Inspectors General: Alleged Misconduct by NASA Inspector General (Letter
Report, 02/10/95, GAO/OSI-95-9).

This report reviews allegations of misconduct by the former NASA
Inspector General, William Colvin.   GAO discusses Mr. Colvin's (1)
prenotification of senior NASA employees who were targets of impending
Office of the Inspector General investigations, (2) unauthorized
disclosure of grand jury-related information, and (3) premature closing
of selected audits and investigations.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  OSI-95-9
     TITLE:  Inspectors General: Alleged Misconduct by NASA Inspector 
             General
      DATE:  02/10/95
   SUBJECT:  Information disclosure
             Conflict of interest
             Confidential records
             Disclosure law
             Investigations into federal agencies
             Ethical conduct
             Inspectors General
             Crimes or offenses
             Audits
             Administrative remedies
IDENTIFIER:  Reston (VA)
             Houston (TX)
             
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major          **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters,    **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and       **
** single lines.  The numbers on the right end of these lines   **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the      **
** document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the  **
** page numbers of the printed product.                         **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************


Cover
================================================================ COVER


Report to Congressional Requesters

February 1995

INSPECTORS GENERAL - ALLEGED
MISCONDUCT BY NASA INSPECTOR
GENERAL

GAO/OSI-95-9

Alleged Misconduct by NASA Inspector General

(600351)


Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV

  IG - Inspector General
  NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  OGC - Office of General Counsel
  OIG - Office of the Inspector General
  OSI - Office of Special Investigations
  PCIE - President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Letter
=============================================================== LETTER


B-259046

February 10, 1995

The Honorable John Glenn
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Governmental Affairs
United States Senate

The Honorable Carl Levin
Ranking Minority Member
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government
 Management and the District of Columbia
Committee on Governmental Affairs
United States Senate

This report responds to your March 25, 1994, request that we review
allegations of misconduct by the then-National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) Inspector General, William Colvin.\1 The report
discusses the results of our investigation concerning Mr.  Colvin's
(1) prenotification of senior NASA employees who were targets of
impending Office of the Inspector General (OIG) investigations, (2)
unauthorized disclosure of grand jury-related information, and (3)
premature closing of selected audits and investigations. 


--------------------
\1 Mr.  Colvin resigned his Inspector General position effective
September 3, 1994. 


   RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1

Mr.  Colvin's practice concerning prenotification matters appears to
constitute a failure to exercise due professional care and could be
viewed as an impairment of his office's execution of investigations. 
For example, we found that before the OIG began an investigation into
a possible conflict-of-interest matter, Mr.  Colvin told a
senior-level NASA official who was the subject of an investigation
about the allegations. 

In another matter involving the alleged prenotification of a
high-level NASA official, we found that Mr.  Colvin had not
prenotified the official.  However, Mr.  Colvin, after communicating
with the NASA administrator, used questionable judgment in not
notifying his agent in charge of the investigation that the matter
might be handled administratively. 

In the matter of the alleged unauthorized release of grand jury
information pertaining to an OIG contractor investigation, the
Assistant U.S.  Attorney stated that although such disclosures would
normally constitute a violation of 6(e) regulations,\2 Mr.  Colvin's
alleged discussion of grand jury-related information in this specific
incident did not violate the 6(e) provisions since the U.S. 
Attorney's Office had already apprised the defendants in the matter
of an impending indictment. 

Further, evidence indicates that Mr.  Colvin did not close audits or
investigations prematurely, as alleged.  For example, the NASA Office
of General Counsel (OGC) suggested that insufficient evidence existed
in a matter concerning violations of the Anti-Deficiency Act.  In
another matter regarding space station contracts, NASA auditors
terminated the audit independently of Mr.  Colvin.  With regard to a
situation involving the acceptance of gratuities from a NASA
contractor, Mr.  Colvin questioned the need for additional work
because the OIG had sufficient evidence to show misconduct. 


--------------------
\2 Rule 6(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure prohibits
the disclosure of information gathered by a grand jury, unless the
disclosure is made by a witness or to persons with responsibility for
investigating or prosecuting the matter. 


   PRENOTIFICATION OF TARGETS OF
   INVESTIGATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2


      PRENOTIFICATION
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :2.1

A former NASA Center Director allegedly attempted to improperly
relocate a NASA program from Reston, Virginia, to Houston, Texas, and
attempted to pressure NASA contractor officials to hire a friend to
manage the program.  When an OIG investigator met with the Center
Director, the Director stated that Mr.  Colvin had previously told
him of the allegations against him.  The Director offered the
investigator several documents that he had assembled as a consequence
of his conversation with Mr.  Colvin.  Further, the investigator
reported to his superiors about the Center Director's statement that
Mr.  Colvin had informed him of the pending investigation. 

The former Center Director confirmed that he had been informed of the
nature of the allegations before the OIG investigator interviewed
him.  When questioned about this case, Mr.  Colvin responded that
although he was not able to recall having had a conversation with the
subject, he did not dispute that it may have occurred. 


      IG'S POSITION ON
      PRENOTIFICATION
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :2.2

Mr.  Colvin stated that it was his practice to contact high-level
NASA officials to advise them that they were the subject of an
investigation and would be interviewed by an OIG staff member.  He
also informed them of the nature of the allegation.  We asked Mr. 
Colvin if he had any concerns with prenotifying individuals of
allegations against them in investigations having potential criminal
merit.  We referred specifically to situations involving conflict of
interest, which could possibly cause the destruction/alteration of
documents, conspiracy with others, or otherwise compromise an
investigation.  Mr.  Colvin replied that it would not be a concern. 
He further remarked that he did not see a problem in letting
high-level employees know that they were subjects of an
investigation. 

The investigator told us that he was unable to determine whether Mr. 
Colvin's premature disclosure compromised his investigation. 
However, he believed that Mr.  Colvin's actions eliminated the
ability to obtain from the former Center Director spontaneous and
unrehearsed responses to questions.  Subsequently, the case was
closed as unsubstantiated. 

We learned from the Assistant IG for Investigations that the OIG has
no written or unwritten policy regarding the prenotification of
subjects and targets of investigations.  However, according to the
Assistant IG, although the previously identified investigation was
noncriminal in nature, it is his opinion that the OIG practice in
criminal investigations would apply:  Subjects or targets of
investigations should not be prenotified of the allegations prior to
the official initiation of an investigation.  Further, he would be
concerned upon learning that any OIG agent had intentionally
forewarned a subject of an investigation. 


      FAILURE TO INFORM
      INVESTIGATOR OF DISCUSSION
      WITH NASA ADMINISTRATOR
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :2.3

In another matter, it was alleged that a senior NASA official had
misused NASA aircraft because he had taken his wife with him on a
business trip.  In consideration of the official's minority status
and a "volatile" Equal Employment Opportunity situation that existed
at that particular NASA facility, NASA OIG opened the matter for
investigation. 

When the OIG investigator interviewed the senior official, the
official stated that NASA's Chief of Staff had already told him of
the allegations against him.  Therefore, the official had initiated
steps to repay the agency for his wife's airfare.  According to the
then-Chief of Staff, Mr.  Colvin suggested that the nature of the
allegation be discussed with the official and that the official
arrange to reimburse NASA for the equivalent commercial airfare for
his wife.  Mr.  Colvin told us that in a meeting he attended with the
Administrator and the Chief of Staff, the Administrator had asked how
NASA should address the situation.  The Chief of Staff recommended
pursuing administrative action to include recoupment of the
commercial cost of the airfare.  Mr.  Colvin stated that he had
concurred with the suggested action. 

We do not believe that Mr.  Colvin's discussions with the NASA
Administrator and Chief of Staff concerning possible resolution of
the travel matter were inappropriate.  However, we believe that he
erred in failing to apprise his field investigative staff of the
decision to pursue an administrative resolution of the matter. 


   UNAUTHORIZED RELEASE OF GRAND
   JURY INFORMATION
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3

We received information suggesting that Mr.  Colvin had improperly
revealed grand jury-related information during a meeting with NASA
officials who were not OIG personnel.  Mr.  Colvin may have told the
participants that a specific NASA contractor was under indictment,
and he may have revealed the proposed number of criminal counts under
consideration in the indictment.  Within 1 week following the
meeting, a story about the impending indictment appeared in the local
newspaper of the area where the contractor was located.  Credit for
the content of the news article was attributed to a "confidential
source."

Mr.  Colvin stated that during the course of a meeting with two
associate administrators from the Houston office, he may have advised
them to anticipate press exposure of a pending indictment.  However,
he could not recall whether he had discussed the specific number of
counts in the indictment. 

According to the cognizant Assistant U.S.  Attorney, any information
released prematurely could have precluded using that information for
trial, but that was not a concern in this particular instance.  He
stated that Mr.  Colvin's disclosures of grand jury-related
information to anyone not authorized to receive it would normally be
inappropriate.  However, since the defendants in this matter were
clearly aware of the ongoing investigation and knew that an
indictment would eventually result, Mr.  Colvin's disclosures would
not, in his opinion, constitute a violation of the general rule for
secrecy of grand jury proceedings. 


   PREMATURE CLOSING OF AND
   INTERFERENCE IN AUDITS/
   INVESTIGATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4

Some allegations concerned Mr.  Colvin's premature closing of and
interference in audits or investigations involving Anti-Deficiency
Act violations, space station contracts, and a senior NASA official's
acceptance of gratuities from a contractor. 

It was alleged that Mr.  Colvin pressured OIG staff to end an audit
that had identified violations of the Anti-Deficiency Act.  The
allegation noted that no record of the audit ever surfaced nor did
the OIG issue an audit report on the matter.  Additionally, the IG
offered no comments to the audit team as to the disposition of the
report.  We learned that the Deputy Assistant IG for Audits had
decided not to issue a report on the Anti-Deficiency Act matter
because the NASA OGC did not believe that sufficient evidence existed
to show that a violation had occurred.  Further, after contacting an
appropriate congressional staff member, the OIG was told that no
additional reporting on the matter would be necessary. 

Concerning an audit of space station contracts, it was alleged that
Mr.  Colvin had persuaded a Center Director to abandon the audit and
encouraged the Center Director to discourage the Assistant Inspector
General for Audits from attempting to issue a management letter
addressing the issue.  We did not corroborate any information to
support the allegation.  OIG staff members disclosed that NASA
auditors decided to terminate the space station audit without
consulting Mr.  Colvin once it had become evident that the Space
Station Program Office had issued termination letters to contractors. 
Additionally, NASA auditors noted, when the termination letters were
to take effect, that the contractor had independently decided to
cease further work under the contract.  The Assistant IG for Audits
subsequently determined that it was too late to report on the matter. 

Finally, in an investigation involving a senior NASA official accused
of accepting gratuities from a NASA contractor, Mr.  Colvin allegedly
instructed OIG investigators not to pursue part of the allegation
after he received a telephone call from a friend who was employed by
a NASA contractor.  The senior official had been accused of accepting
favors from the NASA contractor, i.e., free or reduced-cost housing
and private club membership.  We learned that Mr.  Colvin had
questioned the need for further work since the OIG, in his opinion,
had sufficient evidence to take action against the senior official. 
Further, because Mr.  Colvin had questioned the need for additional
investigative work, the OIG did not pursue the allegation pertaining
to the club membership.  Finally, the OIG investigative report showed
that sufficient evidence existed to act on the case and that the
senior official subsequently resigned voluntarily. 

Mr.  Colvin stated that he had no recollection of having discouraged
OIG staff from pursuing allegations relative to club membership,
although he conceded that it may have happened.  However, according
to Mr.  Colvin, as a result of a decision made by his headquarters
staff, the Defense Contract Audit Agency is pursuing the allegation
concerning the club membership as a "spin-off" from the original
investigation. 


   METHODOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5

We conducted our investigation from March 1993, when the GAO Hotline
received allegations of possible misconduct, through July 1994.  We
conducted it in Washington, D.C.; Slidell, Mississippi; Houston,
Texas; Los Angeles, California; and Cleveland, Ohio.  We interviewed
NASA-OIG management officials, as well as approximately 40 current
and former OIG investigators and auditors, to assess the merits of
the allegations.  In addition, we reviewed pertinent OIG audit and
investigative files and related correspondence.  We also reviewed
relevant OIG investigative and audit policies and guidelines. 
Finally, we interviewed other NASA officials purported to have
information about the alleged activities. 


---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.1

As requested, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30
days from the date of the letter.  At that time, we will send copies
to the Acting NASA Inspector General and to the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget and will make copies available to
others upon request.  If you have any questions concerning our
investigation, please contact me or Assistant Director Barney Gomez
of my staff at (202) 512-6722. 

Richard C.  Stiener
Director


MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
=========================================================== Appendix I


   OFFICE OF SPECIAL
   INVESTIGATIONS, WASHINGTON,
   D.C. 
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:1

Barney L.  Gomez, Assistant Director for General Crimes and Health
Care
Robert J.  Gettings, Special Agent
Barbara W.  Alsip, Reports Analyst


   OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL,
   WASHINGTON, D.C. 
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2

Glenn G.  Wolcott, Assistant General Counsel
Leslie J.  Krasner, Attorney Adviser

*** End of document. ***