Military Personnel
Improved Quality Controls Needed over Servicemembers' Employment Rights Claims at DOL Gao ID: GAO-07-907 July 20, 2007The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) protects the employment and reemployment rights of federal and nonfederal employees who leave their employment to perform military service. The Department of Labor (DOL) investigates and attempts to resolve claims filed by servicemembers, and if not successful, DOL is to inform the federal claimants that they may request to have their claims referred to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC). Under a demonstration project, from February 8, 2005, through September 30, 2007, OSC is authorized to receive and investigate certain USERRA claims, with DOL continuing its investigative role for others. As required by Pub. L. No. 108-454, this report describes the (1) processes, (2) outcomes, and (3) major changes during the demonstration project. GAO selected a random sample of cases from DOL's and OSC's databases and traced data for selected elements from the electronic files to source case files.
Since the start of the demonstration project on February 8, 2005, both DOL and OSC have had policies and procedures for receiving, investigating, and resolving USERRA claims against federal executive branch employers, with DOL investigating the ones from claimants with even-number social security numbers, and OSC those from claimants with odd social security numbers as well as those with related allegations of prohibited personnel practices. Under the demonstration project, DOL's process for investigating USERRA claims remains unchanged: DOL uses a nationwide network of over a hundred investigators from offices in every state. Under the demonstration project, OSC has instituted a centralized approach for investigating USERRA claims, with a single office of about half a dozen investigators and attorneys in its Washington, D.C., headquarters. Data for reporting outcomes were not reliable at either agency. At DOL, inaccurate data were included in the agency's annual report to Congress, which could adversely affect Congress's ability to assess how well federal USERRA claims are processed and whether changes are needed in the future. GAO also found that DOL did not consistently notify claimants concerning the right to have their claims referred to OSC for further investigation or to bring their claims directly to the Merit Systems Protection Board. Citing GAO's preliminary findings, in December 2006, DOL officials required each region to revise its guidance regarding notifying claimants in the closure letter of their rights. GAO found that for the period of its review--February 8, 2005, through September 30, 2006--DOL received a total of 166 unique claims, although 202 claims were recorded as opened in DOL's database. Duplicate, reopened, and transferred claims accounted for most of this difference. During a review of a random sample of DOL's case files to assess the reliability of DOL's data, GAO found the closed dates in DOL's database, which it uses to report to Congress on the number and percentage of claims it closes within 90, 120, and 365 days, were not reliable. From the start of the demonstration project, through September 30, 2006, OSC received 269 claims and took an average of 115 days to process these claims. The closed dates in OSC's case tracking system were sufficiently reliable. Three primary changes have occurred in federal employees' USERRA claims' processing since the demonstration project. First, two agencies now investigate claims from federal employees using two different models for investigations. Second, both DOL and OSC officials said cooperation and communication between the two agencies on claims has increased under the demonstration project, in turn raising awareness of issues related to servicemembers who are federal employees. Finally, technological enhancements have occurred, including an enhancement to DOL's database enabling the electronic transfer of information between agencies, which began in October 2006.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Team: Phone:GAO-07-907, Military Personnel: Improved Quality Controls Needed over Servicemembers' Employment Rights Claims at DOL
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-07-907
entitled 'Military Personnel: Improved Quality Controls Needed over
Servicemembers' Employment Rights Claims at DOL' which was released on
July 20, 2007.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Committees:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
July 2007:
Military Personnel:
Improved Quality Controls Needed over Servicemembers' Employment Rights
Claims at DOL:
GAO-07-907:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-07-907, a report to congressional committees
Why GAO Did This Study:
The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994
(USERRA) protects the employment and reemployment rights of federal and
nonfederal employees who leave their employment to perform military
service. The Department of Labor (DOL) investigates and attempts to
resolve claims filed by servicemembers, and if not successful, DOL is
to inform the federal claimants that they may request to have their
claims referred to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC). Under a
demonstration project, from February 8, 2005, through September 30,
2007, OSC is authorized to receive and investigate certain USERRA
claims, with DOL continuing its investigative role for others. As
required by Pub. L. No. 108-454, this report describes the (1)
processes, (2) outcomes, and (3) major changes during the demonstration
project. GAO selected a random sample of cases from DOL‘s and OSC‘s
databases and traced data for selected elements from the electronic
files to source case files.
What GAO Found:
Since the start of the demonstration project on February 8, 2005, both
DOL and OSC have had policies and procedures for receiving,
investigating, and resolving USERRA claims against federal executive
branch employers, with DOL investigating the ones from claimants with
even-number social security numbers, and OSC those from claimants with
odd social security numbers as well as those with related allegations
of prohibited personnel practices. Under the demonstration project,
DOL‘s process for investigating USERRA claims remains unchanged: DOL
uses a nationwide network of over a hundred investigators from offices
in every state. Under the demonstration project, OSC has instituted a
centralized approach for investigating USERRA claims, with a single
office of about half a dozen investigators and attorneys in its
Washington, D.C., headquarters.
Data for reporting outcomes were not reliable at either agency. At DOL,
inaccurate data were included in the agency‘s annual report to
Congress, which could adversely affect Congress‘s ability to assess how
well federal USERRA claims are processed and whether changes are needed
in the future. GAO also found that DOL did not consistently notify
claimants concerning the right to have their claims referred to OSC for
further investigation or to bring their claims directly to the Merit
Systems Protection Board. Citing GAO‘s preliminary findings, in
December 2006, DOL officials required each region to revise its
guidance regarding notifying claimants in the closure letter of their
rights. GAO found that for the period of its review”February 8, 2005,
through September 30, 2006”DOL received a total of 166 unique claims,
although 202 claims were recorded as opened in DOL‘s database.
Duplicate, reopened, and transferred claims accounted for most of this
difference. During a review of a random sample of DOL‘s case files to
assess the reliability of DOL‘s data, GAO found the closed dates in
DOL‘s database, which it uses to report to Congress on the number and
percentage of claims it closes within 90, 120, and 365 days, were not
reliable. From the start of the demonstration project, through
September 30, 2006, OSC received 269 claims and took an average of 115
days to process these claims. The closed dates in OSC‘s case tracking
system were sufficiently reliable.
Three primary changes have occurred in federal employees‘ USERRA
claims‘ processing since the demonstration project. First, two agencies
now investigate claims from federal employees using two different
models for investigations. Second, both DOL and OSC officials said
cooperation and communication between the two agencies on claims has
increased under the demonstration project, in turn raising awareness of
issues related to servicemembers who are federal employees. Finally,
technological enhancements have occurred, including an enhancement to
DOL‘s database enabling the electronic transfer of information between
agencies, which began in October 2006.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO recommends that the Secretary of Labor develop an internal review
mechanism for all unresolved claims before they are closed and
claimants are notified and establish internal controls to ensure the
accuracy of data entered into DOL‘s database. DOL agreed with our
recommendations.
[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-907].
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact George H. Stalcup on
(202) 512-9490 or at stalcupg@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
DOL and OSC Both Had Policies and Procedures for Processing USERRA
Claims during the Demonstration Project:
Under the Demonstration Project, Data Limitations at Both DOL and OSC
and Inconsistent Notifications at DOL:
Three Primary Changes Have Occurred since the Demonstration Project
Began:
Conclusion:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Objective 1: Describe DOL's and OSC's Policies and Procedures for
Processing Federal Employees' USERRA Claims under the Demonstration
Project:
Objective 2: Identify the Number of Federal Employees' USERRA Claims
that DOL and OSC Received and the Outcomes of These Claims, Including
Average Processing Times:
Objective 3: Identify Changes to Federal Employees' USERRA Claims'
Processing since the Demonstration Project Began:
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Labor:
Appendix III: Comments from the Office of Special Counsel:
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Notifications of Rights in VETS's Closure Letters of
Unresolved Claims from Sample of Case Files Reviewed:
Table 2: OSC Investigations Opened and Closed by Type of Claims from
February 8, 2005, through September 30, 2006:
Table 3: OSC Average Processing Time by Type of Claim from February 8,
2005, through September 30, 2006:
Table 4: Characteristics of DOL's and OSC's USERRA Claims' Processing
Models:
Figure:
Figure 1: USERRA Claims' Processing under the Demonstration Project:
Abbreviations:
DOL: Department of Labor:
MSPB: Merit Systems Protection Board:
OSC: Office of Special Counsel:
USERRA: Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of
1994:
VBIA: Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 2004:
VETS: Veterans' Employment and Training Service:
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
July 20, 2007:
Congressional Committees:
The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994
(USERRA) protects the employment and reemployment rights of federal and
nonfederal employees who leave their employment to perform military or
other uniformed service.[Footnote 1] USERRA also prohibits
discrimination in employment against individuals because of their
uniformed service, obligation to perform service, or membership or
application for membership in the uniformed services. USERRA further
prohibits employer retaliation against any individual who engages in
protected activity under USERRA, regardless of whether the individual
has performed service in the uniformed services.[Footnote 2] USERRA
applies to a wide range of employers, including federal, state, and
local governments as well as private sector firms. This report focuses
on servicemembers who are employees of, prior employees of, and
applicants to federal executive branch agencies.[Footnote 3]
Under USERRA, an employee of or applicant to a federal executive branch
agency who believes that his or her USERRA rights have been violated
may file a claim with the Department of Labor's (DOL) Veterans'
Employment and Training Service (VETS), which investigates and attempts
to resolve the claim. If DOL's VETS cannot resolve the claim, DOL is to
inform claimants that they may request to have their claims referred to
the Office of Special Counsel (OSC),[Footnote 4] an independent
investigative and prosecutorial agency with the primary mission of
protecting the employment rights of federal employees and applicants
for federal employment. OSC determines whether the evidence of referred
claims is sufficient to resolve the claimants' USERRA allegations and,
if so, seeks voluntary corrective action from the involved agency or
initiates legal action against the agency before the Merit Systems
Protection Board (MSPB).[Footnote 5]
Under a demonstration project established by the Veterans Benefits
Improvement Act of 2004 (VBIA),[Footnote 6] from February 8, 2005,
through September 30, 2007, OSC is granted authorization to receive and
investigate claims and seek corrective action for individuals whose
social security numbers end in odd numbers. Claims by individuals whose
social security numbers end in even numbers are to be investigated by
VETS, with the referral process to OSC for these claims remaining
unchanged. Under the demonstration project, OSC is also authorized to
handle any USERRA claim brought by the USERRA claimant where OSC has
authority to handle a related prohibited personnel practice
claim.[Footnote 7] In addition, VBIA reinstated the requirement that
the Secretary of Labor in consultation with the U.S. Attorney General
and the Special Counsel prepare and transmit a USERRA annual report to
Congress on, among other matters, the number of USERRA claims reviewed
by DOL along with the number of claims referred to the Department of
Justice or OSC. The annual report is also to address the nature and
status of each claim and to state "whether there are any apparent
patterns of violation."
Furthermore, VBIA mandates that the Comptroller General of the United
States conduct periodic evaluations of the demonstration project and
submit to Congress a report on these evaluations. We briefed you on our
overall findings concerning the demonstration project on March 28,
2007, and this report provides additional details. Our objectives for
the report were to (1) describe DOL's and OSC's policies and procedures
for processing federal employees' USERRA claims under the demonstration
project; (2) identify the number of federal employees' USERRA claims
that DOL and OSC received during the demonstration project and the
outcomes of these claims, including average processing times; and (3)
identify changes to federal employees' USERRA claims' processing since
the demonstration project began.
To describe DOL's and OSC's policies and procedures for processing
federal employees' USERRA claims under the demonstration project, we
reviewed relevant documentation and interviewed knowledgeable DOL and
OSC officials. To identify the number of federal employees' USERRA
claims that DOL and OSC received and the outcomes of these claims,
including average processing time, we reviewed and analyzed data
downloaded from VETS's database, the USERRA Information Management
System,[Footnote 8] and OSC's case tracking system, OSC 2000.[Footnote
9] This report covers the period from the start of the demonstration
project on February 8, 2005, through fiscal year 2006. We also assessed
the reliability of selected data elements on federal employee claims
from VETS's database and OSC's case tracking system by tracing a
statistically random sample of data to case files from the start of the
demonstration project on February 8, 2005, through July 21, 2006.
Unless otherwise stated in the report, the data were sufficiently
reliable for the purposes of our review. To identify the extent to
which changes have occurred in federal employee USERRA claims'
processing since the demonstration project began, we reviewed USERRA
and VBIA, how USERRA claims of federal executive branch employees and
applicants for employment were processed before the demonstration
project, and how such claims were being processed under the
demonstration project by DOL and OSC. We also interviewed knowledgeable
DOL and OSC officials. We conducted our review in Washington, D.C.,
from May 2006 through May 2007 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards.
Results in Brief:
Since the start of the demonstration project on February 8, 2005, both
DOL's VETS and OSC have had policies and procedures for receiving,
investigating, and resolving USERRA claims against federal executive
branch employers. VETS continues to conduct its investigation of USERRA
claims using a nationwide network of over a hundred investigators from
offices in every state. Under the demonstration project, OSC has
instituted a centralized approach for investigating USERRA claims, with
a single office of about half a dozen investigators and attorneys in
its Washington, D.C., headquarters.
Data for reporting outcomes were not sufficiently reliable at either
agency. At DOL, inaccurate data were included in the agency's annual
report to Congress, which could adversely affect Congress's ability to
assess how well federal USERRA claims are processed and whether changes
are needed in the future. Concerning the number of federal employees'
USERRA claims received for investigation, we found that for February 8,
2005, through September 30, 2006, VETS received a total of 166 unique
claims, although 202 claims were recorded as opened in VETS's database.
Duplicate, reopened, and transferred claims accounted for most of this
difference. Additionally, during our review of a random sample of
VETS's case files to assess the reliability of VETS's data, we found
the dates recorded for case closure in VETS's database were not
reliable; that is, VETS's database did not reflect the dates on the
closure letters, which VETS uses to indicate completion of the
investigation, in over 40 percent of sampled claims. VETS uses the date
recorded for case closure in its database to report to Congress on the
number and percentage of claims it closes within 90, 120, and 365 days.
After identifying the correct dates from the sample case files
reviewed, we estimated that the average processing time for the period
of the sample ranged from 53 to 86 days. We also found that the closed
code, which VETS uses to describe the outcomes of USERRA claims (i.e.,
claim granted, claim settled, no merit, withdrawn) was not sufficiently
reliable for reporting specific outcomes of claims. From the start of
the demonstration project through September 30, 2006, OSC received 269
claims and took an average of 115 days to process these claims. We
found the closed dates in OSC's case tracking system to be sufficiently
reliable; however, the corrective action data element, which OSC uses
to describe the outcomes of USERRA claims, was not sufficiently
reliable for reporting specific outcomes of claims.
During our review of the sample of case files, we found that VETS did
not consistently notify claimants in writing of their right to have
their claims referred to OSC or to bring their claims directly to MSPB
if the case was not resolved by DOL. This may be due in part to the
lack of consistent instructions to investigators in the VETS's USERRA
Operations Manual as to when a claimant is to be notified of his or her
right of referral and the content of that notification. For example,
one chapter instructs investigators to notify the claimants of their
right to referral if there is no voluntary compliance by the employer,
regardless of whether the claim has merit, but another chapter
instructs investigators to advise claimants of their right only if the
claimant does not concur with VETS's determination. Lack of an internal
process to routinely review investigators' determinations, especially
of unresolved claims, before claimants are notified may also have
contributed to the inconsistent notification to servicemembers of their
rights. Citing our preliminary findings, DOL officials required each
region to revise its guidance concerning the notification of rights.
This is a positive step. However, uniform guidance will continue to be
lacking until VETS completes revisions to its USERRA Operations Manual,
which is expected in October 2007, and reviews of investigators'
determinations are not done on unresolved claims on a consistent basis.
Three primary changes have occurred in federal employees' USERRA
claims' processing since the demonstration project. First, two agencies
now investigate USERRA claims from federal employees using two
different models for conducting investigations: (1) a nationwide
approach by VETS that gives much authority to individual investigators
in resolving and closing claims without review or approval of
determinations on claims and (2) a centralized approach by OSC that has
a single individual reviewing and approving determinations on all
claims. Second, both DOL and OSC officials have said that cooperation
and communication between the two agencies concerning USERRA claims has
increased under the demonstration project, and that this in turn has
raised awareness of the issues related to servicemembers who are
federal employees. Third and finally, technological enhancements have
occurred, primarily on the part of VETS since the demonstration
project. For example, beginning with fiscal year 2007, an enhancement
to VETS's database now enables the electronic transfer of information
between agencies. In addition, VETS implemented electronic filing,
which eliminates the need for initial data entry by staff and avoids
the introduction of error when staff manually enter data.
We recommend that the Secretary of Labor direct the Assistant Secretary
for Veterans' Employment and Training to (1) establish uniform
procedures and ensure that investigators are trained regarding the
notification of claimants on their right to refer claims to OSC or
bring them directly to MSPB, (2) develop an internal review mechanism
for all unresolved claims' determinations before claimants are notified
of determinations and claims are closed, and (3) establish a plan for
implementing internal controls to ensure the accuracy of data entered
into VETS's database. We provided the Secretary of Labor and the
Special Counsel with a draft of this report for their review and
comment. DOL agreed with our recommendations and in written comments
discussed actions that it is taking to address the recommendations. A
copy of DOL's written comments are in appendix II, and a copy of OSC's
written comments are in appendix III.
Background:
Before the demonstration project, VETS was authorized to investigate
all USERRA claims filed against federal executive branch agencies as
well as claims against state and local governments and private sector
employers. Under the demonstration project, VETS is authorized to
investigate claims filed against federal executive agencies by
servicemembers with social security numbers ending in even numbers; its
role in handling other nonfederal USERRA claims remains unchanged. In
addition, under the demonstration project, OSC is authorized to
investigate and seek corrective action for USERRA claims against
federal executive agencies from servicemembers whose social security
numbers end in odd numbers. Also, under the demonstration project, OSC
is authorized to handle any USERRA claim filed against federal
executive branch agencies where the claimant also brings a related
prohibited personnel practice claim--that is, a "mixed claim."
When a claimant with a social security number that ends in an odd digit
submits a claim to VETS, VETS sends the claim information to OSC either
electronically or via facsimile, depending on whether the claim was
filed electronically or in hard copy. VETS also forwards OSC the claim
information on all mixed claims. Similarly, when a claimant with a
social security number that ends in an even digit submits a claim to
OSC, OSC sends an e-mail notification and the file to VETS headquarters
and informs the claimant of the transfer of the claim to VETS.
OSC's responsibility under USERRA for conducting independent reviews of
certain claims after they are investigated by VETS remained unchanged
during the demonstration project. For those claims VETS investigates
and is unsuccessful in resolving, a claimant employed by a federal
executive agency may request to have his or her USERRA claim referred
to OSC. Before sending the referred claim to OSC, VETS prepares a
memorandum of referral, which it sends with the investigative file to a
VETS regional office for review; the regional office conducts a review
and sends the file to a DOL regional Office of the Solicitor, which
prepares a legal analysis of the claim and then refers the claim to
OSC. OSC reviews the case file, and if satisfied that the evidence is
sufficient to resolve the claimant's allegations and that the claimant
is entitled to corrective action, OSC begins negotiations with the
claimant's federal executive branch employer. According to OSC, if an
agreement for full relief via voluntary settlement by the employer
cannot be reached, OSC may represent the servicemember before MSPB. If
MSPB rules against the servicemember, OSC may appeal the decision to
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In instances where
OSC finds that claims do not have merit, it informs servicemembers of
its decision not to represent them and that they have the right to take
their claims to MSPB without OSC representation. Figure 1 depicts
USERRA claims' processing under the demonstration project.
Figure 1: USERRA Claims' Processing under the Demonstration Project:
[See PDF for image]
Sources; GAO (data), Art Explosion (images).
Note: VBIA did not change VETS's formal investigative process or the
referral phase under the demonstration project.
[A] OSC is also authorized to handle any USERRA claim where OSC has
authority to handle a related claim--that is, one alleging a related
prohibited personnel practice--brought by the USERRA claimant.
[End of figure]
In October 2005, we issued a report that reviewed the extent to which
the four USERRA coordinating agencies--DOL, OSC, and the Departments of
Defense and Justice--(1) had data that indicate the level of compliance
with USERRA, (2) conducted educational outreach, and (3) addressed
servicemember complaints.[Footnote 10] In February 2007, we issued a
report that assessed the status of the Department of Defense's effort
to capture reservists' employer data, the four USERRA coordinating
agencies' processes to track and address reservists' USERRA claims, and
the agencies' efforts to track reservists' USERRA claims related to
disabilities incurred while on active duty.[Footnote 11]
DOL and OSC Both Had Policies and Procedures for Processing USERRA
Claims during the Demonstration Project:
Within their different organizational structures, both DOL and OSC had
policies and procedures for receiving, investigating, and resolving
claims and, for DOL, referring claims to OSC.
Organizational Structure:
DOL's responsibility concerning servicemembers' claims for USERRA
rights and benefits is carried out primarily through the efforts of
VETS, which is led by an assistant secretary supported by staff in a
national office, six regions, and offices in every state. A VETS
official said that in fiscal year 2006, of 189 VETS investigators
authorized around the country to conduct USERRA investigations, 115
were assigned as primary investigators on USERRA claims during fiscal
year 2006. The remaining 74 investigators include regional
administrators and management who were authorized to investigate USERRA
claims but were not assigned to any. VETS investigators also have
responsibilities concerning a federal law requiring that preference be
given to veterans in federal hiring and retention during reductions in
force.[Footnote 12] VETS investigators are required to complete three
courses: one on the basics of USERRA law, one on advanced investigative
techniques, and one on veterans' preference issues, which includes a
section on prohibited personnel practices. In addition, in fiscal year
2006, VETS designated 7 senior investigators who are to conduct
investigations, assist investigators, and review the work of
investigators in their six respective regions and the national office.
To ensure consistency and understanding of relevant legal issues
between offices and organizations, an official from DOL's Office of the
Solicitor said that the Office of the Solicitor conducts a monthly
conference call with the regional Solicitors' Offices in which
officials from OSC and the Department of Justice take part. According
to the senior investigator from VETS's national office, the senior
investigators also conduct a monthly conference call and hold quarterly
meetings in one of the regional offices around the country and invite
participation from the Office of the Solicitor, the Department of
Justice, OSC, and the Department of Defense's Employer Support of the
Guard and Reserve, which provides informal assistance in resolving
conflicts arising from an employee's military commitment before a
formal claim is filed with VETS or OSC.
Along with their USERRA investigation and mediation responsibilities,
which according to VETS officials take on average about one-third of
VETS investigators' time, investigators conduct briefings to educate
employers (federal and nonfederal) and servicemembers (at mobilizations
and demobilizations) about USERRA requirements and responsibilities. In
addition, they handle service-related employment and reemployment
questions that are directed to their offices. According to VETS
officials, after VETS provides technical assistance, including
education and outreach briefings as well as informal requests for
information, to servicemembers informally, many servicemembers decide
not to file formal claims. In addition, after providing such
assistance, VETS also encourages servicemembers to go to the Department
of Defense's Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve to try and
resolve a concern through informal resolution. According to VETS's
technical assistance logs, in fiscal year 2006, VETS received 7,044
telephone and 1,584 written (including e-mail) inquiries and conducted
1,088 presentations and briefings.
OSC uses a centralized approach for processing USERRA claims, under the
demonstration project, in its Washington, D.C., headquarters and has a
single individual (an attorney)--the USERRA Unit Chief--responsible for
data entry, review, and oversight of the investigation, analysis,
resolution, and prosecution of all USERRA claims. OSC established a
USERRA Unit at its headquarters in January 2005 to investigate,
mediate, and, as necessary, litigate USERRA and other federal
employment rights claims involving servicemembers. OSC's USERRA Unit
currently consists of the Unit Chief, three investigators, and three
attorneys. According to OSC officials, the members of the USERRA Unit
spend most of their time on USERRA claims, but they also handle other
prohibited personnel practice claims brought by servicemembers and
concerning servicemember issues.[Footnote 13] According to OSC, all new
USERRA Unit members are provided with two structured USERRA training
sessions. In addition, OSC's USERRA Unit Chief stated that he meets on
a weekly basis with each unit member to discuss the status of his or
her investigations and analyses, and the entire team meets on a
biweekly basis (e.g., to discuss changes in the law, investigative
techniques, and other issues that may affect the operations of the
unit). OSC USERRA staff also have provided off-site education and
outreach to federal agencies (e.g., human resources specialists and
attorneys) about USERRA, including a seminar at the annual Federal
Dispute Resolution Conference and a basic and advanced USERRA course at
the Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School in
Charlottesville, Virginia.
Receiving Claims:
A servicemember can file a formal USERRA claim against his or her
civilian employer directly with DOL using a VETS Form 1010
electronically at hyperlink, https://vets1010.dol.gov or can file a
signed printed copy of the claim form with the Secretary of Labor by
mail or fax. Servicemembers also can file indirectly through the VETS
electronic USERRA Advisor link, which contains an interactive question-
and-answer component to answer questions for potential claimants on
employee and employer rights and responsibilities and provides access
to the electronic VETS Form 1010. Electronic filing of claims directly
enters the claimant's information into VETS's E-filing database first
and then into VETS's database, records the date the claim was received,
and sends an automatic response to the claimant. According to a DOL
official, an individual other than the claimant may file a claim on
behalf of a servicemember when the individual has a signed power of
attorney that complies with the laws of the state where the claim is
filed. The official said that although this happens rarely, it could
happen when a servicemember is deployed; then a claim could be filed,
for example, by a spouse or veteran's service organization.
Any person may contact OSC via mail, e-mail, telephone, fax, OSC's
Internet hotline, or in person to seek technical assistance about
USERRA or to file a claim. OSC will open an investigation once it
receives information that allows OSC to determine whether it has
jurisdiction over the allegation and to begin a focused inquiry--a form
is not required to file a claim. The claimant may print out OSC-Form 14
and mail or fax it. The claimant also may save it as a portable
document format file and e-mail it, as the form is not available for
direct electronic filing.[Footnote 14] According to an OSC official,
OSC is awaiting the outcome of the demonstration project before
implementing electronic filing of USERRA claims. According to the
USERRA Unit Chief, anyone may report USERRA violations on a claimant's
behalf, but under the Privacy Act, the claimant must sign a consent
form, which identifies three levels of confidentiality--none, partial,
or complete--for OSC to open a case in its case tracking system. In
addition, according to OSC, USERRA Unit investigators and attorneys may
obtain the claimant's consent telephonically and document the telephone
conversation, which is standard operating practice for all of OSC's
investigative divisions.
Investigating Claims:
Claims to be reviewed by VETS are assigned to an investigator located
close to the claimant's worksite. According to a DOL official, each
region has its own procedures for assigning an investigator to a claim,
and regional administrators are responsible for determining the
workload for their investigators. Unlike claims that are filed
electronically, claims that are submitted to VETS by hard copy must be
entered into VETS's database by an investigator once an investigation
is begun. VETS's USERRA Operations Manual states that a case should be
opened immediately upon receipt of a signed VETS Form 1010, unless the
written information does not provide enough data to establish
eligibility; in that case, the investigator should contact the claimant
for clarification before opening a case.
At OSC, after entering the claim in OSC's case tracking system, the
USERRA Unit Chief assigns the claim to either an investigator, or an
attorney, or both, depending on the claim's complexity. The USERRA Unit
Chief stated that investigators or attorneys are assigned according to
their individual qualifications and caseloads. At the time a claim is
opened in OSC's case tracking system, the USERRA Unit Chief sends an
acknowledgement letter and consent form (if a signed form has not been
received) to the claimant. When the claimant's original submission does
not include enough information to begin an investigation, the USERRA
Unit Chief may ask relevant questions in the acknowledgment letter.
When the claimant's original submission raises issues over which OSC
may not have jurisdiction, the acknowledgment letter is to inform the
claimant of other potential avenues of redress.
VETS investigators and OSC investigators or attorneys are first to
review the claim information. VETS's USERRA Operations Manual states
that initially the investigator is to identify the alleged violation
and the remedies available; identify the applicable section(s) of the
statute; determine whether the claimant is eligible for USERRA
assistance; and if not, open and close the case file and notify the
claimant of the result. Although OSC's USERRA Unit Operations Manual
states that the assigned investigator or attorney is to perform a
similar initial review of the case, according to OSC, in everyday
practice the USERRA Unit Chief performs this task during his initial
review of the file when entering the claim into OSC's case tracking
system and so informs the assigned investigator or attorney of his
assessments.
Concerning evidence gathering, both agencies' general policy is to
contact the employer during the investigation with the consent of the
claimant. VETS requests the employer's position regarding the
allegations of the claim and documentation to support that position.
According to the VETS's USERRA Operations Manual, investigations seek
evidence to determine whether the case has merit and generally include
interviews and document reviews to develop evidence admissible in
court. Within 30 days of starting a formal investigation, the
investigator is to develop a written investigative plan, which among
other things, is to identify any evidence needed to make a factual
determination; the means through which evidence is to be obtained
(e.g., interview, records review); and all steps necessary to arrive at
a determination of the merits of the claim. According to OSC, a typical
USERRA investigation includes sending written questions to and
requesting documents of the employer and, upon receipt of such
evidence, interviewing relevant witnesses and subjects. Additionally,
according to OSC's USERRA Unit Operations Manual, where appropriate,
OSC also requests copies of e-mail communications between relevant
witnesses.
Concerning legal analysis, an official from DOL's Office of the
Solicitor said that if an investigator has a question or needs legal
assistance, attorneys from the Office of the Solicitor are available
for consultations at any time. The official said that attorneys from
the Office of the Solicitor are only assigned when contacted by VETS
investigators or when a regional office is contacted by the public. He
added that an attorney from the Office of the Solicitor is assigned to
every case that is a referral, which involves a legal review of a
completed case file, but not to every case during an investigation.
According to OSC's USERRA Unit Chief, a legal analysis is conducted
during each USERRA investigation with investigators and attorneys using
a collaborative team approach throughout the investigation.
Resolving Claims:
According to the VETS's USERRA Operations Manual, a VETS investigator
may hold a case resolution conference at any stage of the claims
process when the investigator believes it may help the claimant and
employer reach agreement, and should be attempted when the
investigation has been completed and letters and telephone calls are
unable to resolve the case. Once the VETS investigator completes the
investigation and arrives at a determination on the claim, the
investigator is to contact the claimant, discuss the findings, and send
a letter to the claimant notifying him or her of VETS's determination.
VETS's USERRA Operations Manual does not specify the date an
investigator should record in VETS's database as the date the
investigation is closed. VETS officials told us that the date closed in
VETS's database should be the date of the closure letter, or if VETS
requests additional information, the date by which the claimant needed
to provide the information to avoid, for example, a determination of
"no merit."
According to OSC's USERRA Unit Operations Manual, once the OSC
investigator or attorney completes an investigation, he or she is to
discuss his or her determination with the USERRA Unit Chief. If the
USERRA Unit Chief agrees that further investigation is not warranted on
a case not having merit, the investigator or attorney is to submit for
the USERRA Unit Chief's review and approval the summary of
investigation, which includes the closure letter detailing the factual
and legal basis of the determination and a rights letter providing
information to the claimant about his or her right to file a USERRA
appeal with MSPB. According to OSC, when a case has merit and cannot be
resolved through discussions with the agency, the investigator or
attorney may prepare a demand letter for the Unit Chief's review. The
demand letter explains the factual and legal bases for OSC's
determination and the relief being sought from the agency and is viewed
by OSC as antecedent to formal litigation. OSC's USERRA Unit Operations
Manual states that the assigned investigator or attorney is to provide
the closing information to the USERRA Unit Chief to enter in OSC's case
tracking system but does not specify the date to be used when closing a
case. OSC's USERRA Unit Chief said that the date entered into OSC's
case tracking system reflecting when the case is officially closed is
the same as the date the closure letter is sent to the claimant.
Quality Assurance/Oversight:
VETS has no internal process to routinely review investigators'
determinations before claimants are notified of them. According to a
VETS official, there is no requirement that a supervisor review
investigators' determinations before notifying the claimant of the
determination. Instead, VETS's policy of reviewing claims prior to
notifying claimants of the determinations is limited to a random sample
of 10 percent of all open claims at the regional level, to ensure that
policies and procedures have been followed and all available witnesses
have been interviewed, and to any claim that takes more than 90 days,
to process to determine why the claim is still open. VETS officials
said any claim still open after 90 days appears on a "red flag report"
and is to be reviewed by the senior investigator for the region in
which the claim is being processed. Other reviews take place after the
claim has been closed. According to VETS officials, senior
investigators are to review a random sample of 25 percent of closed
claims at the regional level. Legal reviews by a DOL regional Office of
the Solicitor only occur if a claimant requests to have his or her
claim referred to OSC.
OSC's policy is that the USERRA Unit Chief, an attorney, provides
ongoing guidance, reviews all work products in a case, and reviews and
approves the letter notifying the claimant of OSC's determination and,
in a case with merit, the demand letter to the agency, prior to sending
the letters.
Request for Referral of Claims from VETS to OSC:
Under USERRA and the demonstration project, when VETS is unsuccessful
in resolving servicemembers' claims, DOL is to notify servicemembers
who filed claims against federal executive branch agencies that they
may request to have their claims referred to OSC or file directly with
MSPB. A VETS official estimated that about 7 percent of claimants ask
for their claims to be referred to OSC or, for nonfederal
servicemembers, the Department of Justice.
After Claimant Requests a Referral, Two Additional Reviews at DOL Take
Place:
According to VETS's USERRA Operations Manual, after a claimant requests
a referral to OSC in writing, the VETS investigator is to prepare a
report of investigation called the memorandum of referral, which
provides a description of the case and supporting documentation. This
triggers two additional sequential reviews at DOL. The memorandum and
the case file are then sent to a VETS regional office, which is to
review the memorandum of referral to ensure that the investigation is
thorough and that the documentation in the file is accurate and
sufficient. According to VETS's USERRA Operations Manual, if the
regional office review finds the investigation is incomplete, it is to
return the file to the VETS investigator and request additional
investigation on specific points. When the regional office is satisfied
as to the scope and quality of the investigation, the regional office
is to prepare a memorandum and forward it and the case file for review
by a DOL regional Office of the Solicitor to assess the claim's legal
basis and prepare a separate analysis before sending the file to OSC. A
VETS regional office and a DOL regional Office of the Solicitor
separately make recommendations on the merits of the claim.
Even if DOL finds that a claim has no merit, DOL is required by USERRA
to send a federal sector claim to OSC if the claimant requested a
referral. According to an official from the Office of the Solicitor,
this office's review is not required by law or regulation, but the
practice is established through memorandums of understanding with OSC
and, for nonfederal claims, the Department of Justice. The official
said that both agencies have indicated that they find the practice
useful. He added that if OSC did not find the analyses to be valuable,
the memorandum of understanding could be renegotiated so as to revise
or discontinue the existing process. According to OSC's USERRA Unit
Chief, OSC reviews the Office of the Solicitor's letter of referral,
which OSC finds useful for providing a summary of a case, but does not
rely on the Office of the Solicitor's legal analysis. Instead, OSC does
an independent legal review of the case as required by USERRA to
determine whether it is reasonably satisfied that the claimant is
entitled to the rights and benefits sought.
Under the Demonstration Project, Data Limitations at Both DOL and OSC
and Inconsistent Notifications at DOL:
We found data limitations at both agencies that made claim outcome data
unreliable. At DOL, data limitations affected DOL's annual report to
Congress. We also found that DOL did not consistently notify claimants
concerning the right to have their claims referred to OSC for further
investigation or to bring their claims directly to MSPB if DOL did not
resolve their claims.
VETS's Data Limitations Affect the Determination of the Number of
Claims Processed, Outcomes, and Average Processing Time:
Under VBIA, DOL is to prepare an annual report to Congress to include,
among other matters, the number of claims reviewed, the number of cases
referred to the U.S. Attorney General or OSC, and the nature (type) and
status of each case. Specifically, VETS provides information on the
number and percentage of claims opened by type of employer, issues
raised--such as discrimination or refusal to reinstate--outcome, and
total time to resolve.
The number of claims shown in VETS's database exceeded the number of
unique claims VETS processed. Data from VETS's database showed that
from the start of the demonstration project through September 30, 2006,
DOL received 202 claims.[Footnote 15] We found, however, that of these
202 claims, VETS investigated a total of 166 unique claims during this
time. The difference of 36 claims was a result of:
* reopened claims for the same claimant being recorded as separate
claims,
* duplicate filings (i.e., filed by the same claimant within 3 days and
then closed),
* claims transferred to OSC after being opened in VETS's database
(i.e., those with odd social security numbers and allegations of
prohibited personnel practices),
* claims originally opened prior to the demonstration project, and:
* one veterans' preference claim erroneously opened as a USERRA claim.
Of the 166 unique claims investigated by VETS from the start of the
demonstration project through September 30, 2006, it closed 155, or 93
percent of them. The remaining 11 claims were still being investigated
as of September 30, 2006.
Because of our finding concerning the accuracy of the number of unique
claims in VETS's database during the demonstration project, we reviewed
the data DOL reported in its most recent USERRA annual report to
Congress for fiscal year 2005. We found that DOL overstated the number
of claims filed against federal executive branch agencies because it
did not account for duplicate, reopened, transferred, and erroneously
opened cases, resulting in an inaccurate number of investigations
opened and closed. Specifically, DOL reported that it opened 146 claims
involving federal employers, reflecting the number of claims in VETS's
database for fiscal year 2005. Our analysis, however, showed that of
the reported 146 claims, 117 were claims actually investigated by VETS
in fiscal year 2005.
Additionally, during our review of a random sample of 54 VETS case
files to assess the reliability of VETS's data, we found the closed
dates in VETS's database did not match the date contained in the
closure letter to the claimant in 22 of 52 claims reviewed.[Footnote
16] According to VETS officials, the date closed in VETS's database
should agree with the date of the closure letter, or if VETS requests
additional information, the date by which the claimant needed to
provide the information to avoid, for example, a determination of "no
merit." For those claims where there was not a match, the difference in
the number of days between the actual closed date in the closure letter
and in VETS's database averaged 67 days. Moreover, in nearly all claims
where the closed dates in VETS's database did not match the date in the
closure letter, the closed date in VETS's database preceded the date in
the letter. VETS's USERRA Operations Manual is silent on the date to be
used for the official closure of an investigation in VETS's database,
which could have contributed to some of the inaccuracies we found in
closed dates.
Because DOL reports annually to Congress on the number and percentage
of claims it closed within 90, 120, and 365 days, such inaccuracies in
the number of claims reported and the closed dates also affect the
quality of information reported to Congress on the time it takes VETS
to process claims. VETS senior officials indicated that they had
identified problems similar to those we found in a particular region
concerning inaccurate closed dates. Citing our preliminary findings, in
December 2006, one region issued a memorandum instructing investigators
to make the closed date in VETS's database match the date of the
closure letter to the claimant.
Because the closed dates entered in VETS's database were not
sufficiently reliable, we could not use the dates for the time VETS
spent on investigations in the database to accurately determine DOL's
average processing time. Instead, we used the correct closed dates from
the case files in our random sample and statistically estimated the
average processing time for VETS's investigations from the start of the
demonstration project through July 21, 2006--the period of our sample.
Based on the random sample, there is at least a 95 percent chance that
VETS's average processing time for investigations ranged from 53 to 86
days.
Additionally, during our review of case files, we found that the closed
code, which VETS uses to describe the outcomes of USERRA claims (i.e.,
claim granted, claim settled, no merit, withdrawn) was not sufficiently
reliable for reporting specific outcomes of claims. Therefore, the
information that DOL reports to Congress on the number and percentage
of claims by outcome is not reliable.
DOL Did Not Consistently Notify Claimants of Right of Referral:
At the conclusion of an investigation when VETS is not successful in
resolving the claim, USERRA requires VETS to notify servicemembers with
claims against federal executive branch agencies of their right to have
their claims referred to OSC or to bring their claims directly to MSPB.
According to a VETS official, claimants should be notified in writing
of the right to referral. For the 54 claims in our sample of VETS's
case files, we found that in the 28 claims VETS was not successful in
resolving (i.e., claims not granted or settled), VETS failed to notify
claimants of the right to referral in the closure letter in half of
these claims. VETS correctly notified five claimants and notified
others of only some of their options.[Footnote 17] In addition, VETS
incorrectly advised some servicemembers of a right applicable only to
nonfederal claimants--to have their claims referred to the Department
of Justice or to bring their claims directly to federal district court.
Table 1 shows the extent to which claimants were notified in the
closure letter of their right to have their unsuccessful claims
referred.
Table 1: Notifications of Rights in VETS's Closure Letters of
Unresolved Claims from Sample of Case Files Reviewed:
Description of notification in closure letter: No notification
provided;
Number of claimants: 14[A].
Description of notification in closure letter: Refer to OSC/bring
directly to MSPB[B];
Number of claimants: 5.
Description of notification in closure letter: Refer to OSC;
Number of claimants: 1.
Description of notification in closure letter: Bring directly to MSPB;
Number of claimants: 1.
Description of notification in closure letter: Refer to the Department
of Justice[C];
Number of claimants: 1.
Description of notification in closure letter: Refer to OSC/bring
directly to federal district court[D];
Number of claimants: 2.
Description of notification in closure letter: Refer to the Department
of Justice/ bring directly to federal district court[C,D];
Number of claimants: 4.
Description of notification in closure letter: Total;
Number of claimants: 28.
Source: GAO analysis of VETS's USERRA case files.
Notes: We excluded claims we could identify as (1) subject to the
Defense Finance and Accounting Service administrative procedure to
resolve claims under Butterbaugh v. Department of Justice, 336 F.3d.
1332 (Fed. Cir. 2003) holding that federal agencies had improperly
charged reserve component members' military leave for nonworkdays, (2)
a veterans' preference claim that was inadvertently opened as a USERRA
claim, or (3) a file of a duplicate claim.
[A] We excluded two instances concerning withdrawals. If individuals
withdraw their claims, VETS would not be obligated under USERRA to send
a closure letter notifying those individuals of their right to have
their claims referred to OSC or to bring their claims directly to MSPB.
[B] This is required by USERRA for claims against federal executive
branch agencies.
[C] Referral of claims to the Department of Justice is a right
available to nonfederal claimants.
[D] The right to bring claims directly to federal district court is a
right available to claimants of private employers and local government
employers.
[End of table]
Two possible reasons for VETS's failure to notify servicemembers in
writing of their rights include VETS's lack of an internal review
process and the inconsistent guidance provided to investigators in its
USERRA Operations Manual. As discussed earlier, we found that VETS has
no internal process to routinely review claim determinations prior to
informing claimants of such determinations or closing the claim.
Additionally, VETS failed to provide clear guidance in its USERRA
Operations Manual on when to notify claimants of their right to
referral, the content of the notification, or any guidance on notifying
claimants of their right to bring their claims directly to MSPB. For
example, one chapter instructs investigators to notify the claimants of
their right to referral if there is no voluntary compliance by the
employer, regardless of whether claim has merit, but in another
instructs investigators to advise claimants of their right only if the
claimant does not concur with the determination. Further, the sample
closure letters to claimants contained in the manual are not consistent
regarding notifying claimants; those that contain a notification advise
claimants of a right to request referral to the U.S. Attorney General,
a right applicable to nonfederal claimants. Additionally, VETS's USERRA
Operations Manual does not instruct investigators to notify claimants
of their right to bring their claims directly to MSPB. VETS senior
officials indicated that they had identified problems similar to those
we found in a particular region concerning the lack of consistent
notification of the right to referral. It is not clear what course of
action VETS took at that time.
Following a briefing on our preliminary findings in December 2006, a
VETS official told us that because VETS's USERRA Operations Manual had
not clearly articulated when and how to notify claimants of their
rights, some investigators were not aware that claimants should be
notified in writing at the end of the investigation. Citing our
preliminary findings, VETS officials required each region to revise its
guidance concerning the notification of rights. One region issued a
memorandum providing specific additional guidance to investigators to
notify claimants in the closure letter of their right to a referral or
to bring their claims directly to MSPB and provided revised sample
closure letters for federal and nonfederal USERRA claims, which other
regions were to use as a model. Each region will have its own guidance
until VETS completes revisions to its USERRA Operations
Manual,[Footnote 18] which VETS senior investigators began updating
January 2007. The manual is expected to be issued in October 2007.
Claims Processed by OSC under the Demonstration Project:
From the start of the demonstration project through fiscal year 2006,
OSC received 269 USERRA claims and closed 176, or 65 percent of
them.[Footnote 19] The remaining 93 claims were still being
investigated as of September 30, 2006. More than 75 percent of these
claims included only allegations of USERRA violations. The remaining
were mixed claims--allegations of both USERRA violations and a related
prohibited personnel practice. Table 2 shows the number and type of
claims OSC received and closed during the demonstration project.
Table 2: OSC Investigations Opened and Closed by Type of Claims from
February 8, 2005, through September 30, 2006:
Type of claim: USERRA only;
Number opened: 208;
Number closed: 141;
Percentage closed: 68.
Type of claim: Mixed;
Number opened: 61;
Number closed: 35;
Percentage closed: 57.
Type of claim: All;
Number opened: 269;
Number closed: 176;
Percentage closed: 65.
Source: GAO analysis of OSC data.
[End of table]
Table 3 shows OSC's average processing time overall and for both USERRA
only and mixed claims.
Table 3: OSC Average Processing Time by Type of Claim from February 8,
2005, through September 30, 2006:
Type of claim: USERRA only;
Average processing time in days: 113.
Type of claim: Mixed;
Average processing time in days: 123.
Type of claim: All;
Average processing time in days: 115.
Source: GAO analysis of OSC data.
[End of table]
We assessed the reliability of selected data elements in OSC's case
tracking system in an earlier report.[Footnote 20] We found the closed
dates in OSC's case tracking system to be sufficiently reliable;
however, the corrective action data element, which would be used for
identifying the outcomes of USERRA claims, was not sufficiently
reliable for reporting specific outcomes of USERRA claims.
Claims Referred Took Several Months to Process:
We separately reviewed those claims that VETS investigated but could
not resolve and for which claimants requested referral of their claims
to OSC. For these claims, two sequential DOL reviews take place: A VETS
regional office prepares a report of the investigation and makes a
recommendation on the merits, and a regional Office of the Solicitor
conducts a separate legal analysis and also makes a recommendation on
the merits. From February 8, 2005, through September 30, 2006, 11
claimants asked VETS to refer their claims to OSC. Of those 11 claims,
6 claims had been reviewed by both a VETS regional office and a
regional Office of the Solicitor and sent to OSC, and 5 were still at
DOL. The Office of the Solicitor recommended litigation on 1 of the
claims sent to OSC. For those 6 claims, it took from initial
investigation through the regional office and regional Office of the
Solicitor reviews an average of 247 days or about 8 months before the
Office of the Solicitor sent the claims to OSC. Because of the data
limitations concerning the reliability of investigations' closed dates
in VETS's database, it was not possible to isolate the length of time
for the two additional reviews.
Of the six referred claims that OSC received from DOL during the
demonstration project, OSC declined to represent the claimant in five
claims as of September 30, 2006, and was still reviewing one of them.
OSC took an average of 61 days to independently review the claims and
determine if the claims had merit and whether to represent the
claimants.
Three Primary Changes Have Occurred since the Demonstration Project
Began:
Three primary changes have occurred in federal employees' USERRA
claims' processing since the start of the demonstration project. First,
two agencies now receive and process claims with two different models
for investigating USERRA claims from federal executive branch
employees--a nationwide approach by VETS that gives much authority to
individual investigators in resolving and closing claims and a
centralized approach by OSC that has a single individual entering
claims into the case tracking system, providing guidance, and reviewing
all claims. Second, both DOL and OSC officials have said that since the
demonstration project began, cooperation and communication concerning
USERRA claims has increased, in turn raising awareness of the issues
related to servicemembers who are federal executive branch employees.
Finally, technological enhancements have occurred during the
demonstration project. For example, an enhancement to VETS's database
enables the electronic transfer of information between agencies. In
addition, VETS implemented electronic filing, which eliminates the need
for initial data entry by staff.
Two Models Used for Processing Claims:
As we discussed earlier, under the demonstration project, two different
models have been used for investigating USERRA claims from federal
employees. Table 4 identifies characteristics of DOL's and OSC's models
for processing USERRA claims.
Table 4: Characteristics of DOL's and OSC's USERRA Claims' Processing
Models:
Characteristic: Structure of office;
DOL: Nationwide network with investigators at VETS's offices in each
state, six regional offices, and one national office;
OSC: Centralized USERRA Unit within OSC headquarters with investigators
and attorneys working together on fact- finding and legal analysis.
Characteristic: Responsibilities of staff;
DOL: Investigators process both federal and nonfederal USERRA and
veterans' preference claims and provide outreach and education to
servicemembers and employers;
OSC: Investigators and attorneys process federal employees' USERRA
claims, process prohibited personnel practice claims filed by
servicemembers, and provide outreach and education to employees and
employers.
Characteristic: Investigative approach;
DOL: Investigators are to investigate and attempt to resolve claims,
prepare an investigative plan for claims taking more than 30 days, and
send a letter notifying claimant of the determination. In the case of
referrals, investigators prepare a memorandum of referral with
supporting documentation;
OSC: Investigators or attorneys are to investigate and attempt to
resolve claims, prepare a summary of investigation with supporting
documentation, and provide a detailed letter to the claimant (and for
claims with merit, to the agency) containing the factual and legal
basis for its conclusions.
Characteristic: Oversight;
DOL: There is no required internal review of investigative findings and
closure letters prior to closure letters being sent to the claimant;
VETS senior investigators are to review claims taking longer than 90
days and a random sample of 25 percent of all closed claims and 10
percent of all open claims at the regional level;
OSC: The USERRA Unit Chief provides ongoing guidance, reviews all work
products in a case, and reviews and approves the letter notifying the
claimant of OSC's determination and, in a case with merit, the letter
to the agency, prior to sending the letters.
Source: GAO.
Note: VBIA did not change VETS's formal investigative process or the
referral phase under the demonstration project.
[End of table]
Communication Concerning USERRA Claims Has Increased since the
Demonstration Project Began:
Under the demonstration project, both OSC and VETS officials said that
cooperation and communication concerning USERRA claims has increased
between them. Increased communication has in turn, according to these
officials, raised the awareness among these two agencies of the issues
related to servicemembers who are federal employees. For example, OSC
and DOL officials mentioned working together to decide how to process
certain types of frequently occurring cases concerning leave issues
affecting some servicemembers.[Footnote 21] OSC also has been meeting
monthly with VETS and Office of the Solicitor officials, and OSC
participates in the Office of the Solicitor's monthly telephone
conference calls to discuss selected claims they are working on, offer
legal advice, and discuss what is happening during each agency's
investigative process. Officials from the Office of the Solicitor and
OSC said that these meetings and telephone conferences have been very
useful and that during them they discuss issues related to federal
employees and how the demonstration project is being handled by DOL and
OSC.
Technological Enhancements Have Improved USERRA Claims' Processing
since the Demonstration Project Began:
Following a recommendation in our October 2005 report,[Footnote 22]
VETS implemented an enhancement to its database in October 2006 to
enable the four USERRA coordinating agencies--DOL, OSC, and the
Departments of Defense and Justice--to electronically transfer case
information between agencies. Officials from each of the USERRA
coordinating agencies are also able to see such claim information as
whether a case is open or closed, which agency is currently addressing
it, and how long it took to resolve. As such, the database enhancement
grants OSC limited access to demonstration project data in VETS's
database, including the ability to view summary data for federal
employer cases opened by VETS during the demonstration project period
(e.g., case numbers, employer, open and closed dates, and issues
concerning a case) and allows OSC to enter case data for demonstration
project cases OSC has opened since October 1, 2006. [Footnote 23]
According to OSC's USERRA Unit Chief, to the extent consistent with the
consent provided by claimants, he has been entering information on
demonstration project claims into VETS's database. Officials from each
coordinating agency are able to produce a report containing aggregate
data on the claims over which they have jurisdiction. For
investigations opened by VETS, only VETS has visibility over a claim's
history, from its submission to VETS until it is resolved. The other
coordinating agencies have visibility over only those claims that were
opened by or referred to them. According to VETS officials, when the
enhancement was being developed, the Office of the Solicitor determined
that because of the sensitive nature of the information that the
enhanced VETS's database may contain, except for VETS, full access to
all data fields for a claim would be limited to those cases within each
agency's jurisdiction.
Another technological enhancement by VETS is the implementation of
electronic filing.[Footnote 24] A VETS official told us that from July
18, 2005, the date on which electronic filing of USERRA claims at VETS
became available, through September 30, 2006, about 39 percent of
USERRA claims from servicemembers employed by federal executive branch
agencies were filed with VETS electronically. As we said earlier,
electronic filing of claims directly enters the information into VETS's
E-filing database first and then into VETS's database, records the date
the claim was received, and sends an automatic response to the
claimant. This eliminates the need for initial data entry by staff and
avoids the introduction of error when staff manually enter data. Also,
when a claimant files electronically, VETS's database sends an
automatic message to OSC to determine whether any prohibited personnel
practice cases have been filed by the claimant.
In addition, according to OSC, although VBIA did not require that OSC
modify its existing system, OSC enhanced its case tracking system to
maintain demonstration project data that would be useful in tracking
USERRA claims. For example, on October 1, 2006, OSC began tracking a
claimant's status as veteran, disabled veteran, reservist, guardsman,
or other and the claimant's allegation, such as veteran discrimination,
disabled veteran discrimination, reservist reemployment, and reprisal.
According to OSC, maintaining this information will enable OSC to
prepare reports showing the number and the types of allegations filed
by various claimant groups.
Conclusion:
At a time when the nation's attention is focused on those who serve our
country, it is important that policymakers have reliable information
about the extent to which employment and reemployment rights are
protected for applicants to and employees of the federal government who
leave their employment to perform military or other uniformed service.
While we did not assess the quality of the claims investigations or the
correctness of outcomes, we believe that DOL's controls and oversight
of the claims process need to be improved. DOL does not consistently
notify servicemembers of their right to have their claims referred to
OSC or to file directly with MSPB if DOL is not successful in resolving
their claims, which may have prevented some servicemembers from seeking
further review of their claims. Moreover, VETS's database does not
contain sufficiently reliable data for purposes of our review on the
number of cases, outcomes, and the time to investigate claims.
Additionally, DOL has a lengthy two-phase review process that has
servicemembers waiting months before the referral of their claims takes
place.
We note that VETS uses the same process, including the same procedures,
practices, investigators, and database, for federal and nonfederal
USERRA claims. The same kinds of problems that we found in our review
of federal USERRA claims may be occurring for nonfederal claims.
Citing our preliminary findings, in December 2006, VETS officials took
action to rectify some of the identified shortcomings. While we view
these actions as positive and a step in the right direction toward
clarifying steps that VETS investigators are to take, VETS still lacks
uniform policies and quality controls to help ensure that servicemember
employment rights are protected and that Congress receives accurate
information.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
We recommend that the Secretary of Labor direct the Assistant Secretary
for Veterans' Employment and Training to implement the following four
actions:
* Incorporate into the formal update to VETS's USERRA Operations Manual
the guidance from a VETS regional office December 2006 memorandum on
the procedures that investigators should follow concerning the
notification of a claimant's right to referral and the appropriate
closed date in VETS's database.
* Require all VETS investigators to undergo mandatory training on the
procedures to be followed concerning notification of a claimant's right
to referral to help ensure that servicemembers know their rights under
USERRA.
* Develop and implement an internal review mechanism for all unresolved
claims before claimants are notified of determinations and claims are
closed to help ensure adherence to all procedures and standards.
* Establish a plan of intended actions with target dates for
implementing internal controls to ensure that VETS's database
accurately reflects: the number of unique USERRA claims filed annually
against federal executive branch agencies, the dates those claims were
closed, and the outcomes of those claims, to ensure that accurate
information on USERRA claims' processing is available to DOL and to
Congress.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
We provided a draft of this report to the Secretary of Labor and the
Special Counsel for their review and comment. In written comments,
which are included in appendix II, the Assistant Secretary for
Veterans' Employment and Training agreed with our recommendations and
discussed actions that DOL is taking to address the recommendations.
In written comments, which are included in appendix III, the Special
Counsel disagreed with our statement that OSC's corrective action data
element, which OSC uses to describe the results or outcomes of USERRA
claims, was not reliable. He also notes that the report does not
address the differences between the results and time taken to get
results by OSC versus DOL. As stated in our report, during our review,
OSC and DOL provided us with data on USERRA claims processed, but
because the data element for outcomes was not sufficiently reliable in
either agency's database, we do not report on outcomes. Also in his
written comments, the Special Counsel references a December 2006 letter
to us in which he expressed disagreement with a methodology used in
calculating the time an investigative file is with DOL's Office of the
Solicitor. The December letter refers not to the methodology in this
report but rather to a preliminary methodology used in another GAO
engagement.[Footnote 25] Our methodology for this engagement, which
includes a discussion of the time an investigative file is with DOL's
Office of the Solicitor, is discussed in this letter and in more detail
in appendix I.
In addition, both the Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and
Training and the Special Counsel provided their views on the
demonstration project and their respective agency's role in processing
USERRA claims.
We will send copies of this report to the Secretary of Labor, the
Special Counsel, and other interested parties. Copies will be made
available to others upon request. This report will also be available at
no charge on GAO's Web site at hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov.
If you have questions about this report, please contact me on (202) 512-
9490 or at stalcupg@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last
page of this report. Staff who made major contributions are listed in
appendix IV.
Signed by:
George H. Stalcup:
Director, Strategic Issues:
List of Congressional Committees:
The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka:
Chairman:
The Honorable Larry E. Craig:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Veterans' Affairs:
U.S. Senate:
The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman:
Chairman:
The Honorable Susan M. Collins:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
U.S. Senate:
The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka:
Chairman:
The Honorable George V. Voinovich:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal
Workforce, and the District of Columbia:
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
U.S. Senate:
The Honorable Bob Filner:
Chairman:
The Honorable Steve Buyer:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Veterans' Affairs:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Henry A. Waxman:
Chairman:
The Honorable Tom Davis:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Stephanie Herseth Sandlin:
Chairman:
The Honorable John Boozman:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity:
Committee on Veterans' Affairs:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Danny K. Davis:
Chairman:
The Honorable Kenny Marchant:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal Service, and the District of
Columbia:
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform:
House of Representatives:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Our objectives were to (1) describe the Department of Labor's (DOL) and
Office of Special Counsel's (OSC) policies and procedures for
processing federal employees' Uniformed Services Employment and
Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) claims under the demonstration
project; (2) identify the number of federal employees' USERRA claims
that DOL and OSC received and the outcomes of these claims, including
average processing times; and (3) identify changes to federal
employees' USERRA claims' processing since the demonstration project
began.
Objective 1: Describe DOL's and OSC's Policies and Procedures for
Processing Federal Employees' USERRA Claims under the Demonstration
Project:
To describe DOL's and OSC's policies and procedures for processing
federal employees' USERRA claims under the demonstration project, we
reviewed applicable laws, including USERRA and the Veterans Benefit
Improvement Act of 2004, and regulations; agency policies, memorandums
of understanding, and correspondence between DOL and OSC; DOL and OSC
USERRA claims' processing manuals; other internal guidance and program
information; and DOL's annual USERRA reports to Congress. We also
interviewed knowledgeable DOL and OSC officials. At DOL, we interviewed
officials from its Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS)
National Office, VETS's Atlanta Regional Office, and DOL's Office of
the Solicitor. At OSC, we interviewed the USERRA Unit Chief.
Objective 2: Identify the Number of Federal Employees' USERRA Claims
that DOL and OSC Received and the Outcomes of These Claims, Including
Average Processing Times:
To identify the number of federal employees' USERRA claims that DOL and
OSC received and the outcomes of these claims, including average
processing times, we obtained information on all the USERRA claims
filed against federal executive branch agencies that DOL and OSC
received from February 8, 2005--the beginning of the demonstration
project--through September 30, 2006. We excluded claims from our
analysis identified by DOL and OSC as being brought by Transportation
Security Administration security screeners and supervisory security
screeners because they are not covered by USERRA,[Footnote 26]
specifically 7 claims at DOL and 10 claims at OSC.
Data Reliability:
DOL:
We also assessed the reliability of data on federal employee claims
from VETS's database, the USERRA Information Management System, and
OSC's case tracking system, OSC 2000, by tracing a statistically random
sample of data to case files. Concerning the reliability of VETS's
data, for selected data elements including open date, closed date,
closed code, agency name, regional office action date, and Office of
the Solicitor action date, we compared the electronic data in VETS's
database to the source case files for 54 randomly selected cases
received between February 8, 2005, and July 21, 2006. We assessed
reliability by the amount of agreement between the data in VETS's
database and the source case files. In addition, for each selected data
element, we excluded claims if information was missing from the case
file, thus preventing a comparison between data in VETS's database and
the case file. We did not evaluate the accuracy of the source case
files for the data elements reviewed. For data elements pertaining to
time (i.e., open date and closed date), we considered the date a match
if the date in VETS's database was the same or within 1 day of the date
reflected in the case file.
We determined that data contained in the closed date and closed code
fields were not reliable for purposes of this study. Specifically, we
found that the closed dates in VETS's database did not match a closed
date indicated in the case files in 22 of 52 claims.[Footnote 27] We
considered the closed date a match if the date in VETS's database was
the same as either the date of the closure letter, the date indicated
in the closure letter by which a claimant had to respond to a request
for information, or the date stated in the closure letter indicating
when the investigation was closed. Thus, we are 95 percent confident
that between 31 and 53 percent of the closed dates in VETS's database
would not match between the VETS's database and the source case files.
Regarding the closed code, which VETS uses to describe the outcomes of
USERRA claims (i.e., claim granted, claim settled, no merit, withdrawn)
we are 95 percent confident that as many as 16 percent of the outcomes
would not match between the VETS's database and the source case files.
While our analysis of VETS's database showed that about one-fifth of
claimants received partial or full relief, we found that this data
element was not sufficiently reliable for reporting specific outcomes
of claims. We determined that the other data elements--open date,
agency name, regional office action date, and Office of the Solicitor
action date--necessary to answer our objectives were sufficiently
reliable for purposes of this review.
OSC:
Concerning the reliability of OSC's data, in an earlier report we
assessed the reliability of selected data elements in OSC's case
tracking system for USERRA claims by comparing them to the source case
files.[Footnote 28] We reviewed the selected data elements for a
statistically random sample of USERRA claims and determined the
corrective action code, which OSC uses to describe the outcomes of
USERRA claims, was not sufficiently reliable. Specifically, we are 95
percent confident that as many as 24 percent of the outcomes would not
match between the case tracking system and the source case files. While
our analysis of OSC's data showed that about a quarter of claimants
received full relief, this data element is not sufficiently reliable
for reporting outcomes of claims. We determined that the other data
elements--date received, date closed, agency name, case type, case
subtype, and action office--were sufficiently reliable for purposes of
this review.
Determining the Number of Claims Received:
DOL:
We reviewed data from VETS's database from February 8, 2005, though
September 30, 2006, to determine the number of claims processed by DOL
during the demonstration project. In doing so, we found that VETS's
database records as separate claims (1) duplicate filings by the same
claimant, (2) reopened claims for the same claimant, and (3) claims
transferred to OSC. To determine the number of unique claims opened by
VETS, we:
* removed claims opened prior to the demonstration project;
* removed claims transferred to OSC after being opened in VETS's
database (i.e., those with odd social security numbers and allegations
of related prohibited personnel practices);
* removed duplicate filings (i.e., those opened within 3 days of
another claim brought by the same claimant and subsequently closed,
while the original claim remained open);
* removed one veterans' preference claim identified by VETS as being
inadvertently opened as a USERRA claim; and:
* combined and counted as one claim original and reopened claims where
both were opened during the demonstration project.
Because the number of claims shown in VETS's database exceeded the
number of unique claims VETS investigated, we concluded that the data
in VETS's database were not sufficiently reliable for determining the
number of claims. As a result of the steps we took to identify the
number of unique claims DOL received, the number of claims received
went from 202 shown in VETS's database from February 8, 2005, through
September 30, 2006, to 166--the number we used for purposes of this
review.
Because of our concerns over the reliability of the number of claims in
VETS's database for the demonstration project, we also analyzed the
number of claims in VETS's database for fiscal year 2005 and compared
it to the number of claims filed against federal executive branch
agencies that DOL reported in its fiscal year 2005 USERRA Annual Report
to Congress. To determine the number of unique claims processed by VETS
in fiscal year 2005 that were filed against federal executive branch
agencies, we used a methodology similar to the one used to determine
the number of unique claims during the demonstration project.[Footnote
29] We again found that DOL had not removed duplicate, reopened,
transferred, and erroneously opened federal USERRA claims.
Specifically, DOL reported that it opened 146 claims involving federal
employers for fiscal year 2005, reflecting the number of claims
involving federal employers in VETS's database for fiscal year 2005.
Our analysis, however, showed that of the reported 146 claims, 117
unique claims were investigated by VETS in fiscal year 2005.
OSC:
To determine the number of claims processed by OSC during the
demonstration project, we analyzed data from OSC's case tracking system
for claims alleging only violations of USERRA and claims alleging both
violations of USERRA and related prohibited personnel practices.
Determining Average Processing Time for DOL:
Because the closed dates entered in VETS's database were not
sufficiently reliable, we could not use the average of the time VETS
spent on investigations reflected in its database to accurately
determine DOL's average processing time. Instead, to determine average
processing time, we used the correct closed dates from the case files
in our random sample and (1) estimated average processing time for VETS
investigations from the start of the demonstration project through July
21, 2006--the period of our sample--and (2) calculated the actual total
DOL average processing time for those claims referred to OSC.[Footnote
30]
VETS Investigations:
To determine VETS's average processing time, we used the data from the
sample of cases because the closed dates for all claims in VETS's
database were not sufficiently reliable for our purposes. Where the
closed date in VETS's database did not match the date in the closure
letter, we used the correct dates obtained from our review of the hard
copy case files and generated estimates from the sample of cases, which
were opened and closed from February 8, 2005, through July 21, 2006--
the period of our sample. Based on the random sample, we are 95 percent
confident that VETS's average processing time for conducting
investigations was between 53 and 86 days. Because our sample contained
only one case that received the two additional reviews at DOL after the
VETS investigation was closed, (i.e., by a VETS's regional office and
the Office of the Solicitor) before being referred to OSC, we could not
reliably use this same process to estimate the average processing time
for all of DOL's USERRA claims' processing.
DOL's Referrals to OSC:
We separately reviewed those claims that VETS investigated but could
not resolve and for which claimants requested referral of their claims
to OSC. From February 8, 2005, through September 30, 2006, for 16
claims in the VETS's database, claimants asked VETS for referral to
OSC. Of those 16 claims, 5 were reopened (i.e., claims brought by the
same claimant), which we combined with their original claims, and 5
were still being reviewed at DOL. The other 6 claims had not been
reopened. Thus, 11 unique claims were to be referred to OSC. Of the 11
unique claims, 6 had been reviewed by both a VETS regional office and
the Office of the Solicitor as of September 30, 2006 (3 of the reopened
claims and 3 of the others). To calculate the average processing time
for DOL to process claims that were referred through DOL to OSC using
actual dates, we used the average processing time of these 6 claims. We
based this average on the number of days that it took DOL to process a
claim from the date that VETS opened the investigation through the date
that the Office of the Solicitor completed its review and made a
recommendation to OSC. Because we found the closed dates of VETS
investigations entered in VETS's database were not sufficiently
reliable for our purposes, we could not determine how long it took the
VETS regional office and the Office of the Solicitor to process
referrals following VETS investigations.
For each of the three claims that were reopened, there were two open
dates. Because we determined that the closed dates in VETS's database
were unreliable, we could not accurately account for the time these
claims had been closed before they were reopened. To compensate for
this, we calculated the processing time for these three reopened claims
in two ways: (1) using the open date of the first claim and (2) using
the open date of the reopened, or second claim, in VETS's database. We
then calculated two averages using each of the processing time
calculations for the three claims. For the remaining three claims that
were referred but not closed and reopened, there was only one open date
to use in calculating processing time, which was used in both
calculations of average processing time for the six referrals. The
difference in the average processing time between these two
calculations was about 31 days. For purposes of this report, we use the
approximate midpoint obtained from each of the calculations--about 247
days or 8 months.
Determining Average Processing Time for OSC:
To determine the average processing time for all OSC claims, USERRA
only, and mixed claims, using the data in OSC's database, we calculated
the number of days from and including the date that the claim was
opened through the date that the claim was closed.
Notification of Rights:
During our review of a sample of VETS's case files, for claims that
were not successfully resolved, we reviewed the extent to which VETS
notified claimants in closure letters of their right to have their
claims referred to OSC or to bring them directly to MSPB using a
private attorney. We defined "not successfully resolved" as those
claims that did not have a closed code in VETS's database of "claim
granted" or "claim settled." As a result, we excluded from our analysis
of the 54 claims in the sample those claims with a closed code in
VETS's database of claim granted or claim settled. We also excluded
those claims that we were able to identify (1) as subject to the
Defense Finance and Accounting Service administrative procedure to
resolve their Butterbaugh claims,[Footnote 31] (2) a veterans'
preference claim that was inadvertently opened as a USERRA claim, (3) a
file of a duplicate claim, or (4) those withdrawn by the claimant. In
total, we included 28 closure letters from our random sample of 54
claims in our review.
Objective 3: Identify Changes to Federal Employees' USERRA Claims'
Processing since the Demonstration Project Began:
To identify changes to federal employees' USERRA claims' processing
since the demonstration project began, we reviewed applicable law,
regulations, and legislative histories. We also reviewed relevant
documentation about claims' processing prior to the demonstration
project and compared that to relevant documentation from DOL and OSC
regarding claims' processing during the demonstration project. We also
interviewed knowledgeable DOL and OSC officials and representatives
from veterans' service organizations, including The American Legion,
Military Officers Association of America, National Guard Association of
the United States, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Reserve Enlisted
Association, Reserve Officers Association, Veterans of Foreign Wars of
the United States, and Vietnam Veterans of America.
We conducted our work from May 2006 to May 2007 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Labor:
U.S. Department of Labor:
Assistant Secretary for Veteran's Employment and Training:
Washington DC 20210:
Jul - 5 2007:
Mr. George H. Stalcup:
Director, Strategic Issues:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Mr. Stalcup:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft report GAO-07-
907, which evaluates the demonstration project conducted by the U.S.
Department of Labor Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS)
and the Office of the Special Counsel (OSC) for addressing complaints
under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
(USERRA). Under this multi-year demonstration project, mandated by
Section 214 of the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act and ending in
September 2007, certain claims against federal agencies under USERRA
are referred to OSC for investigation, enforcement and resolution.
In the report, GAO recommends that VETS implement four specific actions
to continue improvement in its handling of service members' employment
rights claims. In summary, GAO recommends that VETS:
* Update its USERRA Operations Manual procedures for notifying
claimants of their referral rights and for entry of case closure dates
into the VETS database.
* Require all VETS USERRA investigators to undergo mandatory training
on the procedures for notifying a claimant of their right to referral.
* Ensure adherence to procedures and standards by developing and
implementing an internal mechanism for reviewing unresolved claims
before they are closed and before claimants are notified of
determinations.
* Establish a plan and milestones for implementing internal controls to
ensure that VETS' database provides more accurate information.
We agree with the recommendations and, as noted in the report, VETS is
addressing practices that GAO's preliminary report indicated could be
improved. For example, all our USERRA investigators received new
instructions on notifying claimants of their right to referral and on
recording the appropriate closure date for a claim. Furthermore, the
USERRA Operations Manual is being revised to institute systemic
procedures to be followed in notifying claimants in writing of their
right to referral and entering closure dates into the VETS database.
VETS is also implementing a new Quality Assurance Review process for
all USERRA cases, federal and nonfederal, that will require a higher-
level review before a claimant is notified of the determinations and
before cases are closed. This review process will ensure that 100% of
the cases investigated adhere to systemic procedures and standards, and
that data entered into the VETS database accurately reflects our USERRA
claims processing. The Quality Assurance Review mechanism is being
tested in six states beginning this month, and we plan to expand it to
all states in the future.
The draft report also draws a contrast between OSC's centralized
process for investigating USERRA claims and VETS' nationwide, one-stop,
comprehensive approach to addressing a wide range of work-related
matters of importance to service members. VETS emphasizes pre-filing
technical assistance that is immediately responsive and provides
guidance to help resolve USERRA concerns in informal, non-adversarial
ways that preserve on-going working relationships. This assistance,
together with electronic tools such as the USERRA claws Advisor, helps
resolve most reemployment rights problems before USERRA claims are ever
filed.
VETS' network of veteran-focused employment specialists conducts
outreach and provides technical assistance to employers, service
members, veterans, and veterans' organizations on employment and
reemployment issues at the national, state and local levels, including
locations where service members are demobilized. In cases where a
formal USERRA complaint is filed, VETS has made the filing easier and
faster through electronic filing, and VETS draws on its many years of
experience with USERRA and predecessor laws in investigating and
resolving those complaints.
VETS is constantly seeking ways to better achieve the USERRA goal of
minimizing disruption to service members and their employers by
protecting against discrimination and securing prompt reemployment
after military service. (See 38 U.S.C. § 4301.) Our immediate responses
to concerns expressed by GAO in its preliminary report, and to the
lessons learned during the demonstration project, have already produced
tangible benefits for our country's service members. We are gratified
that GAO's report recognizes these efforts. The Department of Labor is
in a better position than ever before to serve the needs of all
veterans. Therefore, we strongly believe that all federal and
nonfederal sector USERRA cases should be investigated by VETS.
Thank you again for working with the Department of Labor to help
improve the delivery of services under USERRA and for the opportunity
to comment on this report. You can be assured that VETS will continue
to work with the Office of Special Counsel to identify ways in which
our two agencies can improve service to service members.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Charles S. Ciccolella:
[End of section]
Appendix III: Comments from the Office of Special Counsel:
U.S. Office Of Special Counsel:
1730 M Street, N. W , Suite 300:
Washington, D.C. 20036-4505:
hyperlink, http://www.osc.gov:
The Special Counsel:
July 6, 2007:
Ms. Belva Martin:
Assistant Director:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G St., NW:
Washington, DC 20548:
By electronic transmission to: martinb@gao.gov:
Re: Response to GAO-07-907:
Dear Ms. Martin:
On behalf of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), I thank you for
the opportunity to respond to the draft version of the U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled Military Personnel:
Improved Quality Controls Needed over Servicemembers' Employment Rights
Claims at DOL (GAO-07-907). For the reasons set forth below, I concur
with GAO's recommendations for executive action but respectfully
disagree with its conclusion that OSC's corrective action data element
was not reliable.
We attach a copy of our letter of December 11, 2006, in which OSC
identifies the shortcomings of the methodology you use in calculating
the delays occurring when an investigative file is with the DOL
Solicitor's offices around the country (attached as Exhibit "A"). More
importantly, the report does not address the differences between the
results, and time taken to get results, by OSC versus the Department of
Labor, Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS). OSC's USERRA
unit achieves a 25% corrective action rate for service members in about
half the time necessary for VETS to complete an investigation. OSC's
timeliness is all the more noteworthy because the added leg of
prosecution which VETS lacks the power to do can create delay
unattributable to anything in OSC's power.
The charts used in your report are accurate insofar as they show that a
service member enters the process and exits it at a certain point, but
they do not accurately reflect the level of complexity a service member
encounters when going through a VETS investigation. Thus the contrast
between OSC's one-stop shopping simplicity and the relative complexity
and delay of a VETS investigation that may bounce around between
regional offices and the Solicitor's office is lost. This is a key
aspect of the Demonstration Project to show which office is better
suited to help the service member, and to do so in a timely manner. The
chart we created and shared with GAO to explain this problem is Exhibit
C to the December 19, 2006 letter (attached as Exhibit "A").
Further, because the GAO Report did not assess the quality of the
claims, investigations or the correctness of the outcomes, I believe it
is imperative for the congressional addressees to be aware of OSC's
unique experience and expertise in investigating, analyzing, and
resolving federal sector claims arising under the Uniformed Services
Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), 38 U.S.C. § 4301, et
seq. OSC's unmatched experience and expertise has directly benefited
servicemembers during the demonstration project. In light of that
success, this letter also addresses the reasons why Congress should
permanently grant OSC the authority to receive and investigate all
federal sector USERRA claims.
A. OSC's Role in Enforcing USERRA:
1. Background:
For the benefit of those congressional addressees who may not have a
complete understanding of my office and its important mission, I offer
a brief overview of OSC and its role in enforcing USERRA:
OSC is an independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency
established pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 1211. Its primary mission is to
safeguard the federal merit system by protecting the employment rights
of federal employees and applicants for federal employment. OSC employs
personnel specialists, investigators, and attorneys who accomplish that
mission by receiving, investigating, analyzing, resolving, and
prosecuting prohibited personnel practices and other violations of
civil service law. We are the only federal agency authorized to seek
corrective action on behalf of aggrieved claimants and disciplinary
action against federal managers for committing prohibited personnel
practices and related offenses. OSC prosecutes such claims before the
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). OSC has a proud history of
serving the federal workforce and the public through its tenacious
defense of the merit system principles that safeguard the integrity of
the executive branch agencies of the United States.
2. USERRA:
With the passage of USERRA in October of 1994, Congress expanded OSC's
role as protector of the federal merit system and federal workplace
rights, however, it is a 2 step process. Under USERRA's 1994 statutory
scheme, VETS, first receives all federal and non federal sector USERRA
claims, conducts investigations, and endeavors to resolve claims with
the involved employer. If VETS is unable to resolve claims filed
against federal employers, the matter is then referred to OSC at the
servicemember's request since VETS has no prosecutorial authority.
[Footnote 32]
When a federal sector USERRA claim is referred, OSC objectively reviews
the facts and laws applicable to each complaint. Where a VETS
investigation is deficient, OSC obtains additional information from the
involved agency. In the cases where OSC is satisfied that claimant is
entitled to relief, then OSC may exercise prosecutorial authority and
represent the claimant before the MPSB and, if required, the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. As prosecutor, OSC seeks to obtain
full corrective action on behalf of claimants either by settlements
with the involved federal employer or litigation before the MSPB.
Moreover, as protector of the merit system, OSC seeks "systemic"
corrective action to prevent future violations whenever the USERRA Unit
uncovers violations of USERRA within a federal agency that affect
servicemembers beyond the individual claimant. For example, OSC will
assist an agency in modifying its leave policy so that it does not
violate USERRA.
Because allegations of federal sector USERRA violations are equivalent
to prohibited personnel practices, the responsibility for receiving and
investigating USERRA claims under the demonstration project merge
seamlessly into OSC's day-to-day operations. In short, OSC's role in
enforcing USERRA complements its role in protecting the federal
employees and applicants from prohibited personnel practice in the
federal workplace.
3. USERRA Demonstration Project and OSC's USERRA Unit:
In February 2005, OSC's role in enforcing USERRA and protecting the
federal employment rights of servicemembers expanded. Specifically,
pursuant to a demonstration project established by section 204 of the
Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 2004 (VBIA), P.L. 108-454,
Congress gave OSC the exclusive authority to investigate federal sector
USERRA claims brought by servicemembers whose social security number
ends in an odd-numbered digit. Additionally, under the project, OSC
investigates all federal sector USERRA claims containing a related
prohibited personnel practice allegation over which OSC has
jurisdiction regardless of the servicemember's social security number
(so-called "mixed claims").[Footnote 33]
With the new, additional investigative responsibilities Congress
assigned to OSC under demonstration project and my personal desire to
revitalize OSC's enforcement of USERRA during my term as Special
Counsel, I established the USERRA Unit as part of my January 6. 2005,
directive reorganizing the agency. The USERRA Unit is the in-take,
investigative, and prosecutorial unit for all matters pertaining to
USERRA and servicemember-related employment issues. The Unit is
responsible for investigating USERRA claims and prosecuting meritorious
cases.
The USERRA Unit is staffed with attorney and investigators who possess
expert knowledge of federal personnel law and years of experience
investigating, analyzing, and resolving allegations of violations
federal employment rights. The Unit's chief is a national expert in
USERRA and has taught advanced USERRA classes at numerous conferences
such as the prestigious Federal Dispute Resolution Conference and the
Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School in Charlottesville,
Virginia.[Footnote 34] The unit as a whole participates in OSC's USERRA
outreach program and maintains a telephonic and web-based "hotlines"
for answering USERRA-related questions from the public and private
sectors.
The demonstration project has highlighted the benefits to
servicemembers in eliminating the inefficiencies associated with the
inter-agency bifurcation of the investigation and prosecution aspects
of USERRA claims. OSC's involvement with a USERRA claim at the moment
the claim is filed has streamlined the processing of claims as
illustrated by the charts accompanying this letter. Chart A "DOL Case
Processing" shows the manner in which the Department of Labor processes
USERRA cases, while Chart B "OSC Case Processing" depicts the
efficiency of having OSC's USERRA Unit receive and investigate federal
sector USERRA claims.[Footnote 35] As discussed below, it has also led
to beneficial resolutions for servicemembers "at a time when the.
nation's attention is focused on those who serve our country." (GAO
draft Report, p. 29).
B. Specific Comments to GAO Report:
1. Investigative Quality and Correctness of Legal Determinations:
According to the report, GAO did not assess the quality of the claims
investigations. Nor did it asses the correctness of outcomes. I assure
the congressional addressees that the OSC's USERRA Unit's
investigations and legal determination are of the highest professional
quality.
The demonstration project enables certain servicemembers to have their
USERRA allegations investigated by the USERRA Unit's experienced
attorneys and investigators. For OSC, it is a reasonable extension of
what OSC's was established to do: protect the employment rights of
federal employees and applicants. Three press releases are attached as
Exhibit "B". These releases provide a small sampling of the USERRA
Unit's ability to investigate adeptly and analyze correctly federal
sector USERRA claims. Indeed, the 6/27/06 release is an example of
where the USERRA Unit obtained relief for a servicemember after DOL
failed to analyze the case correctly.
Therefore, notwithstanding that GAO did' not assess the quality of
investigations or the correctness of legal analyses, Congress can be
confident in the USERRA Unit's ability to handle competently and
zealously federal sector USERRA claims.
2. GAO's Assessment of OSC's Data Reliability:
GAO found OSC's information management data to be reliable except for
one exception: OSC's "corrective action" code was not sufficiently
reliable.[Footnote 36] I respectfully disagree with GAO's assessment.
OSC's information management system uses codes both for closing
individual allegations within a case as well as for the case as a
whole. Thus, a case could be closed with a favorable corrective action
even though not all of the servicemembers allegations were
substantiated. A "corrective action" code is a type of closure code. I
believe that GAO may have not completely understood that unique
characteristic of OSC's information management system.
Notwithstanding data entry codes, OSC provided GAO with data evidencing
the USERRA Unit's impressive corrective action rate of over 25%. That
is to say that over one in four the claims investigated and closed
resulted in full corrective action to the servicemember. Those results
were obtained via thorough investigations, creative legal analysis, and
dedication to the mission of protecting servicemembers' employment and
reemployment rights.
I commend the hard, honest effort made by GAO to understand OSC's
information management system and its the data entry code for
corrective actions. At the end of the day, however, it is fundamental
that the congressional addressees understand that real life "outcomes"
are far more important than computer "output." Thus, Exhibit "C" to
this letter identifies each of the corrective actions obtained during
the February 8, 2005, through September 30, 2006 (the period over which
the GAO report is based). Exhibit B shows that OSC obtained meaningful
results for real problems encountered by federal sector servicemembers.
C. Comments Regarding GAO's Recommendations for Executive Action:
Recommendation #1: GAO recommends that the Secretary of Labor direct
the Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and Training
incorporate into the formal update to VETS USERRA Operations Manual the
guidance from a VETS's regional office December 2006 memorandum on the
procedures that investigators should follow concerning the notification
of a claimant's right to referral and the appropriate closed date in
VETS's database.
OSC concurs. Servicemembers must be informed that OSC, as prosecutor of
federal sector USERA cases and protector of the federal merit system,
is ready willing and able to enforce zealously their USERRA and related
employment rights.
Recommendation #2: GAO recommends that the Secretary of Labor direct
the Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and Training Require
all VETS's investigators to undergo mandatory training on the
procedures to be followed concerning notification of a claimant's right
to referral to help ensure that servicemembers know their rights under
USERRA.
OSC concurs. Such training will strengthen the enforcement of USERRA,
and OSC is willing to assist in training VETS personnel on the
important role OSC plays in enforcing servicemembers' USERRA and
related employment rights.
Recommendation #3: GAO recommends that the Secretary of Labor direct
the Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and Training develop
and implement an internal review mechanism for all unresolved claims
before claimants are notified of determinations and claims are closed
to help ensure adherence to all procedures and standards.
OSC concurs. OSC's USERRA Unit relies on an internal review mechanism
for ensuring that claims are thoroughly investigated and correctly
analyzed and that servicemember are fully informed of their appeal
rights. The success of such model is evidenced in the timeliness and
correctness of its case resolutions.
Recommendation #4: GAO recommends that the Secretary of Labor direct
the Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and Training establish
a plan of intended actions with target dates for implementing internal
controls to ensure that VETS's database accurately reflects: the number
of unique USERRA claims filed annually against federal executive branch
agencies, the dates those claims were closed, and the outcomes of those
claims to ensure that accurate information on USERRA claims' processing
is available to DOL and to Congress.
OSC concurs. OSC has provided accurate information to DOL on the USERRA
cases OSC receives, investigates, analyzes and resolves. It will
continue to work with DOL to ensure that Congress receives accurate
information about USERRA on an annual basis.
D. Congressional Action:
The USERRA Unit's timely resolution of cases, the correctness of its
legal determinations, and the beneficial results it obtained for
servicemembers prove that OSC is well-suited for investigating all
federal sector USERRA claims, which comprise only about 10% of the
total number of USERRA claims that DOL receives each fiscal year.
Indeed, should OSC be given investigative responsibility for all
federal sector claims, I firmly believe DOL will be able to redirect
its full investigative capabilities and resources to its non-federal
sector claims. With the resulting slightly narrower investigative realm
from the shift of 10% of the USERRA claims to OSC, VETS,should be able
to hone their non-federal sector investigative and analytical skills
and claims processing. The shift will give VETS the opportunity to
become the "expert" in the non-federal sector claims and allow it to
provide the same quality of investigative and analytical expertise that
OSC provides to servicemembers in the federal sector.
In short, there is ample reason for Congress to depart from the "old
way" of processing federal sector USERRA claims and to establish a
better way of protecting employment and reemployment rights. Certainly,
our brave servicemembers deserve the best legal protection available in
light of the tremendous personal sacrifices they make. Most
importantly, our servicemembers deserve speedy and efficient resolution
of their claims - not 2 years of being unemployed, waiting to see if
he/she is going to be employees again in the federal sector, after
being deployed and returning to find that his/her job has been
eliminated.
E. Concluding Remarks:
In summary, I thank you and your colleagues for the time and effort
expended in reviewing OSC's receipt, investigation, analysis, and
resolution of federal sector USERRA claims during the demonstration
project. The report, coupled with this response, should provide
Congress with a solid understanding of the benefits that will flow to
servicemembers should OSC be given the authority to receive and
investigate all federal sector USERRA claims.
Thank you for providing me the opportunity to respond to the draft
report:
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Scott J. Bloch:
Special Counsel:
[End of section]
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
George H. Stalcup on (202) 512-9490 or at stalcupg@gao.gov:
Acknowledgments:
In addition to the individual named above, Belva Martin, Assistant
Director; James Ashley; Karin Fangman; Tamara F. Stenzel; Kiki
Theodoropoulos; Jason Vassilicos; Michael R. Volpe; and Gregory H.
Wilmoth made key contributions to this report.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Pub. L. No. 103-353, 108 Stat. 3149, 38 U.S.C. §§ 4301-4334.
[2] Acting to exercise or enforce a USERRA right, testifying in any
enforcement proceeding, or assisting in an investigation is protected
activity under USERRA.
[3] For purposes of this report, we are using the term servicemember,
but as discussed earlier, individuals who are not servicemembers (or
who have merely applied to become a servicemember) may also be
protected by USERRA's discrimination and retaliation prohibitions.
[4] DOL is also to inform claimants that they may file a complaint
directly with the Merit Systems Protection Board. If DOL's VETS cannot
resolve nonfederal USERRA claims, DOL is to inform claimants that they
may request to have their claims referred to the U.S. Attorney General.
The Department of Justice prosecutes nonfederal sector USERRA claims.
[5] An independent, quasi-judicial agency in the executive branch, MSPB
serves as the guardian of federal merit principles.
[6] See section 204 of Pub. L. No. 108-454, 118 Stat. 3598, 3606-3608,
38 U.S.C. § 4301 note.
[7] There are 12 prohibited personnel practices including
discrimination, retaliation, or unauthorized preference or improper
advantage. 5 U.S.C. § 2302.
[8] The USERRA Information Management System is a Web-based case
management and reporting tool implemented by VETS in October 1996 that
allows for automated collection and investigator input of information
regarding USERRA claims and generation of reports for analysis of
USERRA operations and outcomes.
[9] OSC 2000 was implemented by OSC in July 1999 and was designed to
capture and record data from the initial filing of a claim until the
closure and archiving of the case file and allows for queries that
create a number of management and workload reports.
[10] GAO, Military Personnel: Federal Management of Servicemember
Employment Rights Can Be Further Improved, GAO-06-60 (Washington, D.C.:
Oct. 19, 2005).
[11] GAO, Military Personnel: Additional Actions Needed to Improve
Oversight of Reserve Employment Issues, GAO-07-259 (Washington, D.C.:
Feb. 8, 2007).
[12] Under the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1998, Pub. L.
No. 105-339 (Oct. 31, 1998), an individual who believes his or her
preference rights have been violated may file a complaint with VETS
within 60 days after the alleged violation, and if VETS's efforts do
not result in resolution of the complaint, the individual may appeal
the matter to MSPB, 5 U.S.C. § 3330a.
[13] For example, committing a knowing violation of veterans'
preference rights is a prohibited personnel practice under 5 U.S.C. §
2302 (b)(11).
[14] OSC provides a direct electronic filing option for claims alleging
prohibited personnel practices, OSC-Form 11, which has been used for
filing USERRA claims.
[15] We excluded from our analysis claims brought by seven
Transportation Security Administration security screeners and
supervisory security screeners, who are not covered by USERRA.
[16] We excluded claims if information was missing from the case file,
thus preventing a comparison between data in VETS's database and the
case file. Thus, 2 of the 54 claims in the sample were excluded for
assessing the reliability of date closed. See app. I for additional
information on our review of case files.
[17] See app. I for additional information on our analysis of
claimants' notification of their rights.
[18] VETS periodically has made changes to its USERRA Operations
Manual, issued in 1995, through memorandums addressed to regional
administrators and directors for Veterans' Employment and Training.
[19] We excluded from our analysis 10 claims brought by Transportation
Security Administration security screeners and supervisory security
screeners, who are not covered by USERRA.
[20] GAO, Office of Special Counsel Needs to Follow Structured Life
Cycle Management Practices for Its Case Tracking System, GAO-07-318R
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 16, 2007).
[21] These include claims resulting from the Federal Circuit Court of
Appeals decision in Butterbaugh v. Department of Justice.
[22] GAO-06-60.
[23] All information related to OSC demonstration project claims is to
be stored in a separate database throughout the entire life cycle of
all demonstration project claims.
[24] OSC is awaiting the outcome of the demonstration project before
implementing electronic filing of USERRA claims.
[25] See GAO-07-259. However, the methodology referenced by the Special
Counsel was revised and not used in the issued report.
[26] Transportation Security Administration security screeners and
supervisory security screeners are not covered by USERRA. See, Spain v.
Department of Homeland Security, 99 M.S.P.R. 529 (2005), citing to
Conyers v. M.S.P.B, 388 F.3d. 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The Transportation
Security Administration, however, voluntarily permits DOL and OSC to
investigate USERRA claims.
[27] As we said earlier, we excluded claims from the original sample
size of 54 when information was missing from the case file, which
accounts for any difference from 54.
[28] GAO, Office of Special Counsel Did Not Follow Structured Life
Cycle Management Practices for Its Case Tracking System, GAO-07-318R
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 16, 2007).
[29] Transportation Security Administration screeners and supervisory
screeners were not excluded from this analysis because they could not
be identified in VETS's database.
[30] Although we found the open date field to be sufficiently reliable
for our purposes, as we were using the correct closed dates from the
case files for our calculations, we used the correct open dates from
case files to be as accurate as possible.
[31] Butterbaugh v. Department of Justice, 336 F.3d. 1332 (Fed. Cir.
2003) holds that federal agencies had improperly charged reserve
component members military leave for nonworkdays.
[32] Prior to the demonstration project, claims were not being referred
to OSC from VETS for sometimes up to 2 years because of VETS referral
process outlined in GAO's draft Report. Moreover, during the
demonstration project, GAO found that "DOL has not been consistently
notifying claimants concerning the right to have their claims referred
to OSC for further investigation or to bring their claims directly to
the Merit System Protection Board if DOL did not resolve their claims."
p. 18.
[33] During the VBIA demonstration project, VETS's investigative
authority over federal sector USERRA claims was restricted to claims
filed by servicemember whose social security number ends in an odd-
numbered digit and claims that did not allege a prohibited personnel
practice.
[34] GAO points out the fact that the Unit's chief reviews all claims
when they first come into OSC and is responsible for "over-sight" of
all claims. This is an important point because this assures consistency
in how OSC analyzes and resolves all federal sector USERRA claims. As
GAO points out, "VETS" has no internal process to routinely review
investigators' determinations before claimants are notified of them .
there is no requirement that a supervisor review investigator's
determinations before notifying the claimant of the determination." p.
16. Moreover, these claims are spread out all over the country, and
even if a supervisor reviewed the claims, it would merely 1 of the 7
VETS `Senior Investigator' Supervisor, a non-lawyer.
[35] GAO-07-907 Figure 1 "USERRA Claims Processing under the
Demonstration Project" does not endeavor to reflect the level of detail
as Chart A.
[36] See page 36 of the draft report.
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site.
To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon,
go to www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548:
