Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 110 Part 6.djvu/584

 110 STAT. 4406 CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONS—APR. 16, 1996 items missing through intentional wrongdoing, and a reasonable suspicion that the employee to be polygraphed was involved in the incident under investigation. Administering a polygraph test in circumstances where the missing property is merely unspecified, statistical shortages, without identification of a specific incident or activity that produced the missing property and a "reasonable suspicion that the employee was involved", would amount to little more than a fishing expedition and is prohibited by the EPPA as applied to covered employees and employing offices by the CAA. (c)(l)(i) The terms economic loss or injury to the employing office's operations include both direct and indirect economic loss or injury. (ii) Direct loss or injury includes losses or injuries resulting from theft, embezzlement, misappropriation, espionage or sabotage. These examples, cited in the EPPA, are intended to be illustrative and not exhaustive. Another specific incident which would constitute direct economic loss or injury is the misappropriation of confidential or trade secret information. (iii) Indirect loss or injury includes the use of an employing office's operations to commit a crime, such as check-kiting or money laundering. In such cases, the ongoing investigation must be limited to criminal activity that has already occurred, and to use of the employing office's operations (and not simply the use of the premises) for such activity. For example, the use of an employing office's vehicles, warehouses, computers or equipment to smuggle or facilitate the importing of illegal substances constitutes an indirect loss or injury to the employing office's business operations. Conversely, the mere fact that an illegal act occurs on the employing office's premises (such as a drug transaction that takes place in the employ- ing office's parking lot or rest room) does not constitute an indirect economic loss or injury to the employing office. (iv) Indirect loss or injury also includes theft or injury to property of another for which the employing office exercises fiduciary, managerial or security responsibility, or where the office has custody of the property (but not property of other offices to which the employees have access by virtue of the employment relationship). For example, if a maintenance employee of the manager of an apartment building steals jewelry from a tenant's apartment, the theft results in an indirect economic loss or injury to the employer because of the manager's management responsibility with respect to the tenant's apartment. A messenger on a delivery of confidential business reports for a client firm who steals the reports causes an indirect economic loss or injury to the messenger service because the messenger service is custodian of the client firm's reports, and therefore is responsible for their security. Similarly, the theft of property protected by a security service employer is considered an economic loss or injury to that employer. (v) A theft or injury to a client firm does not constitute an indirect loss or injury to an employing office unless that employing office has custody of, or management, or security responsibility for, the property of the client that was lost or stolen or injured. For example, a cleaning contractor has no responsibility for the money at a client bank. If money is stolen from the bank by one of the cleaning contractor's employees, the clesining contractor does not suffer sin indirect loss or injury.

�