Investigative Reports

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) Administrative Investigations Division investigated an allegation that an employee in the Veterans Health Administration, Office of Quality, Safety and Value engineered the award of a contract valued in excess of $1 million to a company whose Chief Executive Officer was alleged to be a personal friend. The complainant alleged that an existing contracting vehicle was available to meet the requirement and should have been used to procure the services at issue, and that the employee instead improperly steered the contract to the company run by the employee’s friend. The OIG did not substantiate the allegations.

An Amtrak employee in Los Angeles, California, resigned from employment on December 4, 2018, following our investigation which revealed the employee stole money from the Employee Committee Fund. During an interview, the employee admitted to stealing over $20,000 from the fund and using the money to pay for personal expenses. The employee resigned from Amtrak immediately following the interview. Judicial proceedings are pending.

The OIG investigated allegations that an Interior Business Center (IBC) official reprised against a subordinate employee by suspending the employee’s security clearance after the employee filed an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaint against the official.We determined that the employee made a protected disclosure, that the official knew about the disclosure before suspending the clearance, and that the official did not provide clear and convincing evidence that the clearance would have been suspended regardless of the disclosure.We also determined that the IBC official consulted with the DOI Office of the Solicitor, IBC Human Resources, and the official’s supervisor before suspending the employee’s clearance. The clearance suspension was reviewed by U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) personnel, per a Memorandum of Agreement with the IBC, and the BOR recommended reinstatement. The IBC subsequently reinstated the employee’s clearance.

DHS OIG this investigation in response to a complaint made by a Lieutenant Commander in the United States Coast Guard, stationed at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy in New London, Connecticut, alleging that: (1) Complainant received a negative Officer Evaluation Report (OER) after making discrimination and harassment complaints against her superiors; (2) The U.S. Coast Guard failed to respond to the discrimination and harassment experienced by the Complainant; and (3) The U.S. Coast Guard subjected the Complainant to additional harassment and retaliatory actions after filing the complaints. DHS OIG’s investigation substantiated Complainant’s claim that she was retaliated against on the basis of her complaints, in violation of the Military Whistleblower Protection Act, 10 U.S.C. § 1034. Specifically, a preponderance of the evidence established that her complaints were a contributing factor in the numerical marks in her OER for the period ending May 31, 2016. The totality of the evidence demonstrated that the Complainant would have received higher marks absent her complaints. DHS OIG thus recommends that the Secretary order corrective action with regard to the Complainant’s OER.

The OIG investigated an allegation that a National Park Service (NPS) contractor in the U.S. Virgin Islands attempted to provide a cash bribe to an NPS employee. We also investigated allegations that a park supervisor influenced Government personnel to hire a family member as a contractor, that another supervisor prepared fraudulent Government documents to support an improper payment to a contractor, and that two supervisors received free personal work or discounts from a contractor in return for work or promises of work.We found that in June 2018, an NPS contractor gave an NPS employee $500 cash as an illegal gratuity for hiring him to do contract work at the park. The employee immediately reported the incident and turned the money over to the park’s acting superintendent, who provided it to our office.In addition, we found that a park supervisor gave the appearance of a conflict of interest when she told park staff about her family member’s qualifications, but we found no evidence the supervisor was directly involved in hiring the family member as a contractor.We further found that another supervisor failed to follow park guidance by preparing a micropurchase approval form after the contractor had been paid instead of completing the approval form before the work was completed. We did not, however, find that the payment was improper because the contractor performed the work. We found no evidence that two supervisors received free or discounted personal work from a contractor in exchange for work or promises of work.We presented our illegal gratuity finding to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of the U.S. Virgin Islands, which declined prosecution.

The OIG investigated allegations that a Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) manager had used his position for the private gain of a friend, overruled decisions made by an employee’s supervisor regarding the employee’s leave and telework requests, and improperly influenced the award of a contract because of a personal relationship.We found that the BIA manager created the appearance of using public office for the private gain of a friend when he participated on the interview panel that recommended the friend, who was also his former fiancé, for a position within the BIA. We found no evidence that the manager influenced any decisions related to an employee’s leave or telework requests, or that the manager improperly influenced a contract award.

The OIG investigated allegations that senior management within the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Gulf of Mexico Region reprised against an employee for disclosures she made to BOEM officials. The employee also filed similar complaints under Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) provisions.During our investigation, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Office of Civil Rights issued a finding that the employee was discriminated against and subjected to reprisal and a hostile work environment by a former BOEM supervisor. The former BOEM supervisor resigned from Federal service before the Office of Civil Rights issued its finding.The employee subsequently settled with the DOI to resolve all claims, some of which pertained to matters under our investigation. Because of the resolution provided under the settlement agreement, we concluded our investigation.

The OIG investigated allegations that two former employees of a tribally controlled school funded by the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) did not repay payroll advances.We found that one employee failed to repay the school for more than $77,000 in payroll advances and the other failed to repay the school for more than $16,000 in payroll advances. Both employees admitted to owing the funds and that they made no attempt to repay the money when they were no longer employed by the school.We referred this matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Mexico, which declined prosecution.

We investigated whether the boundaries of Utah’s Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (GSENM) were modified, at least in part, for the personal financial benefit of former Utah State Representative Michael Noel, who owned property along the GSENM border and who is currently the executive director of the Kane County (UT) Water Conservancy District. Our investigation focused on:1. Whether the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) followed an established process for assessing proposed boundaries for national monuments, including the proposed GSENM boundary modifications2. Whether Noel influenced the boundary-modification proposal Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke submitted to the President, including whether Zinke was aware of Noel’s property ownership and financial interest in revising the GSENM boundaries and whether he gave Noel preferential treatment in the proposed boundariesWe found that although the DOI had no formal processes in place for modifying national monument boundaries, DOI staff developed and followed a consistent process when reviewing the GSENM and other DOI-controlled national monuments that were being considered for boundary modifications.We also found no evidence that Noel influenced the DOI’s proposed revisions to the GSENM boundaries, that Zinke or other DOI staff involved in the project were aware of Noel’s financial interest in the revised boundaries, or that they gave Noel any preferential treatment in the boundaries proposed to the President.We provided this report to the Deputy Secretary of the Interior for any action deemed appropriate.

The OIG investigated an allegation that Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Administratively Determined (AD) firefighters intentionally set wildland fires for profit on the Cherokee Reservation in Cherokee, NC.We found that firefighters Raymond Swayney, Grady Davis, Zachary Winchester, and three others caused or participated in several wildland arsons for profit between fiscal years 2010 and 2014, impacting hundreds of acres in Cherokee and costing the Federal Government thousands of dollars.Swayney, Davis, and Winchester pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. Swayney was sentenced to 21 months in prison and ordered to pay restitution of $4,989 for violating 18 U.S.C. § 1855 (Timber Set Afire) and 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Conspiracy). Davis was sentenced to 12 months of probation and ordered to pay restitution of $926.16 for violating 18 U.S.C. § 4 (Misprision of a Felony). Winchester was sentenced to 30 days in prison, followed by 24 months of probation for violating 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Conspiracy). At the request of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, we referred the three other firefighters to Cherokee Tribal Court for their participation in starting the fires.

The OIG investigated allegations of mismanagement from students, faculty, and administrators at Haskell Indian Nations University (Haskell) against the Haskell President. The complaints included allegations that the Haskell President and other university officials mishandled misconduct complaints, and that the Haskell President bullied employees, committed nepotism for the benefit of a family member, and showed favoritism towards a subordinate employee. We also investigated allegations of an improper computer purchase using Title III funds.We found that university officials did not consistently follow Haskell’s guidelines for handling complaints of misconduct and that Haskell’s administration inaccurately reported crime statistics in 2014 and 2015. We also found that Haskell employees felt bullied and intimidated by the Haskell President, and we found that the President’s presence in a meeting influenced a family member’s appointment to a high-level position. We did not find evidence that the President showed favoritism or that computers were purchased improperly as alleged.During our investigation, we learned of allegations that a Haskell instructor sexually assaulted a student. We referred that matter to the Lawrence Police Department.

The OIG investigated allegations that Prime 8, LLC, a company that conducted oil and gas operations and inspections in the Gulf of Mexico, violated departmental regulations and created records to support fictitious inspections of offshore platforms regulated by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE).We found the company did not perform platform visits and inspections as required, and documents prepared by the company’s owner concealed that the mandatory platform visits had not occurred. Because of the inaccuracies in the company’s documents, BSEE inspectors could not have known that the company did not complete the required inspections.We referred our investigation to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas, which declined prosecution.

The OIG completed an investigation to determine if Peabody Energy Corporation (Peabody) submitted false statements to the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WDEQ) to obtain self-bonds for coal mines on Federal leases in Wyoming and to determine if the WDEQ acted appropriately in the review of those applications.We did not find any false statements submitted by Peabody. Further, we found the WDEQ acted appropriately in the review of Peabody’s self-bonding applications.We issued this report of investigation to the Director for the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.

This work product summarizes an OIG review of allegations of VA waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement. The results of the OIG’s oversight efforts are typically published in a formal report. However, the OIG has issued alternative work products, such as this one, in lieu of a full report in certain circumstances. These included instances in which the OIG could not substantiate an allegation or substantiated an allegation without issuing recommendations, when actions were taken by VA during the course of an ongoing project to remediate errors, or when the subject of an allegation retired or resigned from service prior to the completion of OIG's work. In addition, the OIG has issued work products when investigating allegations involving its own personnel when not in the exclusive purview of other agencies.

The VA OIG did not find that the Northern California Health Care System Director violated VA policy regarding the use of government vehicles. The Director was unaware employees drove these vehicles between work and home. The OIG found that Dr. Dawn Erckenbrack (GS-15), the Associate Director of the Sacramento VA Medical Center, improperly authorized a local policy permitting her to delegate authority for the approval of no-cost travel orders to the Chief of Logistics Management Service (CLMS). The CLMS used this authority to allow employees to take government vehicles home overnight and on weekends under the provisions applicable to TDY travel with the use of no-cost travel orders. The Director said that upon learning of this policy, he immediately rescinded it. The OIG did not substantiate another allegation, negating the need for further discussion in the report.

An Amtrak Building and Bridges Supervisor in Baltimore, Maryland, was terminated from employment following an administrative hearing on October 23, 2018, for violating company policy by claiming and receiving pay for unworked hours and instructing a subordinate employee, also based in Baltimore, to use the supervisor’s company identification card to clock the supervisor in and out for his shifts on several occasions. The subordinate employee was also found to have violated company policy for his role in assisting the supervisor and, following an administrative hearing on October 25, 2018, the subordinate employee was suspended for 30-days

U.S. Department of Labor Office of Inspector General's investigations newsletter for the period of August 1 - September 30, 2018.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) is conducting an investigation into allegations that the whistleblower was retaliated against for, among other things, communicating with Members of Congress regarding discrimination and retaliation against the whistleblower. The whistleblower alleged being subjected to retaliatory investigations by CGIS in violation of the Military Whistleblower Protection Act (MWPA). We recently learned that CGIS executed a search warrant against the whistleblower several months after the whistleblower retired from the Coast Guard, but soon after CGIS became aware of the OIG’s whistleblower retaliation investigation. Our information indicates that a CGIS agent obtained the search warrant in connection with a CGIS-directed investigation.

The OIG investigated allegations of misconduct and mismanagement at Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute (SIPI), a community college in Albuquerque, NM, operated and overseen by the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE). The complainant alleged that a SIPI manager engaged in sexual misconduct and harassment, and violated Federal travel regulations and U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) policy. The complainant also alleged that other SIPI managers and employees retaliated against her for filing complaints about the SIPI manager, failed to address employee complaints, failed to complete performance appraisals, engaged in improper hiring practices, circumvented the acquisition process, and misused a Government purchase card.We found that the SIPI manager had a sexual relationship with a SIPI student, but neither the college nor the BIE have a policy prohibiting sexual relationships between faculty and students. In addition, several of the manager’s colleagues and direct reports described the manager’s behavior in the workplace as confrontational, abrasive, and argumentative. We did not substantiate the allegations that the SIPI manager violated Federal travel regulations or DOI policy.We also found that SIPI managers did not complete performance appraisals for all employees and that the appraisal process at SIPI allowed managers to determine ratings-based cash awards for themselves. We did not substantiate the remaining allegations, including retaliation against the complainant.

We investigated an anonymous complaint alleging that Superintendent Ed Clark of Gettysburg National Military Park (GETT) violated ethics rules by soliciting funds on behalf of the Gettysburg Foundation, a non-Government organization; accepting Foundation-funded travel to events sponsored by the Foundation and those sponsored by other non-Government entities; and hosting a Foundation-funded dinner for his employees.We found that from February 2014 to October 2016, Clark traveled 27 times to attend events organized by the Foundation. We found that Clark committed criminal violations by submitting false travel vouchers and by accepting more than $23,000 in meals, lodging, and other in-kind gifts from non-Government organizations as compensation for his official services. In addition, he violated laws and regulations by failing to obtain required supervisory and ethics approval prior to taking these trips and by failing to report expenses accurately following his trips.We also found that his subordinate staff approved his travel authorizations, that he sometimes traveled without first submitting a travel authorization request, and that he requested full per diem reimbursement even though the Foundation paid for some of his meals during those trips.We found that Clark functioned as GETT’s liaison to the Foundation without prior supervisory approval or consulting with ethics officials. We did not find evidence that Clark solicited funds on GETT’s behalf, but we did find that Clark twice gave statements of support to the Foundation and the Civil War Trust that were included in solicitation letters addressed to members and potential donors.We also found that in September 2015 Clark asked the Foundation to pay for a dinner costing more than $6,000 that Clark and other National Park Service employees and Foundation guests attended, violating the ethics regulation that prohibits soliciting gifts from prohibited sources.We coordinated this investigation with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and on October 17, 2018, we were informed that office had declined prosecution.