Office of Inspector General

The Bureau Did Not Demonstrate Effective Property Control Over Field Device 7

OIG-2026-01 RECOMMENDATIONS OPEN. ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATES HAVE PASSED. CAP Rev. 12.4

Document type

Inspector General report

Issuing office

Office of Inspector General

Closure status

Recommendations open. Estimated completion dates have passed.

Public impact

Level 3, Administrative

Published

June 30, 2026

Why the review was initiated

The Office of Inspector General initiated this review after the Bureau reported zero property losses for the twenty-first consecutive reporting period and, in the same period, prepared a Report of Survey for an item recovered from an archaeological context.

Objective

To determine whether HAEB maintained effective control over field equipment issued for nonlocal historical duty, and whether the Bureau’s property loss statistics reflect the location of Bureau property.

Scope and methodology

We reviewed property records for the 2026 inventory period, Directive 6.3, the 2026 Report of Survey for Field Device 7, evidence record EV-0079-7, field report FR-0079-14, and CASE HAEB-0079-DEVICE7. We interviewed six offices.

Our sample was drawn on March 3, 2026, and consisted of 41 items. On re-verification the sample consisted of 40 items. We report the original sample size.

We did not attempt to establish the location of any item during the period under review. The Bureau states that the location is known.

Background

Field Device 7 is a standard Bureau handset issued to the Office of Field Support and carried by Senior Field Compliance Officer HAEB-7714 to an authorized date-of-duty in the Vesuvius District in the year 79. The officer returned at the conclusion of the assignment. The item was recovered 1,669 years later. It entered Bureau inventory in 2026 with a condition code of used.

The Bureau’s position, stated in CASE HAEB-0079-DEVICE7 and in the Report of Survey, is that the item remained in continuous government custody throughout, and that no loss occurred.

Findings

Finding 1. Accountability for the item could not be established

We asked six offices to identify the office accountable for Field Device 7.

No office identified itself.

Finding 2. Custody was reported as continuous for a period in which the item was not held

The Bureau records custody of Field Device 7 as continuous from August 24, 79 through the current inventory date. During 1,669 years of that period the item was beneath volcanic deposits. It was not inspected, was not counted in any inventory, and was not in a Bureau facility.

The Bureau’s position is that custody is a legal condition and does not require possession, and that government custody, once established, extends to every date on which the item exists.

Because loss is defined as an interruption in the chain of custody, and the chain of custody is recorded as unbroken at every date on which the item existed, the Bureau’s property loss statistics cannot record a loss.

We reviewed the statistics. They are accurate.

Finding 3. The correction program could not demonstrate a reduction in discrepancies

We reviewed 50 corrective actions closed under Directive 14.6 during the reporting period. In 37 of them, the only recorded discrepancy in the underlying event was created during the corrective action.

HAEB could not demonstrate that its correction program reduced discrepancies and in 74 percent of reviewed cases introduced the only known discrepancy.

All 50 corrective actions were certified as having no historical effect. The certifications and this finding are both correct under the definitions in use.

Evidence

1. EV-0079-7. Evidence record for Field Device 7. The record states a manufacture date later than the recovery date and an administrative age expressed as a negative number.
2. FR-0079-14. Field report of the assigned officer. The report records the item as retained and records a variance in the officer’s recollection on return. The variance was not reconciled.
3. 1748 accession note. The note accompanying the item’s recovery names the recovering party as ████████████.
4. 2026 Report of Survey. Prepared to document that the item was in the location recorded for it.
5. Property inventory adjustment, 2026. Counted property increased by one item with no corresponding acquisition entry.

Impact

The Bureau reports zero property losses. That report is accurate under the definition in use.

The Bureau cannot state where an item of field equipment is located between issue and recovery, cannot identify an accountable custodian for the item reviewed, and cannot assess financial liability, because liability requires a loss.

In 74 percent of the corrective actions we reviewed, the Bureau’s own corrective work is the only recorded source of the discrepancy in the underlying event.

None of these conditions is reported as a deficiency in the Bureau’s performance dashboard.

Recommendations

1. We recommend that the Directorate document a standard definition of “introduced.”
2. We recommend that the Office of Anachronism Control designate one accountable property custodian for items recorded as continuously held.
3. We recommend that property accountability be added to mandatory annual training.

Management response

Management concurs in principle with all three recommendations.

Management does not concur with the use of the term “introduced” in Finding 3 and notes that the term has not been defined.

Recommendation 1 has been assigned to the Directorate of Retroactive Compliance with an estimated completion date of September 30, 2024. Recommendations 2 and 3 have been referred to the annual training cycle.

Management notes that no property was lost during the period under review.

OIG comment

Recommendation 1 remains open. The estimated completion date precedes the recommendation by two years.

Management’s response to Finding 3 relies on the definition that Recommendation 1 asks it to write.

Closure status

Recommendations 1 through 3 open. Findings 1 and 2 unresolved. Finding 3 is disputed as to terminology and is not disputed as to the figure.

This report will appear in the semiannual report to the Congress, which the Office of the Administrator prepares on behalf of the Office of Inspector General.

The Bureau’s property loss statistics remain accurate.

R. Morrow Inspector General