Table Of Content

. OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE INDEPENDENCE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL IN THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE Y4.P 84/10:103-23 Oversight Hearing on the Independen.. HEARING BEFORETHE SUBCOMMITTEE OX THE CIVIL SERVICE OFTHE COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS FIRST SESSION OCTOBER 5, 1993 Serial No. 103-23 Printed for the use ofthe Committee on Post Office and Civil Service AUG * 1994 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFT^E,IT^nr»;!|jC8vrr^^,.. WASHINGTON : 1994 ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments.CongressionalSalesOffice.Washington,DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-044410-1 — . \V) oversight hearing on the independence OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL IN THE =^= UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE Y4.P 84/10:103-23 Oversight Hearing on the Independen.. HEAKING BEFORETHE SUBCOMMITTEE OX THE CIVIL SERVICE OFTHE COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS FIRST SESSION OCTOBER 5, 1993 Serial No. 103-23 Printed for the use ofthe Committee on Post Office and Civil Service AUG 4 1994 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE" " '^^'llaVTT^£94- ' WASHINGTON : 1994 ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments.CongressionalSalesOffice,Washington.DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-044410-1 COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE WILLIAM L. CLAY, Missouri,Chairman PATRICIASCHROEDER, Colorado JOHNT.MYERS, Indiana FRANKMcCLOSKEY,Indiana BENJAMINA. GILMAN,NewYork GTPEAAHLUROELYAMNAELOS..RAKCAC.HNKOSJELAORWMRMYSEAEKSNRI,,,NONOPRheeTniwnoOsNYyo,lrvkaDnisitarictof TDDCOHAONONNSMYBTAUOASRUNTNJC.OGEN,R,IAA.DlIGaMnEsdO,kiRaaPEneaLnLnsAy,lvMaanriyaland Columbia THOMASE. PETRI,Wisconsin BARBARA-ROSE COLLINS, Michigan SHERWOODL. BOEHLERT,NewYork LESLIE L. BYRNE,Virginia (Vacancy) MELVINL. WATT,NorthCarolina ALBERTRUSSELLWYNN,Maryland GREGLAUGHLIN,Texas SANFORDD. BISHOP,Jr.,Georgia SHERRODBROWN,Ohio ALCEE L. HASTINGS,Florida GailE. Weiss,StaffDirector RobertE. Lockhart,General Counsel DorisMoore-Glenn,DeputyStaffDirector JosephA. Fisher,MinorityStaffDirector Subcommittee on the Civil Service FRANKMcCLOSKEY, Indiana, Chairman PATRICIASCHROEDER,Colorado DANBURTON, Indiana PAULE. KANJORSKI,Pennsylvania CONSTANCEA. MORELLA,Maryland Deborah Kendall,SubcommitteeStaffDirector (ID CONTENTS HearingheldinWashington,DC,October5, 1993 1 Statementof: Beauchamp, Craig, Assistant Inspector General, Department of Agri- culture; accompanied by Richard F. Allen, Deputy Assistant Inspector GeneralforInvestigations,OfficeofInspectorGeneral 71 Marsh,Jonathan,specialagent,U.S.ForestService,region9 42 Nitsch,Michael,specialagent,U.S.ForestService,region6 35 Robertson,F.Dale,Chief,ForestService,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture; accompanied by Charles Rex Hartgraves, Associate Deputy Chief of Administration, Forest Service; Al Trujillo, National Director ofLaw Enforcement and Investigations; and Hank Kashdan, Head, Timber TheftTaskForce 57 Schrader,Dennis,specialagent,U.S.ForestService,TimberTaskForce.. 47 Stiener, Richard, Director, Office ofSpecial Investigations, General Ac- countingOffice;accompaniedbyJamesK.Meissner,RegionalManager, Seattle Office, and Associate Director for Timber Issues, and Stephen R.Myerson,AssistantDirector,Investigations,SanFranciscoOffice 5 Turner,CharlesH.,formerU.S.attorney,StateofOregon 18 Preparedstatements,letterssupplementalmaterials,etcetera: Beauchamp, Craig, Assistant Inspector General, Department of Agri- culture,preparedstatementof 73 Burton, Hon. Dan, a Representative in Congress from the State ofIndi- ana,preparedstatementof 56 Marsh, Jonathan, special agent, U.S. Forest Service, region 9, prepared statementof '. 44 McCloskey, Hon. Frank, a Representative in Congress from the State ofIndiana,preparedstatementof 3 Nitsch, Michael, special agent, U.S. Forest Service, region 6 prepared statementof 37 Robertson,F.Dale,Chief,ForestService,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture, preparedstatementof 68 Schrader, Dennis, special agent, U.S. ForestService, TimberTaskForce, preparedstatementof 48 Stiener, Richard, Director, Office ofSpecial Investigations, General Ac- countingOffice,preparedstatementof 8 Turner, Charles H., former U.S. attorney, State of Oregon, prepared statementof 27 (III> OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE INDEPEND- ENCE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL IN THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1993 House of Representatives, Subcommittee onthe Civil Service, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:10 a.m., in room 311, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Frank McCloskey (chairman ofthe subcommittee) presiding. Members present: Representatives McCloskey and Morella. Mr. McCloskey. Good morning. The hearing will come to order. Each year, millions ofFederal dollars are stolen and valuable resources lost from our national forests. Timber thefts, arson, contract fraud, illegal drug activities, desecration of Indian reservations, and the exploitation ofillegal aliens are pervasive. Although the Forest Service claims it is not a law enforcement agency, its mission is to protect public safety and resources. How can the For- est Service fulfill this mission if it does not place a high priority on the organization and structure of its law enforcement compo- nent? Since 1988, critics within and outside ofthe U.S. Forest Service have recommended that the service reorganize its law enforcement structure to provide for operational independence, to allow law enforcement investigators and officers to operate independently of those superiors that they may have to investigate. Numerous internal and external studies have been conducted over the past five years about the U.S. Forest Service's investigative function and law enforcement structure, and all conclude that the Forest Service investigative activities should be independent of the line management function. It has only been within the last month that the Forest Service has started to inch forward in a more positive direction. According to the Chiefofthe Forest Service, Mr. Dale Robertson, who will be testifying soon, directives have been issued to the regions that For- est Service investigators will be reporting to the Regional Special Agent who in turn reports to the Regional Forester. The directive cuts through some layers of line management, but still requires Forest Service investigators to eventually report to an individual who does not have a law enforcement background and who could potentially be the subject ofan investigation. (1) Clearly, this change in structure does not meet the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency's quality standards for investigators. Under the second general standard of independence, the PCIE states "An investigative organization's independence can be affected by its place within the structure ofthe government entity ofwhich it is a part. To help achieve maximum independence, the investigative function or organization should be organizationally located outside the staff or line management function of the unit under investigation orwhose employees are underinvestigation." A Regional Forester is an autonomous line manager, and he is obviously not located outside of the administrative chain of com- mand ofthe Forest Service. forAensottsh—iesrthiemppoerrtcaenpttiiosns—ueantdhaittahfafsecbtseetnhedoscecuumreinttyeodfionurreNcaetnitonT'Vs reports of reprisal against whistleblowers in the Forest Service. Both the General Accounting Office and the Office of Inspector General at the Department ofAgriculture stress in their testimony that a fear of reprisal creates an atmosphere where abuse and fraud are not reported to those who can take corrective action. In fact, the GAO received data on over 180 alleged incidents of interference and retaliation from information and discussions with more than 110 individuals involved with law enforcement in Forest Service including 60 criminal investigators. This fear ofretaliation must be addressed, otherwise the law enforcement arm simply will remain ineffective. A separate, independent law enforcement organization will go a longwaytowards endingthe fearofreprisal. The House-passed version of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations' bill for fiscal year 1994, contains specific language requiring the Forest Service to establish a separate law enforcement organization, with all levels ofthe organization reporting directly to the Chief Law Enforcement Office in the Washington office. He will in turn report directly to the Chiefofthe Forest Serv- ice. Althoughthe Chiefofthe Forest Service indicates that theWash- ington Office Law Enforcement position has been elevated from "Branch Chief to "Director of Law Enforcement and Investiga- tions," he does not report directly to the Chief. The DirectorofLaw Enforcement reports to the Associate Deputy Chief ofAdministra- tion who is two management layers awayfrom the Chief. The House Interior Appropriations bill also sets up a new appropriations account with an increase of $2 million over the amounts included in the budget request to add special agents and investigative assistants, additional support costs, and increase criminal investigations, and general law enforcement support. One of the concerns raised by our panel of special agents and former U.S. Attorney Charles Turner is that Forest Service management defunds investigators or uses the lack offunds as an ex- cuse to prevent athorough investigation. Clearly with the increasing number of crimes being perpetrated in our Nation's forests, more money must be spent on investigations and law enforcement operations. In addition, the Forest Serv- ice must make a long-term commitment to elevate the importance ofthe law enforcement function within the agency by strong over- 3 sight ofthe regional forest law enforcement structure, and instituting the changes recommended by the General Accounting Office. I hope that today's hearing will highlight the need for increased attention to the Forest Service's law enforcement function and that the House position will prevail in the conference on the Interior Appropriations bill. I welcome today's witnesses, and look forward to theirtestimony. I welcome the witnesses and recognize Mrs. Morella. [The prepared statement ofHon. Frank McCloskeyfollows:] PreparedStatementofHon.FrankMcCloskey.aRepresentativein CongressFromtheStateofIndiana Eachyear, millionsofFederaldollars arestolenandvaluableresourceslostfrom our national forests. Timber thefts, arson, contract fraud, illegal drug activities, desecration ofIndian reservations, and the exploitation ofillegal aliens are pervasive.AlthoughtheForestServiceclaimsitisnotalawenforcementagency, itsmis- sionistoprotectpublicsafetyandresources. HowcantheForestServicefulfillthis mission, ifitdoesnotplace ahigh priority on the organizationand structureofits lawenforcementcomponent? Since 1988, critics within and outside of the U.S. Forest Service have recommended thatthe servi—ce reorganize its law enforcement structure to provide for operational independence that is to allow law enforcement investigators and offi- cerstooperateindependently ofthose superiors thatthey mayhavetoinvestigate. Numerous studies, both internal and external, have been conducted over the past five years about the U.S. Forest Service's investigative function and law enforce- mentstructure,andtheyallconcludethattheForestServiceinvestigativeactivities shouldbeindependentofthelinemanagementfunction. Ithasonlybeenwithinthelastmonth,thattheForestServicehasstartedtoinch forward in a more positive direction. According to the Chiefofthe Forest Service, Mr. Dale Robertson, directives have been issued to the regions that Forest Service investigators will be reporting to the regional special agent who in turn reports to the regional forester. The directive cuts through some layers ofline management, but still requires Forest Service investigators to eventually report to an individual whodoes nothavealawenforcementbackground andwhocould potentiallybethe subjectofaninvestigation. Clearly, this change in structure does not meetthe President's Council on Integ- rity and Efficiency's (PCIE) quality standards for investigators. Under the second general standard ofindependence, the PCIE states "an investigative organization's independence can be affected by its place within the structure ofthe government entityofwhichitis apart. Tohelp achieve maximum independence, theinvestiga- tive function ororganization should be organizationally located outside the staffor line management function ofthe unit under investigation or whose employees are underinvestigation."Aregional foresteris an autonomous linemanager, and heis obviously notlocated outside ofthe administrative chain ofcommand oftheForest Service. AnotherimportantissuethataffectsthesecurityofourNation'sforestsistheper- ception ofreprisal against whistleblowers in the Forest Service. Both the General AccountingOffice (GAO)andthe officeofthe InspectorGeneral atthe Department ofAgriculturestressintheirtestimonythatafearofreprisalcreatesanatmosphere whereabuse andfraud are notreported tothosewhocan takecorrective action. In fact, theGAOreceiveddata onover 180 alleged incidentsofinterference and retaliation from information and discussions with more than 110 individuals involved withlawenforcementintheForestServiceincluding60criminalinvestigators.This fear ofretaliation must be addressed, otherwise the law enforcement arm simply will remain ineffective. A separate, independent law enforcement organization will goalongwaytowardsendingthefearofreprisal. The House passed version ofthe Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations' Bill for fiscal year 1994, contains specific language requiring the forest service to establish a separate law enforcement organization, with all levels ofthe organization reportingdirectly to the chieflaw enforcementoffice in theWashington office. HewillinturnreportdirectlytothechiefoftheForestService. Although, thechiefoftheForestServiceindicatesthattheWashingtonofficelaw enforcementpositionhasbeenelevatedfrom"BranchChiefto"DirectorofLawEn- forcementandInvestigations", hedoes notreportdirectlytothechief. The Director ofLaw Enforcement reports to the Associate Deputy ChiefofAdministration who isTthweomHaounsaegeImnetenrtiolrayAeprpsroapwraiaytifornosmBtihlelcahliseof.setsup anewappropriationsaccount with an increase of$2 million over the amounts included in thebudget request to add special agents and investigative assistants, additional support costs, and in- creasecriminalinvestigations,andgenerallawenforcementsupport.Oneofthecon- cernsraisedbyourpanelofspecialagentsandformerU.S.AttorneyCharlesTurn- er, is that Forest Service management defends investigators or uses the lack of fundsasanexcusetopreventathoroughinvestigation. Clearly with the increasing number ofcrimes being perpetrated in our Nation's forests, more money must be spent on investigations and law enforcement operations. In addition, the Forest Service must make a long-term commitmentto elevate the importance ofthe law enforcement function within the agency by strong oversight of the regional forest law enforcement structure, and instituting the changesrecommendedbytheGeneralAccountingOffice. ForIehsotpeSertvhiacte'tsodlaayw'sehnefaorricnegmewnitllfhuingchtliiognhtantdhethnaetedthfeorHionucsreeapsoesditaitotnenwtiilolnptroevtahiel in the conference on the Interior appropriations bill. I welcome today's witnesses, andlookforwardtotheirtestimony. Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to hearingfrom ourwitnessestoday. The hearing is about the concerns ofForest Service law enforcement officers who seem to have no person or function to report to in their direct line ofcommand except for someone in Washington, so that as I understand it, when they are in the field they often must reportto the people that they are investigating. It also seems as though most ofthe management has no law enforcement training and that they more often than not can bungle up ongoinginvestigations because ofthat. Another complaint I have heard is that management is not up- holding acts which protect the forests and that, additionally, there may be more friendliness shown toward one group than another, toward industry than environmentalists. Looking at some of the testimony that we are goingto hear, the GAO testimony statesthat the culture of the Forest Service is so independent that anything dealing with law enforcement may not fit their mode. The Forest Service does not conform with the organizational guidelines pro- posed by the Department of Agriculture's Office of the Inspector General in 1988 and therefore would be about five years behind target. With all of those critical perceptions and perhaps some state- ments offact, I lookforward to hearingfrom ourwitnesses. Thankyou, Mr. Chairman. Mr. McCloskey. Thankyou, Mrs. Morella. Welcome, gentlemen. Good to see you again. Our first witness is Richard Stiener, Director of the Office of Special Investigations of the GAO withtwo associates. Dick, please introduce them. We will accept your written state- ments forthe record. You may proceed asyou like.