Skip to content
← The Issue Encyclopedia

Issue Encyclopedia · Guideline M · IT Systems

Unauthorized Modification, Destruction, or Denial of Access

What the decided record shows for this issue, computed from public DOHA hearing-level decisions. Descriptive history, not a prediction.

Does unauthorized modification, destruction, or denial of access affect a security clearance?

Unauthorized Modification, Destruction, or Denial of Access is an issue decided under Guideline M, IT Systems. In the decided DOHA record it appears in 40 hearing-level cases, and 20% of the 40 decided ended with access granted (8 granted, 32 denied). The mitigating conditions judges credited most often, and example decisions either way, are below.

Basis: 40 decided hearing-level cases raising this issue. Descriptive history of decided cases, not a prediction.

More questions people ask the record

Decided cases

40

hearing-level decisions raising this issue

Granted

20%

8 granted · 32 denied or revoked

Official mitigating conditions cited

The formal mitigating conditions the case profiles identified on this issue, in cases that were granted and in cases that were denied. Each is shown with its paragraph number and a plain name. Read what each condition says.
  • ¶ 41(a) · So long ago, or so unusual, that it is unlikely to recur

    In granted cases
    5
    In denied cases
    2

Recent decided examples

  • The applicant in this case was a 41-year-old director of engineering employed by a defense contractor since 2003, seeking to reinstate his security clearance to enhance his position. The Defense Count…

  • The applicant in this case was a 45-year-old information technology support specialist who sought a security clearance to work in the defense industry. The Department of Defense (DoD) issued a Stateme…

  • The applicant in this case was a 26-year-old female who had previously served in the U.S. Air Force and was seeking a security clearance. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency issued a S…

  • The applicant in this case was a 67-year-old consulting chief engineer employed by a defense contractor since 2005. He held multiple advanced degrees and had a history of security clearance eligibilit…

See all 40 decisions on this issue

Related issues under Guideline M

How these numbers are measured

Scope: decided hearing-level cases whose per-allegation profile records this issue, matched to the same issue value the search filters use, so a count here and a filtered search always agree. A case raising several issues counts under each one. The mitigating conditions and the credited circumstances below were extracted for a subset of the record, so both are counts of cases rather than rates. Pages exist only for issues with at least 25 decided cases, and † marks any split built on fewer than 20.

Reading the statistics

  • Granted = access granted or continued; Denied = denied or revoked.
  • Grant rate = granted ÷ (granted + denied).
  • † marks figures based on fewer than 20 cases, too few to be reliable.
  • Hovering any rate shows its statistical range (a 95% confidence interval).
  • Figures are descriptive counts over decided, public DOHA ISCR decisions, never predictions or assessments of any pending case.

Where to go from here

Get help with my case

Send us your question, or the Statement of Reasons you received. No charge, and a CASE analyst reads it. Usually five to ten business days.

Ask a question →

I do this for clients

Rank every decision by how closely it matches a matter, see how the assigned judge has ruled, and keep it together with cited exports.

For attorneys and firms →

Decided public cases: descriptive, never a prediction.