The head of NOAA on Friday announced an overhaul of the agency's asset forfeiture fund but made no mention of restitution or discipline of officials who were found to have been using the money as a slush fund.
Jane Lubchenco wrote to Todd Zinser, the inspector general who earlier this year uncovered not only the trouble with the trust fund but a law enforcement unit that was virtually out of control, especially in New England.
She spelled out the steps that she and her subordinates are taking to clean up the mess in the fund, which is so severe that the investigation couldn't even determine how much money is in it or what exactly defines it.
Pamela Lafreniere, a New Bedford attorney who represents the fishing industry, sharply criticized Lubchenco's letter.
For one thing, she said, there is no mention of returning some of the seized assets to the fishermen who were prosecuted by a vindictive, unsupervised law enforcement office, according to the inspector general's report.
There is no discussion about ending the practice of funding the law enforcement division (apart from salaries) with seized assets. And the wording suggests that NOAA will set a budget and then try to meet it with asset forfeitures, she said.
"They need to go to Congress for their funding," she said. "They should get an appropriation to do what they need to do, and answer to Congress."
Lafreniere noted that there is no mention of Dale Jones, the former head of law enforcement who was found to be shredding documents during the inspector general's investigation and later disappeared from his job. Despite the talk of transparency and building trust, Lafreniere said, no explanation has ever been made about Jones or anyone else in his office.
She also criticized NOAA for still not having a legal document spelling out what can and can't be done with the asset fund. The inquiry found that NOAA was using the money to buy cars for everyone, a luxury ($300,000) undercover boat, and trips to Europe for conferences.
"It's going to be Sept. 30 before you have a legal definition of the fund," Lafreniere said.
"If you have this fund and you don't even know how to legally use it, I think it shows you shouldn't have it."
The inspector general of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimated that $8 million remains in the fund, and his report suggests that upward of $40 million is unaccounted for.
"I think it's pretty clear that they are just not capable as an agency of having the fund. Congress should take it from them," Lafreniere said.
Read the complete story from The South Coast Today [subscription site]