Summary
A 43-year-old software engineer for a defense contractor was denied a security clearance under Guideline B, Foreign Influence. The denial stemmed from his familial ties to the People's Republic of China (PRC), specifically that his mother, sister, and parents-in-law are all citizens and residents of the PRC. Additionally, the applicant maintained contact with associates in the PRC and had traveled to the country on four or more occasions since 1996.
The Statement of Reasons cited these relationships and contacts as disqualifying conditions. While the applicant had reduced his trips to the PRC, he did not provide sufficient evidence to mitigate the security concerns associated with his immediate family members being PRC citizens and residents.
Ultimately, the applicant's contacts with associates in the PRC were not deemed casual or infrequent enough to alleviate concerns. The decision concluded that the applicant failed to mitigate the risks posed by his foreign familial relationships, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- Applicant's immediate family members are citizens and residents of the PRC, raising security concerns.
- Applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to mitigate the risks associated with his familial ties to the PRC.
- The applicant's contacts with associates in the PRC were not characterized as casual or infrequent.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A2.1.2.1appliedForeign Influence Disqualifying ConditionAn immediate family member, or a person to whom the individual has close ties of affection or obligation, is a citizen of, or resident or present in, a foreign country.
- E2.A2.1.3.1rejectedForeign Interest Mitigating ConditionApplicant failed to present evidence that his immediate family members are not agents of a foreign power.
- E2.A2.1.3.3rejectedForeign Interest Mitigating ConditionApplicant's contact with foreign citizens was not shown to be casual and infrequent.
- E2.A2.1.3.4rejectedForeign Interest Mitigating ConditionApplicant did not promptly report all contacts with foreign citizens.
- E2.A2.1.3.2notedForeign Interest Mitigating Condition
- E2.A2.1.3.5notedForeign Interest Mitigating Condition
Key Rule Quoted
“the clearly consistent standard indicates that security clearance determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedNov 9, 2004
- Answer filedNov 29, 2004
- Hearing held—
- Decision dateMar 18, 2005
Cite For
- Security Risks Associated with Familial Ties to Foreign Nations Under Guideline B
- The Burden of Persuasion on the Applicant to Mitigate Security Concerns
- The Application of the Clearly Consistent Standard in Security Clearance Determinations