You never expected your integrity to be called into question. Yet here you are – maybe you’ve received a Statement of Reasons (SOR) alleging “Guideline E: Personal Conduct” concerns, or an investigator raised red flags about your honesty or judgment. It’s a shocking, confusing, and downright frightening situation. You’re likely asking yourself, “Is one mistake going to end my career?” The thought of losing your security clearance – and with it, your job, livelihood, and reputation – is keeping you up at night.

The good news: it doesn’t have to be the end. Guideline E concerns can be addressed and mitigated with the right approach. At National Security Law Firm (NSLF), we help clients in your exact position every day. We understand the panic and uncertainty you’re feeling, and we know how to fight back so you can clear your name, protect your clearance, and move forward with confidence.

This comprehensive guide will explain what Guideline E is, why you might be facing it, how to mitigate these allegations, and how our team can help you achieve the best possible outcome.

What Is Guideline E: Personal Conduct?

Guideline E – Personal Conduct – is essentially a catch-all category used in security clearance decisions to evaluate your honesty, reliability, and judgment. Unlike other guidelines that focus on specific issues (like finances or foreign contacts), Guideline E looks at your overall trustworthiness as demonstrated by your conduct. The core concern is straightforward: Have you engaged in behavior that suggests questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and laws? If so, the government worries that you might not responsibly safeguard classified information.

In plain terms, Guideline E is about trust. You don’t have to be a criminal or a spy to trigger it – even seemingly minor lies or rule violations can raise big questions. In fact, personal conduct issues are one of the most common reasons clearances get denied or revoked, accounting for roughly 16% of clearance denials in recent years. Often, it’s not the underlying misstep itself, but the dishonesty or poor judgment surrounding it that creates a problem. As the official guidelines warn: “Of special interest is any failure to cooperate or provide truthful and candid answers during national security investigative or adjudicative processes.” In other words, a cover-up can be worse than the crime.

What kinds of actions fall under Guideline E? It covers a broad range of conduct, including:

  • Dishonesty or False Statements: Lying on security forms (especially the SF-86) or to investigators. Even a small omission or “white lie” on your clearance application can loom large.

  • Omissions of Required Information: Failing to disclose something important – like leaving out a past arrest, drug use, or firing – is treated similarly to an outright lie.

  • Failure to Follow Rules or Laws: This could be anything from violating your employer’s policies or security procedures to committing minor offenses. Even if not prosecuted, such behavior shows questionable judgment.

  • Pattern of Questionable Judgment: A series of small infractions (financial irresponsibility, fights, rule-breaking) can collectively become a concern, even if no single incident is disqualifying on its own.

  • Refusal to Cooperate with the Process: For example, declining to answer investigators’ questions, refusing a polygraph (when required), or otherwise not complying with the clearance process. This creates a presumption you’re hiding something.

  • Associating with Misconduct: Close involvement with people who are engaged in criminal or dishonest behavior can reflect poorly on your judgment. Likewise, vulnerability to coercion – if you’re hiding a personal secret that someone could use to blackmail you – also falls under Guideline E.

You don’t have to break the law to violate Guideline E. Sometimes a pattern of small missteps, or a single serious lapse in honesty, can be just as damaging as an actual crime when it comes to your clearance.

What Can Trigger a Guideline E Security Concern?

Because Guideline E covers so many types of personal conduct, it can be triggered by a variety of situations in your life. Some common examples include:

  • Lying or Omitting Facts on the SF-86: This is the classic Guideline E issue. Perhaps you thought an incident was too minor or too old to mention, or you were embarrassed to disclose something. If that information later comes out (and it usually does), it’s seen as an intentional falsification. For instance, not listing a past arrest or drug use, or hiding a foreign contact or job termination – any of these can result in an SOR citing Guideline E for false statements.

  • Being Fired or Disciplined (and Not Reporting It): If you were fired for cause from a job or significantly reprimanded (especially from a clearance-holding position) and you fail to report it on your clearance forms or to your security officer, that’s a red flag. Even if you do report it, the incident itself (e.g. being fired for misconduct, violence, or fraud) will raise personal conduct concerns that need to be mitigated by showing it was an isolated event and you learned from it.

  • Violation of Security Rules or Policies: Maybe you mishandled protected information, misused your work computer (for example, viewing inappropriate content on a government system), or otherwise violated workplace rules. If you tried to sweep it under the rug or didn’t promptly self-report, it can snowball into a Guideline E issue. The conduct might overlap with other guidelines (like Guideline K for security violations or Guideline M for IT misuse), but the attempt to hide it or the lapse in judgment can be cited under Guideline E.

  • Failure to Cooperate with an Investigation: This could involve refusing to answer a question in a clearance interview, not providing a required document, or walking out in the middle of a polygraph. Even asserting your Fifth Amendment rights in a clearance context can be problematic – since a clearance is a privilege, not a right, refusing to cooperate generally leads adjudicators to assume the worst. In short, if you don’t fully cooperate, they may conclude you have something to hide, triggering Guideline E.

  • Pattern of Unreliable Behavior: Perhaps no single incident stands out as “the big one,” but taken together, multiple smaller issues paint a picture of unreliability. For example, say in the past few years you had a couple of alcohol-related incidents (but no charges), a few late bill payments, and a reprimand at work for tardiness. Individually, each might fall under different categories (or be too minor), but collectively they might be cited under personal conduct as evidence of poor judgment or lack of responsibility. Guideline E can serve as a catch-all for patterns that don’t fit neatly elsewhere.

  • Associating with Bad Actors: If you maintain close ties to someone who is involved in crime or other misconduct (e.g. you’re best friends with a convicted felon and still hang out regularly), it could trigger Guideline E. The concern is that your judgment in friends is questionable or that their influence might drag you into trouble. (This is distinct from Guideline B (Foreign Influence) or others – it’s not about loyalty or foreign ties here, just plain old hanging out with the wrong crowd). Adjudicators will look at how close the association is and whether it indicates a potential for you to be influenced or compromised.

  • Breaking a Commitment or Rule to Get Your Clearance: In some cases, people are granted clearance on the condition that they do (or refrain from) something – for example, “you must discontinue contact with X” or “resolve these debts within 6 months.” If you violate a written commitment that you agreed to as a condition of holding the clearance, that violation itself will likely be cited under Guideline E. It shows a disregard for rules and agreements.

As you can see, these examples cover a wide spectrum – from lying on a form, to behavioral issues, to associations. It’s essentially anything not covered by a specific guideline that could call your judgment or honesty into question. It’s no wonder that receiving a Guideline E SOR can send a shockwave through your life; it feels like your character is under attack.

However, it’s critical to remember that allegations are not facts. The security clearance process gives you a chance to tell your side of the story and provide context. Many people facing Guideline E concerns are dealing with misunderstandings or lapses that look bad on paper but have explanations. For instance, you might have genuinely forgotten about that decades-old incident, or perhaps you believed you answered truthfully under a mistaken interpretation of a question. Maybe you were following legal advice when you initially refused to provide certain information. The point is: there are often two sides to every story, and you will have an opportunity to present yours.

How to Mitigate Guideline E Security Clearance Concerns

If you’ve been hit with a Guideline E concern, don’t lose hope. The adjudicative guidelines themselves list specific mitigating factors – essentially, conditions that, if true, can lessen the government’s fears and show that you are still trustworthy. In plain English, you need to demonstrate that whatever happened does not reflect a pattern of dishonesty or unreliability in you, and that it won’t happen again. Here are key mitigating circumstances and how you can leverage them to save your clearance:

  • Prove It Wasn’t Intentional: If a false statement or rule violation occurred, show that it wasn’t deliberate. Perhaps you genuinely misunderstood a question or forgot about an incident. Maybe you relied on advice from a security officer or attorney who told you it was okay not to disclose something. One official mitigating factor is if your failure to cooperate or disclose “was caused by improper or inadequate advice of authorized personnel” and, once you realized the issue, you fully cooperated thereafter. In practice, this means explaining the context: for example, “I answered ‘no’ to that question because I truly believed an expunged record didn’t count, and I wasn’t trying to hide it.” If you have any evidence of the advice you received or the confusion (emails, documents, witness statements), include those. The goal is to convince adjudicators that you did not set out to deceive.

  • You Came Clean Early (or Immediately Once Mistaken): It weighs in your favor if you self-reported the issue or corrected the record before it was discovered by investigators. Maybe you realized you made an error on your form and notified your security officer, or you voluntarily disclosed a misconduct incident to your supervisor. This proactive honesty shows integrity. Even if you didn’t catch it before they did, demonstrating that the moment you learned of the problem, you took responsibility and informed the authorities will help. For example, if you initially failed to list a foreign contact but later submitted an updated form or memo correcting it as soon as you remembered – that’s a mitigating fact. It flips the narrative from seeming like you intended to hide it, to showing it was an oversight you rectified.

  • Isolated Incident or Old News: Security adjudicators will consider how long ago the conduct happened, how frequently it happened, and whether it’s likely to recur. If what you did was a one-time lapse in judgment, or it happened many years in the past, emphasize that. A mitigating factor is that the offense is so minor or so old, or happened under such unique circumstances, that it “is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt” on your reliability. In practice, you’d want to say something like: “This incident occurred 8 years ago during a very difficult time in my life, and nothing remotely similar has ever happened again.” If you can show a track record of responsible behavior since then, that will reinforce the point that it was an anomaly.

  • Demonstrate Rehabilitation and Remorse: Own up to it. Acknowledge the mistake and show that you’ve learned from it. Adjudicators are human – they know people mess up. What they want to see is that you recognize the seriousness of what happened and have taken steps to ensure it won’t happen again. This could include things like: obtaining counseling or training (e.g. ethics training, substance abuse counseling if related, etc.), writing a sincere statement of remorse, and changed behavior moving forward. For example, if you had a pattern of rule-breaking, you might illustrate how you’ve since turned your life around (perhaps citing a period of clean discipline records, volunteer work, or other positive contributions). If the issue was lying on a form, you might describe how you now triple-check all security paperwork and would never take that risk again.

  • Show It’s Not Part of a Pattern: If the concern was triggered by a one-time event, hammer that point home. Provide evidence from your life that this was out of character. For instance, “I have worked in the defense industry for 10 years and have never had an integrity issue before or since this incident.” Include character reference letters if possible, especially from supervisors or colleagues who can attest to your honesty and reliability. If you have performance evaluations or awards that speak to your trustworthiness, those can help paint a picture of a “whole person” who is, overall, very responsible. The idea is to isolate the incident as a fluke rather than a symptom of who you are.

  • No Secrets = No Blackmail: If part of the concern is that you hid something (perhaps an embarrassing personal issue) that could make you vulnerable to coercion, you can mitigate this by making sure it’s no longer a secret. Essentially, eliminate the risk of blackmail. For example, if you concealed a past addiction or a personal issue out of shame, consider coming clean to the necessary people (like your spouse or employer, as appropriate) so that a foreign agent or malicious actor couldn’t hold it over you. In your response, you can then say: “I recognize I should have disclosed this. I have since informed [family/employer] of the situation, so I am not susceptible to coercion. There’s nothing anyone could threaten me with that my loved ones or bosses don’t already know about.” This transparency going forward helps neutralize the concern that you could be blackmailed due to the conduct.

  • Example – How Mitigation Works: Let’s bring this to life with a hypothetical scenario. Imagine a young analyst, “Alex,” who, a decade ago in college, got into a fistfight and was charged with a misdemeanor. It was expunged from his record after he completed a program, so when Alex later filled out his SF-86 for a security clearance, he omitted the incident, believing it didn’t count. Fast forward – Alex receives a Guideline E SOR for falsifying his form, since the investigation uncovered the old arrest. He’s mortified; he wasn’t trying to lie, he just thought expunged meant gone. To mitigate this, Alex gathers evidence and crafts a response showing that: (1) He truly misunderstood the question and had no intent to deceive (he might include court docs showing the expungement and perhaps an affidavit about his understanding at the time). (2) It was a one-time mistake from years ago – since then, Alex has a clean record and has been an exemplary employee. (3) He self-reported the moment he realized the issue – perhaps he immediately notified his security manager when the arrest came up. (4) Character references from his current supervisors vouch for his honesty and reliability. (5) He expresses remorse and lessons learned, explaining how he now knows to be fully transparent and will never assume “expunged” means he shouldn’t disclose. With this kind of thorough, honest response addressing every concern, Alex stands a strong chance of convincing the adjudicators that this omission was an innocent mistake, not a sign of persistent dishonesty. The takeaway: Guideline E concerns can be overcome with a well-documented, sincere response. By demonstrating honesty about the issue and highlighting all the positive evidence of your trustworthiness, you can turn things around.

Given what’s at stake – your clearance, career, and reputation – it’s wise to get experienced help in preparing your rebuttal. Crafting a compelling mitigation case under Guideline E is both an art and a science. You have to strike the right tone (accepting responsibility without volunteering for punishment), address every government concern with evidence, and present your life in the best possible light. This is exactly what we do every day at NSLF for our clients.

Our Pricing and Flexible Financing Options

We believe everyone should have access to top-notch legal help when their career is on the line, so we keep our pricing transparent and fair. In fact, we publish flat fees for all common security clearance services:

  • SF-86 Review & Consultation: $950

  • LOI (Letter of Interrogatory) Response: $3,500

  • SOR (Statement of Reasons) Response: $5,000 (with a $3,000 credit if you already paid for an LOI response)

  • Formal Hearing Representation: $7,500 (includes attorney travel costs)

These flat fees cover the work from start to finish for that stage of your case – no surprise bills, no hourly charges piling up. We know that upfront pricing is one less stress for you during an already stressful time.

We also offer legal financing through Pay Later by Affirm, allowing you to break payments into 3, 6, 12, or 24 monthly installments. It’s fast and easy to check your eligibility, and it won’t affect your credit score just to look at your payment options. This means you can get the legal help you need right away, and pay over time in a way that fits your budget. Many of our clients take advantage of this flexible financing so they can focus on their case, not the cost. (Visit our financing page for more details on how Affirm works – it’s straightforward and client-friendly.)

Bottom line: We don’t want financial worries to stand between you and the defense of your clearance. Your career is an investment worth protecting, and we’re committed to providing elite legal services at a clear, reasonable price.

Why Choose National Security Law Firm?

When it comes to defending your security clearance, you want the best team in your corner. We’ve become the go-to law firm for clearance matters nationwide. Here’s why clients trust us with their careers:

  • We’re Clearance Insiders: Our team includes former security clearance adjudicators, ex-DOHA government attorneys, former JAG military officers, and even a former U.S. Attorney. We’ve literally worked inside the agencies and military commands that decide clearance cases. This insider experience means we know exactly how the system works and how to navigate it. We know what arguments will resonate with adjudicators because some of us were adjudicators. That’s a powerful advantage you won’t find at general practice firms.

  • D.C. Expertise, Nationwide Reach: We operate at the heart of national security. Our firm is based in Washington, D.C. – the epicenter of security clearance proceedings – where many hearings and appeals take place. We’re in the mix every day, staying on top of the latest trends and decisions in clearance law. But don’t worry if you’re not local; we represent clients across the country and around the world. Whether you’re in Virginia, California, or stationed overseas, our team is equipped to help via secure communications, and we travel to wherever your hearing is scheduled (covered by our flat fee).

  • We’ve Worn Your Shoes: Most our attorneys hold security clearances. We have served in the military or government ourselves. That means we personally understand what it means to have your loyalty or honesty questioned after years of service. We approach each case with the care and urgency we’d want if we were the client. You won’t have to explain military lingo or the stress of the situation – we get it.

  • Team Strategy = Strong Strategy: When you hire NSLF, you’re not just getting one lawyer working in a vacuum. We take a team approach to tough cases. In fact, we regularly convene our internal Attorney Review Board – a panel of senior attorneys with diverse backgrounds – to brainstorm and pressure-test the defense strategy for our clients. You get the benefit of multiple expert minds collaborating on how best to mitigate your Guideline E concerns. It’s like having a special forces unit of clearance attorneys, rather than a lone soldier.

  • Resources to Strengthen Your Case: Some cases call for more than just legal arguments. We have a network of trusted experts and consultants to bolster your case if needed. This includes polygraph examiners, psychologists or counselors (for example, to provide evidence of rehabilitation or explain an isolated lapse in behavior), forensic finance experts, and more. Whatever the situation calls for, we can bring in the right support to present compelling evidence on your behalf.

  • Proven Results and Reputation: Our track record speaks for itself. We’ve helped hundreds of clients resolve clearance issues – including very difficult Guideline E cases – and get back to work with their clearance intact. We’re proud to have earned a 4.9-star rating in Google Reviews from the clients we’ve represented. These are real people whom we helped stay in the fight for their careers. When everything was on the line for them, we delivered. Their testimonials mention our knowledge, dedication, and the relief they felt having us on their side. That’s the level of service and success we strive to provide every client.

  • Client-Focused Service: High-stakes cases require high-touch support. We know you’re under immense stress, so we make it a point to be accessible and responsive.  We provide regular updates and are always ready to answer your questions. No being passed off to paralegals without oversight – your case is attorney-led. Our mission is not only to win your case, but also to make this process as smooth as possible for you. We handle the heavy lifting so you can focus on your job and family while we fight the clearance battle.

In short, NSLF offers unmatched expertise, insider knowledge, and a commitment to our clients that sets us apart. We don’t dabble in security clearances – we live and breathe them. When you choose us, you’re getting an elite team that will treat your case as if it were our own.

Additional Resources

Worried about other issues that could affect your clearance? We’ve got you covered. Be sure to visit our Security Clearance Resource Center on our website for a wealth of helpful resources. There, you can find articles on common mistakes that lead to clearance denial, step-by-step guides on how to win your case (from responding to SORs to excelling in your hearing), and deep dives into defenses and strategies for every type of security concern – from Guideline A (Allegiance) to Guideline M (Use of IT Systems) and everything in between. It’s essentially a one-stop hub for security clearance knowledge, designed to empower you with insight to avoid pitfalls and strengthen your position. We believe an informed client is an effective client, so we’ve put a lot of useful information at your fingertips.

You Have One Shot to Get This Right — Let’s Make It Count

Personal conduct concerns strike at the very heart of the trust the government places in you. When your honesty or judgment is questioned, everything is on the line – your clearance, your career, your future. The important thing to remember is that you have a chance to respond and tell your side, but you truly have one shot to get it right. It’s critical to make that one chance count.

Don’t risk your future by going it alone or waiting too long. As time passes, evidence can go stale, memories fade, and the investigators/adjudicators may be moving toward a decision. It’s far easier to mitigate concerns before a final denial than to appeal an already-made decision. Every day you wait is a day the government’s case against you goes unchallenged. On the other hand, acting swiftly and strategically can make all the difference in the outcome.

This is not the time for a DIY approach or “wait and see.” Guideline E cases involve nuanced judgments about your character and reliability – nuances that are easy to misinterpret if you don’t address them head-on. You need an elite legal team with insider knowledge of the clearance process, proven strategies, and the skill to present your story in the most favorable light.

✅ We have your six. When you engage National Security Law Firm, we move quickly to take the pressure off your shoulders. From the moment you contact us, we’ll give you clear guidance on what to do (and what not to do) to maximize your chances of success. We’ll tell you exactly what evidence to gather and which mitigating factors apply to your case. We’ll craft a tailored legal strategy grounded in our real-world experience to rebut the allegations against you. In short, we’ll fight to preserve your clearance, your career, and your reputation – so you can move forward with confidence.

Imagine being able to sleep soundly again, knowing that your case is in capable hands. Our clients often tell us that once we stepped in, they felt a huge weight lifted off their shoulders. Instead of losing sleep and second-guessing every decision, they could focus on their work and life while we handled the clearance battle. You deserve that peace of mind.

Getting started is easy and risk-free. We offer free, confidential consultations with no obligation. It’s as simple as booking a time that works for you. You can use our online scheduling tool to pick a slot for a consultation – no need for phone tag or waiting on hold. One of our experienced clearance attorneys will listen to your story, assess the Guideline E issues, and give you straightforward advice on the next steps. This initial case review costs you nothing, and you’ll come away with a clearer plan of action and a sense of direction.

Time is of the essence. Don’t lose another night’s sleep worrying about your clearance. Take control of the situation now – schedule your free consultation with our team today. We’ll show you how to turn this around. You’ve dedicated yourself to serving and protecting your country’s interests; now let us serve and protect yours.

National Security Law Firm: It’s Our Turn to Fight for You.