National Security Complaint

Complaint for: FEMA Contracting Officer Helen Housand
To: Helen Housand
FEMA Contract Specialist
500 C Street S.W.—2^nd floor
Washington, DC,20472

By: Mr. Chad Beckwith Smith
Professional Association of FEMA Inspectors, 848 N.Rainbow Blvd. #2020, Las Vegas, Nevada89107-1103
www.femasbest.com ,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
This formal complaint is filed with the FEMA Contracting Officer Helen Housand requesting the and immediate suspension of the Parsons Brinkerhoff / Alltech FEMA housing Inspection contract for violations under Federal, State and local laws including current and ongoing breeches of National Security. We ask for this suspension to be enforced until such time that the contractor comes into compliance with all laws within the United States of America and its territories.

Dated this 8^th day of August, 2007

Complaint for: FEMA Contracting Officer Helen Housand
To: Helen Housand
FEMA Contract Specialist
500 C Street S.W.—2^nd floor
Washington, DC,20472

By: Mr. Chad Beckwith Smith
Professional Association of FEMA Inspectors, 848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #2020, Las Vegas, Nevada89107-1103
www.femasbest.com ,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
This formal complaint is filed with the FEMA Contracting Officer Helen Housand requesting and immediate suspension of the Parsons Brinkerhoff / Alltech FEMA housing Inspection contract for violations under Federal, State and local laws including current and ongoing breeches of National Security. We ask for this suspension to be enforced until such time that the contractor comes into compliance with all laws within the United States of America and its territories.

Dated this 8^th day of August, 2007

Mr. Chad Beckwith Smith



Complaint Introduction

     Parsons Brinkerhoff / Alltech under the FEMA Individual Assistance Housing Inspection Contract administered by FEMA is in violation of Federal, State and local laws including National Security.

    I claim that I am an at will employee and an interested party pursuant to 29 CFR 4.191

     I Chad Beckwith Smith represent members working under the contractors thru the Professional Association of FEMA Inspectors.

    In this complaint here and after references to the contractor shall mean Parsons Brinkerhoff / Alltech. References to inspectors shall mean persons retained by PB / Alltech to perform housing inspections and all persons with ancillary responsibility for administrating or completing the work under the housing inspection contract including all direct PB / Alltech employees located at the companies facilities in WinchesterVirginia.

    References to the act shall mean the contractors service act and other related federal laws that are applicable to the specific areas of the complaint.

    This complaint will focus primarily on the Contractor’s breeches of National Security.
     Evidence of this violation is attached and further evidence may be obtained by requesting the transcript for the hearing from Pennsylvania UI that is enclosed.

Authority

The authority of this complaint is pursuant to the following law.

THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974, 2004 EDITION
The Privacy Act provides in pertinent part that “[n]o agency shall disclose any record which is contained in a system of records… except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior consent of, the individual to whom the record pertains, unless disclosure of the record would be . . . (2) required under section 552 of this title [FOIA].” 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(2). “The Privacy Act was passed in 1974 to protect the privacy of individuals identified in government information systems by regulating the 1A long and virtually unbroken line of Supreme Court cases have repeatedly articulated these general principles.

EPA v. Mink,
410 U.S. 73 (1973); National Labor Relations Bd. v. Sears, Roebuck
& Co., 421 U.S. 132, 136 (1975); Department of the Air Force v.
Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 361 (1976); Federal Open Mkt. Comm. v. Federal
Reserve Sys., 443 U.S. 340 (1979); Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441
U.S. 281 (1979); United States v. Weber Aircraft Corp., 465 U.S.
792, 793-94 (1984); United States Dep’t of Justice v. Reporters
Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989); John Doe
Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146 (1990); United States Dep’t
of State v. Ray, 502 U.S. 164 (1991); United States Dep’t of
Justice v. Landano, 508 U.S. 165 (1993); United States Dep’t of
Def. v. Federal Labor Relations Auth., 510 U.S. 487 (1994); Bibles
v. OregonNaturalDesert Ass’n, 519 U.S. 355 (1997); Department of
the Interior and Bureau of Indian Affairs v. Klamath Water Users
Protective Ass’n, 532 U.S. 1 (2001); National Archives and Records
Admin. v. Favish, 541 U.S. 157 (2004).

collection, maintenance, use and dissemination of personal
information and prohibiting unnecessary and excessive exchange of
such information within the government and to outside individuals.”
Cochran v. United States, 770 F.2d 949, 954 (11th Cir. 1985).

The Privacy Act was enacted in large part in response to concern over the impact of computer data banks on individual privacy.
United States Dep’t of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 766 (1989).
CRIMINAL PENALTIES
"Any officer or employee of an agency, who by virtue of his employment or official position, has possession of, or access to, agency records which contain individually identifiable information the disclosure of which is prohibited by this section or by rules or regulations established thereunder, and who knowing that disclosure of the specific material is so prohibited, willfully discloses the material in any manner to any person or agency not entitled to receive it, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000." 5 U.S.C. § 552a(i)(1).
"Any officer or employee of any agency who willfully maintains a system of records without meeting the notice requirements of subsection (e)(4) of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000." 5 U.S.C. § 552a(i)(2).
"Any person who knowingly and willfully requests or obtains any record concerning an individual from an agency under false pretenses shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000." 5 U.S.C. § 552a(i)(3).
Comment:
These provisions are solely penal and create no private right of action. SeeJones v. Farm Credit Admin., No. 86-2243, slip op. at 3 (8th Cir. Apr. 13, 1987); Unt v. Aerospace Corp., 765 F.2d 1440, 1448 (9th Cir. 1985); McNeill v. IRS, No. 93-2204, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2372, at **9-10 (D.D.C. Feb. 7, 1995); Lapin v. Taylor, 475 F. Supp. 446, 448 (D. Haw. 1979); see alsoFLRA v. DOD, 977 F.2d 545, 549 n.6 (11th Cir. 1992) (dictum); Beckette v. USPS, No. 88-802, slip op. at 14 n.14 (E.D. Va. July 3, 1989); Kassel v. VA, 682 F. Supp. 646, 657 (D.N.H. 1988); Bernson v. ICC, 625 F. Supp. 10, 13 (D. Mass. 1984); cf.Thomas v. Reno, No. 97-1155, 1998 WL 33923, at *2 (10th Cir. Jan. 29, 1998) (finding that plaintiff's request for criminal sanctions did "not allege sufficient facts to raise the issue of whether there exists a private right of action to enforce the Privacy Act's provision for criminal penalties," and citing Unt and FLRA v. DOD).
There have been at least two criminal prosecutions for unlawful disclosure of Privacy Act-protected records. SeeUnited States v. Trabert, 978 F. Supp. 1368 (D. Colo. 1997) (defendant found not guilty; prosecution did not prove "beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant 'willfully disclosed' protected material"; evidence presented constituted, "at best, gross negligence" and thus was "insufficient for purposes of prosecution under § 552a(i)(1)"); United States v. Gonzales, No. 76-132 (M.D. La. Dec. 21, 1976) (guilty plea entered). See generallyIn re Mullins (Tamposi Fee Application), 84 F.3d 1439, 1441 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (case concerning application for reimbursement of attorney fees where Independent Counsel found that no prosecution was warranted under Privacy Act because there was no conclusive evidence of improper disclosure of information).
29 CFR 4.191 - Complaints and compliance assistance.
                     Section Number: 4.191
                     Section Name: Complaints and compliance assistance.
    (a) Any employer, employee, labor or trade organization, contracting
agency, or other interested person or organization may report to any
office of the Wage and Hour Division (or to any office of the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, in instances involving
the safety and health provisions), a violation, or apparent violation,
of the Act, or of any of the rules or regulations prescribed thereunder.
Such offices are also available to assist or provide information to
contractors or subcontractors desiring to insure that their practices
are in compliance with the Act. Information furnished is treated
confidentially. It is the policy of the Department of Labor to protect
the identity of its confidential sources and to prevent an unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy. Accordingly, the identity of an employee
who makes a confidential written or oral statement as a complaint or in
the course of an investigation, as well as portions of the statement
which would reveal his identity, will not be disclosed without the prior
consent of the employee. Disclosure of employee statements shall be
governed by the provisions of the ``Freedom of Information Act'' (5
U.S.C. 552, see 29 CFR part 70) and the ``Privacy Act of 1974'' (5
U.S.C. 552a).
    (b) A report of breach or violation relating solely to safety and
health requirements may be in writing and addressed to the Regional
Administrator of an Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Regional Office, U.S. Department of Labor, or to the Assistant Secretary
for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor,
Washington, DC20210.
    (c) Any other report of breach or violation may be in writing and
addressed to the Assistant Regional Administrator of a Wage and Hour
Division's regional office, U.S. Department of Labor, or to the
Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor,
Washington, DC20210.
    (d) In the event that an Assistant Regional Administrator for the
Wage and Hour Division, Employment Standards Administration, is notified
of a breach or violation which also involves safety and health
standards, the Regional Administrator of the Employment Standards
Administration shall notify the appropriate Regional Administrator of
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration who shall with respect
to the safety and health violation take action commensurate with his
responsibilities pertaining to safety and health standards.
    (e) Any report should contain the following:
    (1) The full name and address of the person or organization
reporting the breach or violations.
    (2) The full name and address of the person against whom the report
is made.
    (3) A clear and concise statement of the facts constituting the
alleged breach or violation of any of the provisions of the McNamara-
O'Hara Service Contract Act, or of any of the rules or regulations
prescribed thereunder.

Request

FEMA is hereby requested to immediately suspend the Parsons Brinkerhoff / Alltech FEMA housing Inspection contract for violations under Federal, State and local laws including current and ongoing breeches of National Security. We ask for this suspension to be enforced until such time that the contractor comes in to compliance with all laws within the United States of America.

We further request FEMA to enforce all Federal and State Labor Laws and all aspects of the Contract Service Act and State UI regulations by forcing the Contractor to employee all FEMA Inspectors that they now call Independent Contractors or withhold the contract from the Contractor for failing to do so.

We further request that FEMA immediately suspend the Contract with the Contractor by enacting the provisions of the CFR to stop all Federal Contracts presently held with any government body and prohibit them from bidding on any contracts for the time according to the act.

Further Request:
Should FEMA find violations of the Privacy act. It is hereby requested that the FEMA take action against the contractor pursuant to the provisions of.

·        29 CFR 4.188 - Ineligibility for further contracts when violations occur.
·        29 CFR 4.190 - Contract cancellation.

·       COMPLAINT #1

     National Security Violations

   In the recent appeal hearing (attached Appeal No. 07-09-A-7008) in the letter to the hearing Referee Mr. Brown from Parsons Brinckerhoff Attorney Cary M. Siegel clearly states “The claimant could retain his own employees to perform the work” . In the actual hearing under sworn testimony Parsons Brinckerhoff/ Alltech Project Manager Mr. Hugh Inglis reiterated the above statement and cited two examples where by any Inspector can give free access of Federal Computers indiscriminately to anyone they employ in the process of doing FEMA Inspections. Clearly this is a National Security Violation and in that it is presently ongoing all work presently being done by PB/Alltech inspectors should cease until the applicants are protected from the peril of fraud.

Parsons Brinkerhoff’s blatant violations to control the behavior of its PB/FEMA Inspectors in the past has resulted sometimes with Inspectors commiting criminal acts to the FEMA appliecants.

In the recent past according to the Ft. Lauderdale Sun Sentential, Parsons Brinkerhoff had Child molesters, rapists, forgers, Drug addicts, and a wide assortment of other criminals being paid by the contractor to enter the homes of Americans applicants for FEMA assistance. The contractor is still allowing this through its policy for Inspectors to hire anyone they want to in order do the work on the applications.

The many violations Parsons Brinckerhoff has committed is in an effort to circumvent the labor laws of our country for profiteering while parts of the United States is under a Presidential declared disaster. I ask also that a complete criminal investigation begin at once and that if criminal wrongdoing is found that you help prosecute the wrongdoers to the fullest extent of the law.

·       COMPLAINT #2

    Parsons Brinckerhoff has not given any Security Briefings to any of the Inspectors what so ever.
   Under sworn oath in the UI appeal hearing attached PB Project Manager Hugh Ingles has admitted knowledge of Inspectors violating National Security by having the Inspectors hire at will and unknown employees. He stated that       “ Inspectors hire employees to make the phone calls to the FEMA Applicants and to set up appointments” and “ to do the Inspectors billing “. This work that Hugh Ingles mentions gives free access to FEMA’s computers to virtually anyone without the required security clearances of which there is no avenue for an Inspector to obtain .

There is no avenue set up for a FEMA inspector to submit names of potential employees to FEMA for a security clearance and even if it there was a process the length of time (up to six weeks ) for the FBI finger printing and criminal record background check would
take longer than the length of time the average disasters bulk of work is done. Therefore what Hugh Ingles has stated is that he knowingly allows National Security laws to be broken and encourages it among the FEMA inspectors from his tone in his statement.

The Parsons Brinkerhoff’s Attorney Cary M. Siegel letter to Judge T. Brown attached here and part of the Hearings record states “ the Claimant could retain his own employees to perform the work” That statement is all inclusive and opens the doors once again for criminals to enter homes as employees by working indirectly for FEMA doing inspections. “The more things change the more things stay the same “   FEMA has worked very hard lately to change its image and security for the protection of all Americans applying for Federal Disaster aid. It has set up a security clearance process so that never again will we have criminals entering the homes of Americans and committing crimes. In the past these crimes have included rape attempted child molestation, looting, theft, fraud and more. In the sworn testimony from PB Manager Hugh Ingles and PB Attorney Siegel it is perfectly all right for the Inspector to bring anyone into these homes and to have full use of the computers.

From my understanding the Contractor requires all Inspectors to sign a Non-disclosure agreement (DHS Form 11000-6 (08-04)) under penalty of being fired. Part of the agreement states that (a Security Briefing was held and attended and that each person has a full knowledge of the agreement and that all questions were answered by the briefing officer). The agreement is signed and witness. Parsons Brinckerhoff insists that each inspector sign this affidavit knowing full well that they have never attended a security briefing as none were ever held by Parsons Brinckerhoff. If the Inspector refuses to sign it he is told he will never work for the company again.

Note:
              ID Theft Statistics
1. Over 10 million identity theft victims in the US.
2 .An identity is stolen every 4 seconds in the US.
3 The average cost to restore a stolen identity is $8,000.
4. Victims spend an average of 600 hours recovering from this crime
Conclusion
Every officer and official from the President on downward in the United States takes an oath to defend the United States of America from all enemies foreign and domestic.

“Osama bin Laden brought criminals to our Country for the god… Mohamed and Parsons Brinkerhoff brought criminals to our homes for the god… Profit and is still allowing this to happen today.”

Parsons Brinckerhoff continues to do this from its own sworn testimony and our Government has done noting too effectively to stop this. I ask you Helen Housand and all our elected Government officials to take action to protect our citizens and to suspend this contract with Parsons Brinckerhoff/ Alltech until the safety of our citizens is insured by not allowing PB/FEMA Inspectors to hire at will unknown employees and bring them into our homes as Parsons Brinkerhoff’s Lawyers and Officers have testified to in court under oath.

Thank you,
Chad Beckwith Smith
613 756-5001

Chandra Lewis, Branch Chief, Phone: 202-646-3118 Fax: 202-646-1765 chandra.lewis@dhs.gov
Helen Housand, Contract Specialist, Phone: 202-646-2658 Fax: 202-646-1765 helen.housand@dhs.gov
Contracting Office Address Department of Homeland Security,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Mitigation Branch,
500 C Street, S.W. PP -- 2nd Floor,
Washington, DC, 20472, UNITED STATES


FEMA's inspectors included criminals
The US Government Continues to Employ Criminals at Every Level
South Florida Sun-Sentinal | April 24, 2005
By Megan O'Matz
Government inspectors entrusted to enter disaster victims' homes and verify damage claims include criminals with records for embezzlement, drug dealing and robbery, a South Florida Sun-Sentinel investigation has found.
Federal officials have pointed to the inspectors as their primary defense against accusations of widespread fraud for their payout of more than $31 million in Hurricane Frances disaster aid in Miami-Dade -- a county spared hurricane-force winds.
During a January news conference, the Federal Emergency Management Agency insisted there was damage in Miami-DadeCounty.
"We know this for several reasons," said Dan Craig, FEMA's director of recovery programs. "Foremost among them is that FEMA's contract inspectors personally inspect and verify the claims. … Our contract inspectors are our first line of accountability."
That first line of accountability, the newspaper found, includes:
James A. DeWan, 46, of Texas. Known by the nickname "Mad Dog," he has a rap sheet that includes marijuana possession, three drunken-driving convictions and four citations for public intoxication. DeWan referred questions about his background to his employer.
Bill J. Neal, 60, of North Carolina, who served more than six years in prison in three states for criminal sexual conduct, attempted embezzlement of public money, conspiracy to commit wire fraud and cocaine possession. After last year's hurricanes, he trained new inspectors in Florida. Neal told the newspaper he had an impeccable work record.
Niels S. May, 39, of Tampa, who pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana, cocaine and drug paraphernalia in 1996. During a search of his home, police found two rifles, a shotgun and a .357 Magnum, court records show. "I'm not going to discuss my criminal history, and it's not much of one, to anybody," May told the Sun-Sentinel .
Darin P. Brebes, 36, a longtime inspector. Twice convicted of drunken driving in California, Brebes is wanted in Florida for failing to appear on a 1999 DUI in BrowardCounty. Brebes said he no longer drinks, adding that a DUI is nothing more than "a traffic violation."
The four are among thousands of independent contractors FEMA has relied on to evaluate damage in disaster areas and help determine whether applicants receive government aid.
It is not known how many in the whole work force might have criminal records because FEMA will not release the names of any of its inspectors or their supervisors, citing an "unwarranted invasion of their personal privacy." The Sun-Sentinel has filed a federal suit against FEMA and its umbrella agency, the Department of Homeland Security, seeking the identities of inspectors and aid recipients.
The newspaper found 30 inspectors or managers with criminal records out of 133 it was able to identify through confidential sources, news clips, FEMA applicants and the Internet. A case against another inspector, charged in Mississippi with the attempted rape of a Hurricane Ivan victim, is still pending. The count includes those with at least one misdemeanor offense, such as drunken driving, but excludes traffic citations or infractions.
Of the inspectors and supervisors identified as having records, 17 had criminal histories at the time they were hired. At least four lost their jobs for arrests after they were hired, including one scheduled for sentencing May 6 in California for child molestation, and two convicted of federal bribery charges for promising higher FEMA payments in exchange for money.
Seven inspectors have records for marijuana or cocaine possession, including one convicted in 2002 after being hired as an inspector in what the local sheriff described as one of the largest drug busts ever in his Louisiana county.
Another inspector is a house burglar who served three stints in prison in Ohio.
How it works
Almost all the inspectors worked for a subsidiary of Parsons Brinckerhoff of Virginia, which has a $150 million, five-year contract with FEMA to recruit, hire and dispatch inspectors to national disasters. Another Virginia company, PaRR Inspections, also has a FEMA contract under similar terms.
FEMA used inspectors' assessments of damage to homes and belongings last year to disburse more than $1 billion in aid to Floridians after the hurricanes. Parsons Brinckerhoff dispatched 2,000 inspectors after the storms, its "largest effort" ever, a company bulletin says.
Neither FEMA nor its inspection companies would say how many inspectors have criminal records.
The government requires the companies to "conduct a complete background check" of inspectors that includes local, state and national criminal searches, FEMA said in a statement to the newspaper. "Records are searched for both felony and misdemeanor charges."
Gregory L. Reynolds, 48, deputy project manager for Parsons Brinckerhoff, said the company has complied with the requirement. "Our background check is very thorough," he said.
Yet Reynolds said he was unaware of the criminal records uncovered by the newspaper.
Reynolds himself was convicted of DUI in Virginia in December. The court restricted his driver's license. "I can drive to work and back," he said.
FEMA and Parsons Brinckerhoff would not say what crimes -- either before or after hiring -- preclude an applicant from serving as an inspector or supervisor.
Parsons Brinckerhoff released a statement saying it uses a company to do FEMA-approved background screening and criminal checks on every inspector "to the extent we are able to obtain such information." Parsons Brinckerhoff "carefully considers the background information we receive in deciding whether an individual inspector is suitable for work."
A lawyer for PaRR referred questions to FEMA.
FEMA declined to comment on the criminal records the newspaper found or its confidence in inspectors. The agency would not answer questions about whether it was aware of the records or if not, what action, if any, would be taken.
Parsons Brinckerhoff fired Brebes, the inspector with the warrant for the Broward County DUI, after being contacted by the Sun-Sentinel last week, he said.
"I should have taken care of it a long time ago," Brebes told the newspaper. "I'm not a criminal. I'm not a bad person. I just had unfortunate drinking incidents."
Inspectors are paid about $45 per inspection and can make upward of $100,000 a year. Several told the newspaper that the job is demanding. Called to disasters nationwide, inspectors must leave their families for weeks at a time and work long hours. Some have been threatened and robbed on the job.
`Not all bad'
"We're not all bad because we have criminal histories," said inspector Keith Zaengle, 40, of HernandoCounty. "We're just the only ones they can get who will do this."
During a 1992 search of Zaengle's home, Tampa police found 4 pounds of marijuana, four scales, two shotguns, a rifle and $1,204 tucked in a cup, police records say. Zaengle told police he was "just dealing small amounts to friends and using the rest himself," the records say.
He received probation after pleading no contest to possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia in an "adjudication withheld" agreement that allowed him to avoid convictions. He pled guilty to another marijuana possession charge in 1999, records show. Zaengle said he has been an inspector for both PaRR and Parsons Brinckerhoff.
"I live a good life," he told the newspaper. "In my five or six years of doing this, I've done a lot of applicants a lot of good. I'm very proud of what I've done."
Inspector Jerry Koontz, a wedding photographer from Oroville, Calif., told the Sun-Sentinel that he disclosed his criminal record on his application to become a FEMA inspector. Koontz, now 60, was convicted of possession of cocaine for sale in 1984 and served six months in a work-furlough program in California. Parsons Brinckerhoff hired him and dispatched him last year to Florida, where he handled FEMA claims after Hurricane Ivan.
The company fired him, he said, after an aid applicant in Pensacola complained that he "became obsessed with her and began to follow her around," according to police records.
Parsons Brinckerhoff prohibits inspectors from socializing with applicants. Koontz told the newspaper he called the woman repeatedly, brought her gifts and took her family to dinner.
"I was wrong," he said. "All I was doing was trying to help the poor girl."
`Gallons of booze'
Parsons Brinckerhoff also fired inspector Terry Rucks, 53, of El Granada, Calif., last year, a day before an Escambia County Sheriff's deputy found him in a motor home with a stun gun, a pit bull and items damaged by Hurricane Ivan. No charges were filed against him.
Rucks told the Sun-Sentinel he and a hitchhiker he befriended had taken "a nice big toolbox with power tools," a life jacket, boat fenders and "gallons and gallons of booze."
"Nothing was stolen," he said. "Before we took anything, we said: `Are you guys throwing this away?'"
During questioning by the deputy, Rucks acknowledged that "he had an extensive criminal background," the sheriff's report states.
Rucks told the Sun-Sentinel that he was charged with manslaughter in a boating accident (the charge was later dropped), jailed twice for violating a restraining order filed by a former wife, and convicted of resisting arrest.
"Twenty-five years ago when I was a youngster, some cops gave me a hard time," he said. "I whipped up on them. I was charged with resisting arrest, which I did, and I'm proud of it."
After being fired by Parsons Brinckerhoff, Rucks said, PaRR contracted with him to do hurricane inspections in central and northeast Florida.
Treasurer stole funds
Long-time inspector Bill Neal said he was fired last year by Parsons Brinckerhoff after the company learned of his criminal record. Neal appealed, and the company rehired him as a trainer, a job that kept him out of applicants' homes, he told the newspaper.
Neal's criminal history dates to 1979, when, as the elected treasurer of Highland Park, Mich., he was arrested for stealing city funds, court records show. He served nine months in prison.
From 1987 to 1992, home for Neal was a state prison in Michigan, records show.
He pleaded guilty to criminal sexual conduct after a colleague at the National Monetary Corp. in Troy, Mich., told police he attacked her following an office party, court records state.
While in jail for that crime, federal prosecutors charged Neal with conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Working as a salesman in 1983, he helped clients interested in drilling for oil and gas in a program run by the federal Bureau of Land Management, court records state.
"The heart of the crime centers on a series of false representations made by Neal during his sales pitch over the telephone," the pre-sentencing memo says. He served two months in the summer of 1992 in a federal prison in Oregon.
A little more than a year later, Neal was working for the federal government. He performed damage inspections for FEMA in southern California after the January 1994 Northridge earthquake, he told the Wilmington (N.C.) Star-News in 1999.
By then, Neal told the paper, he had done more than 6,000 FEMA inspections.
Six months after that interview, he was back in prison in California for DUI and cocaine possession.
He was released from prison Feb. 27, 2001, and returned to work as a FEMA inspector. After successfully completing the terms of probation, the drug charge was dismissed.
"If you go back to the embezzlement, I did do that," he told the newspaper. But Neal said he was the victim of "prosecutorial misconduct" in the criminal sexual conduct case.
Most of the charges against him occurred in the 1980s in "a bad part of my life," Neal said. "My work record has been impeccable over the last 20 years."
A badge and picture
Another FEMA inspector, Mark S. Verheyden, now 45, was charged in 1994 with soliciting a $500 kickback from a federal disaster aid applicant near Houston. He pleaded guilty to bribery and served 26 months in federal prison in Marianna.
By then he already had a lengthy criminal record in Florida. During a 1983 arrest, an OrangeCounty sheriff's deputy had to tie Verheyden's feet with rope after he tried to kick out the windows of a patrol car, a police report says.
He received 10 years' probation in 1986 for kidnapping and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon after he forced a former girlfriend into his car, put a construction-type nail gun to her ribs, and ordered her to drive to an "unknown dirt road in an orange grove," court records state.
"After about three hours of begging to be released," records say, "she decided to lie to Verheyden and tell him that she loved him again and would move in with him again."
Verheyden, who could not be located for comment, also had convictions for battery, driving with a suspended license, resisting arrest without violence, leaving the scene of an accident, contempt of court and reckless driving.
Cynthia Leath of Crosby, Texas, had no reason to distrust Verheyden when FEMA sent him to her home in 1994 after she filed a flood damage claim. Verheyden worked for a private company that no longer has a contract with FEMA. Leath said she was unaware that he was not directly employed by the agency.
"He had a sign on his truck that said FEMA," she recalled. "He had a badge on his shirt, with his picture and big bold FEMA letters."
Once in her home, Verheyden asked Leath for sex and $500 in return for inflating her claim, she said. Leath reported Verheyden and helped authorities catch him on tape seeking a bribe.
Through the court case, Leath learned of Verheyden's criminal past.
"I couldn't believe it," she said. "He's a representative of the government here to help me."
Staff Researchers Barbara Hijek and William Lucey contributed to this story.
Megan O'Matz can be reached at momatz@sun-sentinel.com or 954-356-4518. Sally Kestin can be reached at skestin@sun-sentinel.com or 954-356-4510.

James A. DeWan
Age: 46
Residence: Texas
Background: Known by the nickname "Mad Dog," he has a rap sheet that includes marijuana possession, three drunken-driving convictions and four citations for public intoxication.
Comment: DeWan referred questions about his background to his employer.
CLOSER INSPECTION REVEALS A LONG TRAIL OF RAP SHEETS HERE ARE SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE USED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO EVALUATE DISASTER CLAIMS FOR FEMA
[Broward Metro Edition]
South Florida Sun - Sentinel - Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
Date:
Apr 24, 2005
Start Page:
15.A
Section:
NATIONAL
Text Word Count:
1681
Abstract (Document Summary)
Background: Parsons Brinckerhoff's operations manager, who has overseen more than 2,500 inspectors, pleaded guilty to drunken driving in 2001 in Fort Worth. An officer stopped Soucy after two motorists reported seeing him driving "all over the road" in a pickup, police reports say. One caller said he almost hit someone changing a tire on the roadside. Police found a marijuana cigarette in the truck's console and a bag of marijuana in a briefcase, the reports say. As part of the plea, prosecutors dropped a marijuana- possession charge, and he received two years' probation, court records show. In 1995, Soucy and his wife filed for bankruptcy. The Internal Revenue Service contended the couple owed $142,650 dating to 1983 and had placed several liens on their home, court records show. They emerged from bankruptcy in 2000. A Parsons Brinckerhoff bulletin says Soucy handed out work assignments to inspectors after Florida's hurricanes. The company's Web site says he was "instrumental in gaining an additional five-year contract for PB with [FEMA] in 2000."

OVERVIEW OF THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974, 2004 EDITION
CRIMINAL PENALTIES
"Any officer or employee of an agency, who by virtue of his employment or official position, has possession of, or access to, agency records which contain individually identifiable information the disclosure of which is prohibited by this section or by rules or regulations established hereunder, and who knowing that disclosure of the specific material is so prohibited, willfully discloses the material in any manner to any person or agency not entitled to receive it, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000." 5 U.S.C. § 552a(i)(1).
"Any officer or employee of any agency who willfully maintains a system of records without meeting the notice requirements of subsection (e)(4) of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000." 5 U.S.C. § 552a(i)(2).
"Any person who knowingly and willfully requests or obtains any record concerning an individual from an agency under false pretenses shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000." 5 U.S.C. § 552a(i)(3).
Comment:
These provisions are solely penal and create no private right of action. SeeJones v. Farm Credit Admin., No. 86-2243, slip op. at 3 (8th Cir. Apr. 13, 1987); Unt v. Aerospace Corp., 765 F.2d 1440, 1448 (9th Cir. 1985); McNeill v. IRS, No. 93-2204, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2372, at **9-10 (D.D.C. Feb. 7, 1995); Lapin v. Taylor, 475 F. Supp. 446, 448 (D. Haw. 1979); see alsoFLRA v. DOD, 977 F.2d 545, 549 n.6 (11th Cir. 1992) (dictum); Beckette v. USPS, No. 88-802, slip op. at 14 n.14 (E.D. Va. July 3, 1989); Kassel v. VA, 682 F. Supp. 646, 657 (D.N.H. 1988); Bernson v. ICC, 625 F. Supp. 10, 13 (D. Mass. 1984); cf.Thomas v. Reno, No. 97-1155, 1998 WL 33923, at *2 (10th Cir. Jan. 29, 1998) (finding that plaintiff's request for criminal sanctions did "not allege sufficient facts to raise the issue of whether there exists a private right of action to enforce the Privacy Act's provision for criminal penalties," and citing Unt and FLRA v. DOD).
There have been at least two criminal prosecutions for unlawful disclosure of Privacy Act-protected records. SeeUnited States v. Trabert, 978 F. Supp. 1368 (D. Colo. 1997) (defendant found not guilty; prosecution did not prove "beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant 'willfully disclosed' protected material"; evidence presented constituted, "at best, gross negligence" and thus was "insufficient for purposes of prosecution under § 552a(i)(1)"); United States v. Gonzales, No. 76-132 (M.D. La. Dec. 21, 1976) (guilty plea entered). See generallyIn re Mullins (Tamposi Fee Application), 84 F.3d 1439, 1441 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (case concerning application for reimbursement of attorney fees where Independent Counsel found that no prosecution was warranted under Privacy Act because there was no conclusive evidence of improper disclosure of information).
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act is a law passed by the United States Congress in 1986 intended to reduce "hacking" of computer systems. It was amended in 1994, 1996 and in 2001 by the USA PATRIOT Act.
The USA PATRIOT Act increased the scope and penalties of this act by:
raising the maximum penalty for violations to 10 years (from 5) for a first offense and 20 years (from 10) for a second offense;
ensuring that violators only need to intend to cause damage generally, not intend to cause damage or other specified harm over the $5,000 statutory damage threshold;
allowing aggregation of damages to different computers over a year to reach the $5,000 threshold;
enhancing punishment for violations involving any (not just $5,000) damage to a government computer involved in criminal justice or the military;
including damage to foreign computers involved in US interstate commerce;
including state law offenses as priors for sentencing; and
expanding the definition of loss to expressly include time spent investigating and responding this is why it is important for damage assessment and for restoration.
Criminal Offenses under The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Knowingly accessing a computer without authorization in order to obtain national security data
Intentionally accessing a computer without authorization to obtain
Information contained in a financial record of a financial institution, or contained in a file of a consumer reporting agency on a consumer.
Information from any department or agency of the United States
Information from any protected computer if the conduct involves an interstate or foreign communication
Intentionally accessing without authorization a government computer and affecting the use of the government's operation of the computer.
Knowingly accessing a computer with the intent to defraud and there by obtaining anything of value.
Knowingly causing the transmission of a program, information, code, or command that causes damage or intentionally accessing a computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage that results in:
Loss to one or more persons during any one-year period aggregating at least $5,000 in value.
The modification or impairment, or potential modification or impairment, of the medical examination, diagnosis, treatment, or care of one or more individuals.
Physical injury to any person.
A threat to public health or safety.
Damage affecting a government computer system
Knowingly and with the intent to defraud, trafficking in a password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization.
Decisions referring to this act
·         [1]Theofel v. Farey Jones, 2003 U.S. App. Lexis 17963, decided August 28, 2003 (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit). Using a civil subpoena which is “patently unlawful”, “bad faith” and “at least gross negligence” to gain access to stored email is a breach of this act and the
Stored Communications Act.
Thank You
Chad Beckwith Smith
Note to Helen Housand
Dear Helen,
I could not reach you by fax as you machine seems to be down or is to busy.
However I am summiting you this Complaint by email and will follow up with registered letter.
You will find the evidence for the complaint in the .jpg files in the letter from Mr. Cary Siegel and by requesting transcripts of the case.
    Did you do anything on the information I gave you in regard to Parsons Brinckerhoff over 200 lost or stolen Government Computers with all the sensitive data on it affecting National Security.
Please act on all of this now as it is a National Security Issue.
Sincerely,
Chad Beckwith Smith
Phone 613 756-5001
Email chad@femasbest.com
For more Information go to www.femasbest.com