Investigative Reports

DOJ News Release

1n February 2016, the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community (ICIG), I. Charles McCullough, asked the DHS OlG to review a Presidential Policy Directive 19 ("PPD-19") complaint filed by [REDACTED], a former CIA employee. The OHS OIG accepted the request, and in August 2016, the DHS OIG determined that it would conduct a full Wbistleblower Retaliation Investigation.

The OIG investigated an allegation that a former Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) realty specialist solicited a $200 bribe from a longtime lessee of tribal land so the lessee could retain the lease.We could not prove or disprove the bribery allegation. The lessee provided us a transaction receipt for a $200 check he wrote to a local store for cash, which he said he then paid to the BIA employee in exchange for assistance with renewing the lease. The lessee, however, could not provide any further evidence to corroborate his claim. The former BIA employee denied soliciting or accepting money from the lessee.During our investigation, we learned the lessee submitted a $57,000 lease renewal payment to the BIA but was not awarded the lease because he did not submit his bid in time. The former BIA employee erroneously sent the lessee an invoice and then accepted the payment and issued it to the Tribe. At the time of our report, neither the Tribe nor the BIA had reimbursed the lessee for the erroneous payment.The employee left the Department during our investigation. We referred this matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which declined prosecution.

The OIG investigated an allegation that a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) law enforcement supervisor was involved in an outside business venture in violation of Federal ethics regulations and U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) policies. We also investigated whether the law enforcement supervisor and a subordinate special agent participated in the business activity while on duty and whether the law enforcement supervisor showed preferential treatment toward the special agent. We found the law enforcement supervisor participated in outside activity and employment with three entities, one of which was a prohibited source under Federal regulations and did not seek prior approval from his supervisor and an ethics official as required. The law enforcement supervisor also received financial reimbursements and payments for training services he provided for two of the entities, which violated Federal law, and did not report any of that income on his financial disclosure forms as required by Federal ethics regulations.Finally, the law enforcement supervisor claimed official work hours from the BLM on days when he had been providing training to these entities in his personal capacity.We found no evidence that the subordinate special agent participated in outside activity that violated Federal regulations or DOI policy, or that the law enforcement supervisor showed preferential treatment toward the special agent. The law enforcement supervisor left the Department during our investigation. We referred this matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which declined prosecution.

The OIG investigated allegations that a former U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) employee made personal purchases with his Government travel card (GTC) while he was in an absent without leave (AWOL) employment status.We confirmed the former employee used his GTC to pay his rent and car insurance and attempted to use his GTC to withdraw cash and pay his cell phone bill while AWOL. Our investigation also found the BOR lacked policy to ensure AWOL employees’ GTC accounts are suspended or cancelled.The employee was removed from Federal service. The local District Attorney’s Office charged the employee with unauthorized use of a financial transaction device and there is an active warrant for his arrest.

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.