SfoEE?l rm.aspk

OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL

or: THE 

 

Hetline Complaint Form

Anyene with knewledge cf fraud, waste, abuse, miscenduct, er mismanagement invelving the US. Department ef the lnterier sheuld call er write the Cf?ce ef lnspecter
Seneral's Hetline {please cheese the methed ef eentact which best suits yeu):

- Telephene - CIG Hetline?s Tell Free Number: 
. Fax - Cemplete and submit the Cemplaint Ferm te:
{Attentiem Hetline Cperatiens)
. US Mail - Cemplete and submit the Cemplaint Ferm te:
Cf?ce ef lnspecter General
Department ef the lnterier
SS1 Elden Street, Suite SEED
Attentien: Intake Management Unit
Hemden, VA acne
. E-mail - Cemplete and submit the Cemplaint Ferm by pressing the submit butten belew:

?r?eu may aise repert fraudulent activities te the nearest regienal CIIS e?ices at the fellewing lecatiens:

. Eaatem Pegienal Cf?ce, Hemden, 1v?irginia {$133) 4ET-SE51
. Central Regienal Cf?ce, Lakeweed, Celerade ESE-SEES
. Western Regienal C?iee, Sacramente, Califemia STE-563E

Misconduct

Whe cemmitted the alleged {What is the titlel'pesitien held by the alleged wrengdeer? Please include names, addresses and telephene numbers ef
victims and witnesses. If previding infermatien cencerning centracter er grantee fraud, ptease previde the name ef the primary centracter er sub, type ef centract, eentraet er
grant numbers, the date ef the award and name ef agency ef?cial.)

What exactly did the individual{s) de that was wreng? {Please previde speci?c and relevant details eeneerning the alleged 

ELM ?eld ef?ces update their reseuree management plans every 2e te 25 years. The Carlsbad Field Cf?ce is in the precess ef updating their plan and this
effert began appresimately in 2010. Updating ef the reseuree management plan must fellew the Federal Land Pelicy and Management Act Sectien 2E2 ef
FLPMA eutlines hew land use plans shall be develeped. Up until the change efAdministratien in January 2?1i', the CFC fellewed FLPMA Sectien 2E2 and made land
use deeisiens after years ef werk with the public aleng with interdisciplinary team team) review and analysis. These deeisiens were near ready fer public review in
September and awaiting the ELM Washingten Cf?ce?s "green light" te publish the Draft Fteseurce Management Plan dechent and the CFC had arrived at the last
step befere publishing the deeisiens made after years ef review and analysis. Cnly addressing eutstanding and specific euestiens by the ELM Washingten Cffice staff
remained. The electien in Hevember SE15 breught in a new administratien and this led te a change ef land management deeisiens and this change in deeisiens did
net fellew the requirements ef FLPMA, in particular Sectien and Sectien Mereever, it is my belief that the ratienale fer making these change in land
management deeisiens were net decumented, making these changes arbitrary and capricieus. It is my understanding that these changes te land management deeisiens
were directed by tep appeintees at the ELM and the Department ef lnterier. Te be clear, ameunt and magnitude ef the land management decisien changes pest-
administratien change weuld net have eccurred in the CFC, by the ID Team, had the CFC net been instructed te make these changes by new administratien ef?cials, since
these deeisiens had already been mestly ?nalized after six years ef planning that fellewed FLPMA. The CFC interdisciplinary team was net censidering changes cf this
magnitude after September 2112115 and befere the new administratien came inte pewer at the ELM. it is my epinien that changes in land management deeisiens ef this
magnitude manifested in twe steps: 1. Tep ELM and DCI ef?cials directed the CFC te change the land management deeisiens {land use allecatiens and lease stipulatiens)
that fever the private secter, namely the all and gas industry, in 201?. 2. The CFC Interdisciplinary team selected the geegraphical lecatiens where restrictiens {land use
allecatiens and lease stipulatiens) were leesened. The ?rst step is net prescribed in FLPMA. Mereever, the ?rst step bypasses the decisien making precess prescribed in
Sectien 2E2 Had Step He. 1 net eccurred, the CFC weuld net have had justi?catien te preceed te Step He. 2. Cther changed deeisiens include remeving mere
restrictive and pretective allecatiens and lease s?pulatiens frem prepesed Areas ef Critical Envirenrnental Cencem Sectien 2E2 states, ?give prierity
te the designatien and pretectien ef areas ef critical envirenmental Even prier te the administratien change, the CFC had elected te net prieritiae ACECs that
"quali?ed? and carry them ferward, with a defined beundary cf the area, in the ?Preferred Alternative? identi?ed in the EMP. Eut in net carrying ferward the ACECs in the
Preferred Altemative, the CFC had applied pretective and mere restrictive allecatiens and eil and gas lease stipulatiens te these areas.

When did the eccur?? {Please previde dates and times,if pessible.)

After the new administratien e?icials came inte ef?ce. te present.

Where did the miscenductl'wrengdeing eccur'? {Please previde the bureau er ef?ee, city and state.)
Washingten D.C. ef?ce as they directed the CFC te make decisien changes.

Hew was the cemmitted'? falsifying decuments, etc.)

It is my belief this was verbally directed since having a paper trail directing the CFC te make EMP decisien changes weuld leave evidence ef FLPMA vielatiens. Hewever,
an investigatien inte email cerrespendence ef tep ELM and DCI ef?cials may glean written evidence.

yeu have ?rst hand knewledge cf the miscenduct?wrengdeing?
Yes, in part.

Where can we ebtain additienal infermatien eeneerning this decuments, etc.)

1f2