(a) Standard. Employees have a duty to protect and conserve Government property and may not use such property, or allow its use, for other than authorized purposes.
(b) Definitions. For purposes of this section:
(1) Government property includes any form of real or personal property in which the Government has an ownership, leasehold, or other property interest as well as any right or other intangible interest that is purchased with Government funds, including the services of contractor personnel. The term includes but is not limited to office supplies, telephone and other telecommunications equipment and services, Government mail, computers and other electronic devices, printing and reproduction facilities, Government records, Government email and social media accounts, and Government vehicles.
(2) Authorized purposes are those purposes for which Government property is made available to members of the public or those purposes authorized in accordance with law or regulation. Authorized purposes include but are not limited to those uses of Government property that are in accordance with an agency's limited or de minimis personal use policy.
Example 1 to paragraph (b): As permitted under their agency's de minimis personal use policy, an employee may send an email from a Government email account to a former college roommate to schedule lunch for the following day.
Example 2 to paragraph (b): An employee of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission whose office computer provides access to a commercial service providing information for investors may not use that service for personal investment research.
Example 3 to paragraph (b): In accordance with Office of Personnel Management regulations at part 251 of this title, an attorney employed by the Department of Justice may be permitted to use their office computer and agency photocopy equipment to prepare a paper to be presented at a conference sponsored by a professional association of which they are a member.
Notes of Decisions
Jaclynne M. O'Neill v. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 220 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2000).
· cites it 3× “The administrative judge also sustained the charge of misuse of government property, holding that there is no de minimis exception to the applicable standard of *1359 conduct, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.704 (a), which provides that “an employee has a duty to protect and conserve Government…”
United States v. Farence, 57 M.J. 674 (2002).
“59, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.704 (2002). "Authorized purposes” is defined as "those purposes for which Government property is made available to members of the public or for purposes authorized in accordance with law or regulation.”
United States v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., 72 F.3d 740 (9th Cir. 1995).
“702; the use of government property or government time for personal purposes, 5 C.F.R. §§ 2635.704 , 2635.705; the trafficking in “inside information” for personal advantage, 5 C.”
Baltimore v. Clinton, 900 F. Supp. 2d 21 (D.D.C. 2012).
“§ 1349 and 5 C.F.R. § 2635.704 by authorizing his wife to use a government-owned vehicle.”
Sphatt v. Dhs (Fed. Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “, 78 M.S.P.R. 1 , 6–7 (1998)). Ms. Sphatt does not challenge that choice to merge the charges.”
Martin v. Dhs (Fed. Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “Van-Zile; nor does he dispute that NCIC access is allowed only in connection with official duties.”
Husain v. Warren (D.D.C. 2021).
“40) (citing 5 C.F.R. § 2635.704 (a)). Peters further explained that “[s]ending out mass email to a broad cross section of Agency personnel, containing highly- charged personal allegations[,] is not consistent with authorized purposes for the use of Government property” and that…”
Velasquez v. Grisham (D.N.M. 2019).
“703 Use of nonpublic information; (iv) 5 CFR § 2635.704 Use of Government property; and (v) 5 CFR § 2635.”
Spyropoulos v. Ssa (Fed. Cir. 2025).
“” 5 C.F.R § 2635.704(a). The regulation allows for “limited or de min- imis personal use” if that use is in accordance “with an agency’s .”
Martin v. Navy (Fed. Cir. 2026).
“377–79; see 5 C.F.R. § 2635.704 , it searched her agency-issued computer, re- vealing documents, website activity, and pay records from the latter part of 2016 indicating that Dr.”
United States v. Blair, 67 M.J. 566 (2008).
“” 5 CFR 2635.704(a), rendered in bold italics in Enclosure (1) to COMD-TINST M5370.”
— 5 C.F.R. § 2635.704(a) — 3 cases
Spyropoulos v. Ssa (Fed. Cir. 2025).
“” 5 C.F.R § 2635.704(a). The regulation allows for “limited or de min- imis personal use” if that use is in accordance “with an agency’s .”
United States v. Blair, 67 M.J. 566 (2008).
“” 5 CFR 2635.704(a), rendered in bold italics in Enclosure (1) to COMD-TINST M5370.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.