ISCR Case 02-31057.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-31057.h1

grantedDec 13, 2004· Hon. Wilford H. Ross· hearing

Summary

A 59-year-old married defense contractor with a Ph.D. sought to retain his Top Secret security clearance, which was challenged under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence), C (Foreign Preference), and E (Personal Conduct). Concerns arose from his Egyptian passport, relatives in Egypt, and an alleged false statement on a security questionnaire.

The judge found that the Applicant's foreign relatives, including a sister and his wife's three sisters, all residing in Egypt, were independently wealthy and had no connection to the Egyptian government. The Applicant did not send money overseas, and his contact with professional colleagues in Egypt was rare. While he inherited a half-interest in an eight-unit apartment complex in Egypt in 1991, valued at approximately $60,000 (about five percent of his U.S. estate), this was deemed a minimal financial interest. The Applicant had used his Egyptian passport after becoming a U.S. citizen, primarily for identification when traveling to Egypt.

Ultimately, the clearance was GRANTED. The Applicant surrendered his Egyptian passport, demonstrating a lack of foreign preference. His foreign relatives were not in a position to be exploited, mitigating foreign influence concerns. The incorrect response on his security questionnaire was determined to be an error of judgment, not intentional deception.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The Applicant surrendered his Egyptian passport, demonstrating a lack of foreign preference.
The Applicant's foreign relatives were independently wealthy and not connected to the Egyptian government, mitigating foreign influence concerns.
The Applicant's incorrect answer on the questionnaire was deemed an error of judgment rather than intentional deception.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

C1raisedForeign Preference
B1raisedForeign Influence
E1raisedPersonal Conduct

Mitigating

C1appliedForeign PreferenceThe Applicant does not exercise dual citizenship and surrendered his Egyptian passport.
B1appliedForeign InfluenceThe Applicant's relatives are not in a position to be exploited and his financial interests are minimal.
E1appliedPersonal ConductThe Applicant's incorrect answer was not made with intent to deceive.

Key Rule Quoted

“Each adjudication is to be an overall common sense determination based upon consideration and assessment of all available information, both favorable and unfavorable.”
— Executive Order 10865

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 17, 2003
Answer filedDec 7, 2003
Hearing heldAug 18, 2004
Decision dateDec 13, 2004

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Preference Under Guideline C
Mitigation of Foreign Influence Under Guideline B
Error of Judgment in Personal Conduct Under Guideline E

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	The Applicant's parents are dead. He has one surviving sister who is a citizen and lives in Egypt. She has no connection to the Egyptian government.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Egypt	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk (e) promptly complied with reporting requirements	—
2.b	The Applicant's wife has three sisters who live in Egypt and are Egyptian citizens. They also have no current connection to the Egyptian government.	For Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Egypt	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk (e) promptly complied with reporting requirements	—
2.c	All of the Applicant's relatives are independently wealthy and the Applicant sends no money to relatives overseas.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Egypt	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk (e) promptly complied with reporting requirements	—
2.d	The Applicant has had rare contact with professional colleagues who still live in Egypt. This contact consists of visiting them when he is in Egypt and occasional emails. These people are not close friends of the Applicant.	For Applicant	Friend in Foreign Country Friend	Egypt	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk (e) promptly complied with reporting requirements	—
2.e	When his mother died in 1991, the Applicant inherited a half interest in an eight unit apartment complex. Since that time he has worked with his sister to sell the four apartments which constitute his interest.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Egypt	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk (e) promptly complied with reporting requirements	—
2.f	The property the Applicant owns in Egypt is worth approximately $60,000. This is approximately five percent of the total value of his estate in the United States. Such a value is minimal and is not sufficient to affect his security responsibilities.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	Egypt	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk (e) promptly complied with reporting requirements	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

2.a

The Applicant's parents are dead. He has one surviving sister who is a citizen and lives in Egypt. She has no connection to the Egyptian government.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Egypt

Denied

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

(e) promptly complied with reporting requirements

—

2.b

The Applicant's wife has three sisters who live in Egypt and are Egyptian citizens. They also have no current connection to the Egyptian government.

For Applicant

In Law in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Egypt

Denied

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

(e) promptly complied with reporting requirements

—

2.c

All of the Applicant's relatives are independently wealthy and the Applicant sends no money to relatives overseas.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Egypt

Denied

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

(e) promptly complied with reporting requirements

—

2.d

The Applicant has had rare contact with professional colleagues who still live in Egypt. This contact consists of visiting them when he is in Egypt and occasional emails. These people are not close friends of the Applicant.

For Applicant

Friend in Foreign Country

Friend

Egypt

Denied

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

(e) promptly complied with reporting requirements

—

2.e

When his mother died in 1991, the Applicant inherited a half interest in an eight unit apartment complex. Since that time he has worked with his sister to sell the four apartments which constitute his interest.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Egypt

Denied

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

(e) promptly complied with reporting requirements

—

2.f

The property the Applicant owns in Egypt is worth approximately $60,000. This is approximately five percent of the total value of his estate in the United States. Such a value is minimal and is not sufficient to affect his security responsibilities.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

Egypt

Denied

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

(c) contact so casual and infrequent there is little likelihood of risk

(e) promptly complied with reporting requirements

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant has engaged in activities which indicate a preference for another country over the United States.	For Applicant	Failure to Renounce or Surrender Foreign Status	Unknown	—	—	—
1.b	The Applicant has used his Egyptian passport after becoming an American citizen.	For Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Unknown	—	—	—
1.c	The Applicant retained his Egyptian passport as a means of identification when he traveled to Egypt.	For Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Unknown	—	—	—
1.d	The Applicant has foreign financial interests that could affect his security responsibilities.	For Applicant	Foreign Benefits or Education	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶10)

Mitigating applied (¶11)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant has engaged in activities which indicate a preference for another country over the United States.

For Applicant

Failure to Renounce or Surrender Foreign Status

Unknown

—

1.b

The Applicant has used his Egyptian passport after becoming an American citizen.

For Applicant

Foreign Passport Possession or Use

Unknown

—

1.c

The Applicant retained his Egyptian passport as a means of identification when he traveled to Egypt.

For Applicant

Foreign Passport Possession or Use

Unknown

—

1.d

The Applicant has foreign financial interests that could affect his security responsibilities.

For Applicant

Foreign Benefits or Education

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	The Government alleges in this paragraph that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he intentionally falsified material aspects of his personal background during the clearance screening process.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE	Foreign Contacts or Interests	Denied	—	—	Claimed Explanation of Omission Credible

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

The Government alleges in this paragraph that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he intentionally falsified material aspects of his personal background during the clearance screening process.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE

Foreign Contacts or Interests

Denied

—

Claimed

Explanation of Omission Credible

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES