meiburg, mr. mica would like to know that for the record, and to have you answer back, how many employees of the epa get bonuses >> we will supply that. >> we would appreciate that. we want to make sure we have dates certain so i will expect the names and titles in two weeks. can't be that many. one last thing, mr. sullivan, you have aware of the federal vacancy reform act? >> in general terms. not specificity. >> are you aware of anyone with the same plausible conflict that has been made aware of today in this committee with mr. meiburg? >> no, i am generally aware of the issue involving mr. meiburg but it is not based on the council's opinion. we have not investigated that issue. >> can we have to names from the people you consulted at the epa? >> our council's office, i know i was brief in the issue, but i will get back to the committee. >> i guess we have a gentlemen, mr. duncan, recognized for five minutes. okay. with that i would love the names within two weeks as well. the council talked to

meiburg -- am i saying that right? >> meiburg. >> meiburg. i'm pleased to hear that the new policy increases oversight over the placement of employees on administrative leave during misconduct investigation and adjudications. the new epa policy also requires managers to document alternatives to administrative leaves that were considered and why they were deemed not feasible. is that correct? >> yes, that's correct, congresswoman. >> so, would you tell me today and enlighten us, what alternatives should managers consider before placing an employee on administrative leave? >> managers should consider alternatives about what other kind of work the individual could be doing instead of their regular duties, if it turns out that the investigation will impede their ability to conduct their regular duties. so that would be the first place that you would look, to find work that they can do while the proceeding is occurring. >> do you expect this new policy to reduce the amount of time that employees are placed on administrative leave? is that the goal

meiburg? >> thank you, ranking member cummings. the short answer is it depends on the case and and the nature of the offense. if it was created out of ignorance or the employee didn't know what the rule was counseling may be appropriate. but each case has to be evaluated on its own merits on the facts of the case and law. >> mr. sullivan, my time is running out but ms. coleman asked you about where we go from here. clearly, what would you like to see done so that we can be effective and efficient and so that we can put you out of a job? >> mr. cummings -- >> not trying to get rid of you but you understand what i am saying. >> thank you, sir. i appreciate that. i am concerned when we have an investigation, and because i don't have enough special agents to investigate allegations, we eventually get to them but the old saying justice delayeded is justice denied. i am concerned i don't have enough to adequately and immediately address the allegations. that is why i have so many cases in the pipeli

meiburg, mr. mica would like to know for the record and have you answer back to committee how many of the employees at the epa get bonuses. >> we will supply that. >> we will appreciate that. i also want to make sure we have dates certain so the names and titles of the people that gave you the permission, i would expect that in two weeks. can't be very many. i would expect them in two weeks. >> we'll supply that. >> i'm a taskmaster, okay? one last thing. mr. sullivan, are you aware of the federal vacancies reform act? >> in general terms, sir, not in specificity. >> are you aware of anybody that had the same plausible conflict that's been made aware of today in this committee with mr. meiburg? >> no. i'm generally aware of the issue involving mr. meiburg, but we were told by the agency that it's not an issue based on their counsel's opinion. but we have not investigated that issue to my knowledge. >> did we also have the names from the people that you consulted at the epa that gave you the talkin

meiburg and mr. sullivan. misconduct gives all federal name.yees a bad ur goal is to work swiftly and thoroughly in cases like these. today we've heard about the new policies and information-sharing processes at the e.p.a. and the ig. sullivan you stated since he hearing in 2015 on misconduct, the agency's process has dramatically improved; is correct? that's ms. kelly, correct. > mr. meiburg, these have changed through policy and process and not through change.ive >> that's correct. your agency in have -- >> congresswoman, i do, in fact, that.e it is always the case that we always do better and we strive to do that. but we believe we have the tools agency to execute effective conduct and discipline. >> it's important to remember protections are there for a reason. in 2018 the board issued a that stated more than a century ago the government spoiled system in which employees could be reason including ofbership of any other party and more.ent constitutional due process law ctions rose from the that congress ena

meiburg: that is correct.e feel like in the last year we have made considerable progress moving four. i would agree with the ranking member that we can do better. could you explain briefly -- what has changed that have informed the rank-and-file and the supervisors. mr. meiburg: the interaction, well, in so many ways, all of a piece. we discussed with all our employs important first-line supervisors. again, as i, mentioned on the administrative leave, made sure that this cannot be used and the use of administrative leave has been curtailed. but the interaction involving the inspector general has been tremendously important because we refer cases to the inspector with whom we have evidence of misconduct and asking the inspector general to investigate them. it is helpful in that investigation to have the interaction we now do so that we can be clear that when we get information as quickly as possible we can move upon it. >> are you feeling that this interaction is helping to create a better environment? >> yes.

meiburg. >> mr. meiburg, how many were fired?i don't know ... >> were any ever fired for misconduct? >> yes. >> can you supply, do you think it's more than just my fingers and my toes? >> congressman, and i want to be clear about my answer. >> i tell you, almost nobody here got fired. the only one actually dismissed was a contractor. what's troubling is some of the offenses and i just heard that diehl had to pay $55,000 settlement. was that true , mister sullivan? you said you were involved in the settlement. >> that's correct. >> that's the panel file or ... >> that was the child molester. >> we are paying child molesters $35,000. nobody gets fired. here's one epa official in washington, gs level xv. gs level xv getting a minimum of 125,000.this guy sat around for years, the past several years and watched porno, getting $125,000 and actually, i think he's still on the job. must be a great job where you can sit around, collect $125,000 a year. it's a $95,000 a year, at least 90,000 a year at dc, a third of the employees epa. foun

meiburg, these have changed through policy and process and not through change.ive >> that's correct. your agency in have -- >> congresswoman, i do, in fact, that.e it is always the case that we always do better and we strive to do that. but we believe we have the tools agency to execute effective conduct and discipline. >> it's important to remember protections are there for a reason. in 2018 the board issued a that stated more than a century ago the government spoiled system in which employees could be reason including