United States citizen in 2000. Applicant thought that when he became a United States citizen, he automatically lost his Taiwanese citizenship. When he learned that this was not true, he took affirmative steps to relinquish his Taiwanese citizenship. Exhibit A establishes that he relinquished it in July 2002.

Applicant is married and has two children, both of whom were born in the United States. Applicant is in the process of divorcing his wife, a naturalized United States citizen. All of applicant's wife's immediate family members have become United States citizens and are residing in the United States. Applicant believes that his wife and children will remain in the United States after their divorce.

Applicant's mother, as well as a brother and sister, are citizens and residents of Taiwan. His mother is a retired housewife who lives with applicant's brother in Taiwan. Applicant speaks with them once every two weeks (TR at 44). Applicant has filed a petition with the United States authorities seeking permission to bring his mother to the United States. United States authorities acknowledged receipt of the petition, but indicated there is a long waiting period before they can act on it. Applicant's brother works for a private company in Taiwan. Applicant's sister is a housewife. Since moving to the United States, applicant has visited his family in Taiwan in 1994, 1997, 2000, and 2002.

Applicant has a friend from high school who is a citizen and resident of Taiwan. Applicant speaks with him by telephone two to three times a year. The friend visited applicant in the United States in 2000. During that visit they traveled to Canada for two or three days. This friend does not work for the Taiwanese government.

Applicant's oldest brother is a citizen of Taiwan and a permanent resident of Canada.

Applicant testified, credibly, that his allegiance is to the United States, and if he were ever asked to compromise classified information he would decline to do so, and would report the request to the proper authorities (TR at 38).

POLICIES

Enclosure 2 of the Directive sets forth Guidelines (divided into Conditions that could raise a security concern and conditions that could mitigate security concerns) which must be followed by the Administrative Judge. Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact, the following Disqualifying Factors and Mitigating Factors are applicable:

Foreign Influence

The Concern: A security risk may exist when an individual's immediate family, including cohabitants, and other persons to whom he or she may be bound by affection, influence, or obligation are not citizens of the United States or may be subject to duress. These situations could create the potential for foreign influence that could result in the compromise of classified information. Contacts with citizens of other countries or financial interests in other countries are also relevant to security determinations if they make an individual potentially vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or pressure.

Conditions that could raise a security concern:

1. E2.A2.1.2.1: An immediate family member is a citizen or resident of a foreign country.

Conditions that could mitigate security concerns:

1. E2.A2.1.3.1: The immediate family member in question is not an agent of the foreign power or in a position to be exploited by the foreign power in a way that could force applicant to choose between loyalty to the immediate family member and the United States.

2. E2.A2.1.3.3: Contact with foreign citizens are casual and infrequent.

(high school friend).

CONCLUSION

The Government established a prima facie case. Neither the fact applicant has a high school friend in Taiwan, nor the fact his oldest brother is a Taiwanese citizen living in Canada, raise a significant security concern. However, the fact that applicant's mother, sister and a second brother are citizens and residents of Taiwan does raise a security concern. Accordingly, the Government has established a prima facie case under Guideline B.

Applicant rebutted the Government's prima facie case.

Based upon the evidence presented, I conclude that applicant's immediate family members in Taiwan are not agents of Taiwan, or in a position to be exploited by Taiwan in a way that could force applicant to choose between loyalty to his Taiwanese family members and loyalty to the United States. (1) I reach this conclusion for at least three reasons: First, there is no evidence that any of applicant's immediate family members are connected with the Taiwanese government, or any of the Taiwanese intelligence services. Second, it is highly unlikely that Taiwan, a close United States ally which is highly dependent on the United States for its defense, would risk threatening this relationship by exploiting/threatening its private citizens for the purpose of forcing a United States citizen to betray the United States. Third, since coming to the United States, applicant's conduct, including the affirmative act of relinquishing his Taiwanese citizenship, has indicated that, as he testified, his allegiance is to the United States. This leads me to conclude that, even in the unlikely event pressure was exerted upon him to compromise classified information, he would resist it, and would report the incident to the proper authorities.

FORMAL FINDINGS

GUIDELINE B: FOR THE APPLICANT

DECISION

In light of all the circumstances presented by the record in this case, it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for applicant.

____________________________

Joseph Testan

Administrative Judge

1. Accordingly, Mitigating Condition 1 is applicable to this case.

FOOTNOTES

01-23263.h1 FOR GOVERNMENT Jennifer I. Campbell, Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT John H. Messing, Esq. file:///usr.osd.mil/...yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/01-23263.h1.html[7/2/2021 2:27:38 PM] 01-23263.h1