Federal Reports

DHS OIG issued this management alert to notify the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Protective Service (FPS) of an urgent issue that requires immediate attention and action. DHS must take immediate action to: (1) Ensure that the Director of FPS has authority to designate DHS employees under 40 U.S.C. § 1315(b)(1); and (2) Ensure proper, by-name designation of any DHS employees authorized to exercise authority under 40 U.S.C. § 1315 to protect Federal property and persons on that property. During an ongoing review, we learned that the FPS Director did not properly designate DHS employees deployed to protect Federal properties under 40 U.S.C. § 1315(b)(1). Proper designation is important because deployed law enforcement officers from U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Transportation Security Administration, and U.S. Secret Service typically lack this precise scope of authority. Another effect of the FPS Director’s approach is that several law enforcement personnel were deployed to Portland, Oregon to augment FPS’ protection efforts, but may not have received training on 40 U.S.C. § 1315 before they were deployed.

Final financial statements audit for fiscal year 2020.

NGA OIG Fall Semiannual Report to Congress, 1 April - 30 September 2020

This investigation addressed an allegation that an employee violated federal ethics laws by obtaining outside employment with a TVA contractor while still employed with TVA. The investigation revealed that the employee obtained outside employment only after TVA eliminated his position and he began a 90-severance period during which TVA told him he could pursue employment with any outside company. Furthermore, there was no evidence the employee attempted to influence any official action at TVA during this period. The employee did not comply with several legal and regulatory requirements such as filing a statement notifying the Designated Agency Ethics Official (DAEO) of his negotiation for outside employment. Additionally, the employee did not file a recusal statement, obtain a written waiver for outside employment or qualify for a regulatory exemption from these requirements. The evidence shows the employee worked solely with TVA Human Resources (HR) during the termination process and did not receive advice from the DAEO regarding these requirements.The OIG recommends that TVA HR consult with TVA’s DAEO to ensure TVA employees receive detailed guidance regarding outside employment and post-employment issues.