Security Clearance Denial and Revocation
Time frames posted for security reviews can be deceiving. A decision on your security clearance application could be issued within six to eight months, or it may take much longer. You are really not the priority of your Security Office; the priority is ensuring the filling or maintenance of a particular position, contract slot, or billet does not lead to an unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Depending upon the level of clearance, the amount of investigation required, and the agency’s backlog, however, this may take longer.
A security review does not decide whether you are a ‘good’ person or deserve ‘a second chance.’ It is a hard-nosed, blunt assessment as to whether you are fit to serve in the classified workspace. It is a determination of whether you are worthy of being in an elite cadre of people.
But persistence is also valued. Someone deemed not to be eligible for access to classified information at one point, may be eligible a few years later. And, a denial is not final until the matter has been heard.
In the event your security clearance application is denied, or your security clearance is revoked or suspended, you will be issued a Notice with a Statement of Reasons (SOR). The SOR outlines the specific reasons, disqualifiers, or areas of concern underlying the decision.
You will also be issued information regarding your right to appeal your security clearance denial, and procedural guidance for doing so. Once notified of the government’s intention to deny your clearance, you must respond by the deadline—typically 30 days for military and civilian employees, 15 days for Contractor personnel—lest your eligibility be revoked or your clearance denied.
Your appeal should not only thoroughly mitigate any derogatory information, but also cite relevant legal precedents. You also need to take to heart that the ‘appearance’ of your appeal is important. Attention to detail is valued in the classified workspace. Opinions are nice; facts win cases. Respondents not understanding the difference between facts and opinions are noted in the adjudication process. Format matters. If your tone is informal, and your grammar and punctuation lacking, Security will take note.
In addition to the list of conditions used to disqualify applicants, the adjudicative guidelines also include a list of conditions used to alleviate security concerns and, ultimately, grant you access to a clearance. These mitigating factors differ depending on the reasons for denial or revocation, but can relate to infrequency of the act, the completion of counseling programs related to the disqualifying factor, or length of time lapsed.
Each individual’s situation is unique and requires a thorough review of the circumstances specific to your case. There are a host of mitigating factors that could prove your eligibility for access to classified information and ultimately grant you a security clearance.
Common Reasons for Security Clearance Denial and Revocation
Why would a candidate be denied a clearance? Likewise, why would a current employee’s clearance be revoked? The following list describes areas of issue that may merit mitigation during investigation. It is both permitted and wise to consult a security clearance attorney throughout the application and appeals process to 1. help determine if you have any mitigating factors, and 2. strategically contextualize them in a manner compelling to adjudicators.
Failure to Provide Complete and Truthful Responses or Withholding Information
No guideline issue is by itself automatically disqualifying. However, Guideline E, “Personal Conduct,” can be especially tricky to mitigate. This difficulty is compounded considerably when it results from attempting to conceal or failing to disclose information, or refusing to answer questions fully, frankly, and truthfully at any point in the adjudicative process.
Additionally, while self-reporting has always been a requirement for security clearance holders, it is even more pressing with Continuous Vetting (CV) in place. The failure to self-report potential guideline issues can result in adverse determinations under Guideline E that were more damaging than the original issue itself. You must continue to demonstrate sound judgment, trustworthiness, candor, and your willingness to comply with security procedures during and after the application process, for the duration of your career in a sensitive field.
Drug Use and Alcohol Misuse
Throughout the investigation, and on the PVQ, you will be asked about any previous or current drug use or involvement. Lots of clearance holders have abused substances and been involved with drugs; very few clearance holders have lied about the same. It is important to be completely honest in detailing past use, including the abuse of prescription and non-prescription drugs, as well as the consumption, purchase or selling of illegal drugs. Any illegal drug use while you hold an active security clearance—including any marijuana use—puts your clearance in jeopardy.
Despite state laws, marijuana is an illegal, Schedule 1 substance in the eyes of the federal government. Denials related to marijuana have been increasing steadily since 2022. In 2024, Guideline H (“Drug Involvement”), was the second most common issue. Such denials commonly result from undisclosed marijuana use, whether medical or recreational, and/or stated intention to continue using marijuana in states where it is legalized.
Alcohol is federally legal, but indications of irresponsible or abusive consumption (e.g., DUIs, public intoxication, etc.) are cause for concern. The same holds true for prescription drugs: using medications in a way not prescribed by your doctor can raise concerns about your reliability and good judgment.
Denials due to violations of Guideline H (“Drug Involvement”) and Guideline G (“Alcohol Consumption”) are common: both initially and after appeal. However, with careful mitigation and strategically compiled evidence, it is possible for some with past drug or marijuana use, and/or alcohol misuse to obtain a security clearance.
Financial issues: Debt, Affluence, & Gambling Addiction
Many clearance holders have no revolving debt; they keep their credit card balances at “0” on a monthly basis. More than $12,000 in credit card debt can trigger investigation.
Financial issues are the most common reason for security clearance denials and revocations. Three financial issues present a red flag: debt, affluence, and gambling addiction. Apart from making you vulnerable to coercion, failing to meet financial obligations flags additional character concerns. Delinquent debt, failing to file taxes, or failing to live within your means may indicate poor judgment as well as a failure to follow rules more generally.
Almost every American has some form of debt, whether student loans or mortgages. Debt is not disqualifying in itself. Delinquent debt is more concerning than debt toward which you have been reliably making payments. Both applicants and cleared professionals can find themselves financially underwater. Filing for bankruptcy could jeopardize your security clearance, but it can also be mitigated.
Any sudden influx of money or purchase of goods/services beyond your presumed means is subject to scrutiny. Signs of excessive betting or gambling addiction will be investigated. Mobile sports betting has made gambling both readily accessible and socially accepted. Gambling may be legal, but—like alcohol use—patterns of compulsive or destructive behavior are grounds for denial or revocation.
Financial red flags require careful mitigation. The most effective mitigation strategy will depend upon the severity, nature, and timeline involved. It is important to be proactive: the ability to demonstrate positive trends in repayment, seeking counseling/treatment for addiction, and proof of extenuating circumstances can make all the difference.
Foreign Influence and Relationships with Foreign Nationals
We are well into the internet age, and plenty of people have foreign contacts or relationships. Such foreign ties will not necessarily result in denial or revocation under Guideline B (“Foreign Influence”) or Guideline C (“Foreign Preference”). However, investigators will scrutinize any international relationship: personal, professional, and financial.
Your foreign contact liability occurs in three ‘hops’: you are reviewed, your contacts are reviewed (1); your contacts’ contacts are reviewed (2); and your contacts’ contacts’ contacts (3) are reviewed. This link analysis will attach to you people you do not even know. The list is long, and it is processed to find people who are on watch lists, who are foreign officials, and other people who may use you to leverage classified information from the United States Government. In many cases, a problematic person can be at the outer limit of your link analysis and Security will let it go, but they will watch even as you are granted a clearance.
It is paramount that all foreign information, including travel, be accurately disclosed to determine allegiance to the U.S. and mitigate any concern over your potential susceptibility to foreign control and influence. For those who have many foreign relationships or investments (or work for a company that does), a compelling package of mitigating factors will be needed to obtain clearance.
Today, dual citizenship is not automatically disqualifying. However, in dual citizenship cases, it is advisable to consult an experienced attorney to establish an effective strategy. But while you can have dual citizenship, you cannot have dual loyalties. If you make common ground with an Enemy of the State, you will be treated as a denizen of that Enemy. Your loyalty will be questioned.
Technology Misuse and Illegally Downloaded or Pirated Material
Guideline M (“Use of Information Technology”) does not only concern classified or sensitive material. The downloading, use, or dissemination of pirated music, movies, television shows, books or software is taken very seriously by the government. Also, use of employer computers to view or download pornographic material may trigger allegations under criminal conduct (Guideline J), personal conduct (Guideline E), and sexual behavior guidelines (Guideline D).
The mishandling of sensitive or classified information at previous jobs calls your ability to handle any sensitive material into question with the government. While there is no clear threshold at which one’s amount of illegal downloads becomes “disqualifying” under Guideline M, it is very important to be honest throughout the investigation process. More importantly, now that you are aware of the seriousness of downloading illegal materials, avoid any illegal downloads in the future.
Sexual Behavior
The Federal government is not interested in your morals. Why does the government investigate sex? Typically, the underlying concerns are your vulnerability to coercion, compulsion, and criminality. Red flags raised under Guideline D (“Sexual Behavior”) will be thoroughly investigated, including but not limited to extramarital affairs, criminal sex acts, hiring a prostitute, and exchanging money, goods, and/or services for sexual favors. As long as it is private, consensual, and not criminal, you should do fine.
Sexual orientation should not disqualify you from security clearance eligibility. Any discriminatory conduct by deciding officials may be utilized during the clearance appeals process in your favor. It is highly advisable to seek the counsel of a qualified attorney if you believe you are experiencing discrimination on the basis of your sexual orientation.
Mitigating Guideline D allegations can be complex, but it is possible. Self-reporting, establishing positive behavioral trends over time, and proactively taking steps to prevent future mistakes (such as additional training) are potentially mitigating conditions.
