United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

January 12, 2007 

The Honorable John Conyers, Jr. 

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary 

House of Representatives 

The Honorable Barney Frank 

House of Representatives 

Subject: U.S. Office of Special Counsel’s Procedures for Assigning 

Incoming Cases to and within Organizational Units 

Subject: U.S. Office of Special Counsel’s Procedures for Assigning 

Incoming Cases to and within Organizational Units 

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is an independent federal 

investigative and prosecutorial agency. Its primary mission is to safeguard 

the merit system in federal employment by protecting employees and 

applicants for federal employment from prohibited personnel practices, 

especially reprisal from whistleblowing. Individuals who believe that a 

prohibited personnel practice, such as nepotism or obstruction of the right 

to compete for employment, has been committed may file complaints with 

OSC. In addition, the agency operates a secure channel for federal 

whistleblowing disclosures of violations of law, rule, or regulation; gross 

mismanagement; gross waste of funds; abuse of authority; and substantial 

and specific dangers to public health or safety. OSC also provides advisory

opinions and enforces Hatch Act restrictions on political activities of 

individuals employed by the federal and District of Columbia governments 

as well as certain state and local government employees employed in 

connection with programs financed by federal funds. Additionally, the 

agency enforces the rights of federal employees and applicants for federal 

employment under the Uniformed Services Employment and 

Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) of 1994. A Special Counsel, 

appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, heads the 

agency; the current Special Counsel took office in January 2004. 

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is an independent federal 

investigative and prosecutorial agency. Its primary mission is to safeguard 

the merit system in federal employment by protecting employees and 

applicants for federal employment from prohibited personnel practices, 

especially reprisal from whistleblowing. Individuals who believe that a 

prohibited personnel practice, such as nepotism or obstruction of the right 

to compete for employment, has been committed may file complaints with 

OSC. In addition, the agency operates a secure channel for federal 

whistleblowing disclosures of violations of law, rule, or regulation; gross 

mismanagement; gross waste of funds; abuse of authority; and substantial 

and specific dangers to public health or safety. OSC also provides advisory

opinions and enforces Hatch Act restrictions on political activities of 

individuals employed by the federal and District of Columbia governments 

as well as certain state and local government employees employed in 

connection with programs financed by federal funds. Additionally, the 

agency enforces the rights of federal employees and applicants for federal 

employment under the Uniformed Services Employment and 

Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) of 1994. A Special Counsel, 

appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, heads the 

agency; the current Special Counsel took office in January 2004. 

OSC’s handling of cases has been publicized in the media and you raised

concerns about the assignment of two cases that involved alleged 

violations of the Hatch Act that OSC officials appeared to handle 

differently from other such cases. This report responds to your request to 

provide information on OSC’s policies and procedures for assigning 

incoming cases to and within its organizational units. To meet this 

objective, we reviewed OSC’s written policies and procedures for 

processing cases, which include procedures for assigning cases, and met 

OSC’s handling of cases has been publicized in the media and you raised

concerns about the assignment of two cases that involved alleged 

violations of the Hatch Act that OSC officials appeared to handle 

differently from other such cases. This report responds to your request to 

provide information on OSC’s policies and procedures for assigning 

incoming cases to and within its organizational units. To meet this 

objective, we reviewed OSC’s written policies and procedures for 

processing cases, which include procedures for assigning cases, and met 

Page 1 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
with OSC officials knowledgeable about these procedures. We describe 

the assignment procedures for the four major types of cases but, because 

of long-standing GAO precedent and policy, we do not highlight specific 

cases. We conducted our review in Washington, D.C., from December 2005 

to November 2006 in accordance with generally accepted government 

auditing standards. 

Under OSC’s procedures, the agency receives complaints, matters, 

disclosures, and requests for opinions through electronic media, by mail, 

or by fax. These generally come to the Document Control Branch before 

being sent to one of four units—Complaints Examining, Disclosure, Hatch 

Act, and USERRA—for further review and assignment. For complaints 

alleging prohibited personnel practices, the Document Control Branch 

typically screens the information to identify such information as type of 

complaint and complainant’s name and opens a case file before 

forwarding the case to the Complaints Examining Unit. For disclosure 

matters that are filed electronically, the Document Control Branch is to 

open a case file in OSC’s data tracking system but is to refer disclosure 

matters that are received via mail or fax to the Disclosure Unit before 

creating a case profile. For alleged violations of Hatch Act and requests for 

opinions on applicability of the act as well as USERRA complaints, OSC 

procedures call for the Document Control Branch to forward information 

directly to the respective unit chief who is responsible for reviewing the 

information, opening a case file, and assigning the case. The Special 

Counsel, as head of the agency, has authority and discretion to assign 

cases, but according to OSC, in most cases, the Special Counsel delegates

this authority to unit chiefs, who are career staff. Within individual units, 

specific procedures for assigning cases to individuals vary. Generally, the 

unit chief makes an initial determination, among other things, as to 

whether OSC has jurisdiction over the complaint or disclosure and assigns 

those cases that fall within OSC’s jurisdiction to a specific staff member or 

to a supporting division for review after considering such factors as the 

nature of the allegation and staff experience and workload. Cases that are 

outside of OSC’s jurisdiction are to be closed with a letter of declination to 

the complainant. 

Results in Brief 

Page 2 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
OSC derives its authority under the following federal statutes: the Civil 

Service Reform Act of 1978,1

 the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989,2

the Hatch Act,3

 the Office of Special Counsel Reauthorization Act of 1994,4

the USERRA Act of 1994,5

 and the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 

2004 (VBIA).6

 See enclosure I for a description of the applicable provisions 

of the statutes. 

Background 

OSC carries out its mission pursuant to these statutes by conducting 

investigations of alleged prohibited personnel practices, attempting 

informal resolution through discussion with the agency (or by offering 

mediation), and when necessary, taking corrective or disciplinary action,

or both, before the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).7

 OSC also 

handles whistleblower disclosures, investigates and prosecutes alleged 

Hatch Act violations and renders advisory opinions, and handles alleged 

USERRA violations including representing claimants before the MSPB. In 

fiscal year 2005, OSC reported receiving 1,771 prohibited personnel 

practice complaints, 485 whistleblower disclosures, 245 Hatch Act 

complaints, 30 USERRA referrals from the Department of Labor, and 111 

USERRA complaints under the VBIA demonstration project. 

OSC’s current organizational structure includes the Immediate Office of 

the Special Counsel, five operating units/division—the Complaints 

Examining Unit, Hatch Act Unit, Disclosure Unit, USERRA/Special 

Projects Unit, and the Investigation and Prosecution Division—and four 

supporting offices—Alternative Dispute Resolution Program, Legal 

Counsel and Policy Division, Management and Budget Division, and 

Training Office. OSC maintains its headquarters office in Washington, D.C.,

and has four field offices located in Dallas, Oakland (the San Francisco 

 1

Pub. L. No. 95-454. 

2

Pub. L. No. 101-12. 

3

The provisions commonly referred to as the Hatch Act are found under chapter 15 and 

subchapter III of chapter 73 of title 5. 

4

Pub. L. No. 103-424. 

5

Pub. L. No. 103-353. 

6

Pub. L. No. 108-454. 

7

MSPB is an independent, quasi-judicial agency in the executive branch that serves as the 

guardian of federal merit systems. 

Page 3 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
Bay Area Field Office), Detroit (the Midwest Field Office), and 

Washington, D.C. Figure 1 outlines OSC’s current organizational structure. 

Figure 1: OSC Organizational Chart

Complaints 

Examining Unit Hatch Act Unit Special 

Projects Unit

Congressional 

and Public 

Affairs

Legal Counsel 

and Policy 

Division

Management 

and Budget 

Division

Investigation 

and Prosecution 

Division

Disclosure Unit

Deputy

Special Counsel

Special

Counsel

Principal Special Assistant/

Senior Litigation Attorney

Training Office Washington 

Field Office

S.F. Bay Area 

Field Office

Midwest Field 

Office

Dallas Field 

Office

USERRA Unit Customer 

Service Unit

Outreach

Human Resources

Management 

Branch

Information 

Technology 

Branch

Budget and 

Procurement 

Branch

Document

Control

Branch

Source: OSC.

Senior 

Advisor

OSC tracks its workload across different case types through its 

computerized system, known as “OSC 2000.” This system is designed to 

capture and record data on all case types from the initial filing of the 

complaint, disclosure, or request for advisory opinion, until closure and 

archiving of the file. 

The current Special Counsel took office in January 2004 and announced a 

reorganization on January 6, 2005, which implemented recommendations 

Page 4 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
from internal and external evaluations related to the agency’s operations. 

The Special Counsel noted that the reorganization was intended to address 

the backlog of cases in all units and the cumbersome structure of three 

separate Investigative and Prosecution Divisions.8

 Under the 

reorganization, the Special Counsel directed the heads of most units to 

draft standard operating procedures, which according to OSC officials are 

expected to be incorporated into the agency’s formal directive system by 

the end of January 2007.

OSC units have procedures for processing cases, which includes assigning 

complaints alleging violations of laws or disclosures of wrongdoing for 

review or investigation or both. These procedures cover matters received 

through the mail, by fax, and by electronic media and outline steps for 

preliminary screening, creating a case file in OSC 2000, and initial review 

of cases. The Special Counsel, as head of the agency, has authority and 

discretion to assign cases, but according to OSC, in most cases, the Special 

Counsel delegates this authority to unit chiefs, who are career staff. In line 

with the reorganization as directed by the Special Counsel in January 2005, 

the Disclosure Unit, the Hatch Act Unit, and the Investigation and 

Prosecution Division developed new standard operating procedures that 

included steps on assigning cases. According to OSC officials, these new 

procedures are intended to provide guidance to staff on case processing 

procedures based on recommendations from internal and external 

evaluations of the agency’s organization and operations. 

OSC Units Have 

Procedures for 

Assigning Cases 

Prohibited Personnel Practice Cases: The Complaints Examining Unit 

(CEU) receives and conducts preliminary inquiries into allegations of 

prohibited personnel practices. Complainants alleging prohibited 

personnel practices are required to complete and submit either an 

electronic or paper copy of OSC Form 11, “Complaint of Possible 

Prohibited Personnel Practice or Other Prohibited Activity.” Procedures 

call for the Document Control Branch to receive electronic and paper 

filings of OSC Form 11 and to review the information to ensure that it is 

not a duplicate of a previously received complaint (i.e., electronic and 

paper copy of the same complaint). For new complaints, information is 

entered into OSC 2000 and assigned a case number, and the file containing

 8

For a discussion of OSC case backlog, see GAO, U.S. Office of Special Counsel: Strategy

for Reducing Persistent Backlog of Cases Should Be Provided to Congress, GAO-04-36 

(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 8, 2004). 

Page 5 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
the original documentation submitted by the complainant and an OSCgenerated case profile is forwarded to the Chief, CEU, for review and 

further processing. OSC procedures for handling duplicate complaints 

require the Document Control Branch to update OSC 2000 using the 

“additional information” code, prepare an updated profile, attach it to the 

complaint, and send the file to the CEU. 

The CEU is to screen prohibited personnel practice complaints to 

determine first that jurisdictional requirements are met. For example, 

among other requirements, the complaint must concern a personnel action 

involving a covered agency and must involve a covered position. The unit 

chief determines the priority of the case, generally based on the 

seriousness of the allegation, and assigns the case to a team leader for 

further review. As a result of this review, those cases that are determined 

to have merit are then referred to the Investigation and Prosecution 

Division, which investigates and analyzes such cases to determine whether 

they warrant seeking corrective and disciplinary action. (See enc. II for a

description of the priority system and enc. III on the procedures for 

assigning prohibited personnel practice complaints.) The unit chief 

indicated that the procedures for assigning cases have not changed 

substantially over the years. Moreover, OSC officials indicated that the

unit was already implementing new procedures prior to the 

reorganization; therefore, major changes in operating procedures were not 

necessary as a result of the January 2005 reorganization. 

Whistleblower Disclosure Cases: OSC’s Disclosure Unit (DU) receives 

whistleblower disclosure claims. As described by law, these consist of 

(1) violations of law, rule, or regulation; (2) gross mismanagement; 

(3) gross waste of funds; (4) an abuse of authority; or (5) a substantial and 

specific danger to public health or safety. OSC reviews the information 

within 15 days and determines whether there is a substantial likelihood 

that the information discloses one or more of the above categories of 

wrongdoing.9

 According to DU’s standard operating procedures, 

disclosures may be filed electronically, by mail, or by fax using either 

correspondence or an OSC Form 12, “Disclosure of Information.” 

Electronic versions of OSC Form 12 would go directly to the Document 

Control Branch where a case profile is to be prepared. Disclosures 

received by mail or by fax are to be referred by the Document Control 

 9

OSC defines substantial likelihood as the determination that the agency is more likely than 

not to find the allegation substantiated at the conclusion of its investigation. 

Page 6 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
Branch to the DU before any action is taken, such as creating a case 

profile in OSC 2000. 

Files received by the DU are reviewed by the unit chief to determine 

whether the allegations constitute disclosures under the applicable 

statutes and whether OSC has jurisdiction over the whistleblower, the 

agency, or both. The unit chief prepares a worksheet, including such case 

information as type of allegation, file number, and agency; this worksheet 

is updated as the case moves through the process. The unit chief also 

prepares a brief synopsis of the allegation and assigns a priority to the 

case; this information is entered into OSC 2000. The case priority depends

on the nature of the allegation. For example, cases that appear to meet the 

definition of substantial likelihood that a violation has occurred and 

disclose substantial and specific dangers to public health or safety would 

be identified as Priority 1A. Others appearing to meet the substantial 

likelihood definition but not involving allegations of public health or safety

dangers would be identified as Priority 1B. Both types of cases would be 

reviewed before other disclosure cases. After assigning a priority, the chief

assigns the case to an attorney within the DU for further review, to contact 

the whistleblower, and make a recommendation regarding the substantial

likelihood determination for the Special Counsel’s consideration. (See enc. 

II for a description of the priority system for disclosure cases.) 

Hatch Act Cases: The Hatch Act Unit handles requests for advisory 

opinions about applicability of the Hatch Act as well as complaints 

alleging violation of the act using OSC Form 13, “Complaint of Possible 

Prohibited Political Activity,” although the use of the OSC Form 13 is not 

required to file a written complaint. Under the Hatch Act Unit’s draft 

standard operating procedures, the unit chief assigns Hatch Act advisories 

to Hatch Act unit attorneys and law clerks. All Hatch Act complaints, 

according to these procedures, will be reviewed by the unit chief and 

he/she will assign a priority to cases before assigning them to unit 

attorneys and law clerks for a preliminary inquiry and recommendation. 

After the preliminary inquiry, several options are available, including 

closure, referral for investigation, or prosecution. If staffing within the 

Hatch Act Unit becomes an issue, the unit chief can refer complaints to the 

Investigation and Prosecution Division for preliminary inquiry, 

investigation, and prosecution. (See enc. II for a description of the priority 

system.) 

USERRA Cases: According to the USERRA Unit’s standard operating 

procedures, the unit is responsible for receiving, investigating, resolving, 

and prosecuting all matters that directly concern or relate to federal 

Page 7 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
employment issues affecting veterans and members of the Reserve and 

National Guard components of the Armed Forces. Under the directive 

implementing the January 2005 reorganization, the Special Counsel 

directed the head of the Special Projects Unit to establish a USERRA Unit, 

stating that OSC had in essence been assigned a special project under a 

demonstration project authorized by the VBIA where OSC would be 

handling a much larger number of cases under USERRA.10 Complainants 

may file OSC Form 14, “Complaint of Possible Violation of USERRA,” but

the form is not required to file a complaint. According to the unit’s 

procedures, the unit chief receives and reviews each claim and enters 

information into a case file in OSC 2000. The unit chief assigns the file to 

an investigator or attorney, depending on factors such as work load, the

type of allegation, and the complexity of the case. 

We provided a draft of this report to the Special Counsel for his review 

and comment. In responding, the Special Counsel noted and thanked GAO 

for taking the time to fully understand how OSC assigns and processes 

incoming cases within its organizational units. OSC’s written response is 

included in enclosure IV. In addition, OSC provided technical comments 

which we have incorporated where appropriate. 

We will send copies of this report to the Special Counsel, Office of Special 

Counsel; interested congressional committees; 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 

http://www.gao.gov. 

Agency Comments 

 10Under USERRA, OSC is not authorized to receive claims directly from federal sector 

claimants. Instead, claimants file with the Department of Labor’s Veterans’ Employment 

and Training Service (VETS), which attempts to resolve the claim. If VETS efforts do not 

resolve the claim, the individual can have the case referred to OSC for possible prosecution

before MSPB. However, under the VBIA demonstration project, OSC shares the 

responsibility with VETS to receive and resolve federal sector USERRA claims. The 

demonstration project began on February 8, 2005, and ends on September 30, 2007. 

Page 8 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
If you or your staff have questions about this report, please contact me on

(202) 512-9490 or by e-mail at stalcupg@gao.gov. Contact points for our 

Office of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the 

last page of this report. Key contributors to this report were Belva Martin, 

Assistant Director; Sharon Hogan; Karin Fangman; David Fox; and Greg 

Wilmoth. 

George H. Stalcup 

Director, Strategic Issues 

Enclosures 

Page 9 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
Enclosure I: Statutes That Govern Office of Enclosure I: Statutes That Govern Office of Special Special Counsel (OSC) Authority 

Counsel (OSC) Authority 

Statute Applicable provisions

Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 OSC was created under the Reauthorization Plan Number 2 of 1978. The Reform Act 

established OSC as a part of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) and introduced 

statutory protection for whistleblowers. 

Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 The act strengthens protection for whistleblowers and, thus, encourages whistleblowing. 

It also separated OSC from MSPB, establishing OSC as an independent federal 

investigative and prosecuting agency. 

Office of Special Counsel Reauthorization 

Act of 1994 

The act gives OSC 240 days from the time it receives a complaint involving a prohibited

personnel practice to determine whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that 

such a practice has been committed. If OSC is unable to process cases within this time, 

the agency is required to receive the complainant’s consent to keep the case open. The 

act also makes federal agencies explicitly responsible for informing their employees of 

available rights and remedies under the Whistleblower Protection Act and related laws

and directs that OSC play a consultant role in the process. 

Hatch Act The act limits the political activities of federal employees, employees of the District of 

Columbia government, and certain employees of state and local governments who work 

in connection with programs, such as public health, housing, urban renewal, and area

redevelopment programs, financed in whole or in part by federal loans or grants. The 

Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993 (Pub. L. No. 103-94) allow most employees of 

the federal government and District of Columbia government to take a more active part in 

political management or in political campaigns outside of the workplace, but their 

activities are still restricted. 

Uniformed Services Employment and 

Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 

The act prohibits discrimination against persons because of their service in the Armed 

Forces Reserve, the National Guard, or other uniformed services. The act also protects

the reemployment rights and benefits of persons who were absent due to military service

or training. OSC is not authorized to handle a Uniformed Services Employment and 

Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) claim before a claimant obtains assistance from 

Department of Labor’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service (VETS). Upon the 

claimant’s request, VETS refers the matter to OSC, which is authorized to initiate an 

action on behalf of a federal employee before the MSPB to enforce the act’s provisions. 

OSC may appeal an MSPB decision on behalf of the employee before the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Federal Circuit. 

Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 

2004 

Pursuant to a demonstration project established by the act, OSC has the authority to 

receive and investigate federal sector USERRA claims brought by persons whose social 

security numbers end in an odd-numbered digit. Such claims would not go through VETS. 

Under the demonstration project, OSC will also receive and investigate all federal sector 

USERRA claims containing a related prohibited personnel practice allegation over which 

OSC has jurisdiction regardless of the person’s social security number. OSC is

administering the demonstration project, which began on February 8, 2005, and ends on

September 30, 2007. 

Source: GAO. 

Page 10 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
Enclosure

Prohibited Pers

Whistleb

Cases 

 II: Priority Procedures for 

onnel Practice Cases, 

lower Disclosures, and Hatch Act 

Page 11 GAO-07-263R 

Enclosure II: Priority Procedures for Prohibited 

Personnel Practice Cases, Whistleblower 

Disclosures, and Hatch Act Cases 

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has a priority system for 

processing prohibited personnel practice cases, whistleblower 

disclosures, and Hatch Act complaints to allow more important cases to be

handled more expeditiously. 

In November 2001, OSC issued a policy directive that adopted a priority 

case processing system that classifies all its prohibited personnel practice 

cases into one of three categories. Under this approach, cases are 

investigated and analyzed for a determination of violation based on the 

category to which they have been assigned, while also taking into 

consideration the statutory time limits that apply to all cases. Category 1 

prohibited personnel practice cases consist of the most serious personnel 

actions, involving employees who are removed, suspended for more than 

14 days, geographically reassigned, or reduced in grade, or more than one 

of the above. Category 2 cases are less severe, including cases where 

suspensions are 14 days or fewer, performance appraisal ratings are below 

“fully successful,” and denials of within-pay grade increases are being

challenged. Category 3 cases involve the least serious adverse personnel 

actions, such as lower performance ratings that are still “fully successful,”

nongeographical reassignments or details, failure to promote, reprimands, 

and nonselections. For category 3 cases, investigators may use 

streamlined procedures that may require less time and staff resources to 

complete and may thus be investigated before some other cases. 

According to OSC officials, cases may be moved from one category to 

another as evidence is gathered supporting or refuting the allegation and a 

priority designation may be cancelled and the timing and level of 

resources to be dedicated to the case may be reevaluated on a case-bycase basis. 

Priority System for 

Prohibited Personnel 

Practice Cases 

In addition, within each of these categories, prohibited personnel practice 

cases may be designated “priority”—meaning they will receive the most 

prompt attention—based on the following factors: (1) meet OSC’s criteria 

for seeking a stay of the personnel action or already have a stay in effect;

(2) be a case in which OSC believes, on the basis of the evidence, that 

there is a substantial likelihood that the complaint is meritorious and in 

which OSC will seek corrective or disciplinary action; or (3) there is a 

public interest in prompt resolution of the case. Within each category, 

whistleblower reprisal complaints are given top priority. 

OSC Case Assignment Procedures
Enclosure II: Priority Procedures for 

Prohibited Personnel Practice Cases, 

Whistleblower Disclosures, and Hatch Act 

Cases 

We have reported that OSC has used a priority system for Disclosure Unit 

cases since 2002. These cases are classified into three major categories, 

including two subcategories: 

• Priority 1 cases are those that appear to be referrals to the head of the

agency. Within Priority 1, there are two subcategories: Priority 1A matters 

are disclosures of substantial and specific dangers to public health or 

safety that appear to be referrals and Priority 1B are disclosures of 

violations of the law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; a gross 

waste of funds; and an abuse of authority that appear to be referrals. Upon 

receipt of Priority 1A and 1B matters, the attorney assigned must 

immediately review the file and contact the whistleblower within 2 

business days of receipt. 

• Priority 2 cases are those that appear to be referrals to the Office of 

Inspector General. These cases include all disclosures of violations of law, 

rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; a gross waste of funds; and an 

abuse of authority that appear to be referrals to the Inspector General. 

Generally, OSC refers disclosures involving substantial and specific 

dangers to public health or safety directly to the head of the agency, and 

not the Inspector General. Therefore, there is no need for a separate 

subcategory for public health and safety allegations under this priority. 

Upon receipt of Priority 2 matters, the attorney assigned must immediately 

review the file and contact the whistleblower within 3 business days of 

receipt. 

• Priority 3 cases are those that appear to be closures and are reviewed last. 

Within this priority, there are also two subcategories, 3A and 3B. 

Disclosures that are classified as 3A are of a substantial and specific 

danger to public health or safety that appear to be closures. The 3B 

disclosures are disclosures of violations of a law, rule, or regulation; gross 

mismanagement; a gross waste of funds; and an abuse of authority that 

appear to be closures. Upon receipt of Priority 3A and 3B matters, the 

attorney assigned must immediately review the file and contact the 

whistleblower within 4 business days of receipt. 

Pursuant to the January 2005 draft standard operating procedures, the 

priority system for Hatch Act complaints primarily involves first 

processing those complaints that demonstrate that a serious and existing 

violation has occurred, which may require corrective or disciplinary action 

or is in the public’s interest to quickly resolve. Hatch Act complaints are 

designated as Category I, II, or III. According to OSC, significant 

congressional, executive branch, or media interest may affect the level at

Priority System for 

Whistleblower 

Disclosure Cases 

Priority System for 

Hatch Act Cases 

Page 12 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
Enclosure II: Priority Procedures for 

Prohibited Personnel Practice Cases, 

Whistleblower Disclosures, and Hatch Act 

Cases 

which a case is categorized. Moreover, within a category, cases receiving

such interest would be assigned greater priority. Category I complaints are 

designated high priority and involve the most serious violations, where the 

subject is presently engaged in the prohibited activity or where there is 

evidence that the violation was knowing and willful. Examples of Category 

I complaints include misuse of official authority/coercion cases, candidacy

cases, and solicitation cases. 

Category II complaints are of a midlevel priority and involve past serious 

violations, less serious ongoing violations, and less serious violations 

where there is evidence that the violation is knowing and willful. 

Examples of less serious violations include (1) posting or displaying 

partisan posters and photographs, (2) use of official title while engaged in

political activity, and (3) writing a speech for a candidate while on duty. 

Category III or low-level priority complaints consist of complaints 

involving no apparent Hatch Act prohibited activity, or past violations 

which do not appear to be knowing and willful. 

Page 13 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures
Enclosure

Prohibited Pers

 III: Procedures for Assigning a 

onnel Practice Complaint 

Page 14 GAO-07-263R 

Enclosure III: Procedures for Assigning a 

Prohibited Personnel Practice Complaint 

Note: 

CEU Complaints Examining Unit 

DCB Document Control Branch 

HR Human Resource 

IPD Investigation and Prosecution Division 

OSC Office of Special Counsel 

OSC 2000 OSC Data Tracking System 

PPP Prohibited Personnel Practice 

PPP Complaint 

Form

Rejected

(letter to complainant)

CEU Chief 

prioritizes and 

assigns complaint 

to team leader 

who assigns case 

to HR specialist 

or attorney to 

perform in-depth 

review

Case number assigned 

and profile created in 

OSC 2000

DCB CEU 

Chief

HR specialist or 

attorney makes 

merit/no merit 

determination and 

forwards to team 

leader for possible 

referral

Case goes to CEU 

Chief for approval 

or determines if 

case should go to 

committee for 

review

CEU Chief 

refers the 

complaint to 

IPD Chief

paper

electronic

Does

OSC have

juristiction or

has violation 

occurred?

Does 

CEU accept

complainant’s

case?

no

no

yes yes

Source: GAO.

CEU Chief 

codes the 

referral into 

OSC 2000

IPD Chief 

reviews case

OSC Case Assignment Procedures
Enclosure IV: Comments from the Office of 

Special Counsel 

Page 15 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures (450457) 
Page 16 GAO-07-263R OSC Case Assignment Procedures

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. However, 

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. 
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. 

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.” 

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 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

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 

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 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER