January 9, 2008 MEMORANDUM TO:  Ronnie A. Carter, Deputy Director Washington, D.C. FROM:   *********, Special Agent Senior Operations Officer San Francisco Field Division SUBJECT:   Grievance 1.                  This is a presentation under the Bureau's administrative grievance procedure. 2.                  The matter that aggrieves me occurred on January 7, 2008, and is described in detail as follows: The specific matter I am grieving is the failure of Internal Affairs to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into the willful and intentional destruction of my issued badges and the subsequent attempt to cover this up by the management staff within the San Francisco field division. I am additionally grieving the unprofessional and insufficient investigation of the internal affairs investigator involved in this matter and the fact that the official findings were approved by the managers responsible for the oversight of the Internal Affairs division. This matter is not part of my ongoing EEOC complaint. In January of 2006 as a result of a series of actions initiated by the San Francisco field management staff, I filed an EEOC complaint based on age, disability, violation of the rehabilitation act and retaliation. Throughout the course of these actions my complaint has been amended multiple times and these matters are currently being litigated. As a result of the EEOC process and judicial review process, a significant willful act of destruction of government property was uncovered and willful disregard and violation of ATF policies was identified. On October 30, 2006 ATF attempted to terminate my employment as a Special Agent. As a result of this action, I properly turned over all required accountable ATF property to my RAC in the presence of witnesses and completed the proper transfer of custody documents. This included my pocket credentials, and two badges. Sometime between October 30, 2006 and April 29, 2007, (the official date of my reinstatement), my badges were intentionally defaced to a point that they could no longer be displayed as a professional law enforcement identification. In the process of attempting to regain my ATF identification to resume my duties over the subsequent weeks, it was revealed that my SAC, ASAC and RAC had been aware of this fact for quite some time, and admitted to this in sworn testimony. It was later revealed that attempts to conceal this fact from me were taken by my ASAC after conferring with my RAC and SAC. In fact, this flagrant and blatant act of disrespect to the symbol of our chosen profession and disregard for tax payer property never would have been reported had it not been for the integrity of protective programs and due diligence by me. When I was not contacted to be interviewed by IA and it was reported to me that the RAC involved was overheard stating to the ASAC that IA was going to make this go away I became concerned. I reported all of this to Director Chase and SAC Sanchez with a basic representation of the facts. I believe it is obvious that protocols, investigative mandates and or precedents when conducting ethics investigations were completely ignored and/or disregarded. The only explanation for the less than professional investigation is that all of the allegations were directed at management. I am including what I believe to be evidence of a marginalized investigation consistent with existing allegations already being reviewed by the Office of the Inspector General and Office of Special Counsel related to IA investigations involving management.

1. The first official report to internal affairs by ANY member of ATF management was on June 6, 2006. Over 3 months after the damage to sensitive government property was identified to/by the RAC, ASAC and SAC. This was made only after the attempt to conceal the damaged badges was exposed during depositions related to EEOC discrimination and retaliation against SA Cefalu.

1. SA Milanowski states that in early 2006 SA Cefalu "applied for" a medical disability. I

NEVER applied for a medical disability. I was placed on a total TEMPORARY disability until further medical intervention (surgery) could be explored.

1. The second sentence of the 2^nd paragraph of the IA report ignores that I was seeking temporary light duty to return to duty. This sentence also omits the fact that I provided the reports of 4 separate government doctors stating additional surgery could facilitate my return to duty.

1. SA Milanowski states "in October 2006 SA Cefalu reconsidered and accepted the non-agent position". I did not accept the position until November 2006 after facing termination.

1. SA Milanowski  neglects to illustrate that the badges were not just placed on ASAC Gleysteens desk. They were removed from the RACs safe, transported with other property I turned in at the same time and personally delivered to the field division 50 miles away. The badges had been physically removed from their protective cases/carriers making it virtually impossible to not notice this extensive damage. No probative questions were asked or at least reported as to how the badges were removed and by whom. No discussion of how the RAC was able to recall specifically delivering such items as my computer, vest etc but draws a blank regarding the damaged badges. This was the RACs position only after having a conference ATF counsel the day prior to being confronted under oath. Historically sworn affidavits are requested from witnesses and those exposed to interview as the subject of IA investigations. I have not and will not invoke attorney client privilege related to any internal affairs investigation. All of the managers involved did so during the questioning regarding the destruction of my badges.

1. SA Milanowski states that ASAC Gleysteen sent the damaged badges to HQ and requested new ones. This is a total distortion of the FACTS, (see Porciello deposition, not included in the internal affairs report). The badges were sent to Ms. Porciello w/o explanation or request for action or ANY official documentation. Only after Ms. Porciello initiated telephone contact did ASAC Gleysteen or the SFFD offer any information. When the question was asked by Porciello "did the agent damaged his own badges"? Mr. Gleysteen stated it would appear so. This even though both badges were turned over in the presence of several eye witnesses and the property documents had been witnessed by a disinterested Special agent. This agent has yet to be interviewed.

1. The badges were removed from their holders (pocket commission and belt holder) prior to being placed in the sealed pink envelope. It would be virtually impossible to NOT notice the damage. Ms. Porciellos representation that she became suspicious after repeated calls from ASAC Gleysteen and his request that Ms. Porciello conceal the intentional damage from SA Cefalu has been completely omitted from the IA report. Counsels office has reviewed this report and is intimately aware of the omissions in this report

1. Not ONE sworn statement was taken from any witness identified in this case.

1. The failure to report and the concealment of the damage was not questioned at any point in the investigation.

1. SAC Martin, ASAC Gleysteen, SA Jim Bauer, SA OCDETF coordinator Paul Smith or Robyn Cefalu were never interviewed telephonically or otherwise related to these allegations. SA Cefalu was never interviewed even though ASAC Gleysteens representations in his report to IA are not consistent with his testimony under sworn deposition. ASAC Gleysteen states numerous times he never even asked the RAC or anyone else what happened to the badges. He began representing immediately that SA Cefalu had damaged them. Ultimately under direct examination he states repeatedly he has no idea what happened to the badges but then a month later reports the incident to IA ending his representation with a statement to the effect "since we can't prove the employee did it". This is deceiving and misleading and SA Milanowski could not have reviewed ASAC Gleysteen, SAC Martin or RAC Downs deposition without observing these discrepancies.  SA Milanowski only addresses HOW the badges were damaged and never addresses who and why it wasn't reported. The violation of Federal law, DOJ or ATF policy does not rest upon the determination of how the badges were damaged. It is irrelevant. Yet the badges were sent to our national laboratory for examination w/o any comparative information. It was generally agreed upon that the badges were badly damaged intentionally. No significant purpose was served by the expense and man hours wasted by sending the badges for examination other than to give the appearance of thoroughness.

1. The only representation relied upon in the IA investigations final conclusion is the one provided by the accused themselves. In ASAC Gleysteens email, he attempts to justify his violation of policy and Federal law by inferring that SA Cefalu had ongoing and significant misconduct and disciplinary issues. If SA Milanowski did in fact review the depositions of SAC Martin, ASAC Gleysteen and RAC Downs or reviewed any other documents included in this report, he failed to clarify the following:

The proposed suspension was rescinded. The unqualified and untrained personal opinions of those managers named in Cefalus EEOC complaint are the only suggestion on record supporting ANY anger management "issues", and were not represented until after the filing of the EEOC complaint. That the unsupported disciplinary transfer to Sacramento was challenged and reversed. The injury, treatment and SFFD's knowledge of my job related injury had been ongoing for over 1 ½ years. This includes knowledge of my upcoming surgery which was clearly misrepresented in ASAC Gleysteens email in the IA report. SA Cefalu did NOT quickly request any leave. SA Cefalu DID report to Sacramento as ordered. RAC Downs was advised well in advance and any reference suggesting that SA Cefalu made the decision to conduct surgery rather than the doctor is a lie. The "appropriate division personnel" to whom my badges were delivered were never identified. The IA report contained No discussion or reference to the fact that Mr. Gleysteen attempted to solicit protective programs employee Ms. Porciello to deceive SA Cefalu as to the status of his badges. This occurred numerous times. Mr. Gleysteen infers in the final paragraph in his email report to internal affairs that the Bureau was unable to conclusively prove that SA Cefalu damaged the badges; Chief Counsel recommended reporting the damage. Mr. Gleysteen stated in his deposition that he had discussed the badges with RAC Downs. There was no explanation requested or offered regarding the failure to report such obvious destruction to sensitive property. SA Cefalu was previously threatened with suspension based on anonymous reports of name calling, yet ATF didn't view the intentional damage to his U S DOJ badges as significant enough to investigate and discipline him for? No interview has been conducted or sworn statement requested of SA Cefalu. SA Cefalu has never been asked to submit to a polygraph. I will voluntarily take the first polygraph if the managers involved will submit to subsequent ones. This is a fairly commonly applied investigative tool used on a regular basis in integrity investigations, yet there has been no mention of it in this investigation. The factual representation concluded in SA Milanowskis report is completely inaccurate. 3.         The personal relief I seek is: That a complete thorough and transparent investigation be conducted into the entire circumstances relating to the willful destruction of my assigned badges. That the record be corrected to reflect the facts of these allegations. That those deemed to have acted unethically and illegally be disciplined in accordance with Bureau standards and consistent with the application of the rules to all ATF employees regardless of their management position. That any suggestion or representation that I in any way had any complicity in the destruction of my own badges be removed from all documents in ATF possession. That Upon completion of the investigation I be given a letter of clearance clearly stating that I followed all procedures and was found to be clear of any allegations related to the willful destruction of my badges. 4.                  A complaint will be submitted to the Office of the Inspector General once the reviewing official identified above has received this grievance. It will be directed to the Department of Justice Inspector General office. 5.                  .I will be acting as my own representative in this matter.

Original signed by *************, Special Agent

Attachments:  Copy of Internal Affairs file