Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs 


Enforcement's Worksite Enforcement Strategy 


OIG-10-22 December 2009 
 

Office of Inspector General 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Washington, DC 20528 

December 3, 2009 

MEMORANDUM FOR: John T. Morton 

 Assistant Secretary 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

FROM: Richard L. Skinner 

 Inspector General 

SUBJECT: Letter Report: Release of the U.S. Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

OIG-10-22 

At the request of U.S. Representative Harold (Hal) Rogers, Ranking Member of the 

Subcommittee on Homeland Security, Committee on Appropriations, we initiated a 

review into the potential unauthorized release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement’s (ICE) Worksite Enforcement Strategy guidelines. 

We reviewed the events surrounding the release of the Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

guidelines to the New York Times. The April 30, 2009, article described very specific 

aspects of the strategy, which created confusion as to whether “law enforcement 

sensitive” information was released to the public. Later that day, the copy of the strategy 

provided to Congress was marked as law enforcement sensitive. We determined the 

release had deviated from previously established Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS) and ICE practices; however, no law enforcement sensitive information was 

released. This event appears to be isolated, and not a systemic issue within DHS or ICE. 

We are making two recommendations to clarify the sensitivity designation of the 

Worksite Enforcement Strategy, and to enhance the ICE’s designation removal processes. 

Should you have any questions, please call me, or your staff may contact 

Carlton I. Mann, Assistant Inspector General for Inspections, at (202) 254-4100. 
 

Background 

At the request of U.S. Representative Hal Rogers, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee 

on Homeland Security, Committee on Appropriations, we reviewed the release of the 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

guidelines. The request was in response to an April 30, 2009, article in the New York 

Times that described very specific aspects of the strategy. The public release occurred 

before the strategy was distributed within ICE or to Congress. However, the copy of the 

strategy guidelines provided to Congress later that day was marked as law enforcement 

sensitive (LES) information.1

 Because the copy of the strategy sent to Congress was 

designated LES even though the strategy had been released to the media without such 

designation, confusion was created as to whether LES information was released to the 

public. Our objectives were to (1) determine the process to disseminate the Worksite 

Enforcement Strategy guidelines, and (2) assess the events related to the potential 

unauthorized release of LES information, including ICE’s actions in addressing and 

handling the incident. 

ICE protects the security of the United States through its enforcement of customs and 

immigration laws and has developed a comprehensive worksite enforcement strategy that 

promotes national security, protects critical infrastructure and ensures fair labor 

standards. The worksite enforcement strategy encompasses activities intended to 

mitigate the risk of terrorist attacks posed by unauthorized workers employed in secure 

areas of our Nation’s critical infrastructure. Further, ICE’s worksite enforcement reduces 

the demand of illegal employment and protects employment opportunities for a lawful 

workforce by investigating employers involved in criminal activity or the exploitation of 

workers. 

In January 2009, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a 

series of action directives to assess departmental effectiveness and improve current 

programs and operations. One of the action directives, dated January 30, 2009, included 

a number of emphasis areas related to immigration, border security, employment 

verification, and enforcement. On February 25, 2009, shortly after the directives were 

released, the Secretary testified before the U.S. House of Representative’s Committee on 

Homeland Security that the day before ICE conducted a worksite enforcement action 

without her knowledge. This worksite enforcement action involved the arrest of 28 

illegal immigrant workers at the Yamato Engine Specialists facility in Bellingham, 

Washington. The Secretary further testified that she requested that ICE provide answers 

to questions she asked about the predicate for this enforcement action. Following the 

Secretary’s testimony and issuance of action directives, the department was to focus on 

setting mission priorities, including immigration enforcement, as well as ensuring that 

1

 The term For Official Use Only is used by the Department of Homeland Security to denote sensitive but 

unclassified information that is not regulated by statute or regulation. ICE further delineates within the For 

Official Use Only designation a law enforcement–related category known as LES. 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

1 
worksite enforcement actions focused appropriately on employers. Those events served 

as a catalyst for developing ICE’s new enforcement strategy. 

Results of Review 

Efforts to Develop the Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

In March 2009, the department instructed ICE to create a strategy that emphasized its 

renewed focus on worksite enforcement, targeting employers for criminal prosecution. 

This strategy was to serve as general guidance for ICE agents and direct investigative 

efforts toward those employers who knowingly engaged in employing illegal workers. 

Further, the strategy would clarify that ICE is to use all available civil and administrative 

tools, including fines and debarment, to penalize and deter the employment of illegal 

workers. 

As instructed, ICE’s Office of Investigations, with the assistance of ICE’s Office of the 

Assistant Secretary, collaborated to develop the strategy. By late March 2009, ICE 

forwarded its initial draft to DHS. During the initial development stages, ICE designated 

the draft Worksite Enforcement Strategy guidelines as LES, and the draft copy reportedly 

retained this designation until days before its release. 

Within DHS, personnel from the Offices of the Secretary, General Counsel, and Policy 

worked to finalize the strategy’s content and direction. Although DHS maintained 

ultimate responsibility for the strategy, DHS provided ICE’s Office of Investigations and 

Office of the Assistant Secretary some opportunities for comments. However, we were 

told that several DHS officials limited ICE’s involvement toward the end of drafting in an 

attempt to reduce the potential risk of the strategy becoming public prior to its official 

release. As the department was finalizing the strategy, DHS and ICE officials made 

general statements highlighting the forthcoming strategy and the department’s renewed 

efforts to focus on worksite enforcement operations. However, none of these statements 

committed to providing the strategy prior to its official release. 

Release of the Strategy and Removal of the Law Enforcement Sensitive Information 

Designation Caused Confusion 

As part of the release, DHS officials intended to unveil the department’s Worksite 

Enforcement Strategy guidelines in a manner to generate positive public relations for 

worksite enforcement and highlight DHS’ refocus on worksite enforcement priorities. 

DHS officials determined that the best vehicle for the release was to conduct an exclusive 

news interview with the New York Times. DHS intended for the news article release to 

coincide with ICE’s internal release and its congressional notifications. 

ICE and DHS officials we interviewed provided conflicting statements about the 

strategy’s sensitivity designation and removal. Although ICE had previously designated 

the strategy as LES, some officials reported those involved with the development of the 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

2 
strategy reached a consensus that the document was not LES. However, DHS policy 

states that information designated as “For Official Use Only” retains its designation until 

the original designator, or a management official who has program management 

responsibility over the designator or the information, determines otherwise. Officials 

involved in the creation of the strategy could not verify when or why the LES designation 

was removed from the document. Although it is unclear who removed the LES 

designation during drafting, the final strategy signed on the evening of April 29, 2009, 

did not contain an LES designation. 

After the final strategy was signed on April 29, 2009, DHS proceeded with its 

notification process to the news media, ICE employees, and Congress. On 

April 29, 2009, the department’s Office of Legislative Affairs verbally notified 

congressional staff and those committees with an interest in worksite enforcement 

activities of the program’s new strategy. Although congressional staff requested a copy 

of the strategy during those verbal notifications, a senior management official directed 

the Office of Legislative Affairs not to grant these requests to avert the potential risk of 

the document’s early release. 

On April 30, 2009, at 8:01 a.m., ICE’s Office of Investigations transmitted the strategy, 

without an LES designation, to its field offices. Subsequent to that transmission, ICE’s 

Office of Investigations conducted a teleconference with the Special-Agents-In-Charge to 

announce and discuss the new strategy. As planned, the news article also appeared in the 

New York Times, which included a statement that the newspaper received a copy of the 

new strategy. Although DHS officials held several discussions with the New York Times’ 

reporter prior to the release, neither DHS nor ICE officials were certain whether the 

actual strategy document or just press highlights were provided to the reporter. 

On April 30, 2009, after its release, DHS asked ICE whether the entire strategy document 

could be released to Congress. Although not required, ICE employees routinely seek 

counsel from ICE’s Office of the Principal Legal Advisor before releasing information to 

entities outside of ICE. Therefore, ICE officials immediately forwarded the strategy to 

its Office of the Principal Legal Advisor for an LES review determination to ensure the 

protection and safeguarding of sensitive information. It is unclear why the document 

required an LES review at this point, when it had already been released to the media 

without the LES designation. 

To provide Congress with a timely response, and under some pressure by DHS, ICE 

officials did not wait for the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor’s review and instead 

marked the strategy as LES with an abundance of caution, without any additional 

language to indicate that the LES designation was provisional. As a result, the strategy 

copy forwarded to Congress on April 30, 2009, was marked “Law Enforcement Sensitive 

– Unauthorized Disclosure Prohibited.” Because the copy of the strategy sent to 

Congress was designated LES even though the strategy had been released to the media 

without such designation, confusion was created as to whether LES information was 

released to the public. However, later that afternoon, ICE’s Office of Principal Legal 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

3 
Advisor responded that the strategy was releasable because it did not describe with 

specificity the tools or methodologies employed by ICE in conducting worksite 

enforcement activities. Even so, during our fieldwork, neither ICE nor DHS officials had 

removed the LES designation or reissued the strategy without any designation markings. 

Designation Removal Authorities and Determinations Need Further Enhancement 

Given DHS’ authority over components and its involvement in policy creation, such as 

the Worksite Enforcement Strategy, the department could clarify sensitive but 

unclassified designation removal authorities and processes, as well as release procedures. 

The use of subject matter experts and component program officials to conduct sensitivity 

reviews prior to official internal, congressional, or media releases would enhance 

coordination and communication efforts between DHS and its components, as well as 

avoid potential future disclosures that are perceived to be unauthorized. 

Although the need for better internal coordination and communication within the 

department led to confusion over the Worksite Enforcement Strategy’s release and 

sensitivity designation, this event appears to be isolated and is not a systemic issue within 

DHS or ICE. Nevertheless, ICE should take additional steps to enhance its safeguarding 

of law enforcement sensitive information to avoid potential future disclosures. We urge 

ICE to incorporate additional measures into policies related to its safeguarding of law 

enforcement sensitive information to clarify ultimate designation removal authorities, as 

well as procedures and processes for designation removal determinations, including 

superseding designation determinations. 

Recommendations 

We recommend that the Assistant Secretary of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 

in coordination with the Under Secretary for Management: 

Recommendation #1: Revise policies related to the safeguarding of ICE’s law 

enforcement sensitive information to clarify designation removal authorities, as well 

as procedures and processes for designation removal determinations, including 

superseding designation determinations. 

We recommend that the Assistant Secretary of U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement: 

Recommendation #2: Obtain a final sensitivity review of the Worksite 

Enforcement Strategy and, if appropriate, reissue the strategy without the 'For 

Official Use Only, Law Enforcement Sensitive' designation. 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

4 
Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

We received written comments to our report from ICE. A summary of ICE’s written 

response to the report’s recommendations and our analysis of the response follows each 

recommendation. A copy of ICE’s response, in its entirety, is included as Appendix B. 

ICE Response: ICE concurred with Recommendation 1. 

OIG Analysis: We consider Recommendation 1 resolved and open. This 

recommendation will remain open pending our receipt of ICE’s revised law enforcement 

sensitive information policy that clarifies designation removal authorities, as well as 

procedures and processes for designation removal determinations, including superseding 

designation determinations. 

ICE Response: ICE concurred with Recommendation 2. 

OIG Analysis: We consider Recommendation 2 resolved and open. This 

recommendation will remain open pending documentation of a final sensitivity review of 

the Worksite Enforcement Strategy, and if appropriate, documentation of the strategy’s 

reissuance without the ‘For Official Use Only, Law Enforcement Sensitive’ designation. 

Established Congressional Notification Practices Were Not Followed 

Although ICE’s Worksite Enforcement program does not have a specific congressional 

notification requirement, DHS and ICE have established practices for advance 

notification to Congress. However, DHS’ decision to provide the Worksite Enforcement 

Strategy as an exclusive New York Times interview, and to withhold its notification of the 

strategy to ICE employees and Congress until the morning of the article’s release, 

deviated from previously established practices. 

Both DHS and ICE recognized the importance of prompt response and notification to 

Congress, and special emphasis is placed on ensuring that congressional requests for 

information are fulfilled. Further, DHS and ICE attempt to notify relevant congressional 

members and committees prior to substantive news media events. To the extent possible, 

an ICE official said they attempt to provide 24 hours advance notice, although sometimes 

notifications coincide with media releases. 

DHS and ICE Are Working on Improving Practices 

As a result of the confusion surrounding the release of the Worksite Enforcement 

Strategy, several DHS officials said that they understand the importance of coordination 

and notification practices, as well as the need to adhere to and improve upon past 

practices. The same officials recognized the importance of following established 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

5 
practices to ensure proper coordination of congressional notifications and news media 

releases. 

Since the release of the Worksite Enforcement Strategy, both DHS’ Office of Legislative 

Affairs and ICE’s Office of Congressional Relations have implemented improved 

practices. For congressional notifications, both offices created notifications lists of 

committees and members cross-referenced with the specific areas of interest. Further, the 

Office of Legislative Affairs said that it is working on a manual to clarify roles, 

responsibilities, and processes for both DHS and all of its components. Both offices 

report improved coordination and communication, which will improve service to the 

department, Congress, and the public. 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

6 
Appendix A 

Purpose, Scope, and Methodology 

We conducted this review in response to a request from U.S. 

Representative Hal Rogers, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on 

Homeland Security, Committee on Appropriations. Our objectives were 

to (1) determine the process to disseminate the Worksite Enforcement 

Strategy guidelines, and (2) assess the events related to the potential 

unauthorized release of law enforcement sensitive (LES) information, 

including ICE’s actions in addressing and handling the incident. 

We conducted our fieldwork from June to August 2009. We conducted 

interviews with ICE’s Offices of the Assistant Secretary, Congressional 

Relations, Investigations, and Principal Legal Advisor. At DHS, we 

interviewed staff from the Offices of Legislative Affairs, General Counsel, 

Public Affairs, and Policy. We reviewed DHS and ICE policies, 

procedures, and documentation related to safeguarding sensitive but 

unclassified information, public affairs, and legislative and congressional 

affairs. 

We conducted this review under the authority of the Inspector General Act 

of 1978, as amended, and according to the Quality Standards for 

Inspections issued by the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency. 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

7 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Letter Report 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

8 
Appendix C 

Major Contributors to This Report 

Carlton I. Mann, Assistant Inspector General for Inspections, Department of 

Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General 

Anne M. Ford, Inspector and Team Leader, Department of Homeland 

Security, Office of Inspector General, Office of Inspections 

Alexis Lavi, Inspector, Department of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector 

General, Office of Inspections 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

9 
Appendix D 

Letter Report Distribution 

Department of Homeland Security 

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff for Operations 

Chief of Staff for Policy 

Deputy Chiefs of Staff 

General Counsel 

Under Secretary, Management 

Executive Secretariat 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Public Affairs 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs 

Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office 

ICE Audit Liaison 

Office of Management and Budget 

Chief, Homeland Security Branch 

DHS OIG Budget Examiner 

Congress 

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees, as 

appropriate 

Release of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Worksite Enforcement Strategy 

10 
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COPIES 

To obtain additional copies of this report, please call the Office of Inspector General (OIG) at (202) 254-4100, 

fax your request to (202) 254-4305, or visit the OIG web site at www.dhs.gov/oig. 

OIG HOTLINE 

To report alleged fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement, or any other kind of criminal or noncriminal 

misconduct relative to department programs or operations: 

• Call our Hotline at 1-800-323-8603; 

• Fax the complaint directly to us at (202) 254-4292; 

• Email us at DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov; or 

• Write to us at: 

DHS Office of Inspector General/MAIL STOP 2600, 

Attention: Office of Investigations - Hotline, 

245 Murray Drive, SW, Building 410, 

Washington, DC 20528. 

The OIG seeks to protect the identity of each writer and caller.