Loading case…

Summary

The applicant, a 48-year-old systems engineer, sought a security clearance under Guideline B due to concerns about foreign influence stemming from his wife and son being dual citizens of the United States and Lebanon. The judge found that the applicant's family connections did not pose a security risk, as they were not agents of a foreign power and had adequate security measures in place during visits to Lebanon. Consequently, the applicant was granted a security clearance.

Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant's wife and son are dual citizens of the United States and Lebanon (1.a). Applicant's parents-in-law are dual citizens of Lebanon and Canada (1.b). Applicant's sister-in-law is a dual citizen of Lebanon and the United Kingdom (1.c). Applicant's father-in-law is the Honorary Consul in Lebanon for the Republic of Iceland (1.d). Applicant's in-laws maintain regular contact with friends and officials at the U.S. Embassy (1.e). Applicant has made at least eight trips to Lebanon since 1982 (1.f).

The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions E2.A2.1.2.1, E2.A2.1.2.3, E2.A2.1.2.6. The judge applied mitigating conditions E2.A2.1.3.1, E2.A2.1.3.3. The decision turned on the following: The applicant's wife and son are not agents of a foreign power and are not in a position to be exploited; The applicant's in-laws maintain a secure living environment and have connections to the U.S. Embassy; The applicant's family has the ability to flee to Canada if necessary, mitigating any potential risks.

Why the applicant prevailed

• The applicant's wife and son are not agents of a foreign power and are not in a position to be exploited.
• The applicant's in-laws maintain a secure living environment and have connections to the U.S. Embassy.
• The applicant's family has the ability to flee to Canada if necessary, mitigating any potential risks.

Conditions referenced

Key rule quoted

“Any doubt as to whether access to classified information is clearly consistent with national security will be resolved in favor of national security.”

Procedural posture

• SOR issuedSep 11, 2003
• Answer filedSep 29, 2003Applicant requested a hearing.
• Hearing heldJan 9, 2004Hearing was postponed from January 6, 2004.
• Decision dateMar 31, 2004

Cite for

• Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
• Security Clearance Granted Despite Dual Citizenship of Family Members
• Importance of Family Security Measures in Clearance Decisions