The national interest requires that certain information is maintained in confidence through a system of classification in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, and our participation within the community of nations. The unauthorized disclosure of information classified in the national interest can cause irreparable damage to the national security and loss of human life.

Security policies designed to protect classified information must ensure consistent, cost effective, and efficient protection of our Nation’s classified information, while providing fair and equitable treatment to those Americans upon whom we rely to guard our national security.

This order establishes a uniform Federal personnel security program for employees who will be considered for initial or continued access to classified information.

NOW, THEREFORE, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:




Section 1.1. Definitions. For the purposes of this order:

(a) “Agency” means any “Executive agency,” as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105, the “military departments,” as defined in 5 U.S.C. 102, and any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information, including the Defense Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, and the National Reconnaissance Office.

(b) “Applicant” means a person other than an employee who has received an authorized conditional offer of employment for a position that requires access to classified information.

(c) “Authorized investigative agency” means an agency authorized by law or regulation to conduct a counterintelligence investigation or investigation of persons who are proposed for access to classified information to ascertain whether such persons satisfy the criteria for obtaining and retaining access to such information.

(d) “Classified information” means information that has been determined pursuant to Executive Order No. 12958, or any successor order, Executive Order No. 12951, or any successor order, or the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011), to require protection against unauthorized disclosure.

(e) “Employee” means a person, other than the President and Vice President, employed by, detailed or assigned to, an agency, including members of the Armed Forces; an expert or consultant to an agency; an industrial or commercial contractor, licensee, certificate holder, or grantee of an agency, including all subcontractors; a personal services contractor; or any other category of person who acts for or on behalf of an agency as determined by the appropriate agency head.

(f) “Foreign power” and “agent of a foreign power” have the meaning provided in 50 U.S.C. 1801.

(g) “Need for access” means a determination that an employee requires access to a particular level of classified information in order to perform or assist in a lawful and authorized governmental function.

(h) “Need-to-know” means a determination made by an authorized holder of classified information that a prospective recipient requires access to specific classified information in order to perform or assist in a lawful and authorized governmental function.

(i) “Overseas Security Policy Board” means the Board established by the President to consider, develop, coordinate and promote policies, standards and agreements on overseas security operations, programs and projects that affect all United States Government agencies under the authority of a Chief of Mission.

(j) “Security Policy Board” means the Board established by the President to consider, coordinate, and recommend policy directives for U.S. security policies, procedures, and practices.

(k) “Special access program” has the meaning provided in section 4.1 of Executive Order No. 12958, or any successor order.


Sec. 1.2. Access to Classified Information.

(a) No employee shall be granted access to classified information unless that employee has been determined to be eligible in accordance with this order and to possess a need-to-know.

(b) Agency heads shall be responsible for establishing and maintaining an effective program to ensure that access to classified information by each employee is clearly consistent with the interests of the national security.

(c) Employees shall not be granted access to classified information unless they:

(1) have been determined to be eligible for access under section 3.1 of this order by agency heads or designated officials based upon a favorable adjudication of an appropriate investigation of the employee’s background;

(2) have a demonstrated need-to-know; and

(3) have signed an approved nondisclosure agreement.

(d) All employees shall be subject to investigation by an appropriate government authority prior to being granted access to classified information and at any time during the period of access to ascertain whether they continue to meet the requirements for access.

(e)(1) All employees granted access to classified information shall be required as a condition of such access to provide to the employing agency written consent permitting access by an authorized investigative agency, for such time as access to classified information is maintained and for a peroid of 3 years thereafter, to:

(A) relevant financial records that are maintained by a financial institution as defined in 31 U.S.C. 5312(a) or by a holding company as defined in section 1101(6) of the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3401);

(B) consumer reports pertaining to the employee under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a); and

(C) records maintained by commercial entities within the United States pertaining to any travel by the employee outside the United States.

(2) Information may be requested pursuant to employee consent under this section where:

(A) there are reasonable grounds to believe, based on credible information, that the employee or former employee is, or may be, disclosing classified information in an unauthorized manner to a foreign power or agent of a foreign power;

(B) information the employing agency deems credible indicates the employee or former employee has incurred excessive indebtedness or has acquired a level of affluence that cannot be explained by other information; or

(C) circumstances indicate the employee or former employee had the capability and opportunity to disclose classified information that is known to have been lost or compromised to a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power.

(3) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the authority of an investigating agency to obtain information pursuant to the Right to Financial Privacy Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act or any other applicable law.


Sec. 1.3. Financial Disclosure.

(a) Not later than 180 days after the effective date of this order, the head of each agency that originates, handles, transmits, or possesses classified information shall designate each employee, by position or category where possible, who has a regular need for access to classified information that, in the discretion of the agency head, would reveal:

(1) the identity of covert agents as defined in the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (50 U.S.C. 421);

(2) technical or specialized national intelligence collection and processing systems that, if disclosed in an unauthorized manner, would substantially negate or impair the effectiveness of the system;

(3) the details of:

(A) the nature, contents, algorithm, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system or;

(B) the design, construction, functioning, maintenance, or repair of any cryptographic equipment; but not including information concerning the use of cryptographic equipment and services;

(4) particularly sensitive special access programs, the disclosure of which would substantially negate or impair the effectiveness of the information or activity involved; or

(5) especially sensitive nuclear weapons design information (but only for those positions that have been certified as being of a high degree of importance or sensitivity, as described in section 145(f) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended).

(b) An employee may not be granted access, or hold a position designated as requiring access, to information described in subsection (a) unless, as a condition of access to such information, the employee:

(1) files with the head of the agency a financial disclosure report, including information with respect to the spouse and dependent children of the employee, as part of all background investigations or reinvestigations;

(2) is subject to annual financial disclosure requirements, if selected by the agency head; and

(3) files relevant information concerning foreign travel, as determined by the Security Policy Board.

(c) Not later than 180 days after the effective date of this order, the Security Policy Board shall develop procedures for the implementation of this section, including a standard financial disclosure form for use by employees under subsection (b) of this section, and agency heads shall identify certain employees, by position or category, who are subject to annual financial disclosure.


Sec. 1.4. Use of Automated Financial Record Data Bases.

As part of all investigations and reinvestigations described in section 1.2(d) of this order, agencies may request the Department of the Treasury, under terms and conditions prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury, to search automated data bases consisting of reports of currency transactions by financial institutions, international transportation of currency or monetary instruments, foreign bank and financial accounts, transactions under $10,000 that are reported as possible money laundering violations, and records of foreign travel.


Sec. 1.5. Employee Education and Assistance.

The head of each agency that grants access to classified information shall establish a program for employees with access to classified information to:

(a) educate employees about individual responsibilities under this order; and

(b) inform employees about guidance and assistance available concerning issues that may affect their eligibility for access to classified information, including sources of assistance for employees who have questions or concerns about financial matters, mental health, or substance abuse.



Sec. 2.1. Eligibility Determinations.

(a) Determinations of eligibility for access to classified information shall be based on criteria established under this order. Such determinations are separate from suitability determinations with respect to the hiring or retention of persons for employment by the government or any other personnel actions.

(b) The number of employees that each agency determines are eligible for access to classified information shall be kept to the minimum required for the conduct of agency functions.

(1) Eligibility for access to classified information shall not be requested or granted solely to permit entry to, or ease of movement within, controlled areas when the employee has no need for access and access to classified information may reasonably be prevented. Where circumstances indicate employees may be inadvertently exposed to classified information in the course of their duties, agencies are authorized to grant or deny, in their discretion, facility access approvals to such employees based on an appropriate level of investigation as determined by each agency.

(2) Except in agencies where eligibility for access is a mandatory condition of employment, eligibility for access to classified information shall only be requested or granted based on a demonstrated, foreseeable need for access. Requesting or approving eligibility in excess of actual requirements is prohibited.

(3) Eligibility for access to classified information may be granted where there is a temporary need for access, such as one-time participation in a classified project, provided the investigative standards established under this order have been satisfied. In such cases, a fixed date or event for expiration shall be identified and access to classified information shall be limited to information related to the particular project or assignment.

(4) Access to classified information shall be terminated when an employee no longer has a need for access.


Sec. 2.2. Level of Access Approval.

(a) The level at which an access approval is granted for an employee shall be limited, and relate directly, to the level of classified information for which there is a need for access. Eligibility for access to a higher level of classified information includes eligibility for access to information classified at a lower level.

(b) Access to classified information relating to a special access program shall be granted in accordance with procedures established by the head of the agency that created the program or, for programs pertaining to intelligence activities (including special activities but not including military operational, strategic, and tactical programs) or intelligence sources and methods, by the Director of Central Intelligence. To the extent possible and consistent with the national security interests of the United States, such procedures shall be consistent with the standards and procedures established by and under this order.


Sec. 2.3 Temporary Access to Higher Levels.

(a) An employee who has been determined to be eligible for access to classified information based on favorable adjudication of a completed investigation may be granted temporary access to a higher level where security personnel authorized by the agency head to make access eligibility determinations find that such access:

(1) is necessary to meet operational or contractual exigencies not expected to be of a recurring nature;

(2) will not exceed 180 days; and

(3) is limited to specific, identifiable information that is made the subject of a written access record.

(b) Where the access granted under subsection (a) of this section involves another agency’s classified information, that agency must concur before access to its information is granted.


Sec. 2.4. Reciprocal Acceptance of Access Eligibility Determinations.

(a) Except when an agency has substantial information indicating that an employee may not satisfy the standards in section 3.1 of this order, background investi-gations and eligibility determinations conducted under this order shall be mutually and reciprocally accepted by all agencies.

(b) Except where there is substantial information indicating that the employee may not satisfy the standards in section 3.1 of this order, an employee with existing access to a special access program shall not be denied eligibility for access to another special access program at the same sensitivity level as determined personally by the agency head or deputy agency head, or have an existing access eligibility readjudicated, so long as the employee has a need for access to the information involved.

(c) This section shall not preclude agency heads from establishing additional, but not duplicative, investigative or adjudicative procedures for a special access program or for candidates for detail or assignment to their agencies, where such procedures are required in exceptional circumstances to protect the national security.

(d) Where temporary eligibility for access is granted under sections 2.3 or 3.3 of this order or where the determination of eligibility for access is conditional, the fact of such temporary or conditional access shall be conveyed to any other agency that considers affording the employee access to its information.


Sec. 2.5. Specific Access Requirement.

(a) Employees who have been determined to be eligible for access to classified information shall be given access to classified information only where there is a need-to-know that information.

(b) It is the responsibility of employees who are authorized holders of classified information to verify that a prospective recipient’s eligibility for access has been granted by an authorized agency official and to ensure that a need-to-know exists prior to allowing such access, and to challenge requests for access that do not appear well-founded.


Sec. 2.6. Access by Non-United States Citizens.

(a) Where there are compelling reasons in furtherance of an agency mission, immigrant alien and foreign national employees who possess a special expertise may, in the discretion of the agency, be granted limited access to classified information only for specific programs, projects, contracts, licenses, certificates, or grants for which there is a need for access. Such individuals shall not be eligible for access to any greater level of classified information than the United States Government has determined may be releasable to the country of which the subject is currently a citizen, and such limited access may be approved only if the prior 10 years of the subject’s life can be appropriately investigated. If there are any doubts concerning granting access, additional lawful investigative procedures shall be fully pursued.

(b) Exceptions to these requirements may be permitted only by the agency head or the senior agency official designated under section 6.1 of this order to further substantial national security interests.



Sec. 3.1. Standards.

(a) No employee shall be deemed to be eligible for access to classified information merely by reason of Federal service or contracting, licensee, certificate holder, or grantee status, or as a matter of right or privilege, or as a result of any particular title, rank, position, or affiliation.

(b) Except as provided in sections 2.6 and 3.3 of this order, eligibility for access to classified information shall be granted only to employees who are United States citizens for whom an appropriate investigation has been completed and whose personal and professional history affirmatively indicates loyalty to the United States, strength of character, trustworthiness, honesty, reliability, discretion, and sound judgment, as well as freedom from conflicting allegiances and potential for coercion, and willingness and ability to abide by regulations governing the use, handling, and protection of classified information. A determination of eligibility for access to such information is a discretionary security decision based on judgments by appropriately trained adjudicative personnel. Eligibility shall be granted only where facts and circumstances indicate access to classified information is clearly consistent with the national security interests of the United States, and any doubt shall be resolved in favor of the national security.

(c) The United States Government does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, or sexual orientation in granting access to classified information.

(d) In determining eligibility for access under this order, agencies may investigate and consider any matter that relates to the determination of whether access is clearly consistent with the interests of national security. No inference concerning the standards in this section may be raised solely on the basis of the sexual orientation of the employee.

(e) No negative inference concerning the standards in this section may be raised solely on the basis of mental health counseling. Such counseling can be a positive factor in eligibility determinations. However, mental health counseling, where relevant to the adjudication of access to classified information, may justify further inquiry to determine whether the standards of subsection (b) of this section are satisfied, and mental health may be considered where it directly relates to those standards.

(f) Not later than 180 days after the effective date of this order, the Security Policy Board shall develop a common set of adjudicative guidelines for determining eligibility for access to classified information, including access to special access programs.


Sec. 3.2. Basis for Eligibility Approval.

(a) Eligibility determinations for access to classified information shall be based on information concerning the applicant or employee that is acquired through the investigation conducted pursuant to this order or otherwise available to security officials and shall be made part of the applicant’s or employee’s security record. Applicants or employees shall be required to provide relevant information pertaining to their background and character for use in investigating and adjudicating their eligibility for access.

(b) Not later than 180 days after the effective date of this order, the Security Policy Board shall develop a common set of investigative standards for background investigations for access to classified information. These standards may vary for the various levels of access.

(c) Nothing in this order shall prohibit an agency from utilizing any lawful investigative procedure in addition to the investigative requirements set forth in this order and its implementing regulations to resolve issues that may arise during the course of a background investigation or reinvestigation.


Sec. 3.3. Special Circumstances.

(a) In exceptional circumstances where official functions must be performed prior to the completion of the investigative and adjudication process, temporary eligibility for access to classified information may be granted to an employee while the initial investigation is underway. When such eligibility is granted, the initial investigation shall be expedited.

(1) Temporary eligibility for access under this section shall include a justification, and the employee must be notified in writing that further access is expressly conditioned on the favorable completion of the investigation and issuance of an access eligibility approval. Access will be immediately terminated, along with any assignment requiring an access eligibility approval, if such approval is not granted.

(2) Temporary eligibility for access may be granted only by security personnel authorized by the agency head to make access eligibility determinations and shall be based on minimum investigative standards developed by the Security Policy Board not later than 180 days after the effective date of this order.

(3) Temporary eligibility for access may be granted only to particular, identified categories of classified information necessary to perform the lawful and authorized functions that are the basis for the granting of temporary access.

(b) Nothing in subsection (a) shall be construed as altering the authority of an agency head to waive requirements for granting access to classified information pursuant to statutory authority.

(c) Where access has been terminated under section 2.1(b)(4) of this order and a new need for access arises, access eligibility up to the same level shall be reapproved without further investigation as to employees who were determined to be eligible based on a favorable adjudication of an investigation completed within the prior 5 years, provided they have remained employed by the same employer during the period in question, the employee certifies in writing that there has been no change in the relevant information provided by the employee for the last background investigation, and there is no information that would tend to indicate the employee may no longer satisfy the standards established by this order for access to classified information.

(d) Access eligibility shall be reapproved for individuals who were determined to be eligible based on a favorable adjudication of an investigation completed within the prior 5 years and who have been retired or otherwise separated from United States Government employment for not more than 2 years; provided there is no indication the individual may no longer satisfy the standards of this order, the individual certifies in writing that there has been no change in the relevant information provided by the individual for the last background investigation, and an appropriate record check reveals no unfavorable information.


Sec. 3.4. Reinvestigation Requirements.

(a) Because circumstances and characteristics may change dramatically over time and thereby alter the eligibility of employees for continued access to classified information, reinvestigations shall be conducted with the same priority and care as initial investigations.

(b) Employees who are eligible for access to classified information shall be the subject of periodic reinvestigations and may also be reinvestigated if, at any time, there is reason to believe that they may no longer meet the standards for access established in this order.

(c) Not later than 180 days after the effective date of this order, the Security Policy Board shall develop a common set of reinvestigative standards, including the frequency of reinvestigations.



Sec. 4. Authority.

Agencies that conduct background investigations, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of State, are authorized to conduct personnel security investigations in the United States when requested by a foreign government as part of its own personnel security program and with the consent of the individual.



Sec. 5.1. Determinations of Need for Access.

A determination under section 2.1(b)(4) of this order that an employee does not have, or no longer has, a need for access is a discretionary determination and shall be conclusive.


Sec. 5.2. Review Proceedings for Denials or Revocations of Eligibility for Access.

(a) Applicants and employees who are determined to not meet the standards for access to classified information established in section 3.1 of this order shall be:

(1) provided as comprehensive and detailed a written explanation of the basis for that conclusion as the national security interests of the United States and other applicable law permit;

(2) provided within 30 days, upon request and to the extent the documents would be provided if requested under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) or the Privacy Act (3 U.S.C. 552a), as applicable, any documents, records, and reports upon which a denial or revocation is based;

(3) informed of their right to be represented by counsel or other representative at their own expense; to request any documents, records, and reports as described in section 5.2(a)(2) upon which a denial or revocation is based; and to request the entire investigative file, as permitted by the national security and other applicable law, which, if requested, shall be promptly provided prior to the time set for a written reply;

(4) provided a reasonable opportunity to reply in writing to, and to request a review of, the determination;

(5) provided written notice of and reasons for the results of the review, the identity of the deciding authority, and written notice of the right to appeal;

(6) provided an opportunity to appeal in writing to a high level panel, appointed by the agency head, which shall be comprised of at least three members, two of whom shall be selected from outside the security field. Decisions of the panel shall be in writing, and final except as provided in subsection (b) of this section; and

(7) provided an opportunity to appear personally and to present relevant documents, materials, and information at some point in the process before an adjudicative or other authority, other than the investigating entity, as determined by the agency head. A written summary or recording of such appearance shall be made part of the applicant’s or employee’s security record, unless such appearance occurs in the presence of the appeals panel described in subsection (a)(6) of this section.

(b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit an agency head from personally exercising the appeal authority in subsection (a)(6) of this section based upon recommendations from an appeals panel. In such case, the decision of the agency head shall be final.

(c) Agency heads shall promulgate regulations to implement this section and, at their sole discretion and as resources and national security considerations permit, may provide additional review proceedings beyond those required by subsection (a) of this section. This section does not require additional proceedings, however, and creates no procedural or substantive rights.

(d) When the head of an agency or principal deputy personally certifies that a procedure set forth in this section cannot be made available in a particular case without damaging the national security interests of the United States by revealing classified information, the particular procedure shall not be made available. This certification shall be conclusive.

(e) This section shall not be deemed to limit or affect the responsibility and power of an agency head pursuant to any law or other Executive order to deny or terminate access to classified information in the interests of national security. The power and responsibility to deny or terminate access to classified information pursuant to any law or other Executive order may be exercised only where the agency head determines that the procedures prescribed in subsection (a) of this section cannot be invoked in a manner that is consistent with national security. This determination shall be conclusive.

(f)(1) This section shall not be deemed to limit or affect the responsibility and power of an agency head to make determinations of suitability for employment.

(2) Nothing in this section shall require that an agency provide the procedures prescribed in subsection (a) of this section to an applicant where a conditional offer of employment is withdrawn for reasons of suitability or any other reason other than denial of eligibility for access to classified information.

(3) A suitability determination shall not be used for the purpose of denying an applicant or employee the review proceedings of this section where there has been a denial or revocation of eligibility for access to classified information.



Sec. 6.1. Agency Implementing Responsibilities.

Heads of agencies that grant employees access to classified information shall:

(a) designate a senior agency official to direct and administer the agency’s personnel security program established by this order. All such programs shall include active oversight and continuing security education and awareness programs to ensure effective implementation of this order;

(b) cooperate, under the guidance of the Security Policy Board, with other agencies to achieve practical, consistent, and effective adjudicative training and guidelines; and

(c) conduct periodic evaluations of the agency’s implementation and administration of this order, including the implementation of section 1.3(a) of this order. Copies of each report shall be provided to the Security Policy Board.


Sec. 6.2. Employee Responsibilities.

(a) Employees who are granted eligibility for access to classified information shall:

(1) protect classified information in their custody from unauthorized disclosure;

(2) report all contacts with persons, including foreign nationals, who seek in any way to obtain unauthorized access to classified information;

(3) report all violations of security regulations to the appropriate security officials; and

(4) comply with all other security requirements set forth in this order and its implementing regulations.

(b) Employees are encouraged and expected to report any information that raises doubts as to whether another employee’s continued eligibility for access to classified information is clearly consistent with the national security.


Sec. 6.3. Security Policy Board Responsibilities and Implementation.

(a) With respect to actions taken by the Security Policy Board pursuant to sections 1.3(c), 3.1(f), 3.2(b), 3.3(a)(2), and 3.4(c) of this order, the Security Policy Board shall make recommendations to the President through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs for implementation.

(b) Any guidelines, standards, or procedures developed by the Security Policy Board pursuant to this order shall be consistent with those guidelines issued by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in March 1994 on Background Investigations Policy/Guidelines Regarding Sexual Orientation.

(c) In carrying out its responsibilities under this order, the Security Policy Board shall consult where appropriate with the Overseas Security Policy Board. In carrying out its responsibilities under section 1.3(c) of this order, the Security Policy Board shall obtain the concurrence of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Sec. 6.4. Sanctions. Employees shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly and willfully grant eligibility for, or allow access to, classified information in violation of this order or its implementing regulations. Sanctions may include reprimand, suspension without pay, removal, and other actions in accordance with applicable law and agency regulations.



Sec. 7.1. Classified Information Procedures Act.

Nothing in this order is intended to alter the procedures established under the Classified Information Procedures Act (18 U.S.C. App. 1).


Sec. 7.2. General.

(a) Information obtained by an agency under sections 1.2(e) or 1.3 of this order may not be disseminated outside the agency, except to:

(1) the agency employing the employee who is the subject of the records or information;

(2) the Department of Justice for law enforcement or counterintelligence purposes; or

(3) any agency if such information is clearly relevant to the authorized responsibilities of such agency.

(b) The Attorney General, at the request of the head of an agency, shall render an interpretation of this order with respect to any question arising in the course of its administration.

(c) No prior Executive orders are repealed by this order. To the extent that this order is inconsistent with any provision of any prior Executive order, this order shall control, except that this order shall not diminish or otherwise affect the requirements of Executive Order No. 10450, the denial and revocation procedures provided to individuals covered by Executive Order No. 10865, as amended, or access by historical researchers and former presidential appointees under Executive Order No. 12958 or any successor order.

(d) If any provision of this order or the application of such provision is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order shall not be affected.

(e) This Executive order is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any right to administrative or judicial review, or any other right or benefit or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforceable by a party against the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, its officers or employees, or any other person.

(f) This order is effective immediately.



August 2, 1995.




By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, and in order to provide for a uniform policy for the Federal Government to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 11478, as amended, is further amended as follows:

Section 1. The first sentence of section 1 is amended by substituting “age, or sexual orientation” for “or age”.

Section 2. The second sentence of section 1 is amended by striking the period and adding at the end of the sentence”, to the extent permitted by law.”


MAY 28, 1998

President’s order protects workers

President’s order protects workers

It was only three paragraphs long and received little publicity. But an executive order issued by President Bill Clinton last week, banning anti-Gay discrimination against federal civilian employees, was nevertheless historic, capping a 41-year struggle to end bias in the federal workforce.

Court decisions, civil service rules, and legislation have given Gay federal employees significant – though inconsistent – protection over the years. Clinton’s May 28 action formally adds sexual orientation to Executive Order 11478, which banned job discrimination against federal workers based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap and age.

“The order,” Clinton said in a statement, “provides a uniform policy for the federal government to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation in the federal civilian workforce and states that policy for the first time in an executive order of the president.”

The White House had previously encouraged agencies to include sexual orientation in their non-discrimination policies. Many did so, but a Blade survey last year turned up a significant number that didn’t. Even many agencies that formally banned anti-Gay job bias failed to publicize enforcement procedures, according to a Gay federal employee group.

Frank Kameny, the longtime Washington activist whose dismissal on grounds of homosexuality in 1957 led him to begin the fight to end the federal government’s anti-Gay job bias, joined other activists in hailing Clinton’s executive order, which covers 1.8 million civilian workers.

“It doesn’t do anything new,” said Kameny, now 73, “but it ties up loose ends and, therefore, brings to closure to what has been a 25-year…improvement process. …The deed is done, it is over, we can move on to other battles. It is a total victory which could not have been conceived when I was fired in 1957.”

Elaine Kaplan, the openly Lesbian special counsel in the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, said that, while the executive order doesn’t add “any new substantive legal rights,” it does “confirm that it is executive branch policy” to bar anti-Gay discrimination in the federal workforce.

“I think it will help employees who suffer discrimination based on their sexual orientation,” Kaplan said. “It will bolster their cases.”

“What we were trying to do,” said Richard Socarides, a special assistant to Clinton and his liaison with the Gay community, “was remedy the fact that a lot of federal workers did not know that the federal government did not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, and that they in fact had remedies to pursue a claim of…discrimination.”

The executive order, Socarides said, “is going to allow us now to proceed on a public education campaign” to inform federal workers “that they have these rights and what the procedures are to enforce violations.”

Frank Kameny
“It ties up loose ends,” said Frank Kameny of the order. Kameny was dismissed from his federal job in 1957 on grounds of homosexuality. (by Clint Steib)

Despite the executive order, Gay federal workers still lack significant protection enjoyed by their straight counterparts, for two major reasons:

First, uniformed members of the armed services are automatically excluded from the protection offered by the executive order, since they are covered by the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Pursue” policy proposed by Clinton and approved by Congress. That policy, under challenge in the courts as discriminatory, is strongly defended by the Administration. And,

Second, sexual orientation is not covered by the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which means, as Clinton noted in his statement, that the executive order “cannot create any new enforcement rights,” such as the ability to bring bias complaints to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Reiterating his support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, Clinton said, “I again call upon Congress to pass this important piece of civil rights legislation, which would extend these basic employment discrimination protections to all Gay and Lesbian Americans.”

“Individuals,” Clinton said, “should not be denied a job on the basis of something that has no relationship to their ability to perform their work.”

Rob Sadler, an attorney with the Department of Commerce and president of Federal GLOBE (Gay, Lesbian or Bisexual Employees), said that, even though Gay federal workers still lacked civil rights protection, the executive order has “more than symbolic” significance.

While many agencies have announced nondiscrimination policies that include Gays, Sadler said, the executive order will be “another impetus” to get laggard agencies to issue similar statements. Also, he said, the order will spur many agencies to publicize the previously “hidden procedures” available to Gays to complain about discrimination.

These procedures include filing an administrative complaint within an agency (though barred from appealing that agency’s decision to the EEOC or the courts). In addition, employees who believe they have been fired or suspended for more than 14 days due to sexual orientation discrimination can complain to the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Less serious complaints, like a failure to receive a promotion or a transfer, can be submitted as a grievance by employees covered under collective bargaining agreements, or can be filed with the Office of Special Counsel, which investigates possible violations of “prohibited personnel practices,” including sexual orientation discrimination.

In the past, Sadler said, many agencies argued that because sexual orientation is not included in civil rights law, they had no authority to implement and publicize those protections that Gays did enjoy.

“Most agencies had issued non-discrimination policies,” Sadler says, “but had not followed up to tell employees what does his mean, where you can go [to complain]. In that sense, many of the non-discrimination statements may have been symbolic.”

The executive order, Sadler said, in effect tells agencies to explicitly detail and distribute the complaint procedures for employees who believe they have been subjected to anti-Gay discrimination.

“That will be a major change,” said Sadler. “Our work environment is different now than it was [before the executive order].”

Kaplan of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel agreed that many Gay federal employees are not aware of the protection against discrimination that they have gained over the years.

Chai Feldblum
Law professor Chai Feldblum said those who believe anti-discrimination means affirmative action are “simply wrong.” (by Clint Steib)

“Now, hopefully the executive order will draw more attention to it,” Kaplan said.

Twenty years ago, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 put into law regulatory changes, made in 1975 in response to court decisions, that removed homosexuality as a bar to federal and civil service civilian employment and promotion.

The 1978 law prohibited discrimination against federal employees for “conduct which does not adversely affect” their job performance. That has been interpreted as making sexual orientation discrimination a “prohibited personnel practice.” (The law did not affect the issuing of security clearances by such agencies as the FBI and CIA, which denied clearances to Gays on grounds homosexuality might subject them to blackmail.)

During his 1992 presidential campaign, Clinton promised to sign an executive order barring sexual employment discrimination in the federal civilian workplace (and another order ending the ban on Gay military personnel). When the military plan came under intense fire from the Pentagon and Congress during his first weeks in office, Clinton backtracked on that order – and the civilian directive went on hold.

“The likely time to have done [the civilian order] would have been at the very beginning of the Administration,” says Socarides. “Having been through four or five months around the debate on Gays in the military, I would say that the political climate for doing this by way of executive order was probably not conducive.”

Instead, reportedly believing that an order protecting Gay federal civilian employees might be overturned by Congress, the Administration in late 1993 decided to encourage individual agencies to issue policies banning sexual orientation discrimination. (In 1995, Clinton signed an executive order that barred federal agencies from denying security clearances to applicants solely on the basis of sexual orientation.)

But last year’s investigation by the Blade showed that almost 25 percent of federal employees had not been formally notified in policy statements that sexual orientation discrimination against federal civilian employees is illegal. The Blade survey found that three of the government’s 16 cabinet departments and 39 of its 72 independent agencies had not added sexual orientation to their non-discrimination statements.

Socarides said the Blade survey was instrumental in leading the White House to undertake its own legal and policy review, which Socarides said confirmed “confusion by personnel managers and federal employees as to exactly what their rights were.”

As a result, Socarides said, Bruce Reed, who heads Clinton’s Domestic Policy Council, asked his staff early this year to prepare the executive order.

“While for the most part the federal government is a good place for Gays and Lesbians to work,” Socarides said, “clearly there are pockets where Gays and Lesbians suffer from discrimination. This sends a message. …It makes the federal government the largest employer with a written sexual orientation non-discrimination policy.”

Sadler said GLOBE, which has 40 affiliates with 4,000 to 6,000 members, had hoped Clinton would issue the executive order sooner. But with hindsight, says Federal GLOBE past president Leonard Hirsch, he is glad the executive order was delayed.

“This process of doing it agency by agency meant that [GLOBE] had to educate a lot of people,” Hirsch said. “That process is really at the heart of any non-discrimination program: Getting people to understand what is discrimination, why it’s bad and how it can be stopped and fought….

“Having done [the executive order] much earlier would have been symbolically important,” Hirsch said, “and would have made us all feel good, but having done it this way gives us a much more long-lasting solution.”

The executive order drew a strong attack from the anti-Gay Family Research Council, whose president, Gary Bauer, called on Congress to rescind the “outrageous” directive.

In a statement, Bauer said the order will affect not only all federal employees, but “possibly anyone who received a federal grant or contract with the federal government.

“In other words, it will force a special preference for homosexuality into government and private workplaces,” Bauer asserted.

But Chai Feldblum, professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center, said there is no reference in the executive order to federal contractors or affirmative action.

“It would be nice to have a prohibition [on anti-Gay discrimination] for every entity that receives a federal contract,” Feldblum said, “but this is not what the executive order does.”

“Waving the specter of affirmative action is a classic misstatement that the [Family Research Council] always makes,” said Feldblum. “They automatically assume that anti-discrimination means affirmative action. That’s simply wrong.”

The Washington Times quoted House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Tex.), a religious right supporter, as attacking the order.

“Once again,” Armey said, “this Administration pushes extreme policies on behalf of a narrow special interest group. …I call on the president to reconsider this decision.”

Two national Gay organizations – the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and the Human Rights Campaign – hailed Clinton’s action.

HRC political director Winnie Stachelberg said she is certain Bauer will find some support among legislators for his call to rescind the executive order. But Stachelberg said that, with corporations increasingly adopting policies barring anti-Gay job discrimination and with polls finding most Americans saying they oppose such discrimination, she doubts Congress will overturn Clinton’s directive.

“I don’t see Congress being out of step with the American people, being out of step with corporate America,” Stachelberg said.

The power of a meat smoker in a federal group

The power of a meat smoker in a federal group

The digital era does not support social relations; in fact, it supports virtual relations as opposed to physical relations because of the digital solutions like social media platforms. Federal groups own several companies and at one point they need a forum to stay together as the management and its employees to enhance a cordial relationship in the workplace. There is a lot of work pressure based on the high demand from a customer who needs his orders completed within certain duration; he is even ready to part with more money to achieve this goal. Federal groups are there to make profits; they will try as much as possible to meet the demand by tasking the employees to work extra time. At the end of successful completion of the project, you might need a team building session to recap and unwind. However, the nature of the work may not allow a complete shutdown of the company to attend the session. Smokers within the federal group premises come in handy as a mini team-building session without compromising on the operations of the business.

Why buy a meat smoker for the federal group? The modern automated smokers produce delicious and tasty recipes that adjusting temperature is self-regulated. In addition, an employee will prefer to prepare his own lunch, instead of taking time out to get something to fill the stomach. Be sure, he will take less time and dedicate the extra time in the workplace, which further increases productivity.

How do you maintain employee loyalty to the group? You need value added functions that make the employee comfortable. A smoker within the premise gives him a sense of appreciation and love from the employer.

At one point, the smoker zone will be a meeting point among the employees. They will have to wait and even share a recipe or even decide to prepare a dish for the department as a reward scheme. The exercise is not in vain, it helps to build a strong personality which they emulate in the course of administering their duties. If it is the operations or customer care department, then there is a guarantee of top-notch customer care relations which improves the conversion of sales and further enhances business growth.

The department has organized a meal for the entire staff. It has become the talk of the office. Everyone wants to associate himself or herself with the chef of the day. You have numerous inquiries on the procedure for the smoked meat preparation. How do you feel as an employee? Of course, it improves your confidence levels and it boosts your self-esteem. This positive energy has a ripple effect in your work as well as a positive influence among your colleagues. Employers will wonder a sudden change and the energy employees have in their work. All of a sudden, there is less complain, more insights and pieces of advice to improve the business and constructive innovation and creativity in their operations. What else do you need from an employee? Just because of a simple sacrifice of purchasing a meat smoker(http://bestsmokers.review/) for employees to have meat bites at will.

Garment Steamer is perfect for Lawyers

Garment Steamer is perfect for Lawyers

What do you imagine when you hear the word lawyer? It’s always individuals wearing suits and ties for men, blazers, trousers, and dresses for women, in their leather shoes and carrying briefcases around. Their image is always formal and professional, just like what we always see on TV series and movies. With the pressure that they have to go through studying and defending cases, they always have to always look their best under pressure.

As a law official, it is expected from a lawyer to always look neat and clean. The reasons are first, to show that you are taking the case seriously, the second is to respect the courtroom, and third to look professional just in case they bumped into a potential client outside their offices. The key is to always look the best image they can in front of their clients and to your colleagues. Wrinkled and tacky suits and blazers seem to be an unacceptable wardrobe.

A garment steamer is perfect for lawyers to give these suits and blazers the proper maintenance and care. The fabric of suits and blazers are such an expensive investment, and its material is also susceptible to wear and tear. Thus, proper cleaning must be applied.

Using a streamer is superior to ironing because it also not just pressing out the wrinkles from your garment, but it also deodorizes it. It also kills bacteria and removes unwanted odors such as odors from smoke and food. It makes it a perfect substitute for irons. Why so? Because ironing out the wrinkles of your favorite suit damages the fiber due to high temperature. Steaming your fabric is a more delicate method of restoring the fibers of your favorite suit. Moreover, if quick touch ups are needed, a steamer works fine. It heats up quickly and in just no time, irons out the wrinkles.

Another boon in using a garment steamer is that it is perfect also for travel. It comes various sizes such as portable size for travel, and another size for home use. One of the garment steamers available in the market is the handheld steamer which is best for touch ups and business travels. It removes creases even without the use of an iron board. It fits also just fine inside your luggage without occupying much space. Another is the upright steamer with a stable stand. This streamer promises a quicker and powerful wrinkle removal. It also has a large water tank if you need to steam more clothes. Steamer is perfect for other kinds of complicated fabrics as well such as embroideries, jackets, suits and trousers, wool, ruffles and rushes, pleated fabrics, and silk.

These are all the reasons why a steamer for fabrics is perfect for lawyers. It fits depending on your lifestyle, whether you are always on the go or not. Moreover, it consumes less space as an iron board is unnecessary. Moreover, it will keep your suits, blazers, and other clothing looks and smell fresh and brand new.

Corporate Photography For Lawyers

Corporate Photography For Lawyers

You are probably wondering why photography is so important to lawyers. Well, if you’re trying to make it in the business world and to attract clients, your image is crucial. A lawyer is somebody who can help us in a variety of situations and someone who can help us resolve some serious issues. In one word, our lawyers are our heroes. And we all know what a hero should look like. He has to be serious but still friendly enough to be approached. He also needs to look powerful and confident, and above all, professional. So how can lawyers achieve this look? The best way is with the help of a professional photographer.

In today’s world of internet marketing and a wide array of other online services, lawyers need to make themselves present in the media as well. Whether you are working with people in person or giving advice on the internet, you need to reassure your clients that you are trustworthy. One of the most efficient ways to do this is through having a professional make your business photographs. This kind of photography is the key to the success of many individuals and large businesses and in the law business where your image will also be judged, it is the make it or breaks it element.

So what do you need to know about photography for lawyers? To begin with, this is just like any other corporate photography and like is the case with others; the only difference will come in how you make it stand out. With this tripods and cameras, this will be like a hero shot of you. A hero shot is a professional, clear shot of you that screams �’I am ready to save the day’’. Because that’s exactly what your potential clients are looking for. This photo needs to show your competence, confidence, professionalism and determination to resolve any problems the client might have. When you have your hero shot, you need to get it out there so the people can see it. You can post it to your website, you can have it on billboards and use it with a range of other marketing tools.

Now that you know a little bit about lawyers’ photography and why it’s important, let’s move on and reveal some tips and tricks. Your hero shot will be one of your main marketing tools so you need to be smart about it. You really want to look your best. That’s why it is highly recommendable that you invest in the services of a professional photographer who will be able to provide exactly what you need. This is one investment that can easily pay off big time in the future.

There are 5 essential elements that will make your shots look highly professional and appealing. First of all, you need a solid background, preferably of light color. White is one of the common choices. Secondly, you need to get either a full body shot or a shot that shows the majority of your body so you can strike the right pose. The pose and the facial expression, combined with appropriate clothes are perhaps the main elements that communicate confidence, self-esteem, openness, professionalism, and dependability.

Toilet in a law firm

Toilet in a law firm

The toilet is an essential room in any commercial or residential homes. You will never dictate the time and place to attend to a call of nature- it can be in a public or in a private place. A law firm is a public entity visited by people from all walks of life- clients, employees, students and interns and you can not relax with sauna like at home or you wouldn’t want to check heater buying guide if you are talking about a law firm’s toilet. You just need a flushing toilet itself. It is vital to have a toilet within or around the firm. Most of the commercial apartments always have toilets designated within the floor or in every office depending on the plan of the building.

It is a government regulation through the public health act that ” any public facility should have a toilet within the premises”. The main reason for this is, you have people from diverse places seeking services from your law firm. Some have appointments while others have just passed as walk-in clients. When your law firm provides excellent services, you will always have an influx of people visiting the premise to seek your services. Because of the long queue, it is expected at least 30 percent of them will visit the toilet. Remember it is also expensive to employ someone who cleans the toilet after every visit. Should you charge for every visitor should it be a value-added service for your clients? How should you handle this as an administrator of the law firm? Yes, you have a toilet, the next question is, how do you make it clean and tidy. How can you make the toilet environment and user-friendly for all your clients? What are other additional requirements you should have in the toilet to make it look better? These are some few questions you should ask yourself and act as a guideline to provide better toilet services.

 To answer all these questions, let us look at some of the critical issues when offering the service.


Ensure your law firm has enough supply of toiletries to accommodate everyone who visits with ease. In case the location of your law firm has no toilet, use that as a business opportunity and organize for a portable toilet and charge clients for the visit. If it is provided within the premise, it beats logic for you to charge people for the service. The toiletries include toilet papers, wipes, hand wash, sanitizers and hand warmers. It is a hygienic practice to wash your hands after every toilet visit, ensure there is a constant supply of water in the taps and toilet flush compartment.

 Cleaning detergents and disinfectants

Not everyone will use the toilet as required, employ a cleaner to sort out any toilet needs as well as maintain cleanliness of the toilet. Depending on the type of toilet buy suitable detergents which suit the type of toilet to be sparkling clean all the time. Disinfectants prevent germs and diseases.

 Do not let the lack of a toilet to deny you business, it may seem a minute necessity but it plays a bigger role in your client relationships. As a law firm you handle people, you have to ensure they are comfortable by providing washrooms and bathrooms for them to attend to calls of nature.

GPS projects of federal groups

GPS projects of federal groups

The federal governments have massive programs in their bid to meet their overall goals. The GPS tools come in handy to enhance and hasten the process in a more timely and effective manner. Federal groups deal with a wide geographical operation with complex procedures.  Almost every department in the federal government requires a GPS system in the course of their operations. Here are some of the most obvious areas they use the toolset.

Management of state events

The department of state is mandated o carry out various activities within and outside the state. They need a navigation system for easy coordination and consultation to ensure the events runs smoothly and efficiently. A good example is during a visit by the Governor of the State, the chief protocol officer needs to liaise with personnel on the ground to ensure all protocols and state policies for such functions are observed to the latter.


The telecommunication department uses the satellites for all the business communications whether through cell phones or old communication methods. The GPS system also allows one to know exact location even through social media pages where the systems are integrated. Smartphones have inbuilt GPS systems hence no need for another GPS gadget, although it has limited features.

Security and protection

The department of defense is a sensitive department, which runs the core security functions of the federal governments. Riding gears protect your head in an accident riding gear should be worn at all times. Gears and GPS should be present.The GPS system is used in various ways. First is the location of the enemy through a drone- a gadget randomly thrown in the air and remotely controlled on the ground to show the exact location of the target. Secondly, they use the system to locate themselves when they are out in the wild while protecting the nation. Lastly, they use it to track locations of suspects and even tap their phone conversations. All these helps in faster attacks and rescue missions among members when out for war.

Management of transport systems

Management of the wide transport network requires a centralized system that can monitor the fleet at a glance. The systems are placed at strategic places within the state with cameras for easy monitoring of vehicles within the state. The same system is also applicable at the roundabout to control traffic lights using sensors.

Public administration projects

The core function of the federal government is service delivery among its citizens. Some states are highly populated and cumbersome for use of manual system. The GPS toolkit provides a digital platform for efficient service delivery of public functions. Some of them include digital location when filling online forms.

Personnel management and administration

The human resource departments are not left out either in the whole GPS system equation. The federal governments have the highest number of personnel in different organizations. They use the GPS system to track specific location of all its employees at any time and place. This is through the telephones or business communication tools like Email.

GPS system is a great technology that has improved service delivery in different departments in the federal government.




How to Make Law Firm Equipment with a Table Saw

How to Make Law Firm Equipment with a Table Saw

The time has come and you are opening your own law firm. You have affordable office space with sufficient parking and all the criteria are met that will make you look professional. Now there is only one problem. That nice office needs to be furnished.

Buying equipment for an office is not cheap and by starting every single penny counts for sure. Well, with a table saw and a little bit of skill you can make law firm equipment with a table saw that will make heads turn making people believe that you obtained bespoke furniture from a professional office outfitter.

Woodworking and cabinet making is not at all as intimidating as it may appear at first. Taking it at one step at a time you will quickly realize that even a person with very average skills is able to create the equipment needed to furnish your new law firm office.

Having a table saw is getting you half way there. You can start with simple projects like some bookcases, a large table for your conference room, a comfortable reception desk, printer stands, and some cabinets. You may reason that you are a lawyer and not a handy man. It is true, but if you can put together a simple box, you can build a cabinet. Building a table is easier than falling out of a tree!

With the options for woodworking, perfect measurements, and good quality material and tools, the sky is your limit and more. When using a table saw for your projects it is important to make sure the blades are of good quality and fitted properly.

There are endless plans and instructions available that will allow you to use a humble table saw to make furniture for your law firm.

If one considers the most basic equipment you will need for your new law firm office you should consider the following:


What bliss to build a desk that suits your exact requirements instead of struggling through the day with too little desk space. You can include enough drawers to help declutter your working area with ease and keep documents and papers organized and close at bay.

Side Desks

If you can build a desk, adding a side desk for your PC or laptop should be equally easy. You can choose how small or large it needs to be and if you require space for your PC and printer or just a laptop and printer.

Book Shelves and Cabinets

Clearly, it is as simple as it seems. You will use your table saw to cut the wood into the desired pieces and assemble it. To make the perfect bookcase or shelves you need the cutting blade to be perfectly sharp to make clean cuts. Proper clean cuts will help you to compile a book shelve or set of cabinets that is custom made to fit your requirements to the tee.

The best part of having a table saw to make your law firm equipment is that you will spend a fraction of the cost with making it yourself instead of buying it at more than double the money you spent on materials and you enjoy bespoke furniture for your new law firm.

Pingpong as Stress Reliever for Lawyers

Pingpong as Stress Reliever for Lawyers

Working as a lawyer is one of the most stressful jobs in the USA, involving long hours, difficult situations, and often the added pressure of student debt that can take many years to pay off (the student loan debt for lawyers who graduate from the country’s top law schools is frequently over $150,000 and over 75% of students graduate with debt).


Why is Working in Law so Stressful?


Lawyers must attempt to harden themselves to get used to unjust cases and work with clients who are dealing with incredibly difficult circumstances. However, this constant pressure frequently leads to stress and anxiety, which can then become a depression. The demands of the profession indeed do not leave any room for the faint-hearted.




Money worries can also add to the stress. While lawyers receive a salary that is at a much higher level than many other careers, starting salaries may not be attractive as expected and it can take many years to pay off the staggering amount of student loan debt that most student lawyers rack up while becoming qualified.




Lawyers are 1.33 times more likely to commit suicide than other members of the population – a sobering statistic for anyone considering entering a career in law.


How to Deal with Stress as a Lawyer



Stress is a normal part of life and if it lasts for a relatively short period of time, we are able to adapt and recover. However, when stress is constant and chronic, it can become more of a problem. Almost half of all law students and lawyers will experience an anxiety disorder at some point in their lives.




Medication does exist to help reduce the effect of stress and depression, but it is more of a sticking plaster on a wound than a long-term solution.




However, there are a number of ways you can help to combat stress without any medical involvement. Some ideas include:




  • Meditation


  • Yoga


  • Focused hobbies such as knitting and drawing


  • Journaling


  • Sports and exercise


Pingpong as Stress Relief



You probably haven’t considered ping pong as a type of therapy before, but in fact, ping pong as stress relief for lawyers can be very effective. You can check tons of reviews of the best pool tables online and check the tools used for PingPong.




Pingpong works to combat stress on several levels:




  • It is a physical activity, proven to increase mood through the release of endorphins – the body’s natural “happy hormone”.


  • As ping pong is played with another player, it is a social activity, which can help with feelings of loneliness and isolation. It can also be great for team building and improving relationships at work.


  • A quick game of ping-pong can help to fight fatigue and improve concentration.


  • The physical sensation of hitting the ball is excellent for relieving frustration.


  • Concentrating on trying to hit the ball helps the brain to zone out from whatever it’s dwelling on, allowing you to return to work feeling refreshed.





So if you’re a stressed-out lawyer, it may well be worth investing in an office pingpong table, before your mental state starts to impact on your work.