Skip to content
← The Issue Encyclopedia

Issue Encyclopedia · Guideline E · Personal Conduct

Unspecified Personal Conduct

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

Does unspecified personal conduct affect a security clearance?

Unspecified Personal Conduct is an issue decided under Guideline E, Personal Conduct. In the decided DOHA record it appears in 2,993 hearing-level cases, and 26% of the 2,982 decided ended with access granted (788 granted, 2,194 denied). The mitigating conditions judges credited most often, and example decisions either way, are below.

Basis: 2,982 decided hearing-level cases raising this issue. Descriptive history of decided cases, not a prediction.

More questions people ask the record

Decided cases

2,993

hearing-level decisions raising this issue

Granted

26%

788 granted · 2,194 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.
  • ¶ 17(c) · Minor, long ago, infrequent, or under unique circumstances

    In granted cases
    31
    In denied cases
    9
  • ¶ 17(d) · The behavior acknowledged, with counseling or other positive steps

    In granted cases
    29
    In denied cases
    6
  • ¶ 17(e) · Steps taken to reduce vulnerability to pressure

    In granted cases
    20
    In denied cases
    4
  • ¶ 17(a) · A prompt, good-faith correction made before being confronted

    In granted cases
    8
    In denied cases
    7
  • ¶ 17(b) · The omission followed advice of counsel, and full cooperation followed

    In granted cases
    4
    In denied cases
    2

Recent decided examples

  • The applicant mitigated security concerns related to drug involvement, criminal conduct, and personal conduct. He demonstrated significant rehabilitation efforts, including participation in a veterans…

  • The case involves an applicant who submitted a security clearance application and faced allegations under Guideline I and E. The administrative judge found sufficient evidence to mitigate the concerns…

  • The applicant, a 70-year-old engineer, was denied security clearance due to unresolved security concerns under Guidelines E and J. He admitted to being terminated for bringing a handgun to work in Dec…

  • The applicant's security clearance was denied due to unresolved security concerns under Guidelines D, J, and E. The allegations included felony sexual assault on a minor, multiple criminal conduct cha…

See all 2,993 decisions on this issue

Related issues under Guideline E

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.