CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 03-16995.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 03-16995.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-16995.h1

grantedJan 27, 2006· Hon. Joseph Testan· hearing

Summary

A 62-year-old defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence). The Statement of Reasons cited his wife's Russian citizenship as a disqualifying condition.

However, mitigating conditions were applied, leading to the favorable outcome. The applicant demonstrated that his wife is actively pursuing U.S. citizenship, which significantly reduced the government's foreign influence concerns. Crucially, there was no evidence presented to suggest that the applicant's wife was an agent of a foreign power.

Furthermore, the couple is undergoing divorce proceedings. The finalization of their divorce is expected to fully alleviate any remaining foreign influence concerns, as it will sever the ties that initially raised questions. Based on these factors, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's wife is pursuing U.S. citizenship, reducing foreign influence concerns.
There is no evidence that the applicant's wife is an agent of a foreign power.
The applicant has agreed to divorce, indicating a severing of ties that could lead to foreign influence.

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(s) Are Not Agents of a Foreign Power.

Key Rule Quoted

“Once the Government established that Disqualifying Condition E2.A2.1.2.1 is applicable, the burden shifted to applicant to show that Mitigating Condition E2.A2.1.3.1 applies to this case.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 8, 2004
Answer filedMar 8, 2005Applicant elected to have the case determined on a written record.
Hearing held—No hearing; case determined on written record.
Decision dateJan 27, 2006

Cite For

Foreign Influence Concerns Related to Immediate Family Members
Mitigating Conditions Regarding Family Members Not Being Agents of Foreign Powers
Impact of Divorce Proceedings on Security Clearance Eligibility

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 applicant's wife is a citizen of Russia, but they are currently undergoing divorce proceedings. The judge found that this situation mitigated the government's concerns regarding foreign influence, leading to a decision to grant the security clearance.

U.S. ties the decision noted: U.S. Children · Intent to Remain in U.S.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant's wife is a citizen of Russia.	For Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	Russia	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	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

SYNOPSIS

KEYWORD: Foreign Influence DIGEST: Applicant's wife is a citizen of Russia. They are in the midst of divorce proceedings, which when final, will remove the Government's concerns. Clearance is granted. CASENO: 03-16995.h1 DATE: 01/27/2006 DATE: January 27, 2006

In Re:

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

Applicant for Security Clearance

ISCR Case No. 03-16995

DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE JOSEPH TESTAN

APPEARANCES

SYNOPSIS

Applicant's wife is a citizen of Russia. They are in the midst of divorce proceedings, which when final, will remove the Government's concerns. Clearance is granted.

STATEMENT OF CASE

On December 8, 2004, 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 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 on March 8, 2005, and elected to have his case determined on a written record in lieu of a hearing. Department Counsel submitted the Government's written case (FORM) on or about March 30, 2005. Applicant filed a response to the FORM on June 14, 2005. The case was assigned to me on June 30, 2005.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Applicant is a 62 year old employee of a defense contractor. Since July 1996, he has resided in a foreign country (FC) while performing his duties for the defense contractor. In October 1998, while living in the FC, applicant met a Russian citizen living and working in the FC. They married in 2000 and lived together in the FC. Late in 2000, their daughter was born. The daughter is a United States citizen.

Applicant's mother-in-law lived with applicant and his wife in the FC until August 2004, at which time the mother-in- law moved back to Russia, and applicant's wife moved to the United States. She moved to the United States because she wanted to become a United States citizen. In September 2004, applicant and the daughter traveled to the United States. Applicant moved back to the FC while the daughter remained with the mother.

In May 2005 the wife told applicant she wanted a divorce. Applicant agreed to the request, and the paperwork for the uncontested divorce has been filed with the Court. Applicant states he will have no further contact with any of his wife's family.

In 2001, applicant traveled to Russia with his wife and daughter for a two week vacation.

CONCLUSION

The evidence establishes that applicant's wife is a Russian citizen. This fact requires application of Disqualifying Condition E2.A2.1.2.1 (an immediate family member is a citizen or resident of a foreign country).

Once the Government established that Disqualifying Condition E2.A2.1.2.1 is applicable, the burden shifted to applicant to show that Mitigating Condition E2.A2.1.3.1 (a determination that the immediate family member(s) . . . 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 person(s) involved and the United States) applies to this case. Applicant met his burden. There is no evidence that applicant's wife is a Russian agent, and given the facts that the wife lives in the United States with their daughter and has applied to become a United States citizen, she is not in

much of a position to be exploited by Russia in a way that could force applicant to choose between loyalty to the wife (assuming he still has any) and loyalty to the United States.

FORMAL FINDINGS

PARAGRAPH 1: 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

FOOTNOTES

FOR GOVERNMENT Ray T. Blank, Jr. Department Counsel file:///usr.osd.mil/...Computer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/03-16995.h1.htm[6/24/2021 3:26:53 PM] FOR APPLICANT Pro Se