CASEClearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 03-10198.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 03-10198.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-10198.h1

grantedJun 30, 2004· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

This security clearance decision involved an Applicant, a naturalized U.S. citizen originally from Iran, under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence) and C (Foreign Preference). The Applicant arrived in the U.S. in 1988, graduated from an American university, and became a U.S. citizen in 1995, at which time she renounced her Iranian citizenship. However, she retained her Iranian passport and used it for travel to Iran in 2000 and 2001 to visit her parents. In February 2003, she surrendered her Iranian passport to the Iranian Interest Section in the U.S.

Concerns were raised regarding her brother, who is an Iranian citizen residing in Iran and works for a private bank, though he has applied for a U.S. green card. Additionally, her father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law, and sister-in-law are Iranian citizens residing in Iran and work as farmers, with whom the Applicant has little contact.

The Administrative Judge found that the Applicant successfully mitigated these concerns. Key factors included her renunciation of Iranian citizenship, the surrender of her Iranian passport in 2003, and her stated lack of intention to return to Iran, especially since her parents have immigrated to the U.S. Furthermore, her immediate family members remaining in Iran were not connected to any government and were deemed unlikely to be exploited. Consequently, the security clearance was GRANTED.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The Applicant renounced her Iranian citizenship upon becoming a U.S. citizen.
She surrendered her Iranian passport in February 2003 and has no intention of returning to Iran.
The Applicant's immediate family members in Iran are not connected to any government and are unlikely to be exploited.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

C.1.araisedForeign Preference
B.2.araisedForeign Influence

Mitigating

C.1appliedForeign Preference Mitigation
B.1appliedForeign Influence Mitigation

Key Rule Quoted

“An individual who demonstrates a foreign preference, or who is subject to a foreign influence, may be prone to provide information or make decisions that are harmful to the interests of the United States.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 4, 2003
Answer filedNov 18, 2003
Hearing heldMar 29, 2004
Decision dateJun 30, 2004

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Preference Under Guideline C
Mitigation of Foreign Influence Under Guideline B
Consideration of Family Ties in Security Clearance Decisions

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 Administrative Judge found in favor of the Applicant regarding foreign influence concerns. The Applicant's ties to family members in Iran were deemed mitigated by their lack of connection to any foreign government and the Applicant's limited contact with them. Ultimately, the Judge concluded that the Applicant's foreign influence did not pose a security risk, resulting in the granting of the security clearance.

U.S. ties the decision noted: Naturalized U.S. Citizen · Intent to Remain in U.S. · U.S. Home or Property

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
2.a	The Applicant's brother is a citizen of and presently resides in Iran. He works for a private bank. He has applied for a green card to immigrate to the U.S.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Iran	Admitted	(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	Claimed Other
2.b	The Applicant's father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law are citizens of and reside in Iran. They are farmers, and the Applicant has little contact with them.	For Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Extended Family	Iran	Admitted	(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	Claimed Other

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline C (Foreign Preference) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: granted

The Applicant, who became a U.S. citizen in 1995 after renouncing her Iranian citizenship, retained her Iranian passport and used it to travel to Iran in 2000 and 2001. However, she surrendered her Iranian passport in February 2003 and has no intention of returning to Iran, as her parents have immigrated to the U.S. The judge found that the Applicant's actions were mitigated and ruled in her favor regarding foreign preference concerns.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant came to the U.S. in 1988.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Preference	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	She graduated from an American university in 1995, and became a U.S. citizen that same year.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Preference	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	When she became a U.S. citizen, she renounced her Iranian citizenship.	For Applicant	Failure to Renounce or Surrender Foreign Status	Admitted	(b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S.	—	—
1.d	She retained her Iranian passport, however, and used it to travel to Iran in 2000 and 2001 to visit her parents.	For Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Admitted	(b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S.	—	—
1.e	In February of 2003, the Applicant surrendered her Iranian passport to the Iranian Interest Section in the U.S.	For Applicant	Failure to Renounce or Surrender Foreign Status	Denied	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline C). 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 30, 2004

In Re:

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

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

Applicant for Security Clearance

ISCR Case No. 03-10198

DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE

RICHARD A. CEFOLA

SYNOPSIS

The Applicant came from Iran to the United States in 1988. She attended college in the U.S., and graduated in 1995. She was also naturalized in 1995. When she became a U.S. citizen, she renounced her Iranian citizenship. She retained her Iranian passport, however, and used it to travel to Iran in 2000 and in 2001 to visit her parents. Her parents now live in the U.S.; and as such, she intends no future visits to Iran. She surrendered her Iranian passport in February of 2003. Her brother lives in Iran where he works for a private bank. He has applied for a green card to immigrate to the U.S. Her in- laws are citizens of and live in Iran. They are farmers. She has little contact with them. Mitigation is shown. Clearance is granted.

STATEMENT OF CASE

On September 4, 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, issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to the Applicant, which detailed the 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 the Applicant and recommended referral to an Administrative Judge to determine whether a clearance should be denied or revoked.

Applicant filed an Answer to the SOR on or about November 18, 2003.

The case was received by the undersigned on February 19, 2004. A notice of hearing was issued on March 2, 2004, and the case was heard on March 29, 2004. The Government submitted documentary evidence. Testimony was taken from the Applicant, who also submitted documentary evidence. The transcript was received on April 16, 2004. The issues raised here are whether the Applicant's alleged foreign preference and perceived foreign influence militates against the granting of a security clearance. [The admits the underlying factual basis of most of the allegations, except for 1.a. in that she denies she is dual national, and 1.e. in that she has surrendered her Iranian passport.]

FINDINGS OF FACT

The following Findings of Fact are based on Applicant's Answer to the SOR, the documents and the live testimony. The Applicant is 42 years of age, and is employed by a defense contractor that seeks a security clearance on behalf of the Applicant. After a complete and thorough review of the evidence in the record, and upon due consideration of the same, I make the following additional findings of fact.

Guideline C - Foreign Preference

1.a.~1.e. The Applicant came to the U.S. in 1988 (Government Exhibit (GX) 1 at page 2). She came to the U.S. to flee the current regime, and to further her education (Transcript (TR ) at page 16 lines 1–22). She graduated from an American university in 1995, and became a U.S. citizen that same year (TR at page 17 lines 12–22, and Applicant's Exhibit (AppX) A at pages 9, 11 and 12). When she became a U.S. citizen, she renounced her Iranian citizenship (TR at page 29 lines 16–21). She retained her Iranian passport, however, and used it to travel to Iran in 2000 and 2001 to visit her parents (TR at page 20 line 17 to page 21 line 10, and at page 30 lines 17–19). Her parents have now immigrated to the U.S.; and as such, she has no intention of ever returning to Iran (TR at page 21 lines 9–10, and page 32 lines 10–11). In February of 2003, the Applicant surrendered her Iranian passport to the Iranian Interest Section in the U.S. (TR at page 38 lines 20–24, and Applicant's Answer to the SOR at page 1).

Guideline B - Foreign Influence

2.a. and 2.b. The Applicant's brother is a citizen of and presently resides in Iran (Government Exhibit (GX) 1 at page 5). He works for a private bank (TR at page 18 line 21 to page 20 line 5, and AppX B at page 3). He has applied for a green card to immigrate to the U.S. (TR at page 35 lines 3–6, and AppX A at page 15). His application was approved in June of 1997; and as such, he is waiting for his turn to immigrate which should be "soon" (id).

The Applicant's father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law are citizens of and reside in Iran (TR at page 20 line 6–16, GX 1 at page 5, and AppX B at pages 4–11). They are farmers, and the Applicant has little contact with them (id).

Mitigation

Those who work with and supervise the Applicant aver that she is trustworthy, and should be granted a security clearance (AppX a at pages 16–30 and AppX B at page 2).

POLICIES

Enclosure 2 and Section E.2.2. of the 1992 Directive set forth both policy factors, and conditions that could raise or mitigate a security concern. Furthermore, as set forth in the Directive, each clearance decision must be a fair and impartial common sense determination based upon consideration of all the relevant and material information and the pertinent criteria and adjudication policy in enclosure 2, including as appropriate:

a. Nature, extent, and seriousness of the conduct, and surrounding circumstances.

b. Frequency and recency of the conduct.

c. Age and maturity of the applicant.

d. Motivation of the applicant, and the extent to which the conduct was negligent, willful, voluntary, or undertaken with knowledge of the consequence involved.

e. Absence or presence of rehabilitation.

f. Probability that circumstances or conduct will continue or recur in the future.

The Administrative Judge, however, can only draw those inferences or conclusions that have a reasonable and logical basis in the evidence of record. The Judge cannot draw inferences or conclusions based on evidence which is speculative or conjectural in nature.

The Government must make out a case under Guideline C (foreign preference), and Guideline B (foreign influence), which establishes doubt about a person's judgment, reliability and trustworthiness. While a rational connection, or nexus, must be shown between an applicant's adverse conduct and her ability to effectively safeguard classified information, with respect to sufficiency of proof of a rational connection, objective or direct evidence is not required.

Then, the Applicant must remove that doubt with substantial evidence in refutation, explanation, mitigation or extenuation, which demonstrates that the past disqualifying conduct, is unlikely to be repeated, and that the Applicant presently qualifies for a security clearance.

An individual who demonstrates a foreign preference, or who is subject to a foreign influence, may be prone to provide information or make decisions that are harmful to the interests of the United States. The Government must be able to place a high degree of confidence in a security clearance holder to abide by all security rules and regulations, at all times and in all places.

CONCLUSION

When the Applicant became a U.S. citizen in 1995, she renounced her Iranian citizenship. She retained her Iranian passport, however, and used it to travel to Iran in 2000 and 2001. The second disqualifying condition is therefore applicable, as there was "[p]ossession and/or use of a foreign passport." As her parents have now immigrated to the U.S., she no longer has any intention of visiting Iran, and more than a year ago she surrendered her Iranian passport. She has thus complied with the Money Memorandum, which requires that an Applicant surrender her foreign passport. Guideline C is therefore found in her favor.

The Applicant's brother and in-laws are citizens of and live in Iran. The second disqualifying condition is therefore applicable as "[a]nimmediate family member . . . is a citizen of . . . a foreign country." Her brother works for a private bank, and her in-laws are farmers. Her brother will soon be immigrating to the U.S., and she has little contact with her agrarian in-laws. None of the Applicant's immediate family are presently connected with any government, and there is no evidence that their presence in Iran can be exploited by any government. In addition, I conclude that it would be unlikely that the Applicant would even consider any such attempt at exploitation. The first mitigation condition is therefore applicable as "the immediate family members . . . are not agents of a foreign power or in a position to be exploited by a foreign power in a way that could force the individual to choose between loyalty to the persons involved and the United States." Guideline B is also found in the Applicant's favor.

Considering all the evidence, the Applicant has rebutted the Government's case regarding her alleged foreign preference, and foreign influence. The Applicant has thus met the mitigating conditions of Guidelines B and C, and of Section E.2.2. of the Directive. Accordingly, she has met her ultimate burden of persuasion under Guidelines B and C.

FORMAL FINDINGS

Formal Findings required by paragraph 25 of Enclosure 3 of the Directive are:

Paragraph 1: FOR THE APPLICANT

a. For the Applicant.

b. For the Applicant.

c. For the Applicant.

d. For the Applicant.

e. For the Applicant. Paragraph 2: FOR THE APPLICANT

a. For the Applicant.

b. For the Applicant.

Factual support and reasons for the foregoing are set forth in FINDINGS OF FACT and CONCLUSIONS, supra.

DECISION

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

Richard A. Cefola

Administrative Judge

FOOTNOTES

03-10198.h1 FOR GOVERNMENT Edward W. Loughran, Esquire, Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Patricia G. Gittelson, Esquire, Applicant's Counsel file:///usr.osd.mil/...Computer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/03-10198.h1.html[6/24/2021 3:17:24 PM] 03-10198.h1