Request for Relief From Liability for DEA Officers

Relief was requested for all accountable officers at a regional office of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) from the liability for the loss of $1,500. The loss occurred when 15 one hundred dollar bills out of 650 such bills in a "flash roll" made from Imprest Fund money were replaced by 15 counterfeit one hundred dollar bills. The money was used for investigations and was counted after being passed from one agent to another. Generally where the physical loss of funds which have passed through a series of hands occurs, the last person to give a receipt for the full amount before the loss was discovered would be judged liable for the loss. In this case, because of the subsititution of counterfeit for genuine bills, a count of the money before giving a receipt for it would not have revealed the shortage unless the counterfeits were recognized. The manner in which the counterfeit bills were distributed throughout the flash roll indicated that the person making the substitution had several minutes to do so. Thus, it was unlikely that the substitution could have taken place during any of the times when the bills were being used as a flash roll. An agency investigation supported the position that the substitution was made during one of the times the money was kept in a safe other than the cashier's, to which several unauthorized persons may have had access. Although the security of the safe in these circumstances was inadequate, it was in accordance with agency procedures for the agents to use it for temporary storage, particularly when the casiher was not on duty and the money could not be stored in her safe. The agents used the most secure facility available under the circumstances. Thus, while GAO was unable to determine who was accountable for the money when the loss occurred, the evidence was persuasive that all individuals who were accountable for the flash roll during the time when the substitution took place were free from the kind of negligence which would be viewed as the proximate cause of the loss. Accordingly, relief was granted as requested.