ÿWPC™ òGl¿¶T/²r…L< RmEŸ‰ƒ©MãöÖ‚e…âm²4oLýyÅVÑe²<-HŽóû] ÄÐ?šp6Ç›ÚMu}=¹x<ãÏaúj¨/ùª$“fÊÅíµD…œÖ øÆyåÅÂ.9uˆ{N˜¤‡C‹ªpË|÷dš‘†ÞóH¾·E?Û¹@±g²mÔ²33Oèþbcô‰5ô ‡Ýv/Mk'Òrv†%´†Í³hÞtѪ±¥Ô"Ùlj+{–ÝÉqzõ­5&êAÑáÓÿcŠË×DØH…ßYxc1w‘«Œ_Ø…|õàУbbÆË‰«8àœÉ‚™/²ÒŠ®"Y°m‡ÑÅ:·ïÅޣЬÿ¤« Ò G½ÆòÓ#§œÂŸF¾²4«²h#ý“G G|b½‡Óæ!XW :l;DGÌJ|î²—–$>†õ‹ˆ!÷ÇçÌ~ü•´¬² ‘ÄŽí}7Óô2ôœ«Ù¸ÎWƒ¼GâÇy¯ÁoN X–…ø³EÓ éUÈ3…m[nÄ2Ô®æ".ÈétÖi¹Ëz|($ÐïöF‚¿³¯XmcÖëÉ9(û¿¾ß4dч!Nlôk¨e¾W#ÉÂUN‹ %Ù 0:ß àZ ^ s w 4ƒ — ¦ m¨ N¿ NÁ àZà b E! 0©# lÌ 0D8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 B|˜Hewlett-Packard HP LaserJet P3010 SeriesÈÈÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,Ô8DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUEXmJ•'6 Ðâ âNovember€30,€2016,€after€the€hearing,€Defense€Office€of€Hearings€and€Appeals€(DOHA)Ð Ú,*(7 ÐAdministrative€Judge€Juan€J.€Rivera€denied€Applicantððs€request€for€a€security€clearance.€€ApplicantÐ ° Ðappealed€pursuant€to€Directive€ðððð€E3.1.28€and€E3.1.30.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àApplicant€raised€the€following€issues€on€appeal:€whether€the€Judgeððs€findings€containedÐ tÄ Ðerrors€and€whether€the€Judgeððs€adverse€decision€was€arbitrary,€capricious,€or€contrary€to€law.€Ð `° ÐConsistent€with€the€following,€we€affirm.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àò òThe€Judgeððs€Findings€of€Factó óÐ $ t ÐÌà  àApplicant€works€for€a€Defense€contractor.€€She€received€a€bachelorððs€degree€in€China€and€isÐ ü L  Ðpursuing€a€masterððs€in€the€U.S.€€Her€husband€came€to€the€U.S.€in€the€early€1990s.€€About€a€decadeÐ è 8  Ðlater€he€visited€China,€where€he€met€Applicant.€€In€the€mid„2000s,€Applicant€came€to€the€U.S.€asÐ Ô$  Ðwell.€€She€and€her€husband€have€two€children,€both€of€whom€were€born€in€this€country.€€ApplicantÐ À  Ðhas€retirement€accounts€in€the€U.S.€and€has€no€financial€or€property€interests€in€China.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àApplicantððs€parents€are€citizens€and€residents€of€China.€€Retired,€they€own€twoÐ „Ô  Ðcondominiums€there.€€Applicant€speaks€with€them€two€to€four€times€a€month.€€Applicantððs€parentsÐ pÀ Ðare€generally€aware€of€the€kind€of€work€she€does.€€Applicant€has€no€siblings€and€has€maintained€noÐ \¬ Ðcontact€with€friends€from€college.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àApplicant€traveled€to€China€in€2009,€2010,€2012,€2014,€and€2016.€€Her€parents€visited€herÐ  p Ðthree€times€from€2009€to€2013.€€When€Applicant€acquired€U.S.€citizenship,€the€Chinese€governmentÐ  \ Ðrevoked€her€Chinese€passport€because€China€does€not€recognize€dual€citizenship.€€Applicant€enjoysÐ øH Ðan€excellent€reputation€for€her€duty€performance.€€A€witness,€a€relative€who€holds€security€clearance,Ð ä4 Ðstates€that€Applicant€has€stronger€ties€to€the€U.S.€than€to€China.€€Applicantððs€performance€appraisalÐ Ð  Ðevidences€important€contributions€to€her€employerððs€mission,€and,€in€2015,€she€received€a€jobÐ ¼  Ðpromotion.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àChina€is€one€of€the€most€aggressive€collectors€of€U.S.€economic€and€technologicalÐ €Ð Ðinformation.€€Chinaððs€attempts€to€acquire€U.S.€information€are€expected€to€constitute€a€growingÐ l¼ Ðthreat€to€this€countryððs€economic€security.€€Among€other€things,€China€uses€its€computer€networkÐ X ¨ Ðcapability€to€acquire€intelligence€that€could€benefit€its€defense€capability.€€It€is€able€to€acquire€usefulÐ D!” Ðinformation€under€the€aegis€of€civilian€research€and€development.€€The€Chinese€government€hasÐ 0"€  Ðconducted€large€scale€Ô_ÔcyberÔ_Ô€espionage€against€the€U.S.,€compromising€U.S.€computer€networks€ofÐ #l! Ðthe€DoD,€Defense€contractors,€and€private€entities.€€Chinaððs€most€effective€means€of€acquiringÐ $X" Ðintelligence€and€technology€are€Ô_ÔcyberÔ_Ô€espionage,€collection€by€Chinese€students,€scholars,€andÐ ô$D # Ðscientists€(whether€witting€or€unwitting),€joint€ventures,€and€foreign€cooperation.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àThe€U.S.€State€Department€has€reported€human€rights€abuses€in€China.€€Among€other€things,Ð ¸'#& Ðvisitors€to€China€may€be€subject€to€surveillance.€€Hotel€rooms,€cars,€telephones,€internet€usage,€etc.,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðmay€be€monitored.€Ð )à$( ÐÌ€€Ð h+¸&* ÐÐ T,¤'+ Ðà  àò òThe€Judgeððs€Analysisó óÐ ° ÐÌÔ_Ôà  àThe€Judge€concluded€that€Applicantððs€relationship€with€her€Chinese€parents€is€sufficientlyÐ ˆØ Ðclose€that€she€could€be€subject€to€foreign€influence€or€subjected€to€a€possible€conflict€of€interest.€€InÐ tÄ Ðevaluating€Applicantððs€case€for€mitigation,€the€Judge€cited€to€her€regular€and€frequent€contact€withÐ `° Ðher€parents,€both€electronically€and€through€travel.€€Though€acknowledging€that€there€is€no€evidenceÐ L œ Ðthat€the€Chinese€government€has€actually€tried€to€exert€pressure€on€Applicant€or€her€parents,€heÐ 8 ˆ Ðstated€that€her€family€could€become€targets€of€intelligence€agents.€€He€noted€evidence€of€ApplicantððsÐ $ t Ðstrong€ties€within€the€U.S.€€However,€he€concluded€that€Applicantððs€close€relationship€with€herÐ  ` Ðparents€and€their€awareness€of€the€general€nature€of€Applicantððs€work,€render€her€vulnerable€toÐ ü L  Ðcoercion.€€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àIn€the€whole„person€analysis,€the€Judge€stated€that€the€weight€of€the€record€evidence€militatedÐ À  Ðagainst€granting€Applicant€access€to€classified€information,€citing€to€her€closeness€to€her€parents€andÐ ¬ü  Ðher€frequent€visits€and€regular€communications€with€them.€€Though€not€questioning€ApplicantððsÐ ˜è  Ðpatriotism,€he€concluded€that€she€could€be€placed€in€a€position€of€having€to€choose€between€her€tiesÐ „Ô  Ðin€the€U.S.€and€those€in€China.€€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àò òDiscussionó óÐ H˜ ÐÌà  àApplicant€argues€that€the€Judge€overstated€the€frequency€of€her€travel€to€China.€€However,Ð  p Ðhis€findings€about€Applicantððs€travels€to€that€country€and€her€parentsðð€visits€in€the€U.S.€are€consistentÐ  \ Ðwith€her€testimony€at€the€hearing,€statements€in€her€security€clearance€application,€and€her€AnswerÐ øH Ðto€the€SOR.€€Tr.€at€51„52,€57„58;€SCA€at€29„43;€SOR€Answer,€dated€October€6,€2015.€€We€concludeÐ ä4 Ðthat€the€challenged€finding€is€based€upon€substantial€record€evidence.€€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€ISCR€Case€No.€15„Ð Ð  Ð01285€at€3€(App.€Bd.€Dec.€22,€2016).€€€Applicant€argues€that€the€Judge€failed€to€consider€significantÐ ¼  Ðevidence€of€her€loyalties€and€relationships€in€the€U.S.€€She€states€that€he€did€not€weigh€her€familyÐ ¨ø Ðconnections€in€this€country,€denying€that€she€could€be€subjected€to€a€conflict€of€interest.€€She€arguesÐ ”ä Ðthat€her€communications€with€her€parents€are€casual€and€that€her€visits€to€China€are€solely€of€aÐ €Ð Ðpersonal,€rather€than€official,€nature,€lessening€the€likelihood€that€she€could€be€subjected€to€foreignÐ l¼ Ðcoercion.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àIn€Foreign€Influence€cases,€the€nature€of€the€foreign€government€involved€and€the€intelligenceÐ 0"€  Ðgathering€history€of€that€government€are€among€the€important€considerations€that€provide€contextÐ #l! Ðfor€the€other€record€evidence€and€must€be€brought€to€bear€on€the€Judgeððs€ultimate€conclusions€in€theÐ $X" Ðcase.€€The€countryððs€human€rights€record€is€another€important€consideration.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€ISCR€CaseÐ ô$D # ÐNo.€05„03250€at€4„5€(App.€Bd.€Apr.€6,€2007);€ISCR€Case€No.€04„11463€at€4€(App.€Bd.€Aug.€4,Ð à%0!$ Ð2006).€€There€is€a€rational€connection€between€an€applicantððs€family€ties€in€a€country€whose€interestsÐ Ì&"% Ðare€adverse€to€the€United€States€and€the€risk€that€the€applicant€might€fail€to€protect€and€safeguardÐ ¸'#& Ðclassified€information.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€ISCR€Case€No.€10„07436€at€3,€n.€4€(App.€Bd.€Oct.€19,€2011).Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àWe€note€record€evidence€and€the€Judgeððs€findings€of€the€following:€€Applicantððs€parentsÐ |*Ì%) Ðreside€in€China;€Applicant€communicates€with€them€frequently;€Applicant€has€visited€them€or€theyÐ h+¸&* Ðher€on€a€regular€basis;€Applicantððs€parents€are€aware€of€the€location€and€general€nature€of€her€work;€Ð T,¤'+ ÐChina€practices€espionage€against€the€U.S.;€and€China€has€used€its€cyber„espionage€capability€toÐ ° Ðcompromise€DoD€and€contractor€computer€systems.€€This€evidence€supports€the€Judgeððs€conclusionÐ œì Ðthat€Applicantððs€parents€could€become€a€means€through€which€Applicant€could€come€to€the€attentionÐ ˆØ Ðof€Chinese€intelligence€personnel€and€be€subjected€to€coercion€or€pressure.€€The€Judge€discussedÐ tÄ ÐApplicantððs€ties€within€the€U.S.€and€gave€partial€applicability€to€Mitigating€Condition€8(b).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€TheÐ `° ÐJudgeððs€pertinent€analysis€explaining€why€the€ties€in€the€U.S.€do€not€fully€mitigate€the€risks€posedÐ L œ Ðby€the€presence€of€Applicantððs€parents€in€China€is€sustainable.€€Applicantððs€arguments,€viewed€asÐ 8 ˆ Ða€whole,€are€not€sufficient€to€rebut€the€presumption€that€the€Judge€considered€all€of€the€evidence€inÐ $ t Ðthe€record.€€€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€ISCR€Case€No.€15„02040€at€2€(App.€Bd.€Feb.€14,€2017).€€Neither€are€theyÐ  ` Ðsufficient€to€show€that€the€Judge€weighed€the€evidence€in€a€manner€that€was€arbitrary,€capricious,Ð ü L  Ðor€contrary€to€law.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€ISCR€Case€No.€15„08842€at€3€(App.€Bd.€Feb.€14,€2017).Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àThe€Judge€examined€the€relevant€evidence€and€articulated€a€satisfactory€explanation€for€theÐ À  Ðdecision.€€The€decision€is€sustainable€on€this€record.€€ð ðThe€general€standard€is€that€a€clearance€mayÐ ¬ü  Ðbe€granted€only€when€ððclearly€consistent€with€the€interests€of€the€national€security.ðððð€€òòDepartmentÐ ˜è  Ðof€the€Navy€v.€Eganóó,€484€U.S.€518,€528€(1988).€€òòSee€alsoóó€Directive,€Enclosure€2€ðð€2(b):€€ð ðAny€doubtÐ „Ô  Ðconcerning€personnel€being€considered€for€access€to€classified€information€will€be€resolved€in€favorÐ pÀ Ðof€the€national€security.ððÐ \¬ ÐÌà@ââ(ìàò òOrderó óˆÐ 4„ ÐÌà  àThe€Decision€is€ò òAFFIRMEDó ó.€€€€€€Ð  \ ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àòòSigned:€Michael€Raððanan€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ À Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àMichael€RaððananÐ ¬ü Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àAdministrative€JudgeÐ ˜è Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àChairperson,€Appeal€BoardÐ „Ô ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àòòSigned:€James€E.€Moody€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ 4"„  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àJames€E.€MoodyÐ  #p! Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àAdministrative€JudgeÐ  $\" Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àMember,€Appeal€BoardÐ ø$H # ÐÌÌÐ ¼' #& Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àòòSigned:€James€F.€Duffy€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ ° Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àJames€F.€DuffyÐ œì Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àAdministrative€JudgeÐ ˆØ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àMember,€Appeal€BoardÐ tÄ Ð