Page images


OPR is required to submit an annual report to the Attorney General (28 CFR 0.39a(f) (4)). To prepare its first report, OPR requested each agency to submit a report reviewing the agency's internal investigation activities for the year. To assist OPR in preparing future reports and in monitoring agency integrity investigations, a reporting system is needed to provide OPR with data on each agency's activities during the .. year. Supervisory Level--Seriousness of Allegations

The October 8, 1976, memorandum requested that agency reports include a summary of all misconduct allegations made against supervisory-level or above personnel.

The auditors believe there may be instances that OPR would want reported even though the employees did not meet the supervisory definition. For example, DEA has informally initiated the practice of immediately informing the Administrator when certain types of allegations are received. The allegations include (1) any shooting incident, (2) criminal activity by DEA employees, and (3) those involving notoriety or great publicity. The purpose of this DEA practice is to inform the Administrator of significant allegations of misconduct.

The OPR should consider having investigations of certain enunciated types of allegations of misconduct included in the reporting system in addition to summaries of investigations of allegations against high level employees.

Supervisory Personnel

[ocr errors]

The October 8, 1976 OPR memorandum to the agencies requested that the report "include a brief summary of all misconduct allegations * * *."

Some confusion existed among the agencies over the definition of supervisor. Each agency has a different organization and grade structure--supervisory positions in some organizations begin at higher grade levels than in other organizations. In addition, the grade structure of supervisory positions for professional personnel and clerical personnel often differ. Discussions were held with representatives of the agencies in an attempt to define the term "supervisor" for use in preparing the first report.

The OPR needs to issue guidelines clearly defining the term "Supervisory-level employees" so that all agencies include the proper information in their future reports. Integrity v. Administrative Matters

Thě OPR is concerned with allegations of misconduct that involve matters of integrity rather than matters that are administrative in nature. Each of the six agencies makes some distinction between integrity and administrative matters. Only DEA, however, has a detailed listing of the classes of misconduct that should be reported to the Office of Internal Security as integrity matters. To ensure that all agencies are reporting comparable information, and that all agency employees know what classes of misconduct to report, OPR needs to issue guidelines defining the classes of misconduct allegations to be included under integrity and reported.

[ocr errors]

Periodic Reports

The October 8, 1976, memorandum from OPR to the six agencies outlined the information to be included in the report. Some of the information requested by OPR was not readily retrievable from the agencies' information systems. The agencies did, however, supply the information requested to the extent possible, and have agreed to modify their information system to capture the data needed for future reports.

OPR has been receiving monthly reports from FBI and INS and has recently requested a similar report from DEA. These reports contain a brief description of the allegation, the position of the alleged offender, and the status of the matter. INS also includes a brief summary of the investigation.

To ensure that or receives sufficient information to monitor allegations of misconduct in the Department, a reporting system including monthly reports and an annual report is needed. The reports should include statistical data to allow monitoring of the number of allegations and narrative information on allegations against high-level officials or serious matters.

The exact format and content of the reports will depend on the amount of information OPR wishes to accumulate. However, the monthly reports for each agency should include:


The number of cases opened and closed during
the period, cases in progress at the end of the
period, and the number of allegations found to
be without a substantial factual basis.


An entry for each allegation against supervisory-
level and above officials including the agency
file number, the position of the alleged
offender, a description of the allegation, and
the status of the case.

The annual report should include:
1. A description of any significant structural

or policy changes in the inspection unit

during the year.
2. The number of employees in the unit.
3. Copies of any changes in procedures implemented

during the year.
A brief summary of all misconduct allegations
(without mentioning the name of the individual
accused) made against supervisory-level or
above personnel that were found to have a
substantial factual basis, and a brief

description of how the matter was disposed of. 5. Statistical information for the year on the

number of cases opened, number of cases closed, cases in progress, and number of cases found not to have a substantial factual basis.


Guidelines outlining the content of the reporting system should be issued as expeditiously as possible so that the agencies may modify their information systeins to capture the necessary data.


To enable OPR to receive the information needed to monitor internal investigation activities and prepare future annual reports, the auditors recommend that OPR consider having serious nonsupervisory misconduct investigations included in the reports and that OPR issue guidelines:

Defining the term "supervisory-level employees"

for OPR report purposes.
2. Defining the classes of misconduct included in

the term "integrity."
3. Outlining the content of information to be

included in monthly and annual reports from



[blocks in formation]


Reporting Requirements of Departmental Order Establishing
the Office of Professional Responsibility
Heads of All Offices, Boards, Bureaus and Divisions
A11 United States Attorneys


The Department's Office of Professional Responsibility
was created to oversee investigations of allegations of
misconduct by Department of Justice cmployees. As head of
that Office, the Counsel's function is to ensure that
Departmental employees continue to perform their duties
in accord with the professional standards expected of the
Nation's principal law enforcement agency. The Office is
responsible for reviewing allegations against Departmental
employees involving violations of law, Departmental regula-
tions, or Departmental standards of conduct. To this end,
the office of Professional Responsibility serves as a
special review and advisory body, reporting directly to
the Attorney General or, in appropriate cases, to the
Deputy Attorney General or the Solicitor General. See
50.39 et seq., Departmental Order No. 635-75, 40 Fed. Reg.
58,643 71975). For this Office to perform its function
properly, it must be notified promptly whenever someone
makes an allegation of serious misconduct against any
employee of the Department.

Section 0.39a (f) (1) and (2) of the Department Regula-
tions require the Counsel to submit to the Attorney General
and the Deputy Attorney General "an immediate report"
concerning any matter which appears to involve a violation
(1) of law, or (2) of Departmental regulations or orders,
or applicable standards of conduct which "should be brought
to the attention of a higher official". Section 0.39a (f) (3)
requires the Counsel to submit a monthly report sumarizing
the matters under the Counsel's review.

I wish to remind you that it is your responsibility
to inform the Counsel on Professional Responsibility of all
such allegations which come to your attention and to advise

« PreviousContinue »