1 
 
                                                              
                        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
         DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS 
           
             
 
 
In the matter of: ) 
 ) 
  )  ISCR Case No. 17-04246 
 ) 
Applicant for Security Clearance ) 
 
 
Appearances 
 
For Government: Jeff A. Nagel, Esq., Department Counsel 
For Applicant: Pro se 
 
 
 
______________ 
 
Decision 
______________ 
 
 
LOUGHRAN, Edward W., Administrative Judge: 
 
On January 12, 2018, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a Statement of 
Reasons to Applicant detailing security concerns under Guideline B, foreign influence.1 
Applicant responded to the SOR on January 20, 2018, and requested a hearing before 
an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on May 8, 2018. The hearing 
was held as scheduled on July 10, 2018. On July 20, 2018, I proposed to the parties 
that this case was appropriate for a summary disposition in Applicant’s favor. 
Department Counsel did not object.  
 
 Applicant is a 56-year-old employee of a defense contractor. She was born in 
Egypt to Egyptian parents. She worked at the U.S. Embassy in Egypt and met a U.S. 
citizen who she married in 1993. She immigrated to the United States in 1993, and she 
became a U.S. citizen in 1998. She served in the U.S. military from 1994 until she was 
                                                          
1 This case is adjudicated under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within 
Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; DOD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security 
Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the adjudicative guidelines 
(AG), which became effective on June 8, 2017. 
 
2 
 
honorably discharged in 2004. Her husband passed away. She remarried another 
native-born U.S. citizen, but they divorced. She has a U.S.-citizen child. 
 
 Applicant’s parents and one of her siblings are deceased. She has six surviving 
siblings. One of her siblings is a U.S. citizen and resident. He holds a top secret security 
clearance. Another sibling is a citizen and resident of the United Kingdom. A third sibling 
lives in Canada. Applicant has three siblings who remain citizens and residents of 
Egypt. Her oldest sibling is retired and plans to join her daughter (Applicant’s niece) who 
has immigrated to the United States. One of Applicant’s siblings performs administrative 
work for the police in Egypt.  
 
 Applicant’s father gave land in Egypt to her before she immigrated to the United 
States. The current value of the land and house on the property is about $200,000. 
Applicant intends to sell the property because she does not plan to return to Egypt to 
live. She estimates her U.S. assets at $400,000. She credibly stated that she would not 
succumb to any attempt by a foreign government, intelligence or security service, or 
terrorist organization to blackmail or coerce her.   
 
I considered the totality of Applicant’s ties to Egypt. I also considered the nature 
of that government, its human rights record, and the risk of terrorism in that country. The 
disqualifying conditions under AG ¶¶ 7(a), 7(b), and 7(f) have been raised by the 
evidence. However, Applicant’s ties to Egypt are outweighed by her relationships and 
loyalties in the United States. I find that it is unlikely she will be placed in a position of 
having to choose between the interests of the United States and the interests of Egypt. 
There is no conflict of interest, because Applicant can be expected to resolve any 
conflict of interest in favor of the United States. The mitigating conditions under AG ¶¶ 
8(a), 8(b), and 8(f) are applicable.  
 
The concerns over Applicant’s foreign connections do not create doubt about her 
current reliability, trustworthiness, good judgment, and ability to protect classified 
information. In reaching this conclusion, I weighed the evidence as a whole and 
considered if the favorable evidence outweighed the unfavorable evidence. I also gave 
due consideration to the whole-person concept. Accordingly, I conclude that she met 
her ultimate burden of persuasion to show that it is clearly consistent with the national 
interest to grant her eligibility for access to classified information. This case is decided 
for Applicant.  
 
 
 
________________________ 
Edward W. Loughran 
Administrative Judge