Summary of Defects in U.S. OPM’s Standard Form 61

APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS (“SF-61”)

(Revised August 2002):

https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf61.pdf

1. no OMB control number or expiration date is visible at upper right corner:

Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) requires proper display on Page 1

2. “constitutional form of government” was removed from Paragraph B.:

this phrase is required by 5 U.S.C. 3333, 7311, 18 U.S.C. 1918 and Guarantee Clause

3. no citation to 5 U.S.C. 2903 in bottom paragraph:

authority to do so is required of all officers administering any SF-61

4. “Previous editions not usable” is misleading:

previous editions were usable by complying with applicable Regulations

5. no OMB approval of OPM’s change to an electronic Form in lieu of a paper Form:

OMB must also approve the change to electronic Forms

6. no periodic OMB review or approval routinely required by PRA’s implementing Regulations:

officials at both OPM and OMB have stated there is no “application” for routine OMB review

7. applicable laws and implementing Regulations are listed in this

RESERVATION OF RIGHT TO INSPECT U.S. OPM SF-61:

http://supremelaw.org/letters/reservation.of.right.to.inspect.htm

8. see the following for a summary list of links to important Federal credential laws:

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/laws.and.regs.htm

9. The following points are offered to improve all future editions of SF-61, per 5 CFR 1320.14:

(a) Relevant authorities should be displayed in each lettered Paragraph:

5 USC 3331 in Paragraph A.;

5 USC 3333 and 7311 in Paragraph B.; and,

5 USC 3332 in Paragraph C.

(b) a line should be added under “(Signature of Appointee)” to print Appointee’s name

this printed name will facilitate future FOIA requests for that Officer’s SF-61

(d) under the line above “(Title)” the Officer’s authority to administer SF-61s should be displayed

10. Investigation history of Standard Form 61:

COUNTERFEIT revisions of Standard Form 61 – Sept 1970, June 1986, June 1996, August 2002:

http://supremelaw.org/copyrite/rehnquist/affidavit.gif (see Paragraph B.)

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/sf61.June.1986.pdf

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/sf61.June.1996.pdf

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/sf61.August.2002.pdf

VALID versions of Standard Form 61:

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/tanner.jack/affidavit.annotated.png

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/sf61.December.1966.pdf

Formal NOTICE OF MISSING AND/OR DEFECTIVE CREDENTIALS, Second Circuit:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/United.States.Notice.htm

Formal NOTICE OF MISSING AND/OR DEFECTIVE CREDENTIALS, USDC Oregon:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hammond/United.States.Notice.htm

Crucial Admission by U.S. Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”):

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/opm/letter.2012-08-06/

Crucial Admissions by U.S. Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”):

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2012-08-23/

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2013-01-25/

Key Excerpt from OPM’s GUIDE TO PROCESSING PERSONNEL ACTIONS:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/opm/entry.on.duty.process.htm

Longer Excerpt from OPM’s GUIDE TO PROCESSING PERSONNEL ACTIONS:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/opm/gppa03.pdf

Key Points of Crucial Meeting #4 with Deputy U.S. Marshals, Seattle:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/opm/USMS.Meeting.No.4.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hill/criminal/document.130/notice.errors.clarifications.htm

Status Memo to Deputy U.S. Marshals, San Diego, California:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/gwbush/marshals/memo.2006-09-22.htm

Clerk’s Certificate of SF-61 for Ronald M. Gould complies with 5 U.S.C. 2906

http://supremelaw.org/copyrite/gould/affidavit.gif

Clerk’s Certificate of SF-61 for Richard J. Leon complies with 5 U.S.C. 2906

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/leon.richard/affidavit.gif

Correspondence with U.S. Rep. Val Hoyle re: 5 U.S.C. 3333, 7311

(cf. “constitutional form of government” removed from OPM’s blank SF-61)

https://supremelaw.org/cc/hoyle/letter.2024-06-27/email.2024-06-27.htm