Loading case…

Summary

A senior project manager at a major defense company, who is a dual citizen of the U.S. and Israel, was granted a security clearance. The applicant had lived in Israel from 1993 to 1995 for cultural and religious reasons and held an Israeli passport that expired in 2000 and was not renewed. While he stated he would bear arms for Israel if required, he affirmed he would never do so against the United States. The judge determined that the applicant's connections to Israel did not pose an unacceptable risk of foreign preference, noting he had not visited Israel since 1995 and had no intention of returning to live there.

Concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations) arose from an undisclosed state tax lien filed in August 1998. The applicant explained that his failure to pay 1993 amended state taxes was due to lack of work while in Israel and in 1995 and 1996, and that he needed funds from a house sale for his family. He later learned of the lien, which was apparently satisfied by the state's seizure of an investment account. The lien expired in March 2004 and was released of record in November 2004. The judge found the lien moot, concluding that the applicant's detailed explanation and credit report mitigated any financial concerns.

Finally, no personal conduct issues under Guideline E were found. The applicant's omissions regarding the tax lien were attributed to the state tax authority's failures, rather than intentional misrepresentation. Based on these findings, the security clearance was granted.

Why the applicant prevailed

• Applicant's connections to Israel were not deemed to indicate an unacceptable risk of foreign preference under Guideline C.
• Financial concerns related to a state tax lien were mitigated by the applicant's good faith efforts to resolve the issue and current financial stability.
• No personal conduct issues were found to exist, as the applicant's omissions were attributed to the state tax authority's failures.

Conditions referenced

Key rule quoted

“"A security clearance decision is intended to resolve whether it is clearly consistent with the national interest for an Applicant to either receive or continue to have access to classified information."”

Procedural posture

• SOR issuedAug 19, 2004
• Answer filedSep 10, 2004Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
• Hearing held—No hearing; decided on written record.
• Decision dateMar 10, 2005

Cite for

• Mitigation of Foreign Preference Concerns Under Guideline C
• Resolution of Financial Obligations Under Guideline F
• Consideration of Personal Conduct Issues Under Guideline E