Investigative Reports

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigated allegations that the chief of staff at a VA medical center engaged in a conflict of interest by performing work for a private company that provides education services and misused his official position by recruiting VA physicians to work for that same company in 2017 and 2018. The OIG did not substantiate either alleged violation. The OIG did, however, identify a related misuse of government resources. After the OIG investigation began, the chief of staff sought advice from the VA Office of General Counsel regarding whether the work for the company presented a conflict of interest. The chief of staff was advised that there was no conflict of interest. In seeking this advice, the chief of staff disclosed that he had previously asked two VA physicians to do work for the company. The OGC ethics team advised that the VA physicians could continue working for the company; however, the chief of staff should not participate in any employment arrangements between the VA physicians and the company. The chief of staff confirmed that he would follow the advice. The OIG identified email threads exchanged between the chief of staff and the VA physicians in support of the outside business activities associated with the education company. When presented with these emails, the chief of staff apologized and expressed surprise. The two VA physicians indicated they believed (incorrectly) that the use of VA resources to conduct activities related to the company was permissible if it was done outside working hours. The OIG makes no recommendations. However, nothing in this report shall prevent the medical center director from taking appropriate administrative action with respect to the improper use of VA email resources by the chief of staff and the physicians.

The OIG investigated allegations that a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) manager accepted gifts from prohibited sources, awarded contracts to personal friends, directed improper credit card purchases, and violated travel regulations.We did not find evidence that the manager’s actions violated ethics, procurement, or travel regulations as alleged.

We investigated whether career U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) staff were directed to delay releasing documents responding to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that was being litigated in U.S. district court, and whether withholding these documents conflicted with the court’s order to the DOI to review a certain number of potentially responsive pages every month.We found that after David Bernhardt’s nomination for Interior Secretary was announced on February 4, 2019, then Counselor to the Secretary Hubbel Relat directed career DOI staff to temporarily withhold documents related to Bernhardt from a release of FOIA documents scheduled to occur under the court order. As a result, 253 pages of information were not included in the scheduled release, but most of those pages were released later in 2019. Accordingly, we have determined that this matter does not warrant further investigation and that the court is the proper venue to determine whether the DOI met its obligations under the court order.

We investigated allegations that two National Park Service (NPS) managers violated contracting regulations and procedures by using the Standard Form 182 (SF-182), which is meant to fund standardized training, to pay a company for extended work on an internal NPS training website. We also investigated allegations that NPS employees improperly hired NPS retirees and then re-issued or re-activated their Personal Identity Verification (PIV) cards.We found that the two NPS managers, who oversaw aspects of NPS training programs, improperly used the SF-182 to pay a company $1,041,117 to develop and maintain an internal training website, circumventing contracting regulations. The two NPS managers have since left the agency.We also found that one of the managers retained his PIV card after retiring and had another employee re-enable the card after he left Federal service, in violation of departmental policy. We also discovered a separate instance in which an NPS retiree performed fiscal and budget-related services for an NPS training center without a contract. The NPS retiree received a new PIV card under the guise of an unrelated contract.

The OIG investigated an allegation that an employee with the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs (AS-IA) may have improperly used entities that he owned or had a financial interest in to perform work at the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI).We found that the employee was involved in choosing two unregistered entities with whom he or other DOI staff had personal relationships and repeatedly paid them with a charge card, rather than establish a contract as required. The employee violated DOI policy and Federal regulations by misusing his Government charge card; asking for and receiving cash from the entities while they performed work for the DOI; issuing numerous payments to the entities with no supporting documentation; and submitting altered invoices during an internal charge card review as support for payments he made. We also found the employee personally received funds from the DOI for a private group he operated, and he did not file a financial disclosure as required by his position.The U.S. Department of Justice declined prosecution and the employee left Federal service.

The OIG investigated allegations that Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) Facilities employees Simon Nunez, David Parrish, and Leland Martinez and San Felipe School employees Ruby Montoya and Nancy Nunez made personal purchases on their assigned Government charge cards.Parrish and Martinez admitted to purchasing personal items, including sheds, tankless water heaters, computers, and tools, with their Government purchase charge cards between August 2013 and December 2016. Simon Nunez, a BIE Facilities Manager, directed the purchases and kept some of the stolen property. Nunez purchased three computers, two of which she converted for personal use and one of which she gave to Montoya to be converted to personal use. Montoya authorized Nunez to purchase one computer, which Montoya converted to personal use.Simon Nunez pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico to nine counts of theft, conspiracy, and false statements. He was sentenced to 6 months in prison followed by 24 months of supervised release and was ordered to pay $6,664.52 in restitution, a $900 special assessment, and a $5,000 fine. Simon Nunez left Federal service on December 23, 2016.Parrish pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico to four counts of conspiracy and theft. He was sentenced to 18 months of probation and was ordered to pay $2,035.51 in restitution, a $400 special assessment, and a $2,500 fine. Parrish left Federal service on December 23, 2016.Martinez pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico to five counts of conspiracy and theft. He was sentenced to 24 months of probation and was ordered to pay $2,895 in restitution, a $500 special assessment, and a $500 fine. Martinez left Federal service on November 6, 2019.Montoya pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico to unlawful conversion of government property and was sentenced to 12 months of probation and was ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. Montoya left Federal service on February 10, 2017.Nancy Nunez pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico to three counts of unlawful conversion of government property and was sentenced to 24 months of probation and was ordered to pay a fine of $8,879 and a special assessment of $300. Nancy Nunez left Federal service on April 14, 2017.

We investigated allegations that Lawrence Killsback, while serving as President of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe (NCT), submitted fraudulent travel claims. The funds used to pay the fraudulent claims came from federally funded NCT programs. Our investigation focused on Killsback’s regional travel in Montana, Wyoming, and South Dakota. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a parallel investigation that focused on Killsback’s remaining domestic trips.Together, the parallel investigations found that Killsback stole over $20,000 from NCT programs by submitting multiple fraudulent travel vouchers between August 18, 2014, and August 25, 2017.This investigation was prosecuted jointly with the HHS OIG investigation. Killsback pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for the District of Montana to one count of wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 and one count of false claims conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 286. On December 12, 2019, Killsback was sentenced to 6 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release. Killsback was also ordered to pay a $200 special assessment and $25,092 in restitution.

The OIG investigated allegations that a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) project management specialist illegally diverted water from a BOR canal to a private ranch. Our investigation confirmed the project management specialist approved the water diversion, but we did not find evidence the project management specialist received any personal benefit, financial or otherwise, as a result. The project management specialist said they approved the water diversion because they were trying to solve the ranch owner’s concern that construction in the area had blocked flood-water overflow from coming onto the ranch owner’s property. The project management specialist further said they were concerned that the ranch owner would terminate an agreement that allowed the BOR to operate a pump station—which the BOR uses to protect endangered species in the area by pumping water to dry areas—on the ranch owner’s property because the terms of the agreement allowed the ranch owner to terminate the agreement if the ranch owner believed the BOR impeded any of their projects.We further found the project management specialist circumvented engineering and environmental approval by funding the project through an existing operations and maintenance contract instead of a new contract, which would have triggered the BOR’s review and approval process. The project management specialist said they believed the project was within the scope of work of the existing contract and did not seek approval before authorizing the water diversion.

The Office of Special Reviews investigated allegations that a GS-14 employee in VA’s Office of Information and Technology misused his government email by sending personal emails during work hours, and also took advantage of his telework arrangement to handle personal matters during his duty hours. The OIG could not substantiate the misuse of official time or improper use of VA resources because the employee routinely worked outside of his regular duty hours with his supervisor’s approval, and VA has not established criteria defining how much personal use of VA email is excessive. While investigating these issues, the OIG became aware that the employee had referred staff who were planning conferences for his group to his wife, a sales manager for a large hotel chain, and sent emails providing direction about the arrangements for these conferences. The staff subsequently booked rooms for these events at hotels for which the employee’s wife had sales responsibility. Although the staff made the decision and the arrangements were advantageous to VA, the OIG determined that the employee’s conduct appeared contrary to ethical rules prohibiting an employee from using his public office for “his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity….” The OIG made one recommendation relating to a supervisory review of the employee’s conduct and consideration of appropriate administrative action, if any. VA concurred with this recommendation.

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigated a non-specific allegation that chief nurses within the Miami VA Health Care System (Miami HCS) violated the federal anti-nepotism statute by arranging to have their spouses hired for positions for which the spouses were not qualified. This allegation could not be substantiated. In addition, a specific allegation of nepotism was made pertaining to the conduct of a particular chief nurse. The OIG substantiated the allegation that the chief nurse violated the anti-nepotism statute by recommending the chief nurse’s spouse for a position at the Miami HCS. The chief nurse falls under the statutory definition of a public official and was prohibited from advocating for the employment by VA of the chief nurse’s spouse. The chief nurse was involved in two communications relating to the spouse’s possible employment at VA, one of which the OIG considered advocacy contrary to the federal anti-nepotism statute. The spouse withdrew his/her application without providing an explanation and was not hired by VA. The OIG made one recommendation relating to administrative action against the chief nurse if the Miami HCS Director deems it appropriate. VA concurred with the OIG’s finding and determined administrative action at this time is unwarranted. The OIG considers the recommendation closed.