Eef 2013
Eef 2013
Eef 2013
Department of Defense Office of General Counsel Standards of Conduct Office Updated July 2013
Contents
Introduction
The Standards of Conduct Office of the Department of Defense General Counsels Office has assem led the follo!in" selection of cases of ethical failure for use as a trainin" tool# Our "oal is to pro$ide DoD personnel !ith real e%amples of &ederal employees !ho ha$e intentionally or un!ittin"ly $iolated the standards of conduct# Some cases are humorous' some sad' and all are real# Some !ill an"er you as a &ederal employee and some !ill an"er you as an (merican ta%payer# )lease pay particular attention to the multiple *ail and pro ation sentences' fines' employment terminations and other sanctions that !ere ta+en as a result of these ethical failures# ,iolations of many ethical standards in$ol$e criminal statutes# )rotect yourself and your employees y learnin" !hat you need to +no! and accessin" your ("ency ethics counselor if you ecome unsure of the proper course of conduct# -e sure to access them before you ta+e action re"ardin" the issue in .uestion# /any of the cases displayed in this collection could ha$e een a$oided completely if the offender had ta+en this simple precaution# The cases ha$e een arran"ed accordin" to offense for ease of access# &eel free to reproduce and use them as you li+e in your ethics trainin" pro"ram# &or e%ample 0 you may e conductin" a trainin" session re"ardin" political acti$ities# &eel free to copy and paste a case or t!o into your slidesho! or handout 1 or use them as e%amples or discussion pro lems# 2f you ha$e a case you !ould li+e to ma+e a$aila le for inclusion in a future update of this collection' please email it to soco3osd#mil or you may fa% it to 45036 7890:850#
Disclaimer
This Encyclopedia of Ethical Failure is intended to sensiti;e &ederal employees to the reach and impact of &ederal ethics statutes and re"ulations# 2t is est used to supplement personal $erification of those statutes and re"ulations# 2t should not e interpreted as a indin" or authoritati$e presentation of the la!#
Abuse of Position
Chief Authority
( military ser$ice Chief /aster Ser"eant a used her authority and improperly used a "o$ernment $ehicle !hen she employed a "o$ernment $ehicle and three non0 commissioned officers under her super$ision to mo$e personal property in a "o$ernment rental $ehicle# The soldiers helped her for 3 hours# The Chief /aster Ser"eant !as "i$en a $er al !arnin" and ad$ised of the improper use of "o$ernment $ehicles and the a use of authority#
includin" the failure to a$oid the appearance of impropriety# The employee mo$ed into $isitors .uarters on a military installation !here he stayed for si% months !ithout payin" full price for his room y pressurin" his su ordinate to ac.uiesce to his payment arran"ements# Be also authori;ed an employee to ma+e a @:00 a"ency e%penditure to purchase !or+out clothin" for one /<A fitness instructor# The employee had no reason to elie$e he had the authority to authori;e this e%penditure and should ha$e made in.uiry efore "i$in" authori;ation# The administrati$e la! *ud"e stated that this act >at the $ery least "i$es the appearance of impropriety and should ha$e raised a red fla"#?
Federal A'ent Demoted for I(D(in' )erself as a Federal A'ent to a Police *fficer
( Super$isory Special ("ent for the Department of the Treasury 4GS01:6 !as a passen"er in a car that !as pulled o$er y a local police officer# <hen the officer approached the $ehicle' the employee presented the officer !ith her credentials identifyin" herself as a &ederal ("ent# The police officer had not as+ed to see the 9
employees identification at all# -ecause la! enforcement officials may e tempted to treat other la! enforcement officials more fa$ora ly' the Department determined the employee presented her "o$ernment credentials to the police officer in hopes of recei$in" more fa$ora le treatment# The federal employee did not e%plicitly as+ the police officer for any fa$ors' ut the circumstances led her a"ency to the conclusion that she had attempted to use her official position for personal "ain' !hich is prohi ited y federal ethics rules# (s a result' the employees a"ency determined that she !as untrust!orthy as a super$isor and she !as demoted#
The 2G !as una le to tally the total num er of employees and hours that !ere de$oted to Truscotts nephe!' ut estimated that at least 20 (T& employees !ere in$ol$ed# The 2G determined that Truscott $iolated "o$ernment re"ulations prohi itin" federal employees from usin" their office for pri$ate "ain' !astin" "o$ernment resources' and influencin" su ordinates to !aste "o$ernment resources# 4Office of the 2nspector General' Aeport of 2n$esti"ation Concernin" (lle"ed /ismana"ement and /isconduct y Carl J# Truscott' &ormer Director of the -ureau of (lcohol' To acco' &irearms and =%plosi$es#
conduct esta lished for DoD employees and mem ers of the Senior =%ecuti$e Ser$ice# The Office of the Secretary of Defense promptly initiated actions to terminate the Deputy (ssistant#
(s a result of his action' the -ureau Director !as treated to a four0hour ethics session and a fine for personal use of official posta"e#
-ucrati e Contractin'
( former (rmy officer had found a lucrati$e "i"G acceptin" cash payments for facilitatin" contractin" et!een 2ra.is and the U#S# "o$ernment durin" a deployment to -a"hdad# This particular officer accepted @35'900 in cash payment for these >facilitations#? The officer !as sentenced to prison' three years of super$ised release' and !as re.uired to pay @35'900 restitution to the U#S# Go$ernment#
10
plea a"reement' the employee a"reed to forfeit the ri e proceeds' as !ell as to pay full restitution to the Department of Defense#
e.uipment to do the contractors !or+# Be su mitted false in$oices on ehalf of the contractor' resultin" in a @1#3 million loss to the "o$ernment# (s a result of a plea deal for cooperation in additional procurement in$esti"ations' the mana"er !as sentenced to 19 months in prison and de arred from "o$ernment contractin" for four years# This in$esti"ation touched off fi$e separate criminal in$esti"ations a"ainst other contractors in that /ilitary Ser$ice re"ardin" alle"ations of id ri""in"#
12
&a?or @ron'doin'
( retired (rmy /a*or' Christopher B# /urray' pled "uilty to char"es of ri ery and ma+in" a false statement arisin" from his acti$ities at Camp (rif*an' Iu!ait# 2n 2009 and 2007' !hile ser$in" as a contractin" specialist at Camp (ri*an' /urray recei$ed appro%imately @229'000 in ri es from DOD contractors# 2n return' he recommended the a!ard of contracts for $arious "oods and ser$ices# /urray also admitted that he recei$ed an additional @20'000 in ri es from a DOD contractor in e%chan"e for the a!ard of a construction contract# /urrays misconduct continued as he made false statements to federal a"ents in$esti"atin" his conduct# /urrays sentencin" is pendin"' ut the ma%imum penalty for each of four ri ery counts is 19 years in prison and a @290'000 fine# The ma%imum penalty for ma+in" a false statement is fi$e years in prison and a @290'000 fine# 2n another ri ery case at Camp (rif*an' another (rmy /a*or' James /omon' Jr#' accepted cash ri es from fi$e DOD contractin" firms that supplied ottled !ater and other "oods and ser$ices to ases in Iu!ait# /omon' a contractin" officer at the camp' a!arded contracts and -lan+et )urchase ("reement calls to those contractors' recei$in" @9#E million as payment for his actions# /omon pled "uilty to ri ery and conspiracy to commit ri ery# Bis sentencin" is pendin"' ut' li+e /urray' /omon faces up to 19 years in prison and a @290'000 fine for each ri ery count' as !ell as fi$e years in prison for the conspiracy count# /omon has also a"reed to pay @9#E million in restitution#
Inhibitin' 7ictory
( /a*or in the U#S# (rmy Aeser$e pled "uilty to conspiracy and ri ery char"es related to DOD contracts at Camp ,ictory' 2ra.# (ccordin" to the char"in" document' Theresa Jeanne -a+er recei$ed money and other items' includin" a Barley Da$idson motorcycle' from a defense contractor' Aaman Corporation' and a former employee of another defense contractor' =lie Samir Chidiac# 2n return' -a+er con$eyed sensiti$e information and fraudulently a!arded contracts to the contractor# -a+er also canceled contracts that !ere a!arded to third party contractors and fraudulently re0a!arded them to Chidiac# -a+ers sentencin" is pendin"' ut the ma%imum penalty for each of -a+ers t!o ri ery counts is 19 years in prison and the "reater of a @290'000 fine and three times 13
the monetary e.ui$alent of the thin" of $alue recei$ed# -a+er !as also char"ed !ith t!o counts of conspiracy# =ach count comes !ith a ma%imum penalty of fi$e years in prison and a @290'000 fine#
Courtin' Trouble
( former official of the U#S# Ta% Court' &red &ernando Tim ol Jr#' !as sentenced to 1E months in prison and three years of super$ised release in connection !ith a ri ery conspiracy# Tim ol !as a facilities ser$ices officer in the &acilities /ana"ement Section of the U#S# Ta% Court# Tim ol !as responsi le for assistin" in the a!ard of contracts to contractors !ho pro$ided maintenance' construction' and other related ser$ice to the Court# Tim ol admitted to solicitin" and acceptin" o$er @12'000 from a "o$ernment contractor in e%chan"e for ri""in" the a!ard of at least si% inflated contracts# (s part of a plea a"reement and y order of the court' Tim ol also a"reed to pay restitution of @2:'1:3#
&oore &isconduct
&irst Jieutenant Ao ert /oore 4Aet#6 a"reed to pay @120'000 in restitution for acceptin" money from contractors in e%chan"e for the a!ard of DOD contracts# 2n addition to pleadin" "uilty to ri ery for the a!ard of contracts at -a"ram (irfield' (f"hanistan' /oore pled "uilty to conspiracy' admittin" to falsifyin" the num er of un+ers and arriers deli$ered at -a"ram' !hich resulted in DOD payin" for un+ers and arriers that !ere ne$er recei$ed# /oore also admitted falsifyin" dama"e reports for leased $ehicles' causin" DOD to pay for repairs not performed# T!o other officials' Christopher )# <est' an (rmy /a*or' and )atric+ <# -oyd' an (ir &orce /aster Ser"eant' li+e!ise pled "uilty to ri ery and conspiracy for related conduct# The t!o a"reed to pay @900'000 and @130'000' respecti$ely' in restitution to DOD#
1:
Co# for a @193'000 contract# -ut ehind the scenes' the company had first a"reed to pay the Go$ernment employee @9'000 in e%chan"e for the recommendation' per the employees re.uest# The technician admitted to acceptin" the ri e in return for his official action that resulted in the contract a!ard# The Ka$y de arred the ci$ilian employee for three years' and he left &ederal ser$ice#
$endor supplied her !ith a laptop computer# The ,( )olice and Security Ser$ice' as they are !ont to do' in$esti"ated and disco$ered this quid pro quo# The director !as cau"ht and pleaded "uilty to solicitin" and recei$in" ille"al "ifts# She !as sentenced to 9 months in prison' to e follo!ed y 5 months of home confinement' and ordered to pay restitution of @80:# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' &e # 2001#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2014c64164-6 420036 for ids any pu lic official from acceptin" anythin" of $alue in e%chan"e for an official act to e performed' or ecause of any official act already performed# ,iolations of this la! can merit fines' imprisonment for up to 2 years' or oth#
17
15
and an all0e%pense paid trip to Iorea in e%chan"e for preferential treatment of applications for Iorean pilots from the fli"ht school' <in"s O$er (merica# The employee !as sentenced to pay a @2'000 fine and ser$e four months in prison' follo!ed y three years pro ation for $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2014 6426# -ri ery occurs !hen a pu lic official see+s or accepts anythin" of $alue in return for ein" influenced in the performance of an official act#
to defraud the Go$ernment 41E U#S#C# 13:16# The aide !as sentenced to 1E months imprisonment on each count follo!ed y t!o years pro ation# The staff assistant accepted @3'500 for assistin" indi$iduals in o tainin" permanent residency status y sendin" endorsements on the Con"ressmanDs letterhead to the 2mmi"ration and Katurali;ation Ser$ice 42KS6# The aide !as also in$ol$ed in a scheme to defraud aliens see+in" permanent residency# The aide told the aliens that if they !ere mem ers in the Se$enth Day (d$entist Church' they !ould e eli"i le for permanent resident status e$en thou"h the 2KS Special Aeli"ious 2mmi"rant <or+ )ro"ram co$ers only church !or+ers and their immediate families !ho are employed y a reli"ious or"ani;ation# The aliens !ere informed that for a fee' the aide !ould assist them in applyin" !ith the 2KS# The aide recei$ed appro%imately @:00'000 from 1'000 aliens#
.nited States Customs Ser ice Special A'ent Takes Informant Payoff Funds
-e"innin" in June 18E5' the a"ent !or+ed !ith an informant !ho pro$ided assistance to the Customs Ser$ice in criminal in$esti"ations# One of the a"ents duties !as to monitor and assess the !or+ of the informant# Durin" a period of se$eral years' the informant recei$ed a num er of payments from the Customs Ser$ice as compensation 18
for his ser$ices as informant# On one or more occasions' the informant e%pressed "ratitude for the a"ents assistance y o ser$in" that oth he and the a"ent had en"a"ed in hard !or+ for !hich the informant !ould recei$e su stantial compensation' ut for !hich the a"ent only !ould recei$e his salary# The informant offered to share !ith the a"ent a portion of his earnin"s from the Customs Ser$ice# 2n (pril 1882' the a"ent nominated the informant for a lar"e payment' !hich represented a portion of the $alue of certain assets forfeited as a result of information pro$ided y the informant# The a"ent then initiated a telephone con$ersation !ith the informant in !hich he as+ed the informant for money# Durin" (u"ust 1882' the informant !ent to San &rancisco to recei$e the payment# The a"ent personally "a$e the informant a United States Treasury chec+ in the amount of @110'E59# <hile ridin" in a Go$ernment0o!ned $ehicle' the informant attempted to hand the a"ent an en$elope !ith @:'000 in cash# The a"ent responded that the informant should drop the en$elope in the car ecause he could not accept the cash directly# The informant left the money in the car and the a"ent reco$ered it# The a"ent pled "uilty pursuant to a plea a"reement to a char"e of a criminal $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' ille"al supplementation of salary# Under the plea a"reement' the a"ent a"reed to the imposition of a fine of @:'000 y the Court' to not see+ employment !ith any &ederal' state' or local la! enforcement ("ency' and to pay a special assessment of @29# 2n e%chan"e for these a"reements' the United States a"reed to mo$e to dismiss the 2ndictment char"in" the a"ent !ith a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2014c6 4164-6 and not to prosecute him for any other criminal offense relatin" to his receipt of @:'000 from the informant#
20
!ritten on Con"ressional stationery# On (u"ust 21' 1881' the pastors application for permanent residence !as appro$ed# On July E' 1883' the Con"ressional staffer !ho or"ani;ed the scheme recei$ed a @900 "ratuity from the Southeastern Conference for her efforts on ehalf of the pastor# The staffer used the same scheme to assist another pastor in o tainin" permanent residence so that he could ser$e as minister for t!o of the Southeastern ConferenceDs con"re"ations# The Con"ressman !rote to 2KS on July 27' 1883' on ehalf of the second pastor and the Southeastern Conference# The staffer assisted the second pastor in his dealin"s !ith 2KS# On (u"ust 3' 1883' 2KS appro$ed the pastors petition for residence and' on &e ruary 3' 188:' the staffer recei$ed a @900 "ratuity from the Southeastern Conference for her efforts on ehalf of the pastor# On (pril 27' 188:' another forei"n national paid the staffer @2'500 for assistin" her in applyin" for permanent residence# The staffer su mitted a petition to 2KS on the persons ehalf and si"ned the application as the preparer# (lthou"h the application contained a si"nature' !hich purported to e that of the staffer' she claimed that it !as not her si"nature and that she did not see the application prior to its su mission# The staffer +ne! that the forei"n national !as not eli"i le to ecome a permanent resident of the U#S# ut fraudulently misrepresented to her that she !as eli"i le in order to induce her to utili;e the staffers ser$ices# The staffer !as char"ed !ith t!o counts of acceptin" "ratuities for official acts performed' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2014c64164-6 and +no!in"ly ma+in" a material false !ritin" and presentin" it to 2KS' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 1001# She !as also char"ed !ith acceptin" compensation for ser$ices pro$ided in relation to matters in !hich the United States has a direct and su stantial interest' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2034a6416' and mail fraud' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 13:1# The staffer pled "uilty to the fi$e0count indictment on Septem er 30' 1887' and !as sentenced to 1E months of incarceration on (pril 1E' 1885#
&ultiple Char'es Brou'ht A'ainst Air Force *fficer and Accomplice for Soft,are Scheme
(n (ir &orce officer !as dis"runtled after recei$in" notification that he !ould not e promoted and !as soon to e dischar"ed !ithout a retirement annuity# Be conspired !ith a ase !arehouse super$isor 4!hile also see+in" employment !ith him6 to 21
unla!fully transfer superseded soft!are from the /acDill (&- !arehouse he super$ised to a pri$ate company for su se.uent sale# Be arran"ed !ith the super$isor to remo$e soft!are called Oracle Tools and Data ase 4Oracle6# The (ir &orce officer o tained possession of o$er 87 o%es of Oracle soft!are y ma+in" false statements in !ritin" in an effort to "ain authori;ation from his superiors to ha$e the soft!are destroyed in place# Destruction of superseded soft!are !as the responsi ility of the Go$ernment accordin" to its a"reements !ith soft!are contractors# The (ir &orce officer !or+ed under the pretense that the Oracle soft!are !as ein" turned o$er to a company for destruction# 2nstead' the officer pro$ided the Oracle soft!are to a mo$in" company that transported the o%es from /acDill to a commercial stora"e facility rented y the !arehouse super$isor# Once in possession of the soft!are' he searched for uyers of the soft!are# Ori"inally' the U#S# Central Command had paid the Go$ernment ul+ rate of @58'000 for the Oracle soft!are in 1881# On the "ray mar+et' this soft!are !as $alued et!een @39'000 and @100'000# The officer !as con$icted of a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E 4!or+in" on a pro*ect that affected a company in !hich he had a financial interest6' !hile his co0defendant' the !arehouse super$isor' !as con$icted of $iolations of 1E U#S#C# 2014 6416' 1E U#S#C# 7:1 4theft of Go$ernment property6 and 1E U#S#C# 351 4conspiracy6# The officer !as sentenced to 1 year pro ation and 190 hours community ser$ice# The !arehouse super$isor !as imprisoned for 25 months !ith super$ised release for 3 years#
State Department %e'ional Security *fficer 8%S*< at the American Embassy in Santo Domin'o4 Dominican %epublic Dri es Automobile Scheme
The ASOs primary duties included o$erseein" a small force of U#S# /arines and a lar"er force of security "uards# <hile the ASO had no authority to enter into procurement transactions on the Go$ernmentDs ehalf' he did' in t!o separate transactions' en"ineer the purchase of ei"ht $ehicles for the security company and some pri$ate citi;ens# The security companys contract !ith the Go$ernment re.uired that it use three $ehicles for patrols# These $ehicles !ere purchased in the United States and !ere free from su stantial import duties !hen deli$ered to the Dominican Aepu lic y
22
$irtue of applications y the United States =m assy for Fe%onerationsF from the duties# =%onerations are "i$en for property to e used y forei"n missions# <ith respect to the purchase of the first four $ehicles' the ASO !as "i$en @90'000 y the security company# The ASO carried at least @38'000 in cash to /iami' !hich he ille"ally failed to disclose to customs officials' and purchased : $ehicles for @38'000# The ASO +ept the remainin" @11'000# Jater' !hen the ASO purchased four $ehicles for indi$iduals' he !as "i$en @99'000 in cash# Be returned to /iami !ith at least @39'000 in cash' !hich a"ain he failed to report to Customs' and paid @39'000 for four $ehicles !hich !ere sent to Santo Domin"o and Fe%oneratedF from import duty after the ASO encoura"ed the e%oneration process and initiated some of the paper!or+ throu"h an em assy employee# The ASO retained the unspent @20'000 difference et!een the purchase amount and the amount he had een "i$en to purchase the cars# The security company also !as re.uired to pro$ide !eapons for its security force# The ASO arran"ed to purchase the !eapons for the security company y first attemptin" to ha$e certain firearm companies or retailers ship the !eapons to the Dominican Aepu lic' not!ithstandin" the fact that the ASO did not ha$e a license to e%port the !eapons# These companies refused to sell the !eapons to the ASO# Su se.uently' he purchased the !eapons from a -altimore "un shop after usin" =m assy letterhead and representin" that he !as authori;ed to purchase !eapons for the State Department# The "un shop refused to ship the !eapons to the ASO# The ASO then !ent to -altimore and personally purchased the !eapons and sent them in a lead0lined diplomatic o% to the Dominican Aepu lic# The ASO "a$e most of the !eapons to the security company' ut sold some e%tras that he purchased to citi;ens of the Dominican Aepu lic at considera le profit# Be also +ept for himself the difference of @2000 et!een the amount that the security company had "i$en him to purchase the "uns and the amount that the "un purchase had cost him# The ASO !as char"ed !ith ma+in" false statements to a firearms dealer' recei$in" somethin" of $alue for performance of an official act in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 201' participatin" as a Go$ernment employee in a transaction in !hich he had a financial interest in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E' stealin" ammunition !ith a $alue in e%cess of @100 from the United States' e%portin" firearms !ithout a license' transportin" monetary instruments into the United States for the purpose of carryin" on a $iolation of the (rms
23
Control =%port (ct' and failin" to ma+e a true report to the Customs Ser$ice !hen carryin" @10'000 or more into the United States# The *ury con$icted the ASO on the 201 count and the count of the indictment pertainin" to e%portin" firearms !ithout a license#
2:
29
The former 2KS inspector !as con$icted of ri ery and !as sentenced to 30 months imprisonment follo!ed y three years pro ation#
Former Federal )i'h,ay Administration *fficial and @ife En'a'e in Corrupt Scheme
( former &B<( employee and his !ife !ere sentenced for en"a"in" in a ri ery and +ic+ ac+ scheme in$ol$in" traffic en"ineerin" contracts# The former employee improperly told a contractor that they !ould pro a ly !in a contract# 2n return' the contractor "ranted a su 0contract to the &B<( employees !ifes >consultin" firm#? The employees !ife had no hi"h!ay en"ineerin" education or e%perience# She recei$ed o$er @100'000 in Go$ernment contracts# 2n addition to other char"es' the former employee pled "uilty to one count of ri ery#
27
he also !as accused of simply stealin" lar"e amounts of money from reconstruction funds !hich he then smu""led into the U#S# The official pled "uilty to ri ery' conspiracy' and money0launderin"' as !ell as char"es connected !ith his ille"al possession of at least 90 firearms' includin" machine "uns and "renade launchers# Be a!aits sentencin"' and faces up to 30 years for the conspiracy char"e alone# The contractor pled "uilty to conspiracy' ri ery' and money0 launderin"# Be faces up to :0 years in prison' fi$e years of super$ised release and a fine of @590'000# Be also must repay the "o$ernment @3#7 million and forfeit @3#7 million in assets# The lieutenant colonels case is still pendin"# (Source: Washington Post, February 2, 2 !" #pril $!, 2 !%
2E
indicted for ri es to another Korfol+ federal contract officer totalin" o$er @59'000# 2n return for these "ifts' the o!ners company recei$ed o$er @7:0'000 in shippin" contracts# The o!ner faces up to fi$e years in prison and @290'000 in fines# The t!o contract officers oth pled "uiltyH the first has een sentenced to :: months in prison' and the other a!aits sentencin"# (Source: )ampton *e+s, $ ,2-, -%
28
30
The printin" usiness o!ner pled "uilty to ri ery' and faces up to t!o years in prison and a @290'000 fine# The US)S employees case is pendin" in court#
Compensation for %epresentational Ser ices from Non"Federal Sources 8#9 .(S(C( : $;K"Type 7iolations<
@antedE Employee @ho @ill Not Skip &eetin's to Inter ie, ,ith *ther Companies
(n (rmy -ri"adier General participated personally and su stantially as an ad$ocate and appro$al authority in the effort to increase fundin" on a tas+ order !ith a Go$ernment contractor e$en !hile acti$ely see+in" employment !ith that company# Bis efforts did not rise to the le$el of >ne"otiatin"? employment so he did not $iolate the criminal prohi ition of 1E U#S#C# M20E' ut !as still in $iolation of C#&#A# 2739#70: !hen he too+ official action on ehalf of a company !ith !hich he !as see+in" employment instead of dis.ualifyin" himself from the particular matter# Be also e%tended official tra$el time and claimed unauthori;ed tra$el e%penses in order to "o to *o inter$ie!s and participate in other *o see+in" acti$ities to the point of actually e%cusin" himself from official meetin"s# &inally' he char"ed unauthori;ed personal phone calls to the Go$ernment and ordered su ordinates to run personal errands for him' includin" pic+in" up his dry cleanin"' dri$in" him to the ar er shop' and puttin" the license plates on his personal car 4also directin" them to use an official Go$ernment $ehicle for these purposes6# The Generals eha$ior $iolated the Joint =thics Ae"ulation ecause he used &ederal personnel' e.uipment' and duty time to conduct personal usiness# Bis official participation in a particular matter on ehalf of a company !ith !hich he !as see+in" employment $iolated conflict of interest la!# Bis other acti$ities amounted to misuse of Go$ernment resources 4his su ordinates time and the Go$ernment car6 and improper "ift acceptance 4due to a failure to reim urse su ordinates for e%penditures such as milea"e used !hen performin" his personal ser$ices6# (s if that !as not enou"h of an ethical rap sheet' he $iolated DoD Directi$e 5000#1:0A !hen he decided to char"e at least 19 of his TDP transactions to his personal credit card instead of his Go$ernment tra$el card so that he could recei$e onus point or air miles on the card#
31
The General !as su *ect to (rticle 19 proceedin"s under the Uniform Code of /ilitary Justice' fined @9'000' and directed to reim urse the Go$ernment @9'300 for the improper cell phone use and o$erpayment of TDP e%penses# Be !as allo!ed to retire at his current "rade' O05#
32
that point' he !ould permit the company to remain in usiness and pay a minimal amount of its ta% deficiency# The co0o!ners a"reed to a payment of @1'000 per month for this ser$ice# Durin" this time period' the co0o!ners pro$ided oth 2AS employees !ith free rental cars and paid $acations to &lorida# 2AS employee num er 2 also in$ested money and ac.uired an interest in the company# 2n a separate scheme' 2AS employee num er 2 si"ned a one0year contract !ith a local le$ee oard to perform an economic study# The contract called for the 2AS employee to e paid @E9 per hourH he recei$ed appro%imately @3E'000 o$er the follo!in" year# (t the same time' the le$ee oard had ta% disputes pendin" under the employees super$ision at the 2AS# Be did not disclose this fact to his super$isors at the 2AS# The rental car company o!ners each pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 203' offerin" compensation to a Go$ernment employee for representational ser$ices rendered in a particular matter efore a department or ("ency of the United States# O!ner num er 1 recei$ed one year pro ation and a @290 fine# O!ner num er 2 !as sentenced to fi$e years pro ation and @80'181 restitution# 2AS employee num er 1 pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2014 64164(6 4 ri ery6 and !as sentenced to fi$e years pro ation and a @3'000 fine# 2AS employee num er 2 pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E4a6' ta+in" official action in matters affectin" a personal financial interest' as !ell as 1E U#S#C# 2014 6426 4 ri ery6H he !as sentenced to t!el$e months in *ail' three years super$ised release' and a @3'000 fine#
constituent# <hen sho!n a photo of the &-2 a"ent' he stated that he had een offered money y her ut had turned her do!n# <hen told that the person in the photo !as an &-2 a"ent' the staffer statedG F2 "uess 2Dm in a lot of trou le' arenDt 2OF Be !as char"ed !ith $iolations of 1E U#S#C# 201 and 203 and pled "uilty to one count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 203# Be recei$ed a sentence of pro ation and community ser$ice' and !as ordered to pay restitution#
estate e%ecuti$es !ere formin" due to his status as a Go$ernment employee# On July 22' 1882' the Under Secretary accepted the offer to !or+ for the *oint $enture in dealin"s !ith the United States# Be !as offered 10 percent of the net profits "enerated y the pro*ect# The pro*ect in$ol$ed the uildin" of 7'000 condominiums and !ould "enerate a out @10'000'000 in net profits# The anticipated total cost of the pro*ect !as in e%cess of @120'000'000# The Under Secretary had an intermediary act on his ehalf in si"nin" a memorandum of a"reement !ith the real estate de$elopers# The Under Secretary' throu"hout the period in .uestion' re.uested tra$el authori;ations and su mitted tra$el $ouchers to the Go$ernment for tra$el to /e%ico to !or+ on the /e%ican !or+er housin" pro*ect# The Go$ernment char"ed that he a"reed to accept compensation for representational ser$ices efore the United States in relation to a particular matter' the housin" pro*ect' in !hich the United States Department of Ja or had a direct and su stantial interest in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2034a6 and 2174a6426# The Go$ernment also claimed that the Under Secretary !as actin" as part of a conspiracy a"ainst the United States in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 351# The Under Secretary pled "uilty to the char"es and !as sentenced to pro ation for 9 years#
Ser'eant"at"Arms of the .nited States Senate Takes Free Fli'ht to )a,aii After %ecommendin' Contractor
The Ser"eant0at0(rms is the chief purchasin" a"ent for the Senate and in that capacity he recommended that the Senate purchase and install a @218'000 (TQT
37
telephone system for the U#S# Capitol )olice# Three !ee+s later' he accepted a round0trip <ashin"ton0Bonolulu airline tic+et' $alued at @2'500' from an (TQT employee# Be pled "uilty on Ko$em er 1E' 1882' to one misdemeanor count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 203 and !as sentenced to one year of super$ised pro ation' to pay full restitution of @2'500' and a @9'000 ci$il fine#
35
3E
:0
And the Band Played *n>@hile the Ship Sank Around Them
(n (ssistant Secretary of Telecommunications and 2nformation !ithin the Department of Commerce spo+e !ith ethics officers a out a small dinner party she !as ha$in" at her home ut ne"lected to mentionG a6 the party !as for et!een 70 and E0 people and 6 it !as paid for y companies she !as responsi le for re"ulatin"# (lthou"h
:1
the ethics officers found her to e in $iolation of the departments re"ulations' the Justice Department elected not to press criminal char"es#
a financial interest# (nyone $iolatin" this la! >shall e imprisoned for not more than one year'? fined' or oth 4see 1E U#S#C# M 2176# -y ma+in" a recommendation on a contract in$ol$in" a company !ith !hich he !as ne"otiatin" employment' the official in this case $iolated the la!#
:3
Federal Employee Con icted of Conflict of Interest 7iolation @hile Searchin' for Ne, 5ob
Jo 0huntin" efforts y a former Commerce Department 2nspector General 42G6 turned up a &ederal con$iction for a conflict of interest instead of a *o # (s part of the former 2GDs official duties' he re$ie!ed the performance of a certain company' !hich had contracted !ith the Commerce Department to update automated !eather forecastin" systems# (t the same time that he !as performin" these o$ersi"ht duties' the former official e"an ne"otiatin" employment !ith the same company# ( &ederal criminal statute' 1E U#S#C# 20E' prohi its &ederal employees from officially !or+in" on particular matters that ha$e a direct and predicta le effect on an or"ani;ation !ith !hich they are ne"otiatin" prospecti$e employment# The former 2GDs re$ie! of the companyDs performance on the Commerce Department contract $iolated this statute# This is the same statute that ars &ederal employees from ta+in" official action on matters that affect their o!n financial interests or those of their spouses or children#
::
:9
Former Federal Bureau of In esti'ation 8FBI< A'ent 7iolates Conflict of Interest Statute
( former &-2 a"ent pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E' !hich prohi its &ederal employees from participatin" in official acts in !hich they ha$e a personal financial interest# The a"ents *o responsi ilities included researchin" and testin" the use of pepper spray for the &-2' !hich resulted in contact !ith the manufacturers of one particular type of pepper spray# The a"ent su se.uently recommended this pepper spray' and in return' recei$ed @95'900 in payments from the manufacturer# &ollo!in" the a"ents recommendation' the &-2 appro$ed the use of the pepper spray for its a"ents' resultin" in a lar"e purchase from the manufacturer# (dditionally' as a result of the &-2 a"entDs research and recommendation' other la! enforcement a"encies nation!ide e"an to use the pepper spray produced y the manufacturer# The former a"ent !as sentenced to t!o months imprisonment follo!ed y three years of super$ised release for his $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E# This statute ars &ederal employees from officially participatin" 4in this case' e$en ma+in" a recommendation6 in particular matters 4in this case' a contract to uy pepper spray6 that ha$e a direct and
:7
predicta le effect on the employees financial interests or those of the employees spouse or minor children#
Chief Financial *fficer and Chief Information *fficer of the .nited States Department of Education 7iolates #9 .(S(C( $;9
<hile the official held the a o$e titles at the Department of =ducation' his !ife o!ned 700 shares of Compa. computer stoc+ that she had inherited from her mother# Durin" this period' the official !as in$ol$ed in his official capacity in issues concernin" Compa. computers# The Go$ernment contended that the official $iolated 1E U#S#C# 20E' for participatin" personally and su stantially as a Go$ernment officer in a particular matter in !hich' to his +no!led"e' he andRor his spouse has a financial interest# )ursuant to a ci$il settlement' the official paid the Go$ernment @20'000' and the Go$ernment released him from its claims#
Chief of Staff at the Department of 7eterans Affairs &edical Center in Jansas City4 En'a'es in Conflict of Interest
Durin" the same time the Chief of Staff !as employed y the Department of ,eterans (ffairs /edical Center' he !as also employed as a physician y the Uni$ersity of Iansas /edical Center in Iansas City' Iansas# Su se.uently' the Chief of Staff in his official capacity appro$ed a contract for cardiocath ser$ices to the Department of ,eterans (ffairs /edical Center y the Uni$ersity of Iansas /edical Center#
:5
On /arch E' 2000' the Chief of Staff pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E' !hich ars employees from ta+in" official action in matters affectin" their personal financial interests# On (u"ust 5' 2000' he !as sentenced to pay a @290 fine and a special assessment of @29#
Internal %e enue Ser ice 8I%S< %e enueLSettlement *fficer Prosecuted .P #9 .(S(C( $;9
(n 2AS employee !as assi"ned to a certain 2AS collection matter' !hich "a$e him inside information concernin" a proposed stoc+ e%chan"e# (fter his role in the case !as su stantially o$er' the employee purchased appro%imately @2'000 in the stoc+ su *ect to the proposed e%chan"e ased in part on information he had learned durin" the course of his duties as a Ae$enue Officer# (fter the stoc+ purchase' the 2AS employee had on se$eral occasions' minor contact !ith the parties efore the 2AS# Be e$entually !ent to his super$isor' disclosed his interest in the stoc+' and !as remo$ed from further participation in the case# The 2AS employee lost money on the stoc+ transaction# The 2AS employee !as prosecuted pursuant to 1E U#S#C# 20E for participatin" personally and su stantially as a Go$ernment officer or employee in a particular matter in !hich' to his +no!led"e' he had a financial interest' and 1E U#S#C# 2174a6416# The employee !as placed on pretrial di$ersion for si% months on the condition that he resi"n from the 2AS and perform 120 hours of community ser$ice#
District Conser ationist at Department of A'riculture+s National %esources Conser ation Ser ice Sentenced for Conflict of Interest
The KACS employee !as the Go$ernmentDs technical representati$e on a USD( soil and !ater conser$ation pro"ram that !as implemented throu"h a State of Korth Carolina pro"ram called KC(CS) 4Korth Carolina ("ricultural Cost Share )ro"ram6# Under the KC(CS) pro"ram' local lando!ners can recei$e fundin" to reduce a"ricultural pollution# The KACS employee' in his position as a district conser$ationist' appro$ed a contract !here y a usiness $enture o!ned y his spouse sold filter fa ric to lando!ners throu"h the KC(CS) pro"ram# The KACS employee !as char"ed !ith a felony count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2' aidin" and a ettin"' and 1E U#S#C# 20E' for participatin" personally and su stantially as a
:E
Go$ernment employee in a particular matter' in !hich' to his +no!led"e' his spouse has a financial interest# &urther' in his position as a district conser$ationist' he appro$ed a contract et!een the KC(CS) and a cattle operation in !hich he and his spouse !ere partners# (dditionally' he appro$ed a contract for fence construction et!een the KC(CS) and a third party# This contract resulted in payments that !ere transferred to a partnership consistin" of the KACS employee' his spouse' and the third party# The KACS employee !as char"ed !ith t!o additional felony counts of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E' for participatin" personally and su stantially as a Go$ernment employee in a particular matter' in !hich' to his +no!led"e' he' his spouse' and "eneral partner ha$e a financial interest# ( *ury con$icted the KACS employee on all counts# Be !as sentenced y the court to one year of pro ation#
A Contractin' *fficer for the Department of the Army at Fort 5ackson4 South Carolina Settles Conflict of Interest Alle'ation
Sometime prior to Ko$em er 1889' the contractin" officer e"an a relationship !ith a foreman for a Go$ernment contractor# The foreman su se.uently started his o!n company and e"an iddin" on Go$ernment contracts at &ort Jac+son# 2n Ko$em er 1889' the former Go$ernment contractin" officer assumed the title of pro*ect mana"er at the ne! company and performed $arious duties for the former foreman !ithout monetary compensation# On (pril 8' 1887' the contractin" officer appro$ed and certified for payment an in$oice su mitted y the company# She continued her employment relationship !ith the company until June 1887# Bo!e$er' she su mitted a !ritten statement to the Director of Contractin" at &ort Jac+son attestin" that her association !ith the company ended in /arch 1887# The former contractin" officer !as indicted on Decem er 3' 1885 for $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E' ta+in" official action in matters affectin" an employees personal financial interest# She si"ned a )retrial Di$ersion ("reement !hich re.uires that she complete 90 hours of community ser$ice#
:8
Assistant .nited States Attorney 8A.SA< Con icted on Conflict of Interest and Fraud
The (US( for the Central District of California !as indicted after it !as disco$ered that on numerous occasions he had made fa$ora le recommendations to the court' the pro ation office' and other prosecutin" offices on ehalf of cooperatin" !itnesses and defendants in e%chan"e for hundreds of thousands of dollars# The (US( had' for e%ample' accepted @8E'000 from one cooperatin" !itness !ho had pre$iously een con$icted in the Korthern District of Te%as and on !hose ehalf the (US( had ar"ued for leniency at the sentencin" hearin"# 2n addition' he had used his official position to secure entry into the United States of se$eral forei"n nationals !hom he elie$ed !ould ma+e su stantial in$estments in a company in !hich he and his !ife had a controllin" financial interest# Once the forei"n nationals entered the United States' t!o 2ranian companies !ith !hich they !ere affiliated loaned a total of @E70'000 to the (US(s company# The (US( pled "uilty to one felony conflict of interest count' 1E U#S#C# 20E' and t!o counts of !ire fraud' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 13:3 and 13:7# Be !as fined @5'900 and sentenced to t!o years in prison plus three years of super$ised release#
90
91
92
@1000 fine#
93
ad$ocatin" the officers hirin" noted that >ShTis e%pectations are hi"h ut his $alue has een pro$ed#? Tips from a mem er of the officers command led to an intera"ency in$esti"ation that unco$ered e"re"ious ri e0ta+in" to the tune of more than @500'000 4much of !hich !as hidden in undles of cash under the officers mattress6 in addition to the ille"al ne"otiations !ith the contractors# These ri es had resulted in nearly @29 million in contracts ein" ille"ally re!arded to companies for uildin" facilities and pro$idin" security "uards at military installations in Iorea# The officer pled "uilty to char"es of conspiracy and ri ery' and !as sentenced to 9: months in prison follo!ed y three years of super$ised release# Be !as also assessed a @10'000 fine' !as stripped of ran+' and !ill recei$e no retirement pay# The t!o contractors face fi$e years in prison and a @290'000 fine#
9:
There !as only one small pro lemCthe company !as o!ned y the employee and his !ife# The Department of Commerce e$entually paid the company o$er @10'000 for their !or+' earnin" the employee and his !ife a profit of o$er @1000# Unfortunately for the employee' his fifteen minutes of fame !ere cut short y a District Court Jud"e' !ho sentenced him to one year of pro ation' 100 hours of community ser$ice' and a @800 fine# The employee !as found "uilty of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E4a6' !hich ars employees from participatin" personally and su stantially in a matter in !hich they ha$e a financial interest#
99
from participation in decisions in$ol$in" the company' her recusal came three months after the e"innin" of her ne"otiations# The official e"an ne"otiations !ith the company throu"h encrypted e0mails sent y her dau"hter' !ho !as an employee of the companyH her dau"hter set up a secret meetin" et!een the official and company e%ecuti$es# (t the start of the meetin"' the official informed the e%ecuti$es that she !as still participatin" personally and su stantially on matters in$ol$in" the companyH ho!e$er' oth parties elected to continue the meetin" and to simply +eep it a secret# The ne"otiations continued for se$eral more months' all !hile the official !as still participatin" personally and su stantially in decisions' appro$als' and ad$ice in matters in !hich the company had a financial interest# (fter the official finally su mitted her letter dis.ualifyin" herself from !or+in" on matters in$ol$in" the company' in$esti"ators e"an scrutini;in" the timeline of her story# The official lied repeatedly to in$esti"ators as to the start date of her employment ne"otiations' colla oratin" !ith the company e%ecuti$es to match stories# The former official pled "uilty in &ederal court' and !as sentenced to nine months in prison and se$en months either in a half!ay house or under home detention# The company e%ecuti$e faces a *ail term of no more than si% months under &ederal sentencin" "uidelines# &ederal )rocurement la! specifically for ids a company or its e%ecuti$es from ma+in" any offer or promise of future employment to a &ederal procurement officer# Ji+e!ise' procurement officers are prohi ited from discussin" employment so lon" as they o$ersee matters in$ol$in" that company#
97
@1890 on a G)C and poc+eted @E90' !hich he used to uy a num er of sportin" "oods# The perfect scam didnt !or+ out so !ell for the =07# Be !as con$icted in a court martial' reduced to =01' "i$en 1E months confinement' and "i$en a ad conduct dischar"e#
95
first conducted a fe! >test runs? y purchasin" items for her personal use on her Go$ernment card# The misuse !ent undetected so the sailor *oined !ith a co0conspirator to discuss e$en i""er plans# They decided to uy laptop computers and plasma tele$isions on the sailors Go$ernment card and to re0sell them for personal profit# Ka$y auditors disco$ered the scheme and determined that the sailor and her co0conspirator had defrauded the Go$ernment out of @373'2:3# The sailor had used her Go$ernment card to purchase 172 note oo+ computers' 79 i" screen tele$isions' 22 di"ital cameras' G)S de$ices' camcorders' computer monitors' and home theater systems# Ber efforts to pre$ent her shipmates from "ettin" into trou le and her su se.uent emulation of the local cut0rate electronic retailer led the sailor to plead "uilty to one count of theft of Go$ernment property in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# M7:1# She is scheduled for sentencin" in (u"ust 200E#
9E
and security codes of G)Cs held y mem ers of his unit !ho !ere not deployin"# These cardholders then noticed a rash of une%plained payments from Iu!ait# (s cardholders are personally responsi le for the char"es on their cards' se$eral cardholders disputed the char"es in accordance !ith re"ulations# This led to a lon" series of unnecessary and frustratin" e%chan"es !ith the credit card company# (s a result of his actions' the /a*or recei$ed counselin"# <hile there !as no e$idence that he had used the cards for personal purchases' his use !as unauthori;ed# G)Cs can only e used y their authori;ed cardholder !ith the consent of an (ppro$in" Official# Unauthori;ed use ypasses the safe"uards created to minimi;e a use#
70
( former Department of ,eterans (ffairs employee recently pled "uilty to one count of theft of Go$ernment property# The former employee used her Go$ernment credit card to purchase e%pensi$e items 4T,s !ere a fa$orite6' !hich she then re0sold or +ept for herself# The *ud"e sentenced her to fi$e years pro ation and ordered her to pay @150'000 in restitution#
proceeded to re0sell most of the products at his ar# Some of the items purchased included "as "rills' truc+ parts' and automo ile tires# The super$isor con$inced the mana"ers of the auto parts store and the military surplus store to alter the credit card in$oices to list !hat !ould appear to e official military supplies' instead of listin" the actual "oods purchased# The e$idence indicates that the DoD super$isor defrauded the Go$ernment to the tune of @200'000# The employee pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2E5' for su mittin" false and fraudulent claims' and 1E U#S#C# 20E' for appro$in" the fraudulent purchases# Be !as sentenced to ten months in prison#
The employee faces a ma%imum sentence of ten years imprisonment and a fine of @290'000#
Endorsements
73
7:
Failure to %eport !ifts From Abramoff !ets D*I *fficial T,o"0ears of Probation
( former Department of the 2nterior Officer !ho accepted <ashin"ton Aeds+ins tic+ets' !hich cost o$er @2'000' as !ell as other "ifts from lo yist Jac+ ( ramoff' !as sentenced to t!o years of pro ation' and to pay a @1'000 fine# ( ramoff !as see+in" official action from the officer !hen he "a$e the officer the "ifts# The officer failed to disclose these "ifts on the re.uired financial disclosure report 4&orm :906' and after ein" in$esti"ated in connection !ith the ( ramoff scandal' he pled "uilty to ma+in" a false certificate or !ritin"# )u lic officials !ho are re.uired to file a &orm :90 must disclose "ifts that e%ceed a minimum $alue# -ottom lineG if pu lic officials +eep secrets a out the "ifts they recei$e from sources li+e lo yists' they !ill recei$e a "ift from the federal "o$ernment that they cannot +eep secret C pro ation#
( !orld0reno!ned (l;heimers research scientist for the Kational 2nstitutes of Bealth 4K2B6 !as sentenced to ser$e t!o years of pro ation and four0hundred hours of community ser$ice after failin" to disclose se$eral hundred0thousand dollars in consultin" fees he recei$ed for ser$ices rendered to a prohi ited source C a pharmaceutical company doin" usiness !ith his a"ency# The scientist $iolated a federal conflicts of interest statute and federal re"ulations re.uirin" him to disclose payments from outside sources on his financial disclosure report 4&orm :906# The purpose of the re.uired financial disclosure is to help employees reco"ni;e conflictin" financial interests and a$oid $iolatin" the la!# The scientists la!yer said that it is common for K2B researchers not to file financial disclosures ecause they consider the disclosures a > ureaucratic nuisance#? /ay e so' ut this scientist should ha$e +no!n' as most !orld0 reno!ned medical researchers pro a ly do' that untreated nuisances often ecome de ilitatin" illnesses# 2n addition to pro ation and four0hundred hours of community ser$ice' the scientist !as also forced to forfeit the consultin" fees he had recei$ed from the pharmaceutical company' and !as depri$ed of his retirement from the "o$ernment#
).D Employee Fails to Disclose Ill"!otten %eal Estate on Financial Disclosure4 -oses 5ob
( BUD employees spouse0li+e partner su mitted the !innin" id for a BUD0 o!ned property# (mon" other $iolations' the BUD employee failed to notify the a"ency that someone !ith !hom she !as li$in" !as su mittin" a id for the property# (fter the
77
property !as purchased' the employees partner transferred the property to the employee for @1# To pre$ent BUD from learnin" that the property came to the employee throu"h a stra!0man transaction' the employee failed to list the property on her financial disclosure report as !as re.uired# The employee !as found to ha$e falsified her financial disclosure report and !as fired#
fla"rant $iolations' a &ederal court entered the default *ud"ment and ordered an @11'000 fine' the top ci$il penalty permitted under the statute# The court emphasi;ed the fla"rancy of the $iolation' citin" the employees choice to i"nore the multiple notices and !arnin"s pro$ided to him# (Source: &nited States 56 7ant, *o6 2823$2, 2 $4, 2 3%6% The -a,E The =thics in Go$ernment (ct 4=2G(6' 9 U#S#C# app# M 101 et se.# 420036' re.uires senior officials' !ho file S& 25Es' to file a final financial disclosure report >on or efore the thirtieth day? after termination of their senior positions 4in addition to annual filin" re.uirements6# (nyone !ho +no!in"ly and !illfully fails to pro$ide such a disclosure faces prosecution and fines of up to @10'000 4see 9 U#S#C# app# M 1014e604f6' app# M 10:6# 3 &6S6 0ist6 9E:'S $ !2 (0606;6 <une
Former !o ernment *fficial Con icted for Filin' False Financial Disclosure %eport
Under the =thics in Go$ernment (ct' a former Chief of Staff 4CoS6 for the Secretary of ("riculture !as re.uired to file the )u lic &inancial Disclosure Aeport 4S& 25E6# <hile in office' the CoS and his !ife recei$ed payments totalin" appro%imately @22'029 from t!o usinessmen !ho !ere lon"time friends and usiness associates of the CoS' and !ho coincidentally recei$ed su sidies from the Department of ("riculture 4USD(6 totalin" @73'000 and @2E:'000' respecti$ely# The CoS !as re.uired to' ut did not' report these payments on his S& 25E# <hile the USD( 2nspector General !as 7E
conductin" an in$esti"ation of the CoS !ith respect to conflict of interest alle"ations' the CoS made a s!orn declaration that he had not recei$ed such payments# Be also stated that his only income from the time he ecame Chief of Staff' aside from the sale of a former residence' !as his USD( salary# The former CoS !as con$icted of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 1001' for failin" to disclose the payments recei$ed from the t!o usinessmen durin" on his S& 25E and for ma+in" a false s!orn statement to the USD( 2nspector General# Be !as sentenced to 25 months in *ail#
Former FDA Commissioner Con icted for False Financial Disclosures and Conflict of Interest
The U#S# District Court for the District of Colum ia sentenced a former Commissioner of the &ood and Dru" (dministration 4&D(6 to ser$e three years of pro ation' alon" !ith 90 hours of community ser$ice' and to pay fines totalin" @E8'355#37# The former Commissioner pled "uilty to t!o misdemeanor char"es in$ol$in" false financial disclosures and a $iolation of the conflict of interest statute' 1E U#S#C# 20E' !hich prohi its a Go$ernment employee from participatin" in any acti$ities in !hich he' his spouse' or minor child has a financial interest#
78
-et!een 2002 and 2007' the former Commissioner held se$eral senior positions !hich re.uired him to certify and file on si% occasions a financial disclosure report that included all of his in$estments $alued at more than @1'000# (lthou"h the Commissioner declared he and his !ife had sold the stoc+ they o!ned in numerous >si"nificantly re"ulated or"ani;ations'? the couple failed to disclose that they actually retained stoc+ in se$eral of the companies# The conflict of interest $iolation occurred !hen the Commissioner !as actin" as the Chairman of the &D(s O esity <or+in" Group# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered t!o of the companies in !hich the Commissioner and his !ife held stoc+ had a direct financial interest in the "roups conclusions# (lthou"h there !as no e$idence that the Commissioners financial interests altered the "roups conclusions' the Court concluded that his participation in the deli erations affected the inte"rity of "roups findin"s# (Source: Federal Ethics Report, (arch 2 4%
50
on' he !as court martialed' sentenced to si% months confinement' fined' and reduced in ran+#
( Ser$ice Chief store+eeper for a su marine in the United States !as found "uilty of usin" ships funds to uy merchandise to later sell for his personal "ain# The Chief made off !ith o$er @80'000 of unauthori;ed items includin" !atches' computers' )D(s' T,s' chairs' and cameras' !hich he stored in his personal room until sellin"# Be !as court0martialed and sentenced to t!o years in prison' reduced do!n to an =01' separated under a ad conduct dischar"e' and ordered to pay @29'000 in fines# Bis immediate super$isor' a *unior Ser$ice officer' !as administrati$ely separated from the Ser$ice# @59'000 !orth of merchandise !as ne$er reco$ered#
&arried or NotG
( soldier "ot married and pro$ided his marria"e certificate to the Ser$ice' ut shortly after the marria"e his !ife returned to her home in another state# Kine months later the marria"e !as annulled# The soldier did not report that he !as no lon"er married' and continued to collect a housin" allo!ance for himself and his no! former !ife# Be also listed her on tra$el reim ursements and recei$ed additional per diem for trips !here she did not accompany him# 2n total' the soldier !as paid appro%imately @:9'000 in funds that he !as not eli"i le to recei$e# (t some point' the soldier appeared to sense that he !as "oin" to e cau"ht ecause he tried to thro! off the in$esti"ation y filin" for di$orce e$en thou"h the marria"e had een annulled much earlier# Be then informed in$esti"ators that he !as not a!are that the marria"e had een annulled prior to his di$orce filin"# The ruse !as not particularly effecti$e ecause court records sho!ed the soldier !as physically present at the annulment hearin"# Bis case !as referred for court martial# 52
53
( Ka$y ci$ilian /edicare claims e%aminer !as employed to represent Go$ernment interests in the settlement of /edical Care Aeco$ery (ct 4/CA(6 claims# Ber *o entailed re"ularly ne"otiatin" !ith insurance companies and in*ured military personnel in order to reco$er Go$ernment e%penditures on medical care for ser$ice mem ers and their dependents !ho !ere in*ured due to the acts of uninsured third parties# (lthou"h the Ka$y has authority to !ai$e its claims on ehalf of in*ured ser$ice mem ers a"ainst insurance companies' the e%aminer orchestrated a scheme in !hich she used her position and authority to !ai$e claims and to fraudulently o tain money for herself that !as o!ed to the Go$ernment# 2n one case' the e%aminer handled the claim for a )etty Officer !ho had een in*ured in a motorcycle accident# She told the ser$ice mem er that she could increase the amount of his settlement if he a"reed to split the amount !ith her# <hen he a"reed' the e%aminer notified the insurance company that the Ka$y !as !ai$in" its /AC( claim# <hen the company sent the )etty Officer a @7'000 chec+' he sent her @3'000 cash *ust as she had directed# 2t turned out that the )etty Officer had een !or+in" !ith la! enforcement authorities all alon"# The U#S# (ttorney prosecuted the e%aminer and o tained a con$iction for one count of /ail &raud# She !as sentenced to t!o months in prison' t!o years of pro ation' a @100 special assessment' and !as de arred y the Ka$y for three years#
5:
fraudulent statements to the Go$ernment and em e;;lin" money elon"in" to KS<C# The $endor pled "uilty to one count of conspiracy to defraud the Go$ernment' 1E U#S#C# M351# The Ka$y de arred the $endor and oth employees for three years#
&arine Corps Say !oodbye to *fficers ,ho Schemed ,ith Thai 7endors
Three U#S# /arine Corps &orces )acific' Joint U#S# /ilitary Group' Thailand 4JUS/(GTB(26 officers !ere cau"ht recei$in" ri es and +ic+ ac+s from a Thai $endor# ( Ka$al Criminal 2n$esti"ati$e Ser$ice in$esti"ation re$ealed that a /arine Corps /a*or' either directly or throu"h his !ife' accepted appro%imately @100'000 in "ifts from a Thai $endor' to include a truc+ and a loan for a house# The /a*or continued to en"a"e in usiness !ith the $endor and a!arded him contracts' ut did not disclose his personal financial conflict of interest to his a"ency desi"nee as mandated y 1E U#S#C# M20E# Be also passed inside information to the $endor' allo!in" her to increase her id !hile still ensurin" she !as the lo!est idder and therefore increasin" her profit mar"in# Be !as also char"ed !ith maintainin" a se%ual relationship !ith a !oman !ho !as not his !ife' !hich is ille"al under the Uniform Code of /ilitary Justice# (nother /arine Corps /a*or recei$ed "ifts' includin" free hotel rooms' from a prohi ited source in $iolation of 10 U#S#C# section E82 and section 833# (dditionally' a third /arine Corps /a*or also !or+ed !ith the $endor to defraud the Go$ernment# The /a*or' ta+in" ad$anta"e of his position as the first person in the lo"istics chain to come into contact !ith "oods and ser$ices pro$ided y contractors' si"ned receipts for deli$ery of purchase orders e$en thou"h the $endor had only deli$ered incomplete shipments# The Go$ernment !as nonetheless illed the cost of full shipment' !hile the conspirin" parties split the profits from these >"host shipments#? The /a*or si"ned orders for at least fi$e "host shipments and recei$ed @2'32: in ri es for his participation# (ll three /a*ors !ere de arred from Go$ernment contractin" y the Ka$y (c.uisition 2nte"rity Office# &urthermore' they !ere all char"ed under the Uniform Code of /ilitary Justice# The first /a*or !as dismissed from acti$e duty' sentenced to four years in confinement and a @29'000 fine# The second /a*or recei$ed a )uniti$e Jetter of Aeprimand and !as su *ected to a @3'070 forfeiture of pay# The third /a*or !as dischar"ed and sent to spend si% months in the ri"# 59
Go$ernment# Bo!e$er' in$esti"ators disco$ered that the contractors allo!ed ei"ht senior0le$el employees to dri$e their $ehicles home at ni"ht as part of an >incenti$es? pro"ram# These contractors !ere further in$ol$ed in three accidents !ith the $ehicles' the cost of !hich !as su mitted for reim ursement to the Go$ernment#
Conflicts of Interest and -ies !arner Alder,oman and Dau'hters Federal Con ictions
( /il!au+ee alder!oman and her t!o dau"hters found themsel$es as defendants in federal court for funnelin" city funds to a non0profit or"ani;ation they had created# The alder!oman' efore her election' founded a non0profit or"ani;ation eli"i le to carry out nei"h orhood social "rantsH it !as lar"ely funded y Bousin" and Ur an 55
De$elopment 4BUD6 "rants a!arded to the City of /il!au+ee# These "rants !ere "i$en to the city upon the condition that each "rant recipient comply !ith BUD re"ulations# (mon" these re"ulations !as a conflict0of0interest pro$ision pre$entin" any elected official that participated in the apportionment of the BUD "rants from o tainin" a financial enefit >either for themsel$es or those !ith !hom they ha$e usiness or immediate family ties#? Upon the alder!omans election' she turned the e%ecuti$e directorship of the non0 profit or"ani;ation o$er to her t!o dau"hters' !ho oth dre! a salary from the or"ani;ation# -oth dau"hters had different last names from each other as !ell as the alder!oman' and the relationship et!een the three !as un+no!n y the City and BUD# (fter ta+in" office' the alder!oman secured mem ership on the Community De$elopment )olicy Committee' the committee that apportioned BUD "rants# She !as informed y the City (ttorney of the BUD conflict0of0interest rules' and !rote a memo assurin" the City that her hus and and 4sin"ular6 dau"hter only !or+ed for the non0profit on a $olunteer asis# This deception persisted the follo!in" year' !hen the City e"an to suspect a scamH the alder!oman !rote another letter to the city attorney admittin" that her 4sin"ular6 dau"hter had een an employee of the non0profit' ut assurin" that she had since left her position 4!hich !as untrue6# Bo!e$er' y this point' the City !as a!are of the alder!omans deception' and she !as char"ed !ith $arious $iolations of federal la!# Durin" the time period the alder!oman !as in office' the non0profit accepted a num er of lucrati$e BUD "rants from the city# =ach contract included a recitation of the BUD conflict0of0interest pro$isions' and !as si"ned y oth dau"hters in their capacity as e%ecuti$e officers# <hen .ueried y the City re"ardin" the familial relation of the t!o dau"hters to the alder!oman' the dau"hters chose not to respond# This duplicity earned oth dau"hters char"es in federal court alon"side their mother# The alder!oman and one of her dau"hters pled "uilty to $arious $iolations of federal la!# The second dau"hter chose to "o to trial' and !as con$icted and sentenced to t!o years pro ation and a @1000 fine for $iolatin" her contractual duty to disclose her familial relationship !ith the alder!oman# (Source: 2 ! &6S6 #pp6 9E:'S $ =4=%
5E
Contractors and Federal Personnel4 @orkin' To'ether4 Defraud the !o ernment and !o to 5ail
(n in$esti"ation y se$eral Go$ernment a"encies in support of the Justice Departments Kational )rocurement &raud Tas+ &orce re$ealed a comple% scheme to defraud the Coalition )ro$isional (uthority 1 South Central Ae"ion 4C)(0SC6 in al0 Billah' 2ra.# The perpetrators' a former Department of Defense 4DoD6 employee' se$eral former soldiers and numerous pu lic officials' includin" t!o hi"h0ran+in" U#S# (rmy
58
officers' conspired in a fraud and money0launderin" plan in$ol$in" contracts in the reconstruction of 2ra.# The Tas+ &orce disco$ered the co0conspirators conni$ed to ri" ids on contracts so that C)(0SC a!arded them all to the same contractor# 2n addition' the conspirators stole o$er @2 million in currency that C)(0SC had slated for reconstruction# (s a re!ard for their efforts' the contractor pro$ided the officials !ith a $ariety of "ifts' includin" o$er @1 million in cash' sports cars' *e!elry' computers' li.uor' and offers of future employment# The Tas+ &orce char"ed a former Jieutenant Colonel' t!o acti$e Jieutenant Colonels' a Colonel and t!o ci$ilians in a 290count indictment# The court sentenced the ci$ilian DoD employee to ser$e 12 months in prison' !hile the former Jieutenant Colonel earned 21 months in prison for his role# (nother former soldier recei$ed nine years in prison and a forfeiture of @3#7 million for char"es of conspiracy' ri ery' and money launderin"' as !ell as !eapons possession char"es# The contractor at the center of the conspiracy pled "uilty to related char"es' and recei$ed a :7 month prison sentence# 2n addition' the court ordered him to forfeit @3#7 million# 4Department of Justice 050::8' June 29' 2005' !!!#usdo*#"o$6
E1
of Go$ernment resources to carry out such an acti$ity on Go$ernment computers# The "uardsmen in$ol$ed !ere counseled y their commandin" officer#
!ift 7iolations
Samplin' of !ift Not Sufficient
( Jieutenant Colonel committed dereliction of duty !hen' in $iolation of the J=A' he recei$ed a ottle of -allantines 30 year0old Scotch $alued at @:00 and failed to report it and properly dispose of it# 2n lieu of a court martial' the colonel resi"ned from the military ser$ice for the "ood of the ser$ice under other than honora le conditions#
-ike a Pri ate )elicopter %ide to @orkG )o, About a &odel ShipG
The FactsE (ccordin" to s!orn testimony and documentation ac.uired y the office of a military ser$ice 2nspector General' a senior military officer accepted "ifts from the o!ner of a corporation that ser$iced and pro$ided landin" facilities for military aircraft# The "ifts to the officer included a helicopter ride to !or+' a shirt !ith the corporations lo"o' a miniature model airplane' meals at a Christmas party' and a leather *ac+et# The officer alle"edly returned the *ac+et ut did nothin" to compensate for receipt of the other "ifts' the $alue of !hich e%ceeded 4and pro a ly !ell e%ceeded6 @100# This conduct occurred as one of a series of alle"ed offenses that resulted in the officer ein" relie$ed of command' issued a puniti$e letter of reprimand' and ordered to forfeit @1000#
E2
The -a,E 9 C#&#A# M 2739#1014 641:6 420036 re.uires all &ederal employees to a$oid any actions that a reasona le person' !ho +ne! the rele$ant facts' could ta+e to e a $iolation of the la!Cincludin" the prohi ition on pro$idin" >preferential treatment to any pri$ate or"ani;ation or indi$idual'? mentioned at M 2739#1014 64E6# 2n this case' the $alue of the "ifts the officer accepted could ma+e it appear that he mi"ht influence Go$ernment contractin" in fa$or of the corporation# To e sure' he en*oyed some neat "iftsCfor a time# Bo!e$erG >)u lic ser$ice is a pu lic trust'? and it re.uires that &ederal employees place loyalty to >the la!s and ethical principles a o$e pri$ate "ain? 4M 2739#1014 64166# =$en more directly on point' 9 C#&#A# MM 2739#2024a6 and 2739#2034d6 apply the "eneral principles mentioned a o$e y prohi itin" &ederal employees from 4amon" other thin"s6 solicitin" "ifts or acceptin" "iftsC!hether solicited or notCfrom any person !ho >SdToes usiness or see+s to do usiness !ith the employees a"ency#? There are some e%ceptions to these rules# 9 C#&#A# M 2739#20:' for e%ample' allo!s the acceptance of >unsolicited "ifts ha$in" an a""re"ate mar+et $alue of @20 or less per source per occasion'? pro$ided that the $alue of "ifts accepted under the >@20 rule? from a sin"le source do not amount to more than @90 in a "i$en calendar year# 2n the case a o$e' the officers "ifts e%ceeded 4and pro a ly !ell e%ceeded6 this limit# 2f you ha$e recei$ed a "ift or "ifts and anticipate that it has put you in *eopardy of $iolatin" these' or any other' re"ulations' 9 C#&#A# M 2739#209 tells you !hat you must do C and that does not include co$erin" it o$er 4!hich mi"ht ma+e thin"s !orse6# &irst' if the "ift is an item and not an acti$ity li+e a helicopter ride' you may return it to the "i$er or pay the "i$er the fair mar+et $alue 4see su section 4a64166# 2f that is not practical' you may C >at the discretion of the employees super$isor or an a"ency ethics official? C donate the item to an appropriate charity' share the item !ith your office' or destroy the item 4see su 0section 4a64266# &or an acti$ity or e$ent' you o $iously cant return the "ift' ut you can and must pay ac+ the "i$er the mar+et $alue of the "iftH simply "i$in" ac+ somethin" similar !ill not suffice 4see su 0section 4a64366# 2f an employee >on his o!n initiati$e' promptly complies !ith the re.uirements of this section? 4that is' M 2739#2096' and the "ift !as not solicited y the employee' then he or she !ill not e considered to ha$e improperly recei$ed that "ift#
E3
E:
"ifts ha$in" a mar+et $alue of @20 or less per occasion' pro$ided that the a""re"ate mar+et $alue of indi$idual "ifts from any one person does not e%ceed @90 in a calendar year# There is no e%ception' ho!e$er' that allo!s for the acceptance of solicited "ifts# 2n response to the a"ency0!ide pro lem identified in the in$esti"ation' ,( officials issued a statement e%plainin" the application of the &ederal "ift rules to the acceptance of pharmaceutical samples' and de$eloped a fact sheet for a"ency employees !ith specific "uidance#
In ol ement in Claims A'ainst the !o ernment or in &atters Affectin' the !o ernment 8#9 .(S(C( : $;I"Type 7iolations<
Don+t Play Attorney A'ainst 0our Federal Employer6
The FactsE 2n the >off0time? from her !or+ !ith the Social Security (dministration' a senior attorney opened her o!n le"al practice and represented clients !ith claims a"ainst that $ery same (dministration# &or her dou le0duty' she !as sued y a U#S# (ttorney and ended up a"reein" to a settlement that re.uired her to pay the United States @113'000 for this and other $iolationsCnot a typical attorneys feeN 4SourceG Office of Go$ernment =thics memorandum' Oct# 2002#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 209 420036 for ids any current &ederal employee from actin" as an attorney in prosecutin" a claim a"ainst the United StatesC!here this is not performed as part of his or her official duties for the &ederal Go$ernment# &or any such $iolation' the la! authori;es fines and possi le imprisonmentCof not more than one year' unless the conduct is >!illful'? in !hich case it can e for up to 9 years 4see 1E U#S#C# M 2174a66#
E7
tra$el $ouchers for Go$ernment reim ursement !hile he ser$ed as an employee of the Department of Justice# The attorney pleaded "uilty and !as sentenced to four months of home detention and one year of pro ation# The plea a"reement also stipulated that the attorney pay restitution to Department of Justice in the amount of @9'000' pay a @9'000 fine' and pay appro%imately @2'900 in pro ation costs# Section 209 prohi its &ederal personnel from representin" anyone efore a &ederal ("ency or court in connection !ith a particular matter in !hich the United States has a direct and su stantial interest#
Air Force Ci ilian Employee Improperly %epresents Fello, Employees Before .(S( !o ernment
( ci$ilian employee of the O+lahoma City' (ir Jo"istics Center 4OC0(JC6' !ho !as also the former OC0(JC shop ste!ard' !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 209# The employee' !ho !as not an attorney' o!ned a pri$ate company called (ssociated Ja or Consultants# This company pro$ided le"al ser$ices to other OC0(JC ci$ilian employees y filin" le"al riefs on ehalf of the ci$ilian employees and y representin" them efore $arious oard hearin"s a"ainst the United States# The employee collected appro%imately @1'090 in fees from OC0(JC ci$ilian employees for his ser$ices' and had illed out ut had not collected an additional @1'E93# The (ir &orce employee !as char"ed !ith a ci$il $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 209# The case !as dismissed !ithout pre*udice# On &e ruary 2' 188E' the parties entered into a stipulated a"reement in !hich the accused a"reed to pay the United States @3'000 and to refrain from ad$isin"' counselin"' or representin" persons !ith claims a"ainst the United States#
E5
time# <ithout permission from the &((' he a"reed to represent a fello! &(( employee !ho !as the tar"et of a criminal in$esti"ation y the U#S# (ttorneyDs Office' and su se.uently contacted the U#S# (ttorneyDs Office on ehalf of his client# The United States rou"ht a ci$il action a"ainst the &(( employee pursuant to 1E U#S#C# 2094a6426 and 1E U#S#C# 217# The parties entered into a consent *ud"ment in !hich the &(( employee a"reed to pay a @1'200 penalty#
resi"nation from the ,(' the architect !as paid an additional @9'703 y the company# Durin" this same period of dual employment' he earned @9'9:0 from the ,(# The architect !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2094a6426# Be !as sentenced to t!o years pro ation' 100 hours of community ser$ice' and !as re.uired to pay a fine of @1'000# Section 209 prohi its &ederal personnel' other than in the proper dischar"e of their official duties' from actin" as an a"ent or attorney for another efore any &ederal a"ency or court' in connection !ith a particular matter in !hich the United States is a party or has a direct and su stantial interest#
E8
"ain e%clusi$e entry into sportin" e$ents to ta+e pictures in his off0duty time# <hen he !as finally cau"ht for misusin" the press pass' he recei$ed a letter of concern from command#
80
81
actually slept at !or+# Bis three day suspension !as reduced to one day after he re$ealed that dro!siness !as a potential side0effect of his prescri ed medication#
!o Speedracer
( ci$ilian reported seein" three Go$ernment $ehicles tra$elin" at hi"h speeds' tail"atin" and !ea$in" throu"h traffic in a dan"erous manner# <hen .uestioned' se$eral ser$ice mem ers admitted to dri$in" in e%cess of the speed limit' passin" on the ri"ht and dri$in" a""ressi$ely# T!o of them !ere "i$en formal counselin" on the proper use of Go$ernment property and the third !as "i$en a non0puniti$e Jetter of 2nstruction#
!o ernment Parkin'
The 2nspector General recei$ed a report that an officer had een usin" a Go$ernment $ehicle par+in" pass to par+ his personal $ehicle !hile he !as at !or+# The report indicated that on se$eral occasions other employees !ere forced to pay for par+in" a Go$ernment $ehicle ecause the officers personal $ehicle !as usin" the par+in" pass# The su se.uent in$esti"ation re$ealed that the officer had een usin" the pass for par+in" his personal $ehicle' and that his superior officers had not een informed or "i$en him permission to do so# (lthou"h the officer ad$ised that he only used the pass !hen "oin" to !or+' and did not use it !hen he elie$ed a Go$ernment $ehicle !ould need it' he recei$ed a letter of counselin"#
82
.n,elcomed @histleblo,ers
( military ser$ice Captain denied reenlistment to a Staff Ser"eant on the asis of a protected communication# The denial !as ased in part on con"ressional in.uiries the Staff Ser"eant had filed concernin" actions of military officials# The denial $iolated 1E U#S#C# 103:' !hich prohi its reprisal a"ainst a military mem er for ma+in" a protected communication# The Captain !as issued a letter of counselin"#
83
2n a similar case' a Captain issued an ad$erse fitness report after an =nsi"n had alle"ed that she had een se%ually assaulted y another military ser$ice mem er# The =nsi"n had her record corrected after !histle lo!er reprisal !as found under 10 U#S#C# 103:#
Chiefly @asteful
( chief of maintenance and lo"istics at a military facility purchased' at a cost of @30'000 each' 7 for+lifts desi"ned for inside use despite the fact that the command needed lifts for outside use' e$en for use in inclement !eather# The for+lifts rusted for E months in an outdoor stora"e area# 2n an e$en more impressi$e display of !aste' the chief purchased a @:00'000 patrol oat !ith a ad "enerator that left the oat inoperati$e 0 and that !ent unrepaired# The chiefs actions $iolated &ederal (c.uisition Ae"ulation 3#10101' !hich sets forth the standard that transactions related to the e%penditure of pu lic funds re.uire the hi"hest de"ree of pu lic trust and an impecca le standard of conduct# The chief !as remo$ed from his position#
*n"Duty Classes
8:
T!o /ilitary Ser"eants &irst Class !ere handed memorandums of admonition for lac+ of "ood *ud"ment for improperly usin" Tuition (ssistance# They attended school durin" on0duty time !hen they should normally ha$e performed their military duties# Their ci$ilian super$isor !as also "i$en a memorandum of admonition for improperly allo!in" the soldiers to ta+e such time#
Colonel Finds It+s Too -ate to Turn Back Time on .nethical %eHuest
(n (rmy Colonel !as scheduled to "o TDP and as+ed one of her contract employees to ma+e a reser$ation for her mother on the same fli"ht# <hen she !as told that such action !ould e ille"al' she responded that it !as >alri"ht? and that she had as+ed him as a >personal fa$or#? (fter e$en more people counseled her on the ille"ality of her actions' the Colonel attempted to stop the employee from ma+in" the fli"ht reser$ation' ut it !as too late# She !as found to ha$e $iolated )ara"raphs 20301 and 30 309 of DoD 9900#50A' Joint =thics Ae"ulation' !hich prohi it use of &ederal 89
Go$ernment resources' includin" personnel and e.uipment' for other than official purposes#
87
corrected# The intern "roup !as counseled' recei$ed trainin" on filin" tra$el $ouchers' and !as made to contact D&(S re"ardin" reim ursement to the Go$ernment for the improper e%penditures#
A S,in' and a &iss for Senior *fficers .sin' !o ernment Funds on !olf *utin'
&our senior officials' includin" t!o (ir &orce Generals' a /arine General' and a Ka$y (dmiral' !ith staff personnel e%tended their official TDP y an e%tra day in order to attend a "olf outin" follo!in" a formal conference in To+yo# They utili;ed Go$ernment transportation and recei$ed per diem for the tournament# There !ere no usiness e$ents that day' and the all0day "olf e$ent !as attended y less than half of the conference participants# (ttendance at the "olf e$ent' costin" the Go$ernment appro%imately an additional @3'000' could not reasona ly e considered to e official Go$ernment usiness# Golf foursomes do not pro$ide the opportunity to dialo"ue !ith a lar"e or di$erse "roup of people and thus do not "reatly foster communication et!een conference participants# The &ederal Joint Tra$el Ae"ulations re.uire that official tra$el only e authori;ed as necessary >to accomplish the mission of the Go$ernment effecti$ely and economically#? The "olf did not further any le"itimate Go$ernment purpose' nor !as it an economical choice# The senior officials $iolated the Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch 49 C#&#A# )art 2739#50: and 2739#5096 y misusin" Go$ernment property and time# They !ere directed to reim urse the Go$ernment for oth the lod"in" and per diem costs incurred due to the "olf outin"#
Not a -iar4 But the Army Still Can+t Train 0our FiancQe+s Son to Fi'ht Fire
The &ire Chief at an army installation did not ha$e enou"h students to fill a pre0 paid' DoD0funded (irfield Aescue &ire &i"hter Class so he sent his fiancWes son to the trainin" to fill one of the unused seats# (lthou"h he !as not a DoD employee and did not possess any pre$ious firefi"hter trainin" or e%perience' he !as issued Depot firefi"htin" e.uipment and sent to the trainin"# This action posed a considera le safety ris+ to all in$ol$ed and $iolated the classs safety re.uirements# The &ire Chief !as not suspected of fraud' only poor *ud"ment# =$en thou"h sendin" the oy did not in$ol$e the
85
e%penditure of additional funds' he still $iolated )ara"raph 20301 of DoD 9900#50A' the Joint =thics Ae"ulation' para"raph 20301' in his misuse of Go$ernment resources y issuin" the oy the Go$ernment e.uipment# The &ire Chief !as issued a !ritten reprimand to e made a matter of record in his official personnel folder for a period not to e%ceed t!o years from the date of receipt#
&isuse of Position
( /a*or General and commander in a military ser$ice a used his authority y arran"in" to ha$e an enlisted mem er ser$e as his unauthori;ed enlisted aide# Pears earlier' a re$ie! of enlisted aide positions eliminated the illet at his center# Despite this' the /a*or General desired the ser$ices of an enlisted aide to assist in official entertainin" and improperly assi"ned enlisted aide duties to a non0commissioned officer# The /a*or General !as issued a letter of counselin"#
-a, Enforcement *fficial Fired for -andin' !o ernment )elicopter at )is Dau'hter+s School
( Department of Bomeland Security order officer !as fired for misuse of "o$ernment property after he fle! a multi0million dollar DBS helicopter to his dau"hters elementary school and landed it on school property# The incident pro$o+ed complaints from parents and attracted media attention# (lthou"h the employees immediate
8E
super$isor told him he could use the helicopter' the employees actions !ere not e%cused ecause employees are e%pected to use their o!n *ud"ment and should not rely solely on the *ud"ment of their superiors !hen it comes to ethical conduct#
88
pu lic and "a$e the employees partner a si"nificant ad$anta"e o$er other idders in "ettin" the !innin" id# (fter the her partner !on the id and purchased the property' the property !as transferred to the employee for @1Can o $ious stra!0man transaction used to "et around a BUD re"ulation prohi itin" BUD employees from iddin" on BUD0 o!ned properties# &ederal re"ulations prohi it employees from usin" non0pu lic information for furtherin" their o!n pri$ate financial interests' or the pri$ate financial interests of others# The BUD employee !as fired#
Block Party for Ne, Staff &embers Not a /)ail and Fare,ell2
( Colonel in <ur; ur"' Germany dre! the attention of in$esti"ators after they disco$ered that he had used Go$ernment resources to host an unofficial ar e.ue at his .uarters# The Colonel had planned a loc+ party to !elcome ne! staff mem ers to his di$ision' and accepted an offer y a superior officer to use Go$ernment property and soldiers for the party# Be su se.uently tas+ed soldiers from his command durin" duty hours to purchase food and e$era"es 4!ith his o!n pri$ate funds6 as !ell as transport and set up a Go$ernment tent and Go$ernment0purchased ta les and enches at his .uarters# The soldiers used Go$ernment $ehicles to transport the party supplies' and returned to rea+ do!n the tent and ta les at the close of the party# <hile the Colonel protested that the e$ent !as a Bail and &are!ell' the e$ent !as ad$ertised to the community as a -loc+ )arty' attendance !as $oluntary' and the e$ent !as not considered a place of duty# Thus' in$esti"ators determined that the e$ent !as unofficial' and resulted in the misuse of "o$ernment resources#
100
101
unauthori;ed &la" /ess# The t!o officers ordered the esta lishment of an on0shore &la" /ess to ser$e them !ithout follo!in" the proper procedures to recei$e appro$al# <hile they pro$ided the funds for the CSs to purchase the food for the mess' they re.uired that the CSs prepare meals and ser$e them in their respecti$e offices# The CSs !ere also directed to prepare food for an unofficial social e$ent "i$en y the (dmiral in his .uarters# (s a result of their misuse of personnel' the officers cases !ere for!arded to the Chief of Ka$al Operations#
102
(ssociation' notin" that they >e%pectSedT? attendance at certain sessions' and e%pressin" their desire for >a "ood turnout#? The email !as in $iolation of DoD Directi$e 9900#5A' !hich prohi its official endorsement of non0&ederal or"ani;ations# The t!o officers !ere counseled for their $iolations#
hours# Be admitted that he +ne! that !hat he !as doin" !ith the GO, !as !ron"' ut he as+ed for a second chance since he had ne$er een in trou le efore# The mechanic !as "i$en the mandatory minimum penaltyG a 300day suspension# The -a,E 31 U#S#C# M 13:84 6 re.uires that an officer or employee !ho >!illfully? uses a $ehicle o!ned or leased y the United States Go$ernment for other than official purposes e suspended for at least one month or' >!hen circumstances !arrant' for a lon"er period or summarily remo$ed from office#? 2n this case' the misuse of the $ehicle !as deemed to e !illful' since the &ederal employee +ne! that his personal use of the GO, !as !ron"#
)oliday !reetin's6 &ilitary *fficer Sent Best @ishes on the Cheap F 0ou Paid6
The FactsE (ccordin" to s!orn testimony and documents unco$ered y a military ser$ice 2nspector General in.uiry' a senior military officer and his !ife had a su ordinate ser$ice mem er print out on a Go$ernment office computer official cards containin" their holiday "reetin"s' !hich they then si"ned' enclosed in official en$elopes !ith printed la els' and sent to a out 100 addresses# Some of their "reetin"s !ere sent o$erseas to forei"n officials usin" Go$ernment posta"e and mar+ed >Official -usiness#? This conduct occurred as one of a series of alle"ed offenses that resulted in the officer ein" relie$ed of command' issued a puniti$e letter of reprimand' and ordered to forfeit @1'000# The -a,E 9 C#&#A# M 2739#101 420036' !hich lays out asic o li"ations for and restrictions upon pu lic ser$ice' for ids the use of &ederal property >for other than authori;ed acti$ities? 4M 2739#1014 64866# 2t thus arred the use of all of the &ederal property employed to produce and to send the "reetin" cards# /oreo$er' 1E U#S#C# M 1518 420036 mandates fines for anyone usin" an official en$elope or la el to a$oid ha$in" to pay their o!n posta"e for pri$ate mail# 2n this case' the official en$elopes addressed to indi$iduals o$erseas !ere improperly used to "ain Go$ernment posta"e# (dmittedly' section C1#:#8 of the Department of Defense 4DoD6 Official /ail /anual 4DoD :929#E0/' Dec# 27' 20016 authori;es the use of >appropriated fund posta"e? y DoD >acti$ities # # # !hen international diplomacy dictates#? 2n this case' ho!e$er' the officers "reetin"s !ere not re.uired for international diplomacy and !ere not sent on
10:
ehalf of an >acti$ity? ut !ere from t!o indi$idualsCthe officer and his !ife# They thus did not fall !ithin the DoD e%ception#
109
&isuse of Email
( Department of Defense 4DoD6 employee inad$ertently recei$ed an email messa"e from another employee' !hom she didnt +no!# The messa"e !ent into "reat detail re"ardin" a pri$ate usiness $enture that the employee !as conductin" !ith a third employee# The recipient promptly for!arded the email to 2nspector General' !ho in$esti"ated and determined that the !riter of the messa"e !as usin" the Go$ernment email system for his o!n pri$ate usiness use# The employee !as !arned' ut continued his acti$ities e$en after counselin"' and !as su se.uently remo$ed from his position# )ara"raph 20301a of DoD 9900#050A' Joint =thics Ae"ulation' restricts use of Department of Defense communications systems to official and authori;ed purposes only# Super$isors may allo! limited personal use of DoD email systems under certain circumstances and !hen such use does not o$er urden the communications system' create si"nificant additional costs' and is of reasona le duration and fre.uency#
for the o$er t!o !or+!ee+s !orth of time she spent on the phone durin" !or+ hours# She !as issued a letter of caution y her super$isor#
10E
The -a,E 31 U#S#C# M 13:8 420036 re.uires that any &ederal officer or employee !ho >!illfully uses or authori;es the use of a passen"er motor $ehicle or aircraft o!ned or leased y the United States Go$ernment'? e%cept for official purposes' e suspended !ithout pay for a minimum of one month and' >!hen circumstances !arrant' for a lon"er period? or e >summarily remo$ed from office#? /oreo$er' in Aro+n 56 &nited States Postal Ser5ice' 7: /#S#)#A# :29' :33 4188:6' the /erit Systems )rotection -oard affirmed that super$isors could e held to hi"her standards of conduct than non0 super$isors' ecause super$isors occupy positions of "reater trust and responsi ility#
all !ithout the super$isors +no!led"e or consent# The remo$ed employee initially denied ha$in" ta+en such actions under oath' ut later admitted that the alle"ations !ere true# (s a conse.uence of the specialists falsification of documents' misuse of Go$ernment property' and a use of official mail' she !as remo$ed from her position and recommended for possi le criminal char"es#
tra$el' and falsely claimin" to ha$e held the desi"nation of ("ency Aepresentati$e on three occasions# The (dministrati$e Jud"e concluded that the employees conduct !as intentional and that he sho!ed minimal' if any' potential for reha ilitation# Conse.uently' the employee !as remo$ed and anned from see+in" &ederal employment in the future#
111
112
her "o$ernment0issued !eapon' !hich she stored at home > ehind the coffee mu"s on the refri"erator? ecause she had >for"otStenT the com ination? to her "un safe# 2n addition to her demotion' the a"ent !as also suspended for 1: days# (Source: 2 - (SPA 9E:'S $=$2%
113
,(s appropriation does not authori;e funds for entertainment e%penses' the 2nspector General recommended that the office director e held personally lia le for the improper payment# Upon re$ie!' the Go$ernment (ccounta ility Office 4G(O6 found that the >certifyin" officer? is indeed personally financially lia le for improperly certified paymentsH ho!e$er' the G(O ruled that the office director !as merely an appro$in" official# The G(O ruled that the funds should e collected either from the payee' if possi le' or from the certifyin" officer !ho actually certified the payment#
11:
119
had
een +illed#
The Commander then relocated to Connecticut to start a ne! y the ne! o!ners' of the Commanders
assi"nment# Upon receipt of the letter' his mistress sho!ed up at the Commanders house to pay her respects' only to e informed' and lost his su marine command# reassi"nment and ne! location# The Commander recei$ed a puniti$e letter of reprimand'
/<A should not e ma+in" and sellin" the T0shirts that !ere "oin" to e re0sold off0 ase# (fter an in$esti"ation' it !as determined that /<A !as not informin" the military mem ers a out the prohi ition re"ardin" the re0sale of /<A "oods and !as also not informin" the military mem ers that they could not re0sell the T0shirts' oth parts of /<A !ritten policy# /<A e"an enforcin" the policies and conducted trainin" for all of their staff#
115
you and people li+e you die off' the etter#? The officers recei$ed correcti$e action !ithin the Ser$ice includin" $er al counselin"#
SeDually EDplicit Emails Are Not the *nly Emails That Can !et 0ou Fired6
T!o federal employees' one at the =n$ironmental )rotection ("ency' the other at the Social Security (dministration' !ere disciplined for $iolations of the Batch (ct# (lthou"h federal employees are entitled to support the political candidates of their choice' the Batch (ct prohi its federal employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ity !hile on duty# Durin" the 200: )residential =lection' the =)( employee fa$ored John Ierry' and !hile on duty' sent 31 of his co0!or+ers an email ur"in" them to support /r# Ierrys campai"n# On the other hand' the SS( employee fa$ored Geor"e <# -ush' and
11E
!hile on duty' sent a similar email to 25 of his co0!or+ers and other indi$iduals# 2t !as irrele$ant !hich candidate each employee supported' oth !ere found to ha$e $iolated the Batch (ct ecause sendin" emails in support of any candidate !hile on duty constitutes prohi ited political acti$ity# Disciplinary action for $iolations of the Batch (ct ran"e from 300day suspension !ithout pay to termination from federal employment#
@arnin'E Federal Employees and Some Non"Federal Employees &ay Not En'a'e in Politics at @ork
The =%ecuti$e Director of Dela!ares Ke! Castle County Bead Start )ro"ram recei$ed a 300day suspension !ithout pay for promotin" a candidate for the U#S# Bouse of Aepresentati$es in his official capacity# ,iolations of the Batch (ct dont "et much more latant than this# The Director in$ited a candidate to spea+ to his capti$e su ordinate audience at a mandatory office meetin"# The Batch (ct prohi its federal e%ecuti$e ranch employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ity !hile on duty and from usin" their official positions' authority' or influence to interfere !ith the results of an election# Durin" the meetin"' the Director introduced the candidate' passed out campai"n materials' and offered employees the opportunity to re"ister to $ote# Be later admitted that he had $iolated the Batch (ct# -ut !hy is the Director of the Ke! Castle County Bead Start pro"ram co$ered y the Batch (ctO The ans!er is thisG the Batch (ct also co$ers state' county' or municipal e%ecuti$e a"ency employees !hose duties are connected !ith pro"rams financed in !hole or in part y federal loans or "rants# Bead Start is one such pro"ram#
118
120
employees personnel file# (lthou"h the Batch (ct !as amended in 188: to allo! &ederal employees to participate more in partisan political acti$ities' it still prohi its employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ities !hile on duty or in any Go$ernment office#
121
122
OSCs petition alle"ed that the administrator re$ie!ed the draft letter and authori;ed the candidates campai"n staff to si"n his name to it' in $iolation of the Batch (ct# That (ct prohi its &ederal employees from solicitin" political contri utions# Su se.uently' the candidates campai"n distri uted the si"ned letter to numerous potential supporters# The Special Counsel also emphasi;ed that !hile OSC stands ready to prosecute $iolations of the Batch (ct' it prefers to help &ederal employees a$oid such $iolations# ><hen in dou t a out !hat is permissi le or impermissi le under Batch (ct'? the Special Counsel ad$ised' >2 !ould encoura"e employees to consult our office# Theres a !ealth of information at our !e site' !!!#oscc#"o$' and employees can actually e0mail .uestions to us#?
123
12:
politically partisan e0mail messa"es to co!or+ers# 2n the first complaint' the OSC alle"ed that an employee at the =n$ironmental )rotection ("ency sent an e0mail to fifteen co!or+ers that contained a !idely0circulated photo"raph and se$eral ne"ati$e statements a out one candidate# 2n the second complaint' the OSC alle"ed that an (ir &orce ci$ilian employee sent an e0mail !hile on official duty to 50 recipients that contained a moc+ resume of one of the candidates# The Batch (ct prohi its &ederal employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ity !hile on duty' !hile in any room or uildin" occupied in the dischar"e of official duties y an indi$idual employed y the Go$ernment' !hile !earin" a uniform' or !hile in a Go$ernment $ehicle# The Batch (ct does not prohi it >!ater cooler?0type discussions amon" co0!or+ers a out current e$ents' and conse.uently does not prohi it >!ater cooler? discussion o$er e0mail# =0mail can e used as an alternati$e mode for casual con$ersation' ut a line is crossed !hen &ederal employees disseminate their messa"e to a mass audience' ena lin" them to en"a"e in an electronic form of leafletin" at the !or+site# OSC has ad$ised that in order to determine !hether an e0mail $iolates the Batch (ct prohi ition a"ainst en"a"in" in political acti$ity' it !ill consider the follo!in"G the audience that recei$ed the e0mail' the num er of people to !hom the e0mail !as sent' the senders relationship to the recipient' !hether the purpose of the messa"e is to encoura"e the recipient to support a particular political party or candidate' !hether the messa"e !as sent in a &ederal uildin"' and !hether the &ederal employee !as on duty#
127
circumstances that mi"ht imply military endorsement of a certain candidate# (lthou"h in such situations the indi$idual ser$ices could ta+e disciplinary andRor administrati$e action' military in$esti"ators deemed the ser$ice mem ers in$ol$ement honest mista+es# 4Department of Defense' 2nspector General6
125
employment restriction in 1E U#S#C# M 2054a6416# Be recei$ed one year pro ation and a @29'000 fine#
Po,er Point
( /ilitary Ser$ice Captain had' under his official responsi ility a pro"ram !ith a "o$ernment contractor durin" his last year of ser$ice# The Captain prepared a )o!erpoint presentation recommendin" the ser$ice contract !ith this company# (fter lea$in" the ser$ice' the Captain !ent to !or+ for the same "o$ernment contractor# Be !as treated to an ethics counselin" session after he approached the Go$ernment on ehalf of his ne! company and deli$ered 0 as the companys representati$e 0 the same )o!erpoint presentation recommendin" the ser$ice contract !ith his company# 12E
The Captains actions $iolated 1E U#S#C# 205' !hich prohi its former officers or employees of the e%ecuti$e ranch from ma+in"' !ith the intent to influence' communications or appearances efore a &ederal Go$ernment officer or employee in connection !ith a particular matter in !hich the former officer or employee participated personally and su stantially !hile an officer or employee#
Federal Employee+s Post"Employment 7iolations Cost Boein' CB#I &illion4 Federal Employee Ends .p Behind Bars
The former chief procurement officer for the (ir &orce' !ho !as responsi le for a!ardin" illions of dollars in contracts' re.uested -oein" e%ecuti$es to "i$e her dau"hter and son0in0la! *o s at -oein"# They did' and after the chief procurement officer retired from the (ir &orce' they "a$e her a *o ' too# (fter a criminal in$esti"ation' -oein" admitted to corruption char"es in$ol$in" conflicts of interest and other unrelated $iolations# -oein" settled !ith the Justice Department for @719 million# The former (ir &orce chief procurement officer met !ith -oein"s Chief &inancial Officer and discussed a potential *o !ith -oein" !hile -oein" !as see+in" a @20 illion contract to lease tan+er aircraft to the (ir &orce# &ederal ethics rules re.uire federal employees to dis.ualify themsel$es from participatin" in matters re"ardin" companies !ith !hich they are see+in" employment' and federal la! imposes criminal lia ility !hen federal employees participate in matters in !hich they ha$e a personal financial interest# The procurement officer did not dis.ualify herself from participatin" in matters in$ol$in" -oein" as she should ha$e# Aather' she used her position to "et her dau"hter' son0in0la!' and herself *o s# She ended up ser$in" a prison sentence for conflicts of interest $iolations# -oein"s Chief &inancial Officer !as also char"ed in the in$esti"ation and pled "uilty to aidin" and a ettin" acts affectin" a personal financial interest# Be !as sentenced to four months in prison' a @290'000 fine' and 200 hours of community ser$ice# 2n addition to settlin" !ith the "o$ernment for @719 million' -oein"s @20 illion tan+er lease contract !as canceled#
!ith a company that ran a >re$erse auctionin" ser$ice? for &ederal a"enciesH throu"h this ser$ice' the company facilitated online auctions for &ederal contracts in e%chan"e for a commission from successful recipients# The official !isely consulted her ethics counselor re"ardin" her *o hunt' and assured the counselor that she !ould dis.ualify herself from in$ol$ement !ith any contracts in$ol$in" the company# Unfortunately' the official su se.uently participated personally and su stantially in a hand"un procurement in !hich she +ne! that the company had a financial interest# 2n addition to attendin" meetin"s and ma+in" phone calls related to the procurement' the official directed her su ordinate to re.uire all prospecti$e idders to re"ister !ith and utili;e the companys ser$ices# The official pled "uilty to a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E for participatin" personally and su stantially in a particular matter in !hich an or"ani;ation !ith !hom she !as ne"otiatin" for employment had a financial interest# She !as sentenced to one year of pro ation' :0 hours of community ser$ice' and a @1'000 fine#
@atch %epresentin' a Business to the A'ency @here Employed the Pre ious 0ear6
The FactsE ( Senior =%ecuti$e Ser$ice 4S=S6 employee of the State Department' !ho had een tas+ed !ith assistin" the -osnian Go$ernment in purchasin" military e.uipment and trainin"' retired and !ithin se$eral days too+ employment !ith a pri$ate contractor of military hard!are# Si% months later' he recommended to the United States =m assy in Sara*e$o that it support his id for a contract et!een his ne! employer and the -osnian Go$ernment# Bis id for the contract !as successful' ut he also succeeded in securin" le"al action from the United States Go$ernment# The employee a"reed to a @10'000 settlement in e%chan"e for ein" released from le"al proceedin"s# 4SourceG Office of Go$ernment =thics memorandum' Oct# 2002#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2054c6 420036 ars e$ery S=S employee for one year after endin" employment !ith the United States from +no!in"ly communicatin" !ith the &ederal a"ency or office !ith !hich he or she has !or+ed' !ith the intent of influencin" that a"ency or office on ehalf of anyone 4other than the Go$ernment6 !ho see+s an official action#
130
SEC Attorney Sentenced for S,itchin' Sides After -ea in' !o ernment
( former attorney !ith the Den$er re"ional office of the Securities and =%chan"e Commission 4S=C6 !as con$icted for $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2054a6' !hich prohi its former Go$ernment employees from communicatin" !ith the Go$ernment !ith re"ard to matters they !or+ed on as Go$ernment employees# The S=C attorney !as responsi le for
131
in$esti"atin" certain stoc+ promoters re"ardin" their promotion of stoc+ in a certain company that the promoters o!ned# Upon departure from the S=C' the attorney !as hired y the same stoc+ promoters to perform le"al !or+ for their su sidiary companies' includin" the company the attorney had een in$esti"atin" !hile at S=C# The attorney' in his ne! capacity as director and counsel for the company' responded to a su poena and communicated !ith S=C officials on ehalf of the company in .uestion# The attorney !as sentenced to one year of imprisonment for this $iolation of a criminal post0employment statute#
(ccordin" to the Go$ernmentDs ci$il complaint' the accused chemist !as employed y the United States &ood and Dru" (dministration 4&D(6 in the Office of Generic Dru"s 4OGD6 for a period of appro%imately t!o years# 2n that capacity' the chemist performed re$ie!s of ( re$iated Ke! Dru" (pplications 4(KD(s6 su mitted y pharmaceutical companies see+in" to "ain appro$al to manufacture and mar+et "eneric $ersions of inno$ator dru"s# Shortly efore lea$in" employment !ith the &D(' the chemist completed the first0le$el chemistry re$ie! of a pharmaceutical companys (KD( for /icona;ole Kitrate ,a"inal Creme 2U' an alle"ed "eneric e.ui$alent to the prescription dru" /onistat05# Bis re$ie! consisted of an e%tensi$e analysis of the chemical components' manufacturin" process' testin" methods' and la elin" re.uirements of the product# (ppro%imately t!o years later' the chemist commenced employment as ,ice )resident of Ae"ulatory (ffairs and United States ("ent for the same pharmaceutical company# Be su se.uently contacted OGD officials on numerous occasions in an effort to o tain appro$al of the companys (KD(' !hich !as still pendin" efore OGD# Bis contacts consisted of status calls in !hich he ur"ed OGD representati$es to speed up the process of appro$al of the application and su stanti$e discussions concernin" pro lems !ith the application# ( su se.uent in$esti"ation found that throu"hout the chemists contacts !ith OGD officials' he !as a""ressi$e in see+in" the appro$al of the (KD(# &urther' the chemist used his ac.uaintance !ith super$isory0le$el OGD officials from his tenure as an OGD employee in an attempt to "et special treatment for the (KD(# The (KD( !as appro$ed se$eral months later# 2n the complaint' the Go$ernment alle"ed that the former employees actions $iolated 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416' !hich permanently prohi its a former Go$ernment employee from communicatin" to or appearin" efore the Go$ernment' on ehalf of another' in connection !ith a particular matter' in$ol$in" specific parties' in !hich he participated personally and su stantially as a Go$ernment employee# )ursuant to a settlement a"reement' the former employee a"reed to pay the Go$ernment @19'000' and the Go$ernment released him from its claims#
133
!ith the United States (ir &orce durin" July 1887 and e"an to !or+ for the company as General /ana"er' Go$ernment Ser$ices Di$ision' in (u"ust 1887# The United States continued to en"a"e in contractual matters !ith the corporation !ith respect to the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect# 2n Septem er 1887' the United States and the second' ac.uired corporation entered into a lease !herein the United States leased from the corporation the military housin" units of the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect# Under the lease a"reement' the United States !as to pay the second corporation @E'7EE'190#00 on or a out Octo er 19' 1887' ut did not ma+e the payment until Octo er 21' 1887# On or a out the 15th and 1Eth of Octo er 1887' the no!0retired Colonel' as a representati$e of oth corporations' contacted an employee of the (ir &orce to attempt to e%pedite the late payment on the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect# 2n addition' on or a out the 18th or 20th of /ay 1885' the retired Colonel' a"ain on ehalf of the corporations' contacted an employee of the (ir &orce to e%press displeasure re"ardin" the (ir &orceDs !arranty claims on the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect# The United States char"ed the retired Colonel !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416 y contactin" (ir &orce employees re"ardin" the late payment and the !arranty claims# 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416 ars former &ederal personnel 4ci$ilians and military6 from representin" another to &ederal a"encies !ith the intent to influence re"ardin" particular matters that in$ol$e specific parties in !hich the former employee participated personally and su stantially !hile in &ederal employment# The retired Colonel pleaded "uilty to one misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416 and a"reed to pay a fine of @9'000#
mana"er of the tri al casino# -e"innin" in 1887' the former superintendent represented the Cro! Tri e in appearances efore the -2( in connection !ith the reconciliation and *ustification for the release of the @103'590 of 2-DG funds that the superintendent had appro$ed for the failed land purchase in 1882# The former superintendent !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 205' representin" the Cro! Tri e efore the United States in connection !ith the reconciliation and *ustification for the release of 2-DG funds' a matter in !hich he had participated personally and su stantially as a superintendent of the -2(# Be !as also char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 351 4conspiracy to con$ert &ederal funds6' 1E U#S#C# 7:1 4!illfully con$ertin" &ederal funds6' and 1E U#S#C# 1173 4misapplication of tri al monies6 and found "uilty on all ut the 1E U#S#C# 1173 char"e# Be !as sentenced to fi$e yearsD pro ation' si% monthsD detention' a @190 Special (ssessment to the Crime ,ictims &und' and a @7'000 fine#
Internal %e enue Ser ice 8I%S< *fficer Pleads !uilty to #9 .(S(C( $;R 7iolation
<hile a collection officer for the 2AS' the accused !as assi"ned to the collection cases of t!o 2AS ta%payers# (fter the accused left the 2AS' he represented oth ta%payers efore the 2AS in connection !ith the collection cases to !hich he had een assi"ned as an 2AS employee# Be !as char"ed !ith t!o $iolations of 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416' ma+in" a communication to and an appearance efore an officer and employee of the 2AS' on ehalf of the t!o ta%payers in connection !ith a matter in !hich the United States !as a party or had an interest and in !hich he had participated !hile an 2AS employee# The accused pled "uilty to the char"es and !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and 100 hours of community ser$ice#
.nited States Army *fficer and Procurement *fficial Fined CI;4;;; for #9 .(S(C( $;R and Procurement Inte'rity Act 7iolations
The (rmy Officer coordinated acti$ities for all medical facilities !ithin his re"ion' includin" (rmy' Ka$y' and (ir &orce facilities# 2n 188:' the officer retired from the (rmy and e"an employment !ith a defense contractor# This contractor had
137
pre$iously een a!arded a contract to pro$ide inpatient and outpatient psychiatric ser$ices in support of <illiam -eaumont (rmy /edical CenterH !hile the officer !as employed y the (rmy' his official duties had included a!ardin" and super$isin" this contract# The (rmy (udit ("ency su se.uently e"an an audit of the contractors contract to determine !hether an option to rene! the contract should e e%ercised# The audit !as completed on January 10' 188:' and for!arded to the officer# On July 12' 1889' a re.uest for proposals !as issued y the (udit ("ency for a follo!0on contract to pro$ide essentially the same ser$ices that !ere ein" pro$ided y the contractor# On Octo er 13' 1889' the contractor su mitted a proposal' !hich !as si"ned y the retired officer as the companyDs Senior ,ice )resident# The retired officer !as char"ed !ith ci$il $iolations of the )rocurement 2nte"rity (ct' :1 U#S#C# :234f6416' and of 1E U#S#C# 2054a6426' and 2054c6416# )ursuant to a settlement a"reement dated July 23' 188E' the accused a"reed to pay the United States @90'000 in e%chan"e for the United StatesD dismissal of the complaint#
Attorney for Securities and EDchan'e Commission 8SEC<4 Di ision of Enforcement 7iolates #9 .(S(C( $;R
2n 1883' the S=C attorney !as assi"ned to in$esti"ate a "roup of persons for securities fraud in$ol$in" the payment of ri es to manipulate the mar+et for the shares of certain companies# These ri es consisted of +ic+ ac+s promoters !ere payin" ro+ers to tout the stoc+s of their companies# (s part of this in$esti"ation' the attorney in$esti"ated t!o stoc+ promoters' !ho cooperated in the attorneys in$esti"ation and "a$e him s!orn testimony in !hich they admitted to en"a"in" in the payment of ri es intended to manipulate the share price of the companys stoc+# The attorney left the S=C on &e ruary 20' 1889 under threat of suspension for unrelated misconduct# Be !as immediately hired y the t!o stoc+ promoters to ser$e as their corporations le"al counsel# 2n January 1887' the S=CDs Ke! Por+ office' !or+in" in con*unction !ith the U#S# (ttorneyDs office in the =astern District of Ke! Por+' e"an an in$esti"ation of the entire matter# 2n &e ruary 1887' the S=C issued a su poena for documents from the promoters corporation# The attorney' !ho !as then the corporations counsel and also on the corporationDs oard of directors' participated in respondin" to that su poena#
135
2n$esti"ators char"ed that the attorneys participation included communications !ith S=C officials that $iolated 1E U#S#C# 2054a6' !hich prohi its former Go$ernment employees from communicatin" !ith the Go$ernment !ith intent to influence in connection !ith particular matters in$ol$in" specific parties in !hich they participated personally and su stantially as Go$ernment employees# The attorney and fi$e other defendants 4includin" the t!o stoc+ promoters6 !ere indicted in Octo er 1887 for securities fraud# (fter the fi$e co0defendants pleaded "uilty' the attorney !as indicted on a host of ne! char"es' includin" securities fraud' money launderin"' and a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2054a6# Be pled "uilty to three counts' includin" the 2054a6 char"e#
Federal A iation Administration 8FAA< &ana'er %esi'ns and Then )as Improper Contact ,ith the A'ency
<hile super$isin" the (ir!ay &acilities -ranch of the &((' the mana"er had official in$ol$ement in the procurement of F(ir!ay &acilities Trainin" Ser$ices#F This &(( contract !as $alued at @:3'705'599# On /arch 25' 1882' the mana"er accepted a position !ith a idder for the a o$e0descri ed contract as F/ana"er' Trainin" Ser$ices on the &ederal ($iation (dministrationDs (ir!ay &acilities Contract#F On (u"ust 10' 1882' the idder included the former mana"ers name as F)ro"ram /ana"erF in the id proposal# /em ers of the Source =$aluation -oard' reco"ni;in" the name' ecame concerned as to the possi le $iolations of procurement inte"rity la!s and sou"ht ad$ice from &(( le"al counsel# The &(( le"al counsel re.uested an official in$esti"ation on June E' 1883# =$idence produced durin" the in$esti"ation indicated that the mana"er in his former capacity had personally re$ie!ed' amended' and corrected the Statement of <or+ for the id' and had also een responsi le for the nominations of t!o selection oard mem ers for the contract# (fter resi"nin"' the former mana"er appeared efore the &(( on ehalf of the idder' his then0employer' at meetin"s pertainin" to the procurement# The former mana"er pled "uilty to a sin"le count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2054a6426' and !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and !as fined @9000# This statute ars former &ederal personnel from representin" a party to &ederal a"encies' for a period of t!o years after lea$in" Go$ernment' re"ardin" particular matters in$ol$in" specific
13E
parties !hich !ere pendin" under the employees official responsi ility durin" the employees last year of &ederal ser$ice#
Senior &ember of the Board of !o ernors of the Federal %eser e System 7iolates #9 .(S(C( $;R
&ollo!in" her resi"nation' the former -oard of Go$ernors mem er !as elected to the oards of directors of a num er of companies# One of these companies !as affected y a "uideline issued y the &ederal Aeser$e called the hi"hly le$era"ed transaction 4BJT6 "uideline# The &ed re.uested pu lic comment on the BJT "uideline# The company in .uestion su mitted a !ritten comment to the &ed' and company officials met !ith a mem er of the &edDs -oard of Go$ernors# The former -oard of Go$ernors mem er oth arran"ed and attended the meetin"# She introduced the company officials to the mem er of the &edDs -oard of Go$ernors' ut said nothin" durin" the su stanti$e part of the meetin"# The company paid the former employee @1'900 for her participation in the meetin"# The former employee a"reed to pay a @9'000 ci$il fine in connection !ith a criminal in$esti"ation into !hether she $iolated the one0year ar of 1E U#S#C# 2054c6' the post0employment acti$ities statute# This statute prohi its former senior Go$ernment officials for one year after lea$in" their senior positions from representin" or appearin" efore employees of their former a"encies on ehalf of another !ith the intent to influence them re"ardin" official action#
Former *fficial at the Department of A'riculture+s Federal Crop Insurance Corporation 8FCIC< Improperly %epresents Ne, Employer to .(S( !o ernment
( ma*or crop insurance corporation e"an the &C2C appeal process !ith respect to ad$erse &C2C decisions on certain claims 4includin" the case of a certain /aine potato farmer6 y sendin" to the official in .uestion a notice of intent to appeal# Jater that year' the official left the &C2C and *oined the crop insurance corporation as a consultant# (fter the &C2C re*ected the appeals that the company had initiated' the official repeatedly tried
138
to persuade ("ency officials to reconsider the denial of the appeal in$ol$in" the /aine potato farmer# The former official pled "uilty to t!o counts of $iolatin" the t!o0year restriction on post0employment contacts codified at 1E U#S#C# 2054a6426 and !as sentenced to pro ation# This statute ars former employees for a period t!o years from representin" others to &ederal a"encies re"ardin" particular matters in$ol$in" specific parties !hich !ere pendin" under the former employees official responsi ility durin" his or her last year of &ederal ser$ice#
Employee !ets T,o 0ears Probation for Improper Post"!o ernment %epresentations
( contract specialist for the General Ser$ices (dministration 4GS(6 pled "uilty to $iolatin" conflict0of0interest la!s after her retirement from federal ser$ice# Durin" the specialists fi$e years at the GS(' she o$ersa! a num er of soft!are0related contracts# She !as in$ol$ed personally and su stantially in one lar"e contract in particular' the ne"otiation of !hich encompassed the span of se$eral years# Upon retirement from her position at the GS(' the contract specialist sou"ht employment !ith the company that had recei$ed the lar"e contract# O$er the ne%t se$eral months' the specialist contacted GS( multiple times !ith the intent to influence GS( to e%tend the companys contract as !ell as a!ard the company ne! contracts# The specialist pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E USC 2054a6416' !hich prohi its an e%ecuti$e ranch employee from +no!in"ly ma+in"' !ith the intent to influence' any communication to any a"ency on ehalf of any other person in connection !ith a particular matter in !hich the person participated personally and su stantially as such officer or employee# She !as sentenced to t!o years super$ised pro ation and su stance a use treatment#
Ne'otiatin' ,ith Employer @hile En'a'ed in *fficial &atters Earns CI;;; Fine
The Chief of Staff for the )residents Critical 2nfrastructure )rotection -oard 4)C2)-6 in the Office of Bomeland Security participated in ne"otiations !ith a company for a contract to pro$ide support functions for the -oard# Bo!e$er' at the same time' he
1:0
!as spea+in" !ith the company re"ardin" prospecti$e employment# The Chief of Staff inter$ie!ed !ith the company on July 1E' and didnt su mit a letter of recusal until July 2:# /ean!hile' he recei$ed a *o offer on July 23' !hich he accepted on (u"ust 1# <hen in$esti"ators e"an to loo+ into the timeline of the employment offer' the former Chief of Staff !as forced to step do!n from the company and pay a @9'000 fine to settle the matter#
Salary for !o ernment @ork from Non"!o ernment Source 8#9 .(S(C( : $;M"Type 7iolations<
7isa Scam Nets CK4;;; Fine
The Chief Consular Officer at a U#S# =m assy earned herself a one0!ay trip to &ederal court after in$esti"ators disco$ered she had traded tourist $isas for pricey *aunts to )aris and Jas ,e"as# 2n$esti"ators learned that after ecomin" ac.uainted !ith a "roup of usiness!omen' the officer had accepted se$eral all0e%penses paid trips# T!o 1:1
of these trips !ere to Jas ,e"as' !here the officer and family mem ers stayed in e%pensi$e suites at the /G/ Grand and Caesars )alace# (irfare alone for the t!o trips !as $alued at @9'000# The officer also accepted an all0e%penses paid trip to )aris to attend a charita le e$ent' includin" first0class airfare $alued at @2':00# Su se.uently' t!o of the usiness!omen su mitted tourist $isas to the officer on ehalf of $arious forei"n indi$iduals# The officer appro$ed 23 $isas' all for indi$iduals !ho !ere ineli"i le under standard =m assy policy# The officer pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2084a6' supplementation of salary# She !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and a @3'000 fine# Ko terrorist lin+s !ere associated !ith the indi$iduals !ho o tained tourist $isas in this manner#
performin" these duties' the employee as+ed a contractor for' and su se.uently recei$ed' a Coach leather !ritin" portfolio and riefcase and a laptop computer# The in$esti"ation started !hen a contractor employee' !ho sa! the fa% that the employee had sent to the contractor re.uestin" the items' notified the Ka$al Criminal 2n$esti"ati$e Ser$ice# =mployees may not solicit or accept compensation' includin" "oods or ser$ices' from any non0Go$ernment source for performin" their Go$ernment duties# =$en thou"h the "oods or ser$ices may not ha$e affected ho! the employees perform their !or+ or ma+e decisions' such as !hether to a!ard a contract' it is a $iolation to solicit or accept such compensation#
1E U#S#C# 208 ars the unla!ful supplementation of salary and applies to officers and employees of the District of Colum ia and non0Go$ernment sources !ho compensate any such officers and employees for their Go$ernment ser$ices#
Pri ate Citi=en Attempts to Bribe Internal %e enue Ser ice 8I%S< Employee
The citi;en tried to ri e the 2AS employee y payin" him @290 for fa$ora le treatment re"ardin" an 2AS matter# The citi;en pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' !hich prohi its the payment of supplementation to a Go$ernment employeeDs salary#
Ci ilian Employee at -an'ley Air Force Base in 7ir'inia 7iolates #9 .(S(C( $;M
(n (ir &orce employee !as desi"nated y his ("ency as the super$isory construction representati$e for the Simplified (c.uisition of -ase =n"ineerin" Ae.uirements 4S(-=A6 contract# Under this contract' a pri$ate company a"reed to pro$ide ase en"ineerin" and construction ser$ices at Jan"ley (ir &orce -ase# The prime
1::
contractor su contracted its electrical !or+ to another company# ( super$isor !ith the su contractor su se.uently pro$ided the (ir &orce employee !ith an air conditionin" system' a Jet S+i and trailer' a home computer system' and a laptop computer' !ith a total $alue of appro%imately @17'900# The (ir &orce employee pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' for recei$in" a supplementation to his salary as compensation for his ser$ices as a Go$ernment employee# Be !as sentenced to three years pro ation and a @2900 fine#
1:9
The father0in0la! pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' !hich prohi its the supplementation of a Go$ernment employeeDs salary' and the contractin" officer pled "uilty to !ire fraud and mail fraud# 2n their pre0indictment plea a"reements' the father0in0la! a"reed to pay @1E'000 restitution' and the contractin" officer a"reed to pay an amount of restitution to e determined at the sentencin" hearin"#
Cab Company *,ner and District of Columbia *fficial Conspire to 7iolate #9 .(S(C( $;M
Suspicious in$esti"ators disco$ered that for three years' a ca company o!ner had conspired !ith the Chief of the D#C# Office of Ta%ica s to pro$ide ille"al ta%ica dri$ers licenses to un.ualified dri$ers# The dri$ers paid money to the company o!ner' !ho too+ the money and the dri$ersD names to the D#C# officialH the D#C# official then prepared the ille"al licenses# The company o!ner also paid the D#C# official money for other ille"al fa$ors' such as re"isterin" $ehicles that should not ha$e een re"istered# The D#C# official pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 208' !hich prohi its the supplementation of a Go$ernment employees salary' and a"reed to testify a"ainst the ca company o!ner# The D#C# official !as also con$icted of nine felony counts' includin" acceptin" ri es and "ratuities in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 201#
Air Force Contractin' *fficer Pays CB;;; for #9 .(S(C( $;M 7iolation
2n return for fa$ora le treatment in contractin"' employees of a pri$ate company a"reed to pro$ide an (ir &orce contractin" officer !ith money in the form of condominium rental payments# That money !as paid throu"h different intermediaries in order to dis"uise the purpose and the source of the funds# 2n addition' an in$esti"ation disclosed that the company purchased certain $alua le "oods and items for the condominium# &inally' the in$esti"ation disclosed that the company purchased smaller $alue items' such as dinners and as+et all tic+ets' for the (ir &orce contractin" officer# Due to statute of limitations pro lems' the in$esti"ation focused on the payment of the smaller $alue items# The contractin" officer pled "uilty to a sin"le misdemeanor count of 1E U#S#C# 208' unla!fully au"mentin" his salary !hile employed y the (ir &orce# Be !as ordered
1:7
to pay a fine of @7'000' !hich the Court calculated to e three times the $alue of those accepted items#
Assistant .nited States Attorney 8A.SA< in Tucson Ille'ally Possesses Sheep Skull and )orns
The (ssistant U#S# (ttorney 4(US(6 prosecuted an indi$idual for ille"ally +illin" a i"horn sheep on an 2ndian Aeser$ation# (s a result of the prosecution' the hunter forfeited the i"horn sheep and trophy 4s+ull and horns6' $alued at appro%imately @9'000' to the (ri;ona Game and &ish Department# )ursuant to a re.uest from the (US(' the (ri;ona Game and &ish Department entered into an a"reement !ith the (US( allo!in" him to pu licly display the s+ull and horns in his office' ut re.uirin" their return upon re.uest# Bo!e$er' after lea$in" employment !ith the U#S# (ttorneys office' the (US( too+ the s+ull and horns !ith him and treated them as his personal property# <hen the former (US( !as .uestioned a year later a out his possession of the s+ull and horns' he claimed that an unspecified 2ndian had sent the s+ull and horns to him in appreciation for his !or+ on the prosecution of the hunter# 2n$esti"ation sho!ed that such a "ift !ould ha$e een contrary to tri al practices and no mem er of the tri e could e found !ho +ne! anythin" a out the alle"ed "ift# The Go$ernment then re"ained possession of the s+ull and horns from the former (US( and returned them to the tri e# The (US( a"reed to plead "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 208 for his possession of the trophy#
1:5
of recei$in" compensation from a non0Go$ernment source for doin" her Go$ernment *o 41E U#S#C# 2084a66 and !as sentenced to t!o years pro ation#
1:8
190
lu%ury cars and to pay for fre.uent =uropean s+i $acations# Be de$oted some of his duty time to the mar+etin" and sellin" of the ootle" $ideos' includin" ta+in" payments !hile on the *o # =$en thou"h the employee had left &ederal ser$ice y the time the accusations a"ainst him !ere su stantiated' administrati$e action !as ta+en to ar him from US (rmy =urope installations#
191
!hich stipulate that super$isors must correctly certify time cards at the end of the pay period in order to pre$ent employee fraud#
192
The FactsE ( &ederal employee at the )enta"on decided to participate in a scheme that in$ol$ed lo""in" false o$ertime hours in an electronic time+eepin" system# The employee pled "uilty at trial and !as sentenced to three years of pro ation alon" !ith si% months of home confinement' and ordered to pay o$er @17'000 restitution# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' /arch 2003#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2E5 420036 mandates fines and imprisonment for up to 9 years for anyone !ho presents a claim for money' !hich the person +no!s to e fraudulent' to the >ci$il' military' or na$al ser$ice of the United States#?
193
Gi$en the reser$ists t!o decades of federal employment' the *ud"e found the reser$ists pleas of i"norance as to the proper lea$e procedures uncon$incin"# The *ud"e also too+ into consideration the testimony of the reser$ists commandin" officer at C=KTCO/' !ho testified that his trust in the reser$ist had een !holly eroded# (s a conse.uence of the reser$ists a use of the lea$e system' his career in the ci$il ser$ice !as terminated# (Source: 2 - (SRP 9E:'S ! ?$%
Employee Disciplined for Double Countin' Ci ilian and &ilitary %eser e Duties
( senior a"ency attorney did a little >dou le duty'? and as a >re!ard'? he !as ordered to reim urse the a"ency for 900#9 hours of annual lea$e and 1E hours of sic+ lea$e# The a"ency report found the la!yer spent the e.ui$alent of a out E3 days performin" his /ilitary Aeser$e duties# <hile his dual ser$ice is admira le' y not char"in" military or annual lea$e for some a sences' the officers ci$ilian lea$e alance e%ceeded that to !hich he !as entitled# Section 2739#509 of Title 9 of the Code of &ederal Ae"ulations states an employee shall use official time in an honest effort to perform official duties# <hile his ci$ilian lea$e alance !as not reduced !hile the attorney !as performin" his official military duties' he recei$ed credit as if he !as performin" his ci$ilian duties at the same time# &urther' the a"ency found the attorney had misused his su ordinates time' usin" them to schedule personal acti$ities such as haircuts' tra$el' and "olf# (lthou"h the final determination found no dishonesty' lac+ of inte"rity' or moti$e for personal "ain on the attorneys part' neither the a"ency nor the /ilitary Aeser$e found the attorneys actions accepta le# The attorney !as admonished for failure to e%ercise reasona le care in monitorin" his lea$e alances' and also counseled for misusin" su ordinates to perform personal tas+s# 2n addition' the /ilitary Aeser$e -ranch counseled him >se$erely? for his ne"li"ence in monitorin" his lea$e account and for improper staff use# <or+in" for t!o military ranches is le"al' ut it re.uires careful accountin" for your time' includin" lea$e# (Source: (ilitary Ser5ice 'nspector 7eneral%
199
Director Abused -ea e and Personnel4 !et+s Demoted and -oses 5ob
The Director of a military staff office cau"ht the eye of the 2nspector General y a usin" time' attendance' and official tra$el re"ulations' and y displayin" a usi$e personal eha$ior to!ards her staff# The Director failed to use proper lea$e or to document authori;ed a sences in$ol$in" se$eral trips# She also discoura"ed attempts y her su ordinates to $erify her !herea outs' often usin" profane lan"ua"e and threatenin" $er al out ursts# 2n addition' the 2nspector General disco$ered the Director had co$ered the documents that detailed her use of lea$e !ith cross outs' chan"es and other in+ annotations' ma+in" them $irtually incomprehensi le# (s a result' the ser$ice secretary too+ action that resulted in her ein" remo$ed from the Senior =%ecuti$e Ser$ices and demoted in "rade to GS019# (s part of a ne"otiated settlement' the Director a"reed to retire from &ederal ser$ice as soon as she !as eli"i le# (Source: (ilitary Ser5ice 'nspector 7eneral%
Tra el 7iolations
Bermuda4 5amaica4 *h I @ant to Take 0ou
( certain military "eneral had a fancy for la$ish $acations# Be decided to ta+e numerous personal trips includin" one to -ermuda usin" a military airplane# Once his $acation re"imen !as disco$ered' the "eneral !as re.uired to reim urse the "o$ernment for @E2'000# 2n addition' he !as demoted upon retirement#
197
empty *et to ma+e the command $isit on time# The "o$ernment incurred @3E'000 in additional costs for the special fli"ht# The officer !as counseled y his command a out the $iolation#
!erman )oliday
T!o employees of a DoD ("ency o tained o$erpayment for official tra$el to Germany# The t!o employees 0 !hom !e !ill call y the pseudonyms John and Sarah 0 claimed hotel lod"in" reim ursement for a ni"ht in !hich they !ere on a plane flyin" to Germany# 2n addition' the t!o too+ a >rest day? efore the conference on !hich no mission duties !ere performed and no lea$e !as ta+en# 4They indicated that this !as in order to o$ercome *et la" efore the conference#6# Their misconduct continued after the conference# The t!o remained in Germany for a day in order to tour $arious tourist sites in Germany on the Go$ernments dime' tra$elin" appro%imately 900 miles in a Go$ernment rental car and re.uestin" reim ursement for the fuel costs associated !ith their personal acti$ity' as !ell as lod"in" and per diem e%penses# Sarah later outdid John y claimin" hotel costs for the ni"ht after she returned to the US and durin" !hich she !as in her o!n home# 195
John and Sarah had o$er @790 and o$er @1100 respecti$ely !ithheld from their pay# The t!o !ere also re.uired to recei$e refresher trainin" on the use of the Defense Tra$el System# John' the appro$in" official for the tra$el $ouchers for Sarahs trip' !as also found to ha$e failed to e%ercise due dili"ence as a Certifyin" Official# 2n the ac+"round of the case !as a romantic relationship et!een John and Sarah# Thou"h the t!o denied ha$in" a romantic relationship durin" their trip' they admitted to e"innin" a relationship E months later 1 and that continued# (s a result of the on"oin" relationship' John !as re.uired to recuse himself from all actions in$ol$in" Sarah' includin" si"nin" as the appro$in" official for any actions that could e to the enefit or detriment of Sarah#
19E
that resulted in the officer ein" relie$ed of command' issued a puniti$e letter of reprimand' and ordered to forfeit @1'000# The -a,E The Department of Defense 4DoD6 Tra$el Ae"ulations pro$ide $arious "uidelines for tra$el of uniformed 4in ,olume 16 and ci$ilian 4in ,olume 26 DoD employees# (pplica le to this case !as ,olume 1G >Joint &ederal Tra$el Ae"ulations? 4J&TA6# J&TA section U2010 re.uires a uniformed ser$ice mem er to use the same care in incurrin" e%penses !hen the &ederal Go$ernment is to pay >as !ould a prudent person tra$elin" at personal e%pense # # # # =%cess costs' circuitous routes' delays or lu%ury accommodations that are unnecessary or un*ustified are the mem ers financial responsi ility#? /oreo$er' J&TA section U:102 for ids a uniformed ser$ice mem er from o tainin" per diem for any temporary duty 4TDP6 performed !ithin t!el$e hours# Since attendance at each all alon" !ith round0trip tra$el could ha$e een completed !ithin t!el$e hours had the officer e%ercised prudence' this re"ulation made it e$en clearer that the officer should not ha$e o tained his per diem# Since other a"encies ha$e tra$el re"ulations' all &ederal employees are encoura"ed to $erify the propriety of ha$in" the Go$ernment pay for their tra$el e%penses#
Bumped @ell
2t !as the youn" employeeDs first official trip to <ashin"ton' DC# 2t !as *ust a one0day' round trip# Ber meetin" !as scheduled for 1G00 )/# (n%ious to ma+e a "ood impression 4and to loo+ around DC6' she oo+ed an early0mornin" fli"ht out of (tlanta# <hen she "ot to the airport' she disco$ered that the fli"ht !as o$er oo+ed' and the airline !as offerin" free' round0trip tic+ets to anyone !ho !ould $olunteer to ta+e the ne%t fli"ht# That fli"ht !as to arri$e in DC at 12G20 )/' and she fi"ured that she !ould still ha$e time to ma+e her meetin"# (s her plane reached Aichmond' the pilot announced that !ould e a sli"ht delay !hile (ir &orce One too+ off# Ber plane circled and circled# The delay lasted for o$er an hour' and y the time the plane finally landed' she had missed the meetin"#
retirement party# /any out0of0to!n G0men tra$eled on official orders and pu lic e%pense# (ccordin" to their tra$el orders' the purpose of the trip !as to attend an ethics conferenceN (ccordin" to the ne!s report' only fi$e people actually attended the ethics forum#
170
171
dinner' and tourin" a local $ineyard# The officer e%plained that he chose to fly usiness0 class on another trip ecause flyin" coach !ould ha$e loo+ed >stran"e? to his hosts# On other trips' the officer made unofficial' unscheduled stops for family reasons' such as attendin" his childrens sportin" e$ents' !ithout ta+in" lea$e# &ederal tra$el re"ulations limit official tra$el to coach0class unless special circumstances' such as special security re.uirements' medical re.uirements' or una$aila ility of coach0class seats' e%ist# The ran+ of the tra$eler does not *ustify premium class tra$el# The officer also $iolated 9 C#&#A# 2739#5094 6' !hich mandates a Go$ernment employee >shall not encoura"e' direct' coerce' or re.uest a su ordinate to use official time to perform acti$ities other than those re.uired in the performance of official duties or authori;ed in accordance !ith la! or re"ulation#? (lthou"h ne$er issuin" any direct orders' the officer re.uested his su ordinates to perform many personal ser$ices such as carin" for his do"' shoppin" for athletic "ear' and repairin" his icycle# Su ordinates reported they had "i$en tours around the local area to the officers friends and relati$es and rescued the officers !ife on the roadside one Sunday# The officers other $iolations included as+in" his su ordinates to ma+e thousands of dollars in payments out of their personal funds for $arious purchases for him# =$en thou"h he reim ursed them later' it is improper to solicit loans from su ordinates# The officer recei$ed a )uniti$e Jetter of Aeprimand at non0*udicial punishment proceedin"s# Be $oluntarily reim ursed the Go$ernment @1:':71#03 for tra$el enefits he and his !ife recei$ed and char"ed 19 days to lea$e to account for days of T(D tra$el that !ere for personal usiness# &urther audit of his tra$el claims resulted in collectin" another @1'315# 2n addition' he !as reduced in "rade upon retirement from acti$e duty# (Source: (ilitary Ser5ice 'nspector 7eneral%
172
e%penses# The *ud"e sentenced her to fi$e years pro ation and ordered her to pay @10':97 in restitution#
173