Issue Encyclopedia · Guideline K · Handling Protected Info
Unspecified Information Handling Failure
Does unspecified information handling failure affect a security clearance?
Basis: 115 decided hearing-level cases raising this issue. Descriptive history of decided cases, not a prediction.
Decided cases
116
hearing-level decisions raising this issue
Granted
57%
66 granted · 49 denied or revoked
Official mitigating conditions cited
| Condition | In granted cases | In denied cases |
|---|---|---|
| ¶ 35(a) · So long ago, so infrequent, or so unusual that it is unlikely to recur | 10 | 2 |
| ¶ 35(b) · A favorable response to counseling or remedial security training | 10 | 1 |
| ¶ 35(d) · Inadvertent, promptly reported, with no evidence of compromise | 7 | 1 |
¶ 35(a) · So long ago, so infrequent, or so unusual that it is unlikely to recur
- In granted cases
- 10
- In denied cases
- 2
¶ 35(b) · A favorable response to counseling or remedial security training
- In granted cases
- 10
- In denied cases
- 1
¶ 35(d) · Inadvertent, promptly reported, with no evidence of compromise
- In granted cases
- 7
- In denied cases
- 1
Recent decided examples
The applicant, who has worked in security roles since 2008, faced allegations under Guideline K for mishandling classified information. The incidents included failing to secure classified areas and im…
The applicant in this case was a 72-year-old retired U.S. military officer who had held various security clearances throughout his career. The Department of Defense's Defense Office of Hearings and Ap…
Applicant, a cybersecurity lead with longstanding clearance access, was denied eligibility under Guideline K. The judge found the government proved multiple protected-information handling problems, in…
The applicant in this case was a 44-year-old individual who had served in the U.S. Air Force and was employed as an industrial security representative with a Department of Defense contractor. The Defe…
Related issues under Guideline K
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.