Skip to main content

Issue Encyclopedia · Guideline M · IT Systems

Unauthorized Use of an IT System

What the decided record shows for this issue, computed from public DOHA hearing-level decisions. Descriptive history, never a prediction.

Decided cases
99
verified hearing-level decisions
Granted
33%
33 granted · 66 denied or revoked

Official mitigating conditions in play

The formal mitigating conditions (by official paragraph) that case profiles identified on this issue, in cases that were granted vs denied. Extracted for a subset of cases; counts are cases, not percentages of everything. Read what each condition says.

ConditionIn granted casesIn denied cases
¶ 41(a)234

What judges credited in granted cases

Specific circumstances the judge expressly credited, among the granted cases on this issue where that detail was extracted (a subset of the record, so these are raw counts, not rates).

  • rehabilitation · credited in 1 granted case

Recent decided examples

  • ISCR 18-00557 granted · 2020
    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
  • ISCR 19-02740 granted · 2021
    The applicant in this case was a 55-year-old individual with a long history in engineering and prior security clearance, who faced allegations under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline M (Use
  • ISCR 17-03051 denied · 2019
    The applicant in this case was a 63-year-old contracts manager for a defense contractor, who had previously held a Department of Defense (DOD) security clearance for 30 years. The Department of Defens
  • ISCR 18-01639 denied · 2019
    The applicant in this case was a 38-year-old employee of a defense contractor who had been employed since November 2016. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security c

See all 99 decisions on this issue →

Wondering how this issue plays against your own facts? Ask the assistant, or get a written, human-reviewed response through Answers. Descriptive research only: not legal advice or a prediction.