Sen. Charles E. Grassley warned the Justice Department to show evidence it implemented changes after an inspector general revealed the FBI retaliated against whistleblowers by revoking security clearances.
Mr. Grassley, an Iowa Republican who co-founded the Senate Whistleblower Caucus, wrote in a letter to Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco that the DOJ needs to overhaul its treatment of employees who flag wrongdoing at the bureau.
“The Justice Department’s failure to follow the law only serves to create a chilling effect on employees reporting wrongdoing out of fear they will have their security clearances suspended and indefinitely put on leave without pay, with little recourse to appeal the decision,” he wrote in the Friday letter.
He cited the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General’s May 9 memorandum that detailed abuse of the security clearance process, which would sideline agents and financially ruin them. The memorandum also recommended changes to bring agencies into compliance with the law.
Mr. Grassley noted that the FBI was widely mentioned in the memo for failure to comply with federal law (50 U.S.C. § 334) and the Director of National Intelligence’s Security Executive Agent Directive 9, known as SEAD 9.
These statutes protect federal employees who allege their security clearance was suspended, revoked, or denied in retaliation for making legally protected whistleblower disclosures.
The senator called on Ms. Monaco to provide details of the efforts the Justice Department and its components have taken or plan to take to fully implement the recommendations and explain the department’s failure to update its internal policies to comply with SEAD 9.
The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment from The Washington Times.
Mr. Grassley also asked Ms. Monaco if the DOJ:
• Notified employees of their rights to appeal security clearance suspensions pending review for over a year to the DOJ OIG and to provide the notification transmitted to employees.
• Allowed employees with suspended security clearances pending review for over a year to appeal to the DOJ OIG?
• Developed and implemented alternatives to indefinite suspensions without pay for employees with a suspended security clearance.
The inspector general found that the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies stripped whistleblower agents of security clearances and pay without providing an opportunity to appeal the decision within a reasonable time frame.
The suspension policy for employees whose security clearances have been suspended, revoked or denied could leave them destitute and unable to return to their jobs or find alternative employment.
“This lack of appeal process is especially problematic at DOJ components that indefinitely suspend employees without pay for the duration of the security investigation and review process, which can sometimes last years,” Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz wrote in the report.
“In many cases, it is financially unrealistic for an employee suspended without pay who claims retaliation ‘to retain their government employment status while [the security clearance review] is pending,’ given the length of time a security clearance inquiry often takes,” he said. “As a practical matter, therefore, the ability of an employee who has been indefinitely suspended without pay to retain their employment status can be rendered meaningless when that suspension lasts for a substantial period of time.”
Congress for two years has investigated the FBI for retaliating against whistleblowers as lawmakers received a flood of protected disclosures about wrongdoing at the bureau.
In a series of exclusive reports, The Times detailed several cases of FBI whistleblowers who said bureau officials retaliated against them or punished them for political views by revoking security clearances, resulting in their suspension without pay.
Mr. Horowitz blamed the Justice Department for not providing an inspector general appeal process for employees whose security clearances are suspended for more than one year and who say an agency is retaliating against them.
Federal law requires government agencies to establish a security clearance review process that allows employees to retain their government employment status while the security clearance review is pending.
According to the inspector general’s review, the Justice Department policy also doesn’t say for how long an employee can be suspended indefinitely without pay while the component’s security review process is pending.
Mr. Horowitz said the Justice Department doesn’t consider “any practicable alternatives to indefinite suspension without pay during a security investigation for employees.”
The inspector general made four recommendations:
• Let employees file a retaliation claim with the inspector general’s office when a security clearance review or suspension lasts longer than one year.
• Ensure that employees are notified in writing of their right to file a retaliation claim with the inspector general’s office when a security clearance review or suspension lasts longer than one year.
• Ensure that employees whose security clearance has been suspended, revoked or denied and who have made retaliation claims have an opportunity to “retain their government employment status” during a security investigation.
• Implement a process to “make every effort to resolve suspension cases as expeditiously as circumstances permit.”The FBI has 106 employees who have had their clearances suspended for six months or longer in the past five years, according to the IG report.
Of those 106 employees, the average time between suspension and a decision to revoke or reinstate the clearance was 527 days.
“The FBI, like the department, does not have a process that allows employees whose security clearance has been suspended for more than one year to file a retaliation complaint,” according to the report.
In response to the report, the FBI said it would be challenging to identify practicable alternatives to indefinite suspensions without pay for employees with suspended security clearances.
• Kerry Picket can be reached at kpicket@washingtontimes.com.