DOJ honors policy

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
MrKappus
Posts: 1685
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:46 am

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby MrKappus » Sat Jul 03, 2010 1:03 am

ScaredWorkedBored wrote:You haven't taken any courses that have touched on how federal court usually works out for defendants, have you?

-

In any case, there should be a sticky telling people they shouldn't lie on security clearance papers and no, the federal government really does take a dim view of its employees engaging in what it considers criminal activity. Really.


It's called impeaching a witness.
Last edited by MrKappus on Sun Jul 04, 2010 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273310
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jul 04, 2010 8:02 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:For those who are well informed on the policy:

Let's say regular (once/week) use of marijuana for a period of a year in college, but no use since (and absolutely non since law school, approx. 50 times).

Is this an automatic ding? Likely ding? Non-issue if you admit it?

Not automatic ding.
Not likely ding.
Not a complete non-issue, but if you don't admit, and they find out, it's likely ding (maybe auto).

/speculation (I went through process without drug use during the time period, but from chatting with others on the job, I gathered that disclosure is not a likely ding)


In my experience, this was an almost automatic ding, but I worked for the DEA.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273310
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 07, 2010 5:44 pm

Are SF86's kept on file forever? If someone filled one out for another agency several years ago but wound up declining the job offer and stopping the clearance process, is there still a record of it? I've always been curious about this.

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby Patriot1208 » Wed Jul 07, 2010 6:01 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Are SF86's kept on file forever? If someone filled one out for another agency several years ago but wound up declining the job offer and stopping the clearance process, is there still a record of it? I've always been curious about this.


I believe, although not positive, that they are kept on file. But you still have to go through the whole process again.

User avatar
ggocat
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby ggocat » Wed Jul 07, 2010 6:10 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Are SF86's kept on file forever? If someone filled one out for another agency several years ago but wound up declining the job offer and stopping the clearance process, is there still a record of it? I've always been curious about this.

http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/grs/grs18.html :

22. Personnel Security Clearance Files.

Personnel security clearance case files created under Office of Personnel Management procedures and regulations and related indexes maintained by the personnel security office of the employing agency.

a. Case files documenting the processing of investigations on Federal employees or applicants for Federal employment, whether or not a security clearance is granted, and other persons, such as those performing work for a Federal agency under contract, who require an approval before having access to Government facilities or to sensitive data. These files include questionnaires, summaries of reports prepared by the investigating agency, and other records reflecting the processing of the investigation and the status of the clearance, exclusive of copies of investigative reports furnished by the investigating agency.

Destroy upon notification of death or not later than 5 years after separation or transfer of employee or no later than 5 years after contract relationship expires, whichever is applicable. (NC1-GRS-80-1 item 23a)

b. Investigative reports and related documents furnished to agencies by investigative organizations for use in making security/suitability determinations.

Destroy in accordance with the investigating agency instructions. (NC1-GRS-80-1 item 23b)

c. Index to the Personnel Security Case Files.

Destroy with related case file. (NC1-GRS-80-1 item 23c)


See also http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/gr ... l#standard
Here is the general records schedule: http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/grs/

Anonymous User
Posts: 273310
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 07, 2010 6:21 pm

So they would be deleted after 5 years?

User avatar
ggocat
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby ggocat » Wed Jul 07, 2010 7:00 pm

Anonymous User wrote:So they would be deleted after 5 years?

Maybe, but I dunno what the provision in 22.b means ("Destroy in accordance with the investigating agency instructions."). If you do some poking around yourself online you might be able to find an answer to your question.

User avatar
NoleinNY
Posts: 1031
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby NoleinNY » Wed Jul 07, 2010 7:09 pm

Don't know if this has been mentioned but anyone know if people can or have been dinged for having smoked doctor-prescribed medical marijuana in CO or CA during the prohibitive window?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273310
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 08, 2010 12:32 am

Can anyone comment on the scrutiny of a federal courts background check vs. a DOJ background check? I.E. if you've passed a background check for a federal courts internship (and been completely honest) do you stand a good chance of passing an FBI/DEA/DOJ background check? Or are the latter much more exhaustive?

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby Patriot1208 » Thu Jul 08, 2010 12:54 am

NoleinNY wrote:Don't know if this has been mentioned but anyone know if people can or have been dinged for having smoked doctor-prescribed medical marijuana in CO or CA during the prohibitive window?


Can you? Sure. But will you? I have no idea. The DEA certainly seems intent on fighting this case in colorado of the medicinal marijuana provider.

User avatar
AR75
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:59 pm

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby AR75 » Wed Jul 14, 2010 1:57 am

Anonymous User wrote:Can anyone comment on the scrutiny of a federal courts background check vs. a DOJ background check? I.E. if you've passed a background check for a federal courts internship (and been completely honest) do you stand a good chance of passing an FBI/DEA/DOJ background check? Or are the latter much more exhaustive?

It would seem very reasonable that the DOJ, etc. would be MUCH more intensive and intrusive. For matters in the courts, you're dealing with already-public records, and with the other agencies, you're dealing with sensitive, yet-undisclosed information. The need for agency confidence would seem much greater with DOJ, etc., and call for more employee assurance--through exhaustive background investigations.
I used to conduct backgrounds for law enforcement applicants--and I had nothing but time to dig and dig and dig and dig and dig. I was only marginally good, because the backgrounds were interspersed with my other duties. The guys who do it full-time are scary good. They will very likely find out things about your personal history, simply through thorough investigation, but mostly because when people do silly things when they're younger, they don't contemporaneously create a cover plan.

Not trying to be a scare tactician, but just know that if a good background investigator has good cause to believe something exists, he or she will find it.

That said, if you're only facing a Fed. Courts background, and there is nothing substantially bad, you should be fine.

Cheers,

Ken

00TREX00
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 7:41 pm

Re: DOJ honors policy

Postby 00TREX00 » Wed Jul 14, 2010 9:10 pm

-




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.