Federal Reports

The OIG investigated an allegation that a supervisor within the Office of the Secretary lowered a subordinate employee’s annual performance rating in reprisal for protected disclosures and activities made by the employee.We found no evidence that the supervisor reprised against the employee. We confirmed that the employee made protected disclosures and engaged in protected activities. However, we found that the supervisor would have given the employee the same performance rating absent the protected disclosures and activities.

The OIG investigated allegations that a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) assistant hatchery manager directed an FWS biologist to validate an inaccurate cause of death for an endangered fish species in a mortality report to cover up alleged neglect at an FWS fishery. It was also alleged that a culture of censorship existed within that FWS region’s management. We investigated this matter jointly with the U.S. Department of the Interior’s (DOI’s) scientific integrity coordinators, Office of Quality and Science Integrity, U.S. Geological Survey.We found no evidence to corroborate the allegation that the biologist was directed to falsify scientific records, nor did we find evidence to corroborate that she was censored. We determined that the biologist was disciplined for a pattern of discourteous behavior toward management and not, as was claimed, in retaliation for scientific findings that reflected poorly on the FWS.We provided this report to the FWS Director for any action deemed appropriate.

Seek link below for the full report, report summary, multimedia or any agency follow-up.

The Chemical Safety Board (CSB) purchase card program, through which the agency spent $326,859 in FY 2018, is at low risk for unauthorized purchases.

The Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) methods for classifying its Office of Inspection (OOI) criminal investigators as law enforcement officers were adequate and valid, but the data TSA used were not adequate or valid. TSA’s criminal investigators spend at least 50 percent of their time performing criminal investigative duties to be classified as law enforcement officers. The FY 2017 timesheet data TSA used to validate that its criminal investigators met the 50 percent requirement were not adequate and valid as the data were not always timely submitted and approved. This occurred because OOI officials lacked oversight and accountability for the timesheet submission, review, and approval processes. Further, criminal investigators and their supervisors did not always complete and approve certification forms as required to verify eligibility for premium pay. In some instances, incorrect timesheet calculations inflated the annual average of unscheduled duty hours criminal investigators worked to be eligible for premium pay. OOI management did not develop and implement guidance to review these key calculations annually. Without better oversight and valid timesheet data, TSA cannot ensure it is accurately classifying criminal investigators as law enforcement officers. TSA also may be wasting agency funds on criminal investigators ineligible to receive premium pay. We made four recommendations that, when implemented, should help TSA improve data used to classify its OOI criminal investigators as law enforcement officers. TSA concurred with all of our recommendations.