United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Inspector General (2441)
Washington DC 20460
EPA-350-K-01-001
May 2001
svEPA Office of Inspector General
Semiannual Report
to the Congress
October 1, 2000 through
March 31, 2001
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Inspector General (2441)
Washington DC 20460
E PA-350-K-01 -001
May 2001
Office of Inspector General
Semiannual Report
to the Congress
October 1, 2000 through
March 31, 2001
-------
EPA Inspector General
Vision Statement
We are agents of positive change striving for continuous improvement in our Agency's
management and program operations, and in our own offices.
Mission
The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, requires the Inspector General to:
(1) conduct and supervise audits and investigations relating to programs and operations
of the Agency; (2) provide leadership and coordination, and make recommendations
designed to (a) promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness, and (b) prevent and
detect fraud and abuse in Agency programs and operations; and (3) fully and currently
inform the Administrator and the Congress about problems and deficiencies identified by
the Office of Inspector General relating to the administration of Agency programs and
operations.
Strategic Plan Goals
1. Contribute to improved environmental quality and human health.
2. Improve EPA's management and program operations.
3. Produce timely, quality, and cost-effective products and services that
meet customer needs.
4. Enhance diversity, innovation, teamwork, and competencies.
Cover Photos: All Photos Taken at or Near Libby, Montana Superfund Sites
-------
Consistent with the vision of Congress and the Administration that
government become more results-oriented, the Office of Inspector
General (OIG) established a new organizational structure which became
effective January 2, 2001. This reorganization addresses the OIG's corporate
vision and values to promote environmental quality, human health, and good
government through problem prevention and cooperative solutions. It also
supports our efforts to be a more responsive, customer-oriented organization by
facilitating the expansion of OIG product lines and by fostering a workplace
which embraces diversity, innovation, and teamwork.
This organizational change is the result of an OIG journey towards
improved performance which began in 1998, and it places strong emphasis on
human capital by supporting the development of employee competencies in
leadership, management, and technical areas. A matrix management approach
to assignments will allow OIG employees to work on a wider variety of
assignments in different locations with different teams and supervisors. This
reorganization delayers management levels so that employees have fewer levels
of review and more direct access to senior OIG management.
In addition, the new organizational structure enables the OIG to more
effectively implement the concepts of the Government Performance and Results
Act by linking planning, budgeting, and accountability. It contributes to the
achievement of the goals in EPA's strategic plan through a centralized planning
process which focuses on targeted areas, includes full stakeholder involvement,
and integrates science, public interest, and program information.
Another benefit of the reorganization is improved communication with
EPA managers and staff. Communication is a critical component of all OIG
efforts, especially our commitment to work collaboratively with EPA to resolve
management challenges in the near future. These challenges represent systemic
weaknesses or vulnerabilities, reported annually to Congress, which can
undermine the success of EPA's management and program operations.
Our new structure provides a solid foundation for the OIG's efforts to
continuously improve its performance, and I am certain that it will greatly
enhance our ability to be agents of positive change. As a result, I believe that
we can be highly effective in assisting EPA and the new Administrator with
protecting human health and safeguarding the natural environment.
Nikki L. Tinsley
Inspector General
-------
Profile of Activities and Results
October 1, 2000 to March 31, 2001
Audit Operations
($ in millions)
I OIG-Managed Reviews
Other Reviews
(Reviews Performed by EPA. Independent Public Accountants.
(Reviews Performed by Another Federal Agency
and State Auditors)
or Single Audit Act Auditors)
Questioned Costs *
Questioned Costs *
- Total
$25.2
- Total
$2.4
- Federal
$23.9
- Federal
$2.4
Recommended Efficiencies *
Recommended Efficiencies *
- Federal
$0.2
- Federal
$0
Costs Disallowed to be Recovered
Costs Disallowed to be Recovered
- Federal
$15.1
- Federal
$3.2
Costs Disallowed as Cost Efficiency
Costs Disallowed as Cost Efficiency
- Federal
$0
- Federal
$0
Reports Issued - OIG-Managed Reviews
Reports Issued - Other Reviews
- EPA Reviews Performed by OIG
26
- EPA Reviews Performed by
- EPA Reviews Performed by
Another Federal Agency
133
Independent Public Accountants
0
- Single Audit Act Reviews
87
- EPA Reviews Performed by
Total
220
State Auditors
0
Total
26
Agency Recoveries -
Recoveries from Audit Resolutions
Reports Resolved
of Current and Prior Periods
(Agreement by Agency officials to take
(cash collections or offsets to
satisfactory corrective actions) ***
102
future payments) **
$2.2
Investigative
Operations
Fines and Recoveries
(including civil) **** $2.1 M
Investigations Opened 13
Investigations Closed 25
Indictments of Persons or Firms 14
Convictions of Persons or Firms 16
Administrative Actions Against
EPA Employees I Firms 14
Civil Filings/Settlements 1
* Questioned Costs and Recommended Efficiencies subject to change pending further review in audit resolution process.
Information on recoveries from audit resolution is provided from EPA Financial Management Division and is unaudited.
Reports Resolved are subject to change pending further review.
Total includes actions resulting from joint investigations.
-------
TableofContents
Goal 1: Contribute to Improved Environmental Quality and
Human Health 1
Goal 2: Improve EPA's Management and Program Operations 8
Goal 3: Produce Timely, Quality and Cost-Effective Products and Services
That Meet Customer Needs 19
Goal 4: Enhance Diversity, Innovation, Teamwork and Competencies .... 21
Audit Report Resolution and Summary of Investigative Results
Status Report on Perpetual Inventory of Reports in Resolution Process 26
Status of Management Decisions on Inspector General Reports 27
Inspector General Issued Reports With Questioned Costs 27
Inspector General Issued Reports With Recommendations that Funds Be
Put to Better Use 28
Summary of Investigative Results 29
Appendices
Appendix 1- Reports Issued 30
Appendix 2- Reports Issued Without Management Decisions (Available upon request)
The complete text of selected audits is available through the EPA OIG
internet home page, http: // www.epa.gov/oigearth
-------
Goal 1: Contribute to Improved Environmental Quality and Human Health
EPA Must Address
Barriers to Prevent
Future Human
Health Tragedies
The work of the OIG is designed to assist EPA in achieving its
environmental goals, thus contributing to environmental improvements.
The following represent some examples of the more significant efforts
under this OIG goal.
Although EPA attempted in the 1970s and 1980s to address contaminant asbestos
exposure like that in Libby, Montana, those attempts did not result in regulations or
other controls that might have protected the citizens of Libby.
In November 1999, the media ran a series of newspaper articles reporting that miners
and their families in the Libby area died or became ill from exposure to asbestos-
contaminated vermiculite ore mined there since the 1920s. Subsequently, the media
reported that EPA officials knew about the problem but did not take action.
We found that EPA only recently took specific action to address the asbestos
exposure at Libby. Currently, EPA is focusing on an aggressive Superfund cleanup
at that location, but has yet to identify and prevent potential asbestos contamination at
other mining sites and related facilities.
Various barriers prevented EPA from sufficiently addressing asbestos-contaminated
vermiculite. Authority for taking action was shared among EPA offices and other
Federal agencies. This fragmented authority and jurisdiction, when combined with
ineffective communication, made taking actions difficult. Limitations in science and
technology and health effects data also impeded EPA's efforts at determining the
degree of health risk at Libby. Furthermore, due to funding constraints and
competing priorities, EPA emphasized other areas, such as asbestos in schools, rather
than asbestos-contaminated vermiculite.
EPA has begun taking actions regarding Superfund cleanup at Libby. Also, EPA has
traced, evaluated, and planned to take action on at least 16 sites throughout the
country that received asbestos-contaminated vermiculite from Libby. We
recommended that EPA, in partnership with other Federal organizations and States,
assess asbestos or asbestos-contaminated ore, rock, and mineral processing sources
and facilities that may be similar although unrelated to Libby. Should the Libby-
related work and/or these assessments find concerns regarding human health and the
environment, we recommend that EPA determine short and long-term actions
necessary to resolve the problems. Some of these actions could include Superfund
removal, changes in the Toxic Substances Control Act or the Clean Air Act
regulations, or statutory changes. We issued the final report (2001-S-7) on
March 31, 2001. A response to the final report is due June 29, 2001.
PAGE 1 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Better Planning
Needed to Reduce
Region 7 Nonpoint
Source Pollution
Combined Sewer
Overflows in
Region 2
Addressed with
Varying Degrees
of Success
EPA had not converted its overall target to reduce nonpoint source pollution into
targets for each region's contribution to achieving the national goal. Furthermore,
Region 7 had not adopted a regional strategy with established targets for nonpoint
source pollution abatement in its four states.
The State of Missouri assessed its watersheds and developed a nonpoint source
management plan in line with EPA guidance. However, Missouri had not completed
comprehensive plans to restore all of its priority watersheds. As a result, Missouri
funded local projects on segments of impaired water rather than focus on restoring
priority watersheds. While the projects should reduce pollution, they did not have
measures on the amount of pollution reduction to be achieved.
We recommended the Acting Regional Administrator work with the Office of Water
to develop nonpoint source pollution reduction targets, to ensure Missouri develops
comprehensive plans to restore watersheds, and to establish measures of reduced
pollution. We issued the final report (2001-P-00003) on February 20, 2001.
Because Region 7 and the State of Missouri adequately addressed all report issues in
response to the draft report, no response to the final report is required.
Despite steady water quality improvement in EPA Region 2 over the past two
decades, Combined Sewer Overflows have continued to impair New York and New
Jersey water bodies, according to 1998 Water Quality Reports. Nonetheless, we
found that certain communities, including New York City, made significant efforts to
address Combined Sewer Overflows, resulting in varying degrees of success.
Combined Sewer Overflow represents the discharge of untreated waste, wastewater,
and stormwater into a water body when a combined sewer system exceeds capacity.
Neither New York nor New Jersey fully implemented EPA's 1994 Combined Sewer
Overflow Control Policy. New York renewed 64 percent (44 of 69) of its Combined
Sewer Overflow permits without change, thus failing to address new elements in the
1994 Policy. New Jersey reissued its general permits for all its permittees without
revising the general permit to include certain long-term control planning elements.
Barriers to effective Combined Sewer Overflow activities by permittees included:
(a) economic stresses, (b) inteijurisdictional disagreements, and (c) high costs.
Furthermore, both states have large permittees operating under administrative consent
orders and judicial court orders that predate the Policy.
Both New York City and Westchester County took active approaches to implement
Combined Sewer Overflow controls, spending a total of more than a billion dollars on
capital improvements and control technologies. Different approaches by New Jersey
permittees also met with varying levels of success.
We recommended that the Regional Administrator work with New York and New
Jersey to establish a plan with milestones to ensure timely updates and aggressive
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 2
-------
monitoring of Combined Sewer Overflow permits. We issued our final report (2001-
P-00001) on January 3, 2001. A response to the report was due April 3, 2001.
EPA Should
Improve
Monitoring of
Violators'
Compliance with
Enforcement
Instruments
EPA's annual enforcement accomplishment reports did not accurately represent the
actual environmental benefits resulting from enforcement activities. For example, the
fiscal 1999 report stated that enforcement actions resulted in the reduction of more
than 6.8 billion pounds of pollutants. This may have been either an understatement or
overstatement, since violators did not always comply with the enforcement
instruments and EPA did not have comprehensive data. Also, EPA's enforcement
performance measures were inadequate to determine the program's actual
accomplishments.
EPA regions often did not adequately monitor compliance with enforcement
instruments, nor take further enforcement actions against violators who did not
comply or did not comply timely. We could find no evidence of monitoring around
the due dates for compliance in more than 50 percent of the cases reviewed. We
found no evidence of compliance in 25 percent of the cases, and an additional
30 percent were late in complying or EPA did not know whether compliance was
timely. EPA did not take further enforcement actions in 85 percent of cases where
violators did not timely comply, or EPA did not know whether they did. In
87 percent of the cases where the files contained no evidence of compliance, EPA
issued the instruments for significant violations.
We recommended that EPA's Acting Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance: (1) establish a performance measure for ensuring that
facilities under a formal enforcement action return to compliance; (2) identify a more
accurate method for reporting actual, rather than estimated, accomplishments
resulting from EPA's enforcement activities; and (3) issue baseline guidance for
monitoring violators' efforts to comply with enforcement instruments and consider
further enforcement actions when violators fail to comply with instrument
requirements. We also recommended that all Regional Administrators adequately
monitor violators' actions, consider further enforcement actions when appropriate,
and determine the status of those cases where our review showed no evidence of
violator compliance.
We issued our final report (2001-P-00006) on March 29, 2001. In responding to our
draft report, EPA agreed that efforts to ensure the terms of compliance with judicial
instruments should be tracked as a performance measure. EPA also agreed to clarify
language on claimed benefits in its future reports. EPA has begun to take steps to
improve tracking and enforcing compliance with requirements in enforcement
instruments. However, EPA still needs to track both judicial and administrative
instruments as a performance measure. A response to the final report is due June 28,
2001.
PAGE 3 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Improvements
Needed to
Strengthen
Montana's RCRA
Enforcement
Program
Company Exposes
Workers to Health
Risks, Pleads
Montana's Department of Environmental Quality did not always appropriately
classify Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) violators or initiate timely
enforcement actions in accordance with its enforcement agreement with EPA
Region 8. Specifically, Montana did not:
Take timely initial enforcement actions to compel facilities to quickly return to
compliance.
Consider economic benefit or multi-day components in its penalty calculations.
Adequately document penalty decisions or a facility's full return to physical
compliance.
Consistently record penalty information into the RCRA Information System.
Also, EPA Region 8 staff did not adequately update the RCRA Information System.
Montana could have benefitted from more effective case monitoring, a more
collaborative internal team approach, and adequately documenting its RCRA
activities in the facility files.
We recommended that the EPA Regional Administrator require Montana to comply
with its new enforcement agreement, escalate recalcitrant facilities for formal
enforcement action, fully calculate and document penalties, and adequately document
violator classifications and a facility's full return to compliance. We also
recommended that Region 8 officials work with Montana staff to better prioritize
enforcement requests, monitor case progress, and implement cross-training and
information-sharing plans.
We issued our final report (2001-P-00004) on March 28, 2001. In response to the
draft report, Region 8 officials agreed with the recommendations and most of the
findings, but Montana did not. A response to the final report is due June 28, 2001.
On December 8, 2000, Construction Personnel, Inc. (CPI), also known as Service
Management, Inc., pleaded guilty to a criminal information filed on
November 8, 2000, in U.S. District Court, District of Colorado. CPI pleaded to
seven counts, including false claims, conspiracy, false statements, wire fraud, money
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 4
-------
Guilty to
Conspiracy and
Immigration
Violations
Southbay Utilities,
Inc., Sentenced for
Clean Water Act
Violations
laundering, aiding and abetting, and immigration violations of encouraging/inducing
unauthorized aliens.
On the same date, CPI also pleaded guilty to a five-count criminal information in the
Eastern District of Tennessee. Those charges included conspiracy, wire fraud, money
laundering, and felony and misdemeanor violations of encouraging and inducing
unauthorized aliens. The firm's president, Roy Weaver, and vice president, Ron
Goodwin, pleaded guilty to conspiracy, wire fraud, and a felony violation of
inducing aliens. Tina Voiles, a payroll clerk, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor
violation of inducing aliens. Also on that date, CPI pleaded guilty in the Middle
District of Louisiana to a criminal information charging conspiracy, wire fraud,
money laundering, and violations of immigration laws.
The defendants provided hourly laborers to various construction and demolition
contractors, including contractors who performed asbestos abatement work. The
majority of the workers were unauthorized aliens, not legally eligible to work in the
United States. The defendants knowingly hired these aliens and provided them, or
assisted them in obtaining, the documents necessary to work in asbestos abatement.
These documents included health certificates, social security cards or numbers, and
asbestos training certificates and licenses, many of which were false.
The fraudulent scheme undercut Federal and state laws designed to protect workers
and the public from health risks by requiring workers to be properly trained and
certified to remove, handle, and dispose of asbestos-containing material.
This investigation was conducted by the EPA OIG as part of the Tennessee
Environmental Crimes Strike Force.
In November 2000, Southbay Utilities, Inc., and its corporate president were
sentenced in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, to pay fines and
restitution totaling more than $1.7 million for violations of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, often called the Clean Water Act.
Southbay Utilities was ordered to pay fines and restitution totaling $1,295,400 to
various environmental protection funds and to the United States, while Paul L. Paver,
corporate president, was sentenced to pay fines and restitution totaling $455,025 to
the Middle District of Florida Environmental Resolution Trust Fund and the United
States.
More recently, on March 27, 2001, Eli Ray Bontrager, a former vice president of
Southbay Utilities, was indicted in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, for
one count of violating the Clean Water Act and four counts of witness tampering.
PAGE 5 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
North Carolina
Improves its
NPDES Permit
Enforcement
Program
Shortly after Southbay Utilities' wastewater treatment plant began operation in 1976,
its drain fields became saturated, making the plant unable to process the amount of
effluent discharged. To relieve the pressure on the drain fields, Southbay Utilities
installed underground bypass pipes without notifying government regulators. These
bypass pipes allowed 1 'A tons of nitrogen to pass directly into Dryman Bay without
adequate treatment.
Excess nitrogen can spawn algae blooms that deplete oxygen needed by fish and block
sunlight essential to the growth of plant life, a key source of food and shelter for
marine life. These actions undermined the EPA's efforts and investment of millions
of dollars to restore the watershed. The plant has since been closed.
This investigation was conducted by the EPA OIG, EPA Criminal Investigation
Division, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Revenue Service, and the
Florida Department of Law Enforcement, acting together as members of the Tampa
Bay Environmental Crimes Task Force.
As a result of a recent EPA OIG audit, North Carolina made improvements to its
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) enforcement program that
will improve protection of public health and the environment.
In September 2000, we reported (2000-P-00025) that EPA Region 4 needed to
strengthen its oversight of North Carolina's NPDES enforcement program. In
response, Region 4 developed a regional policy for oversight of minor facilities
covering all states in the Region. The Region also committed to taking enforcement
actions against significant noncompliers when the state and facility involved have not
resolved the violation within 30 days after the Region's notice.
North Carolina, in response to our audit and after negotiations with Region 4:
Developed a technique to detect violations of daily maximum limits in all permits
and refer these violations to its regional offices for followup action.
Committed to incorporate economic benefit into penalties for egregious violations
and chronic repeat violations.
Developed a storm water enforcement strategy that was negotiated with EPA
Region 4.
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 6
-------
Audit Leads to
Improved
Coordination
Related to
Endangered
Species Protection
Audit Leads to
Uniform Federal
Policy for
Implementing
Environmental
Quality Systems
Agreed to require permitees to use more sensitive test methods for chlorine and
mercury.
Agreed to require all animal facilities that have a subsequent discharge to surface
waters to apply for coverage under an NPDES Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operation permit.
In addition, North Carolina's Department of Environment and Natural Resources
agreed to request delegation authority from the State's Environmental Management
Commission to establish deadlines for compliance without issuance of Special Orders
by Consent.
Following a recommendation in an EPA OIG audit to encourage better coordination
of efforts related to water quality standards, EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and
the National Marine Fisheries Service signed a memorandum of agreement
establishing procedures to enhance coordination on the protection of endangered and
threatened species under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the Clean
Water Act. The memorandum of agreement directs EPA and the Services to establish
local/regional review teams to identify upcoming priorities and workload requirements
and generally ensure close coordination on the full range of activities involving water
quality and endangered/threatened species protection.
We recommended in our September 2000 report, Proactive Approach Would Improve
EPA's Water Quality Standards Program (2000-P-00023), that EPA encourage
collaborative processes with EPA regions, states, tribes, and the Services in
conducting triennial reviews and standards revisions.
An EPA OIG audit led to a task force establishing uniform Federal policy to resolve
inconsistencies and deficiencies in the way various Federal agencies assure the quality
of environmental data, which should result in efficiencies and improved data. In
response to our March 1997 audit report (7100132) on environmental data quality
issues related to Federal facility Superfund sites, EPA worked with the Departments
of Defense and Energy to establish the Intergovernmental Data Quality Task Force.
These agencies charged the task force with developing guidelines for environmental
data quality systems for environmental activities conducted by the agencies.
In November 2000, the task force issued the Uniform Federal Policy for Implementing
Environmental Quality Systems. This policy will serve as the high-level policy for
documenting and implementing acceptable quality systems for Federal agencies, and
for resolving inconsistencies and deficiencies in the ways Federal agencies assured the
quality of environmental data. The benefits of a consistent Federal policy for quality
systems across Federal agencies include:
PAGE 7 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Improving the effectiveness of Federal environmental programs by focusing on
results, quality of data and services, and customer satisfaction.
Clarifying roles and responsibilities in managing and overseeing environmental
data and technology programs.
Having sufficient confidence in the systems so that duplicative oversight can be
minimized.
Enhancing accountability and public confidence in environmental decisions.
Goal 2: Improve EPA's Management and Program Operations
The Office of Inspector General assesses EPA's management and program
operations to identify best practices, areas for improvement, and cooperative
solutions to problems. The OIG's work is designed to promote efficiency
and effectiveness within EPA. The following represent some examples of
the more significant efforts under this OIG goal.
EPA earned an unqualified opinion on its fiscal 2000 financial statements. This is a
major accomplishment for the Agency. Nonetheless, the Agency needs to further
improve its financial statement preparation processes to ensure accuracy, timeliness,
and better day-to-day management. In evaluating EPA's internal controls, we noted
certain matters that we consider to be reportable conditions, but none are believed to be
a material weaknesses which would prevent the presentation of reliable financial
statement amounts.
We did not identify any instances of noncompliance with laws and regulations that
would result in material misstatements to the audited financial statements. However,
we did note EPA was not in substantial compliance with Statement of Federal
Financial Accounting Standards No. 4 that requires EPA to determine the full costs of
its activities, regularly accumulate and report cost of activities, and use appropriate
costing methodologies. We also noted noncompliance related to reconciliation of intra-
governmental transactions and financial system security.
EPA continues to make progress with completing Federal Financial Management
Improvement Act remediation plan actions. EPA made significant improvements in the
financial statement preparation process, financial system security plan, and federal
trading partner information.
In a February 15, 2001, response to our draft report, the Agency generally concurred
EPA Earns
Unqualified
Opinion on
Financial
Statements
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 8
-------
Plan to Enhance
State and Tribal
Superfund Roles
Needs Measurable
Goals
Chicago Public
Schools Misspend
Asbestos
Abatement Funds
with our recommendations and has completed or planned a number of corrective
actions. However, the Agency disagreed with our conclusions that the process for
preparing financial statements was a reportable condition and that there was
noncompliance with the managerial cost accounting standard. We issued the final
report (2001-1-00107) on February 28, 2001. A response to our final report is due by
May 30, 2001.
To encourage greater state and tribal participation, EPA developed a Plan to Enhance
the Role of States and Tribes in the Superfund Program in March 1998. EPA funded
pilot projects with eight states and nine tribes, and concluded that the pilots
successfully overcame barriers and helped states and tribes agree upon mutual
expectations, enabling quicker cleanups of more sites.
Although EPA concluded that its pilot projects to enhance the roles of states and tribes
in the Superfund program were successful, we found that EPA's plan to implement
these projects did not have measurable goals and EPA did not fully track costs. We
noted that EPA's lack of performance goals and measures for the pilot program limited
EPA's ability to document its success. Also, while EPA had a record of how much it
provided the states and tribes for the pilot projects, it did not track other
implementation and oversight costs.
We issued our final report (2001-M-00002) on November 17, 2000. EPA responded
to the report on February 6, 2001. EPA agreed to work with regions to develop a
strategy to: communicate needed information; develop customized plans; collect
baseline information; establish appropriate measures; and track total costs.
We questioned $14.4 million of the $14.6 million claimed by the Chicago Public
Schools under an EPA asbestos abatement loan because the district either did not
spend the money as authorized or did not maintain sufficient documentation for us to
determine whether the money was used as authorized.
EPA provided the Chicago Public Schools with a loan of $ 14.6 million under the
Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act of 1990, to assist the district
in the abatement of asbestos in 20 schools. Specifically, we questioned:
# $1.8 million for unauthorized activities outside the statutory limits of the
PAGE 9 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Ohio School
District Misspends
EPA Funds
Intended for
Asbestos
Abatement
Act, approved scope of work, or approved project period.
# $1.4 million in funds in excess of the final claimed costs.
# $11.2 million because lump-sum contracts included both authorized abatement
work and other unauthorized work, and we could not quantify the eligible and
ineligible costs due to a lack of supporting documentation.
We recommended that EPA recover $1.8 million for unauthorized activities and
$1.4 million of excess funds. The district returned the excess funds to EPA subsequent
to our audit. We also recommended that EPA require the recipient to identify and
support the costs for eligible activities in the unsupported $11.2 million, and then
recover the portion that the recipient cannot identify and support as eligible abatement
activities.
We issued the final report (2001-1-00120) on March 26, 2001. A response to the final
report is due by June 24, 2001.
We determined that $4 million of the $4.3 million claimed by the Napoleon City (Ohio)
Schools under an EPA asbestos grant and loan was questionable because the district
did not spend the funds in accordance with Federal laws, regulations, and the terms of
the assistance agreement. This included at least $2.5 million in ineligible costs that
EPA should recoup.
EPA provided the school district with a combination grant ($1.9 million) and loan
($2.4 million) under the Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act of
1990, to assist in the abatement of asbestos in the district's high school and middle
school. We found that the district inappropriately made claims for:
Damages and delays caused by a contractor's deficient work and default.
Renovations and other items neither authorized nor necessary.
Unauthorized asbestos abatement.
Lump-sum contracts including both authorized asbestos abatement and general
renovation work.
Non-competitive contracts and other agreements not procured as required.
Duplicate, unallowable, and unsupported costs.
We recommended that EPA immediately recover the $2.5 million of ineligible costs.
We also recommended that EPA determine the eligibility of the unsupported work,
including renovation work under lump-sum contracts, and make any additional
recoupments appropriate.
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 10
-------
We issued the final report (2001-1-00073) on January 11, 2001. A response to the
final report is due by July 11, 2001.
Access to EPA
Payroll and
Personnel System
Not Adequately
Controlled
Financial
Assurance Needed
for Closing and
Maintaining
Waste Sites
¦
EPA did not adequately control access to the Environmental Protection Agency Payroll
and Personnel System (EPAYS). Some users had EPAYS access when they did not
need it, and others were granted access authorities greater than needed. Furthermore,
some users continued to have access after they left the Agency or transferred to
different job functions. EPAYS is used to process all EPA payroll and personnel-
related data, and improperly managed access controls increase the potential for fraud,
waste, and abuse of such data.
In addition, users were granted excessive access to EPAYS data sets that contained
sensitive information. Many of these users generally needed access to some of the data
sets, but not all. Excessive access can result in EPA employees' personnel information
being vulnerable to misuse or abuse, including identity theft.
The report included recommendations to improve controls over access to EPAYS
information. The recommendations focused on restricting access to only the
information users need to perform their job functions. The Agency concurred with the
recommendations and took a number of positive actions to correct the deficiencies
identified in this report.
We issued the final report (2001-P-00004) on March 22, 2001. A response to the final
report is due June 20, 2001.
In many cases, corporations appear to have provided sufficient financial assurance to
pay for closing and post-closure care of hazardous waste facilities and municipal solid
waste landfills. However, in some cases, we determined such assurance might not
provide funding that would be adequate to ensure facilities will not pose a threat to
human health and the environment. This would leave the possibility that states or the
Federal government may need to step in to address such threats. Specifically:
There is insufficient assurance that funds will be available to cover the full period
of landfill post-closure. Regulations require post-closure activities and financial
assurance for 30 years after closure and more if necessary, but state and Federal
policy was generally insufficient for extending beyond 30 years, even though
many landfills may need extensions. For the nine states sampled, state officials
indicated 20 percent of the landfills would definitely require care beyond 30
years, and such need had not been evaluated for another 74 percent. By the year
2030, we estimated the unfunded burden for the nine states reviewed would be
PAGE 11 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Old Works with
EPA Region 2 on
Assistance
Agreement Guide
almost $19 million and growing.
Some facilities submitted cost estimates that were too low, and state officials
expressed concerns that the cost estimates were difficult to review. Software is
available that can help states review cost estimates submitted by facilities.
Insurance policies written by "captive" insurance companies (self insurance) do
not provide an adequate level of financial assurance. Most captive insurance
companies are wholly owned subsidiaries in the corporation of the company they
are insuring, and if a parent company experiences financial difficulties, the
captive insurance company may not be able to provide needed closure and post-
closure funds, which averaged $13.3 million for the facilities in our sample.
Analyses of potential failure rates for various financial assurance mechanisms did
not include all significant risk factors. Therefore, the risks that funds will not be
available when needed from financial assurance mechanisms - such as insurance,
surety bonds, and trust funds - may be higher than EPA estimated.
We recommended that EPA's Acting Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and
Emergency Response provide specific guidance regarding insurance matters, further
develop existing training materials, and facilitate the exchange of information through
an Internet bulletin board. We also recommended that, as resources allow, criteria be
developed for the appropriate post-closure care time frames, and that states be helped
to obtain review software.
We issued the final report (2001-P-007) on March 30, 2001. A final response is due
June 28, 2001.
On January 30, 2001, OIG reported (2001-P-00002) that improvements were needed
in Region 2's Management of Children's Health Risk Initiative and Related Projects.
We pointed out concerns with grants administration, including inadequate review and
approval of applicants' workplans and a lack of financial monitoring. We also
indicated that recipients lacked sufficient knowledge of assistance agreement
requirements to comply with EPA financial and administrative regulations and
guidance.
After issuing the report, OIG collaborated with Region 2 on developing a synopsis of
financial management requirements and other relevant information for assistance
agreement recipients. In March 2001, the Region issued the Financial Management
Requirements. The synopsis included requirements for financial record keeping,
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 12
-------
audits, financial reporting, and record retention.
OIG Completes
First Cycle of
State Revolving
Fund Audit
Program
Government
Employees and
Vendors Plead
Guilty to Credit
Card Fraud
As of June 2000, State-administered Clean Water State Revolving Funds had assets of
over $30 billion and the Drinking Water State Revolving Funds had assets of about $4
billion. In March 2001, the OIG completed the first cycle of its State Revolving Fund
financial and compliance audit program, developed in cooperation with the Office of
Water to cover Clean Water and Drinking Water programs.
As part of our effort, OIG either assessed audits conducted by states or conducted the
audits. Since fiscal year 1998, OIG audited State Revolving Funds for 10 states.
During the 6-month period ending March 31, 2001, the OIG:
Issued our first "Best Practices" report on South Carolina's Subrecipient
Monitoring program.
Reported on the Washington State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund for the
year ended June 30, 2000, which included unqualified opinions on the financial
statements and did not identify any material weaknesses in internal controls or
instances of noncompliance.
Started the second round audits of California and Utah.
Consulted with Nevada on developing and testing a new program management and
accounting system for both the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving
Funds.
Consulted with the Washington State Drinking Water program on proper
accounting and financial reporting for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund.
Lolita Flemmings Lee, a former facility manager in EPA's Facilities Management and
Services Division, was sentenced in U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, for
conspiracy to defraud the government, stemming from the improper use of a
government credit card. Lee was sentenced on November 21, 2000, to three years
probation, six months of which is to be served in home detention, and 500 hours of
community service. She was also ordered to pay $68,300 in restitution to EPA and a
$100 special assessment. In addition, Lee resigned her position at EPA. As a result of
this investigation, EPA's Facilities Management and Services Division has increased
internal controls associated with its use of government issued credit cards.
From November 1998 through February 2000, Lee used her government issued credit
PAGE 13 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
EPA Employees
Reprimanded for
Improper Use of
Grant Funds
card to make fictitious purchases from Charles Hawkins of CJ's Stationery. Instead of
providing merchandise to EPA for the purchases, Hawkins would provide cash to Lee,
keeping a portion of the cash for himself. In addition, Lee used her government credit
card to make purchases for her personal benefit.
Hawkins pleaded guilty to a criminal information on October 10, 2000, in U.S. District
Court, Eastern District of Virginia, to conspiracy to defraud the government and
possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. On January 5, 2001, he was sentenced to
15 years in prison on the firearms charge, five years in prison for conspiracy (to run
concurrently), and three years probation. He was also ordered to pay restitution of
$58,780 to EPA, $34,553 to the Department of the Army, and a $200 special
assessment.
In addition to the conspiracy at the EPA with Lee, Hawkins was conducting a similar
conspiracy with Quintin A. Swann, a supply specialist with the Department of the
Army. Swann pleaded guilty to a criminal information on January 31, 2001, in U. S.
District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, to bribery and wire fraud. He has not yet
been sentenced. Swann, in addition to his conspiracy with Hawkins, was conducting
similar fraudulent credit card transactions with Robin Noland of Direct Office
Products.
Noland pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the government in U.S. District Court,
Eastern District of Virginia, on September 11, 2000. She was sentenced on December
22, 2000, to two years probation, and was ordered to pay restitution of $72,500 to the
Department of the Army, and a $100 special assessment.
This investigation was conducted jointly by the EPA OIG; the Federal Bureau of
Investigation; the Defense Criminal Investigative Service; and the Department of the
Army, Criminal Investigations Division.
On November 28, 2000, a Program Management Officer in EPA's Region 4 received a
letter of reprimand for his part in a scheme to improperly use grant money. The
employee requested the Mississippi Agricultural Aviation Board to use its EPA
Performance Partnership Grant to purchase laptop computers for use by EPA
personnel. The grant funding this Mississippi board was monitored by the employee.
Two additional EPA employees, who received laptop computers as a part of this
scheme, received warning letters for their involvement. The computers have been
returned to the State of Mississippi.
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 14
-------
Guilty Plea
Entered for
Identity Theft
State Employee
Indicted for
Forging Air
Inspection
Reports
On October 2, 2000, Edward R. Washington pleaded guilty to two separate criminal
informations in the District Court of Maryland for Anne Arundel County. In the first
information, Washington pleaded guilty to one count of theft, and was sentenced to 28
months in prison, with 14 months suspended, and two years probation. In the second
information, Washington pleaded guilty to one count of forgery, and was again
sentenced to 28 months in prison, with 14 months suspended, and two years probation,
to be served concurrent with the first sentence. He was also ordered to pay $1,008 in
restitution to Cellular One.
Several EPA employees were notified by credit bureaus, loan companies, banks, and
retail establishments that an individual, later identified as Washington, was
impersonating the EPA employees and using their credit, resulting in the theft of
thousands of dollars. An EPA employee had released government documents which
contained personal information of those EPA employees to Washington. The EPA
employee who released the documents resigned as a result of the investigation.
This investigation was conducted by the EPA OIG and the U.S. Secret Service.
On March 5, 2001, Day Niederhauser was indicted by a Commonwealth of Virginia
Grand Jury for five counts of forgery of public documents and five counts of computer
trespassing. Niederhauser, an air inspector for the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, allegedly generated false Level II air inspection reports and
then entered the false data into the EPA-funded Comprehensive Environmental Data
System, a computer data base which tracks state-conducted air inspections. From
December 1999 to September 2000, Niederhauser allegedly was not physically present
at 15 of the facilities to conduct the inspection reports.
Previously, on December 6, 2000, Niederhauser was terminated by the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality and ordered to repay that Department $1,473
for unauthorized vehicle milage usage and associated lost time from the workplace.
This investigation was conducted jointly by the EPA OIG, the Virginia State Police,
and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality.
PAGE 15 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Cost Savings to
Result from
Investigation of
Hotline Complaint
Two Individuals
Convicted for
Embezzlement
from Indian
Tribal Coalition
Three Plead
Guilty in
$2.6 Million
Kickback Scheme
As a result of a call to the EPA OIG Hotline, EPA Region 5 reviewed its
implementation of emergency stand-by pay. The Hotline complainant alleged that two
Region 5 employees were improperly approved for a $400 bonus (stand-by pay) every
pay period for the last year. In fact, three Region 5 employees were improperly
receiving stand-by pay, a violation of the U.S. EPA Pay Administration Manual.
Region 5 terminated the special pay for all three employees and agreed to comply with
the Pay Administration Manual requirements. A cost savings may exceed $23,400 as
a result of the change.
On October 11, 2000, two representatives of the Nevada Indian Environmental
Coalition pleaded guilty to a one-count misdemeanor criminal information, in U.S.
District Court, District of Nevada, for embezzlement from a tribal organization.
During 1997 and 1998, Anita Collins, the coalition's Executive Director, and Debra
O'Neil, office manager, used a coalition credit card for personal expenses and other
unauthorized purposes, such as cashing in earned leave / compensatory time without
permission to do so. The coalition receives part of its funding from U.S. government
agencies, including EPA. On January 12, 2001, Collins was sentenced to one year of
probation, fined $500, and ordered to pay a $25 assessment. Collins had previously
paid $5,209 to the coalition. O'Neil was sentenced on February 2, 2001, to two years
probation, ordered to pay restitution of $4,324, and fined $25.
On March 22, 2001, in U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, Frederic DiNonno
pleaded guilty to a two-count criminal information charging him with conspiracy to
violate the Anti-Kickback Act of 1986 and with filing a false Federal income tax
return. Co-defendant Lawrence J. Towers pleaded guilty to a two-count criminal
information charging him with violations of the Anti-Kickback Act and aiding
DiNonno in filing a false tax return. Co-defendant Stephen A. Cannon also pleaded
guilty to aiding DiNonno in filing a false tax return.
DiNonno admitted that he created a shell company to receive the kickbacks paid by
vendors who subcontracted with his employer, Ebasco Services, Inc. Ebasco was a
major government contractor, providing power generation, environmental remediation,
hazardous waste processing, and construction services to numerous government
agencies.
Ebasco's vendors paid more than $2.6 million in kickbacks to DiNonno and his co-
conspirators in exchange for favorable treatment. Approximately $800,000 of the
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 16
-------
EPA Contractor
Resolves
Racketeering
Charges
kickbacks were in connection with government contracts. DiNonno also admitted that
he did not report $315,675 in kickback payments he received in 1992 on his Federal
income tax return for that year.
This investigation was conducted by the EPA OIG; the Defense Criminal
Investigative Service; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Office of
Inspector General; and the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigations
Division.
On March 9, 2001, Pritam Singh Sabharwal, formerly of Lexington, Kentucky, and
most recently of New Delhi, India, entered a guilty plea to a criminal information in
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky, charging him with one felony count
of obstruction of a Federal audit. Sabharwal was the President of Environmental
Health, Research, & Testing, Inc. (EHRT), an EPA hazardous waste remediation and
laboratory research contractor.
In 1996, EHRT filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and failed to pay a $1 million fine
associated with criminal charges brought against Sabharwal and EHRT in the 1993
bribery of an EPA official. An OIG investigation resulted in a May 30, 2000, criminal
indictment, superseded by a 12-count racketeering indictment on
November 2, 2000, charging Sabharwal, four family members, and a business
associate with various counts of mail fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud, bribery of two
government officials, and obstruction of a Federal audit. Named as defendants in
addition to Pritam Sabharwal were his two sons, Paul and Shawn Sabharwal; his wife,
Jean Sabharwal; a nephew, Harpreet S. Chadha; and former EHRT Vice President,
Dushyant Gulati.
The guilty plea by Pritam Sabharwal is part of a comprehensive plea agreement
between the prosecution and the various defendants that will resolve the November
2000 indictment. At the time of the indictment, Pritam Sabharwal was residing in
India, beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal courts. In consideration of his return to
the United States and guilty plea to the criminal information, the prosecution agreed to
seek the dismissal of the indictment.
This investigation was conducted jointly by the EPA OIG and the Defense Criminal
Investigative Service.
As a result of an investigation into alleged false statements, EPA changed the wording
of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compliance and Liability Act
(CERCLA) "Information Request Pertaining to Financial Disclosure Package"
PAGE 17 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Financial
Disclosure
Package
Former State Air
Authority Director
and Employee
Sentenced
required pursuant to Section 104(e) of the CERCLA to make time frames outlined in
various parts of the package consistent. Prior to the change, the 104(e) letter requested
financial information for the past 5 years, while the Financial Statement of Individuals
form that accompanied the letter requested information for only the past 3 years. Both
the letter and form now request information for the past 5 years. This change was
made in part because the conflicting time periods requested caused difficulty in
prosecuting cases for false statements.
On March 7, 2001, Patsy J. DeLuca, former Executive Director of the North Ohio
Valley Air Authority (NOVAA), was sentenced in U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Ohio, for accepting an unlawful gratuity and conspiracy to defraud the
United States. DeLuca was sentenced to four months in prison; two years probation,
four months of which is to be served in home detention; and ordered to pay a $10,000
fine and a $200 special assessment.
On March 8, 2001, Vincent R. Zumpano, a former employee of NOVAA, was
sentenced in the same court for aiding and abetting the acceptance of an unlawful
gratuity and conspiracy to defraud the United States. Zumpano was sentenced to
15 months in prison, two years probation, and ordered to pay a $8,000 fine and a $200
special assessment.
Prior to disbanding, NOVAA was a multi-county air quality regulatory agency
headquartered in Steubenville, Ohio. NOVAA received funds from the EPA through
the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency to enforce federal and state air quality
laws. While DeLuca was the Executive Director, he agreed to accept $169,750 from
Pine Hollow C&D Landfill for advising them on pending applications before the Ohio
EPA for new or expanded sites. DeLuca was aided in this agreement by Zumpano and
others.
EPA Reduces
Negotiation Times
In response to our March 1998 advisory and assistance report, Superfund: RD/RA
Negotiation Time Frames (8400015), which identified and evaluated trends in
negotiations related to Superfund remedial design/remedial action (RD/RA), EPA
issued policies that resulted in reducing the average time taken for these negotiations.
In November 2000, EPA evaluated the impact of their policy changes by using one of
the analyses from our March 1998 report. This analysis found that the number of
RD/RA negotiations over 120 days decreased by 40 percent and average negotiation
time frames declined 47 percent after the policy changes took effect.
EPA Assists
In response to OIG advice, EPA Region 5 addressed problems in its peer review
process that should better ensure the integrity of scientific analyses. Region 5 issued
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 18
-------
Goal 3: Produce Timely, Quality and Cost-Effective Products and Services That
Meet Customer Needs
Region 5 to
Strengthen Peer
Review Process
orders designed to improve the way regional science activities are conducted. The
orders call for specific actions to assure: (a) strict implementation of the Agency peer
review handbook, (b) secure data and records, and (c) a sound approval process for
science and technical work products.
In her January 2001 response to our audit (Report 2000-1-000416, issued
September 21, 2000) on the management of more than $16.7 million in Federal funds
awarded to Rhode Island since fiscal year 1996, the Region 1 Administrator credited
OIG contributions. "I feel that the improvement made by the Rhode Island Department
of Environmental Management in the management of their operation as a result of your
suggestions has put this program on a better foundation," the Regional Administrator
noted.
The report, issued in September 2000, noted that the state agency did not have
adequate internal controls to ensure Federal funds were being managed appropriately,
and recommended actions to rectify the weaknesses. The state agency developed a
corrective action plan to address our concerns.
The Office of Inspector General is a customer-driven organization in which
customer needs serve as the basis for work planning and the design of OIG
products and services. All OIG work is based on anticipated value to
Congress and EPA. The following represent some examples of the more
significant efforts under this OIG goal.
EPA OIG recently joined EPA's Office of Site Remediation Enforcement and Office
PAGE 19 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Old and Agency
Team Addresses
Super fund
Collections and
Receivables Issues
of Chief Financial Officer on an Agency Joint Management Review team that assessed
the management of Superfund collections and receivables in EPA and the Department
of Justice. EPA designated the management of collections and accounts receivables
due the Trust Fund as a top Superfund priority. As of April 2000, EPA's records
indicated about $527 million in outstanding accounts receivable had been delinquent
for more than 120 days.
The team identified: (1) practices that would facilitate collection of accounts
receivables; (2) areas where the collection and receivable management process could
be improved; and (3) areas in which EPA Headquarters could provide better guidance
and support. The team also worked with Justice to reconcile differences between EPA
and Justice, including making recommendations to improve the collection process and
efforts of both agencies.
The team issued four reports: a national report (2001-S-00002) and three regional
reports (Region 1: 2001-S-00003; Region 5: 2001-S-00004; and Region 6: 2001-S-
00005). The offices involved are taking corrective actions.
During February 2001, EPA OIG conducted Laboratory Data Integrity Training. The
conference, co-hosted by the EPA Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada, was attended by
approximately 100 people representing 22 Federal agencies, including EPA. The
objective of the course was to familiarize Federal investigators and prosecutors from
several investigative agencies about the issue of laboratory fraud, which can occur
both in government and contract labs. Examples of laboratory fraud include peak
shaving, altered holding times for samples, and improper calibration of testing
equipment. Integrity of laboratory data and testing is vital in making the decisions
necessary to protect the environment.
OIG's Office of Audit and EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Office of Acquisition Management, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization, and three Regions participated on a Small Business Workgroup to help
small businesses work with EPA.
Agency senior management was highly receptive to the workgroup's recommendations
and agreed to work together to:
Communicate success stories to all its staff and educate Agency contract and
program managers on the policies and regulations governing small business
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 20
-------
utilization.
Region 1 Training
Program
Developed in
Response to OIG
Small Grantees
Reviews
¦
# Create an in-house advocate for small business utilization in each of its regional
offices.
The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization agreed to meet regularly
with each program office and region to discuss program requirements and
opportunities for small businesses.
To address problems noted in several EPA OIG reports, EPA Region 1 has developed
a training program to educate new, small grantees in grants management. The OIG
participates in providing the instruction.
In two prior reports - Region 1 's Overview of Small Grantees (Report E1FMF6-01-
0020-6100314, issued September 30, 1996) and Nationwide Audit of Environmental
Justice Small Grants Program (Report E1FME6-01-0086-7100247, issued
July 30, 1997) - OIG found that small grantees often were not familiar with Federal
grant regulations and did not understand their responsibilities as Federal grantees. In
some cases, this lack of knowledge prevented the grantees from successfully carrying
out their project objectives.
The training program includes an overview of grants management issues, and specific
instructions on carrying out the terms and conditions of the grant and meeting reporting
requirements. The program also provides an opportunity for the Region and grantees
to share information learned from other projects. OIG's Eastern Audit Division
participates in this annual program by advising grantees what they can expect during
an audit and how to prepare for an audit to minimize disruption to operations. Also,
the OIG representative explains how an audit can be a management tool that helps to
identify inefficient practices.
The Office of Inspector General is committed to becoming a high
performance organization by recruiting and maintaining a diverse and
highly competent workforce. The OIG promotes continuous learning and is
expanding its use of technology and multi-discipline teams. The following
represent some examples of the more significant efforts under this OIG
goal.
PAGE 21 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Goal 4: Enhance Diversity, Innovation, Teamwork and Competencies
The Office of Inspector General established a new organizational structure effective
January 2, 2001. This structure better supports our efforts to be a more responsive,
customer-oriented organization by expanding OIG product lines and using a matrix
management approach. Matrix management allows us to better match assignment
needs and OIG employee skills. It also provides better career development
opportunities for our employees to work on a wider variety of assignments in different
EPA Office of the Inspector General
Counsel
Systems/Science
Advisor
Audit
Investigations
Planning,
Analysis
and
Results
Program
Evaluation
Congressional and Media Liaison
Administrative Sipport
Mission
Systems
Human
Capital
Inspector General
Deputy IG
Audit, Evaluation
and Investigations
Resource Centers
locations with different teams and supervisors.
Leadership
The Immediate Office of the Inspector General, which provides overall leadership,
policy, and direction to the OIG, contains three organizational units: 1) a
Congressional and Media Relations Liaison who serves as the principal point of
contact for all congressional and media relations activities for the OIG, (2) a
Systems/Science Advisor who provides expert and independent advice on issues
relating to science and business systems integration, and (3) an Office of Counsel
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 22
-------
which provides independent legal services and support to the organization.
Product Lines
The new organization features three product lines. Two of these are the traditional
Audit and Investigation activities and the third, Program Evaluation, is new.
The Office of Audit manages, coordinates and leads the policy and direction of audits
in three major areas: systems, contracts and assistance agreements. The Systems Lead
plans, develops and oversees audits of EPA's business systems and processes
including: management information systems, financial systems, and human resources
development. The Contracts Lead designs and oversees audits of EPA contracts and
their effectiveness in achieving desired results. The Assistance Agreements Lead
plans, develops, and oversees audits of grants and cooperative agreements, including
EPA's management and effectiveness in achieving desired results.
The Office of Investigations manages, coordinates, and is responsible for
investigations relating to EPA programs and operations, and is also organized using
Leads. A Special Investigations Unit conducts investigations requiring an immediate
response, such as allegations of criminal wrongdoing and misconduct by Agency
officials, Congressional inquiries, and internal investigations. A Contract
Laboratories Lead provides technical support and coordination for all contract
laboratory investigations. A Computer Crimes group identifies, investigates, and helps
to counter illegal intrusions of EPA's computer systems. A Proactive Lead develops
and coordinates all contracts and assistance agreements investigations that have the
potential for nationwide impact and participates in workload planning.
The Office of Program Evaluation manages, coordinates, and is responsible for
evaluations of major EPA programs, and is also organized using Leads. Initially, these
Leads are focusing on Air, Water, and Waste Management programs. These
evaluations concentrate on: (1) the logic of each program's Government Performance
and Results Act structure; (2) the program's effectiveness and efficiency; (3) the
program's costs and benefits; and (4) the impacts and outcomes of these programs.
Planning and Support
The new organization also features organizations that support these product lines.
The Office of Human Capital manages, coordinates, and provides supervision to
Resource Centers located throughout the country. This office is primarily responsible
PAGE 23 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Old Aligns Staff
Accountability
with Strategic
for career management and staff development of OIG employees, with secondary
responsibilities for assignment accomplishment, customer relations, marketing, and
planning.
Resource Centers for Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
There are 15 Resource Centers and each is managed by a Divisional Inspector
General for Audit, a Divisional Inspector General for Investigations, or a
Headquarters Office Director. The Divisional Inspectors General and
Headquarters Office Directors are responsible for ensuring employees develop
competencies through formal training and career enhancing assignments. They
also manage their offices in accordance with established requirements; ensure
audits, evaluations, and investigations comply with applicable professional
standards; and effectively represent the OIG with its customers.
The Office of Planning, Analysis, and Results is responsible for developing,
managing, and supporting a goals-based management system for the OIG that involves
strategic planning and accountability for environmental, fiscal, and managerial results.
The Office of Mission Systems serves as the focal point for coordinating, developing,
implementing, and maintaining OIG information resource management systems,
developing and maintaining human resource systems, and providing human resource
services for the OIG.
Through a multi-discipline team, the OIG developed new Performance Elements for all
OIG staff, focusing on achieving results aligned with our organizational mission, goals,
and values. Beginning in January 2001, staff performance is being evaluated based on
activities and results relating to quality, quantity, timeliness, accuracy, cost
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 24
-------
Goals
01G Makes
effectiveness, and application of knowledge in four areas. Feedback will be provided
by a combination of external and internal assessments including surveys, discussions,
observations, objective data reports, and 360-degree analysis. The feedback will be
used to identify future training and development needs. Compensation and rewards
systems will also be tied to these elements. This approach integrates organizational
accountability with internal staff accountability by promoting a new relationship
between and among employees and management. The performance elements are as
follows.
Assign men I Accomplishment
Produce results which support Old strategic goals.
~ \ssmiimciils produce useful results
~ Products ;uiil sen ices ;ire much. ;iccur;iie. couiplele. ;iud cosi effccli\ e
~ I)eiiiousir;iles iecliuic;il knowledge
Customer Sen ice
Respond to customer needs in a manner that provides added valve, generates customer
demand, and projects a professional image of the Old.
~ I'Ahihiis customer ;iud business know ledue
~ I!iiikls relationships ;uid profcssion;il iimme
~ (i;ilhers ;uid ;icls on fcedh;ick
Pcrsoiiiil lich;i\inr
Exhibit appropriate behavior that supports the Old's vision, philosophy, and values.
~ (oniniuuicules in ;ui open ;md constructs e iu;iiiuer
~ Demonstrates person;il iiiteurit\ ;md oru;iiii/;itiou;il iiidepeudeuce
~ i:\ercises pcrsoiiiil leadership
~ lJ;irticip;ilcs ;icti\cl> in te;ini effoils
Continuous l.c;irning
Promote self improvement through continuous learning, which contributes to organizational
improvement and or self-fulfillment.
~ M;iiul;iius ;uid enhances professional competencies
~ I !ucour;mcs oru;uii/;itioii;il le;iriiiim
~ De\elops other si;il'f ^ ...
The OIG established a Diversity Action Team that revised and disseminated the OIG
Diversity Action Plan in January 2001 to all staff. The plan places personal
PAGE 25 - OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2001
-------
Significant
Commitment
To Diversify Its
Workforce and
Skills
_¦
accountability for success with both the managers and staff. The goals of the plan are
to:
Create an organizational climate that embraces diversity and strives to
make everyone feel welcome (comfortable) and valued.
Have a workforce where everyone is proactive in resolving
disagreements/discord.
Develop a diverse workforce whose skills and work experience are
maximized for career advancement.
Create a workforce and grade structure throughout the OIG that embraces
diversity and mirrors the society at large.
In addition, the OIG tasked its Special Emphasis Program Managers to develop and
implement a training program that fosters diversity in the workplace. To enhance staff
competencies, the OIG has also identified the needed skills to conduct our work.
OIG Establishes
Office Of Human
Capital
As part of its reorganization, OIG established an Office of Human Capital to manage,
coordinate, and provide supervision to the 15 Resource Centers within the OIG that
perform audits, program evaluations, investigations, and other assignments.
The new Office has overall responsibility for assigning Resource Center staff based on
assignment needs and employee career development requirements. This responsibility
includes mentoring and coaching staff on career management and providing career
development opportunities, as well as monitoring and assisting other OIG offices with
work plan implementation.
The Office is also geared to monitor available OIG competencies and skills for
recruiting goals, provide quality assurance that assignments meet professional
standards, and provide customer relations and marketing of OIG products and services.
Furthermore, the Office will lead efforts to improve OIG's audit, evaluation, and
investigative processes in order to make OIG reports and products more responsive to
customer needs and provide better services to EPA.
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 26
-------
Audit Report Resolution
Status Report on Perpetual Inventory of Reports in Resolution Process for Semiannual Period Ending
March 31, 2001
Report Category
No. of
Reports
Report Issuance
($ in Thousands)
Report Resolution Costs
Sustained
(S in Thousands)
Questioned
Costs
Recommended
Efficiencies
To Be
Recovered
As
Efficiencies
A. For which no management
decision was made by
October 1,2000
118
$103,224
SO
B, Which were issued during the
reporting period
246
26,219
0
C. Which were issued during the
reporting period that required
no resolution
175
0
0
Subtotals (A + B - C)
189
129,443
0
D, For which a management
decision was made during the
reporting period
106
21,691
0
$18,304
$0
E, For which no management
decision was made by
March 31, 2001
83
107,752
0
F. Reports for which no
management decision was made
within 6 months of issuance
40
82,287
0
^!n?«S5^^^S^^^^!3B5^S^SSSTS^B5KS5S55rS5^5SSB8SS8S«SB5ISSS8B
(Any difference in number of reports and amounts of questioned costs or recommended efficiencies between this report
and our previous semiannual report results from corrections made to data in our audit tracking system.)
HTIWAVWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 26
-------
Status of Management
Decisions on OIG Reports
This section presents statistical
information as required by the
Inspector General Act
Amendments of 1988 on the status
of EPA management decisions on
reports issued by the OIG
involving monetary
recommendations.
As presented, information
contained in Tables I and 2 cannot
be used to assess results of reviews
performed or controlled by this
office. Many of the reports were
prepared by other Federal
auditors or independent public
accountants. EPA OIG staff do not
manage or control such
assignments. Auditeesfrequently
provide additional documentation
to support the allowability of such
costs subsequent to report
issuance. We expect that a high
proportion of unsupported costs
may not be sustained.
Table 1 — Inspector General Issued Reports With Questioned Costs for Semiannual Period
Ending March 31, 2001
Report Category
No. of
Reports
Questioned Costs *
($ in Thousands)
Unsupported Costs
($ in Thousands)
A. For which no management decision was
made by October 1, 2000 **
36
$103,224
$31,797
B. New reports issued during period
36
26,219
12,961
Subtotals (A + B)
72
129,443
44,758
C. For which a management decision was
made during the reporting period
33
21,691
9,062
i. Dollar value of disallowed costs
32
18,304
6,523
ii. Dollar value of costs not disallowed
8
3,387
2,539
D. For which no management decision was
made by March 31, 2001
39
107,752
35,696
E. Reports for which no management
decision was made within 6 months of
issuance
17
82,287
31,706
* Questioned costs include the unsupported costs.
** Any difference in number of reports and amounts of questioned costs or recommended efficiencies between this report and
our previous semiannual report results from corrections made to data in our audit tracking system.
PAGE 27 - OCTOBER 1,2000 THROUGH MARCH 31,2001
-------
Table 2 -- Inspector General Issued Reports With Recommendations That Funds Be Put To
Better Use for Semiannual Period Ending March 31,2001
Report Category
No. of
Reports
Dollar Value
($ in Thousands)
A. For which no management decision was made by
October 1,2000
0
$0
B. Which were issued during the period
0
*23
Subtotals (A + B)
0
0 |
C. For which a management decision was made
during the reporting period
0
0 1
i. Dollar value of recommendations from
reports that were agreed to by management
0
0
ii. Dollar value of recommendations
from reports that were not agreed to
by management
0
0
iii. Dollar value of non-awards or unsuccessful
bidders
0
0
D. For which no management decision was made by
March 31, 2001
0
0
E. Reports for which no management decision was
made within 6 months of issuance
0
0
* This information is reported under investigations' Fines and Recoveries.
Audits With No Final Action as of 03/31/01- Which Are Over
365 Days Past OIG Report Issuance Date
Audits
Total
Percentage
Programs
25
17%
Assistance Agreements
94
66%
Contract Audits
14
10%
Single Audits
6
4%
Financial Statement Audits
4
3%
Total
143
100% |
HTTPi'/WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH - PAGE 28
-------
Summary of Investigative Results
Summary Of Investigative
Activities
Pending Investigations as
of September 30, 2000
New Investigations
Opened This Period
Investigations Closed
This Period
Pending Investigations as
of March 31,2001
172
13
25
160
Prosecutive and
Administrative Actions
Resignations
Terminations
Restitutions
Reprimands
Suspension &
Debarment
Other
In this period, investigative
efforts resulted in 16 convictions
and 14 indictments (does not
include indictments obtained in
cases in which we provided
investigative assistance). Fines TOTAL
and recoveries, including those
associated with civil actions,
amounted to $2.1 million.
Fourteen administrative actions
were taken as a result of
investigations.
1
3
2
5
14
Profiles of Pending Investigations by Type
General EPA Programs
Total Cases = 103
'!!!!«•»•»*«#
Superfund
Total Cases = 57
Contract ¦ Employee Integrity
Assistance Agreement gj Program Integrity
Other
PACK29-OCTOBER 1,2000THROUGH MARCH31,2001
-------
Appendix 1 ~ Reports Issued
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ACT REQUIRES A LISTING, SUBDIVIDED ACCORDING TO SUBJECT MATTER, OF EACH REPORT ISSUED BY
THE OFFICE DURING THE REPORTING PERIOD AND FOR EACH REPORT, WHERE APPLICABLE, THE DOLLAR VALUE OF QUESTIONED COSTS
AND THE DOLLAR VALUE OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT FUNDS BE PUT TO BETTER USE.
Report Number
Title
Final Report
Issued
Ineligible
Costs
Questioned Costs
Unsupported
Costs
Recommended
Efficiencies
Unreasonable (Funds Be Put
Costs To Better use)
2001-1-00088 Processing o£ Unliquidated Obligations 01-FEB-01
2001-P-00001 COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS 03-JAN-01
2001-P-00002 children's health risk initiative programs 30-JAN-01
2001-P-00003 CLOSED - REGION 7 NONPOINT SOURCE - Original 08-FEB-01
2001-P-00007 RCRA Financial Assurances 30-MAR-01
2001-P-00005 ASSISTANCE AGREEMENTS TO NON-PROFIT
ORGANIZATIONS 29-MAR-01
2001-P-00006 ENF AGREEMENT COMPLIANCE 29-MAR-01
2001 -P-00004 REGION 8 RCRA AUDIT 28-MAR-01
TOTAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS » 8
2001-1-00073 NAPOLEON CITY SCHOOLS-ASHAA (Hot-Line) il-JAN-01 2,523,327 1,494,085
2001-1-00101 Center for Chesapeake Communities (CCC)
Assist. Agreements 12-FEB-01 50,817 130,434
2001-1-00120 Chicago Public Schools 26-MAR-01 3,145,599 11,244,839
TOTAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT REPORTS = 3
2001-3-00001 Indian Township Tribal Government 05-OCT-00
2001-3-00002 Omaha Tribe o£ Nebraska ll-OCT-OO
2001-3-00003 Bad River Band of Chippewa Indians ll-OCT-OO
2001-3-00004 Sisserton - Wahpeton Sioux Tribe ll-OCT-OO
2001-3-00005 Sacramento, City of 17-OCT-OO
2001-3-00007 San Ildefonso, Pueblo de 18-OCT-OO
2001-3-00010 Metropolitan Government o£ Nashville &
Davidson County 02-NOV-00
2001-3-00013 Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians 03-NOV-00
2001-3-00015 Cherokee Nation 03-NOV-00
2001-3-00016 Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District 07-NOV-Q0
2001-3-00017 Oklahoma, University o£ (Norman Campus) 07-NOV-00
2001-3-00018 Shoshone-Bannock Tribes 07-NOV-00
2001-3-00019 Honolulu, City and County o£ 09-NOV-00
2001-3-00021 Sokaogon Chippewa Community Mole Lake Band 15-NOV-OO
2001-3-00022 George Washington University 17-NOV-OO
2001-3-00026 Sokaogon Chippewa Community Mole Lake Band 28-NOV-OO
2001-3-00029 Fairfax, County of 04-DEC-00
2001-3-00033 Shoshone-Bannock Tribes 08-DEC-00
2001-3-00034 Fond du Lac Reservation 08-DEC-00
2001-3-00037 Indian Township Tribal Government 14-DEC-00
2001-3-00041 San Diego, City of 27-DEC-00
2001-3-00045 Clark County Health District 27-DEC-OQ
2001-3-00046 Lovelock Paiute Tribe 29-DEC-00
2001-3-00047 Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians 29-DEC-0Q
2001-3-00048 Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians 29-DEC-00
2001-3-00049 Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe 29-DEC-00
2001-3-00050 San Diego, City of 29-DEC-00
2001-3-00052 Nogales, City o£ (Region 9 awards) 04-JAN-01
2001-3-00053 Nogales, City of (GAD awards) 04-JAN-01
2001-3-00054 Suquamish Tribe 04-JAN-01
2001-3-00055 Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California 04-JAN-01
2001-3-00056 Pima County 04-JAN-01
2001-3-00057 Lower Valley Water District 05-JAN-01
2001-3-00058 Allentown, School District of the City of 05-JAN-01
2001-3-00059 Lyton Band of Pomo Indians 05-JAN-01
2001- 3 -CQQ62 Illinois EPA 05-JAN-01
2001-3-00063 Illinois EPA 05-JAN-01
15,080
18,694
llTTP://WWW.EF'A.GOV/OK)EARTH - PAGE 30
-------
Recommended
Questioned Costs Efficiencies
Final Report ineligible Unsupported Unreasonable (Funds Be Put
Report Number Title Issued Costs Costs Costs To Better Use)
2001-3-00066 Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Department
2001-3-00070 Lovelock paiute Tribe
2001-3-00072 San Ildelfonso, Pueblo of
2001-3-00073 Sokaogon Chippewa Comunity Mole Lake Band
2001-3-00074 Osage Tribal Council
2001-3-00075 Michigan, Dept. of Agriculture
2001-3-00076 Michigan - Department of Environmental Quality,
State of
2001-3-00078 Hopland Band of Porno Indians 1998
2001-3-00082 Hopland Band of Pomo Indians 1999
2001-3-00083 Lummi Indian Business Council
2001-3-00C84 Alaska, State of
2001-3-00086 East Peoria, City of
2001-3-00087 Perry, City of
2001-3-00088 Red Bluff, City of
2001-3-00089 Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian
Reservat ion
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
3-00092 Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
3-00093 Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
.1-00094 Chehalis Reservation, Confederated Tribes of
3-00095 Guam, Government of
3-00096 Guam, Government of
3-00097 Guam, Government of
2001-3-00099 Atlanta, City of
2001-3-00102 Jefferson County Fiscal Court
00104 Atlanta, City of
Detroit, City of
2001-3-00107 West Virginia, State of
2001-3-00006 Arkansas for Medical Sciences, University of
2001-3-00012 Howard University
2001-3-00014 Woods Hole Oceanographic Unstitution
3-00023 Harvard University and Radcliffs College
3-00024 Xavier University of Louisianna
3-00025 Massachuesetts Institute of Technology
3-00032 New Hampsire, University Sysytem of
3-00038 Harvard University and Ratcliffe College
3-00068 Northeastern University
2001-3-00069 Brigham Young University
2001-3-00071 Northeastern University
2001-3-00090 Clark Atlanta University
2001-3-00098 georgia, University of
2001 -3-00008 Brigham & Women's Hospital
2001-3-00043 American College of Preventive Medicine, Inc.
2001-3-00044 Marine Biological Laboratory
2001-3-00060 The Ecological Society of America
2001-3-00061 The Ecological Society of America
2001-3-00067 Wyoming Association of Rural Water Systems
2001-3-00079 International Council for Local Environmental
Initiatives 97
2001-3-00080 International Council for Local Environmental
Initiatives 98
2001-3-00081 California Institute of Technology
2001-3-00101 Pekiri Community High School
2001-3-00091
2001 -
2001 -
2001-
2001-
2001-
2001-
2001 -3
2001-3-00106
20C1
2001
2001
2001
2001
2001
09-JAN-01
17-JAN-01
18-JAN - 01
19-JAN-01
19-JAN-01
19-JAN - 01
22-JAN-01
31-JAN-01
31-JAN-01
05-FEB-01
05-FEB-01
08 - FEB-01
08 - FEB-01
08 FEB-01
09-FEB-01
12 - FEB - 01
12 - FEB - 01
12 - FEB-01
2 0-FEB-01
2 6 - FEB-01
26 - FEB-01
26 - FEB-01
28 - FEB-01
01-MAR- 01
o:-mar-oi
02-MAR-01
22 MAR-01
17-OCT-00
03-NOV-00
03-NOV-00
28-NOV-00
28 - NOV-00
28-NOV-00
08 - DEC-00
14 - DEC-00
16 -JAN - 01
16 -JAN- 01
18-JAN-01
09 - FEB-01
27-FEB-01
1B-OCT-00
27 - DEC-00
27-DEC-00
05-JAN-01
05 * JAN - 01
09-JAN-01
31-JAN- 01
31-JAN-01
31-JAN-01
28 - FEB-01
16,099
353,308
8,869
152,209
2,305
TOTAL SINGLE AUDIT REPORTS =87
550,465
34,178
Page 31 - OCTOBER 1,2000 through MARCH 31,2001
-------
Recommended
Questioned Costs Efficiencies
Final Report Ineligible Unsupported Unreasonable SFunds Be Put
Report Number Title Issued Costs Costs Costs To Better Use)
2001-1-00031 GUARDIAN ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS FY92-93
INCURRED COSTS 30-NOV-OQ
2001-1-00069 TRC - EC FY 96 09-JAN-01
2001-1-00074 ECOLOGY & ENVIR 94 INCURRED 16-JAN-01
2001-1-00075 E.H. Pechan & Associates FY 1997 i FY 1998
Incurred Cost 25-JAN-01
2001-1-00091 Earth Tech-Incurred Costs(FY96! 05-FEB-01
2001-1-00100 ICF Consulting Group FY 2000 Floorcheck 09-FEB-01
2001-1-00068 ICF Consulting Group, Inc. - FY 2000 Forward
Pricing Rates 05-JAN-01
1,729,121
213.276
49,258
57,023
1,252,686
161,517
TOTAL OIG ISSUED CONTRACT REPORTS =11
1,991,655
1,414,203
2001-1-00013 DLZ National, Inc. - Proposal
(RPP PR-HQ-00 -10536) 26-OCT-00
2001-1-00014 DLZ National, Inc. - Preaward Accting
System PR-HQ-00-10536 26-OCT-OO
2001-2-00009 Mantech Environmental Technology-Preaward
PR-HQ-00-10661 22-NOV-00
2001-2-00010 OAO Corporation-Preaward PR-HQ-000-10323 28-NOV-OO
2001-2-00013 ASRC Aerospace Corporation
- Preaward PR-HQ-00-1054 Q2-FEB-01
2001-2-00016 Computer Sciences Corp
-Preaward PR-HQ-00-1032 3 26-FEB-01
2001-1-00001 BATTELLE MEMORIAL INST.
- FY 1996 Incurred Cost 04-OCT-00
2001-1-00002 BATTELLE MEMORIAL INST.
- FY 1996 Incurred Cost 04-OCT-00
2001-1-00004 JACOBS ENGINEERING- FY 1994 Incurred Cost 06-OCT-00
2001-1-00005 SciComm Inc-FY98 Incurred Cost ll-OCT-OO
2001-1-00015 Stratus Consulting Inc-FY99 Incurred cost 26-OCT-OO
2001-1-00018 Tetra Tech NUS Inc-FY 1998 Incurred Cost 26-OCT-OO
2001-1-00020 Lockheed Martin Services Inc.
-FY 1998 incurred Cost 27-OCT-OO
2001-4-00001 Lee Wilson & Associates-FY99 Incurred cost 27-OCT-OO
2001-1-00021 VERSAR INC-FY 1998 and 1999 Incurred Cost 27-OCT-OO
2001-1-00023 Grace Analytical Labs, Inc-FY98 Incurred Cost 30-OCT-00
2001-4-00002 ENERGY & ENVTL RSCH (EERC)
-FY 1998 Incurred Cost 08-NOV-00
2001-1-00036 ARTHUR D LITTLE-FY 1997 Incurred Cost 09-NOV-00
2001-1-00037 I T Group-FY1998 Incurred Cost
Transition 5/30/98 - 12/25/98 09-NOV-00
2001-4-00003 ELLSWORTH ASSOCIATES-FY 1997 Incurred Cost 16-NOV-OO
2001-1-00041 CDM Corporate - FY 1998 Incurred Cost 16-NOV-OO
2001-1-00042 Sverdrup Corporation-FY99 Incurred cost 16-NOV-OO
2001-1-00045 CH2M HILL, INC-FY 1996 Incurred Cost 22-NOV-OO
2001-1-00046 DynCorp Inc-FY98 Incurred Cost 28-NOV-OO
2001-1-00059 Southwest Research Institute-FY99 Incurred
cost 08-DEC-00
2001-1-00061 Aerodyne Research, Inc-FY98 Incurred cost ll-DEC-00
2001-1-00062 FLUOR DANIEL, INC.-FY 1994 ARCS
Closeout 68-W9-0013 ll-DEC-00
2001-1-00064 Enviromental Management Support
-FY99 Incurred cost 18-DEC-00
2001-1-00067 CH2M HILL INC-FY 1997 Incurred Cost 04-JAN-01
2001-4-00005 Pathology Associates Inc-FY99 Incurred cost 09-JAN-01
2001-1-00071 JACOBS ENGINEERING-FY 1995 Incurred Cost 10-JAN-01
2001-1-00072 JACOBS ENGINEERING-FY 1995 Incurred Cost 10-JAN-01
2001-1-00078 SAIC (Company 6)-FY 2000 Incurred cost 24-JAN-Q1
989,094
27,448
2, 773
18,349
http://www.epa.oov/oigearth - Page 32
-------
Recommended
Questioned Costs Efficiencies
Final Report Ineligible Unsupported Unreasonable {Funds Be Put
Report Number Title Issued Costs Costs Costs To Better Use)
2001-1-00086 Tascon, Inc-FY98 Incurred cost 01-FEB-01
2001-1-00087 Khafra Engineering Consultants
-FY98 Incurred Cost 01-FEB-01
2001-1-00092 McWane & Company Inc-FY98 Incurred cost 06-FEB-01 7,972
2001-1-00094 General Sciences Corp-FY99 Incurred cost 08-FEB-01
2001-1-00097 Acurex Environmental Corporation
-FY98 Incurred Cost 08-FEB-01
2001-1-00095 Aqua Terra Consultants - FY 98 incurred cost 08-FEB-01
2001-1-00102 TN S, Associates -FY99 Incurred cost 15-FEB-01
2001-1-00103 Dynamac Corporation-FY 1999 Incurred cost 15-FEB-01
2001-1-00104 Dynamac Corporation-FY98 Incurred Cost 20-FEB-01
2001-4-00006 Energy S Environmental Research Corp
-FY99 Incurred Cost 27-FEB-01
2001-1-00108 Energy & Environmental Research Corp
-FY99 Incurred Cost 01-MAR-01
2001-1-00109 TN & Associates-FYS8 Incurred Cost 05-MAR-01
2001-1-00111 Abt Associates Inc-FY 98 and 99 Incurred Cost 05-MAR-01
2001-1-00112 ABB Environmental Services
-FY97 & 98 Incurred cost 13-MAR-01
2001-1-00113 GRIFFIN SERVICES, INC-FY 1998 Incurred Cost 16-MAR-01
2001-1-00116 Bionetics Corporation-FY97 Incurred cost 16-MAR-01
2001-1-00115 Clean Air Vehicle Technology Center
-FY 2000 Incurred cost 16-MAR-01
2001-4-00007 Bionetics Corporation-FY98 Incurred cost 16-MAR-01
2001-1-00114 Clean Air Vehicle Technology Center
-FY99 Incurred Cost 16-MAR-01
2001-1-00117 Adsystech Inc-FY98 Incurred cost 21-MAR-01
2001-1-00118 URS Greiner-FY96 i/c Supplemental 21-MAR-01 4,852
2001-1-00119 Nobis Engineering, I nc- FY96 - 99 Incurred cost 2 3 - MAP. - 01
2001-1-00121 Trandes Corporation-FY99 Incurred cost 3Q-MAR-01
2001-1-00123 TALIB SYED & ASSOCIATES-FY 1997 Incurred Cost 30-MAR-01
2001-1-00122 Advanced Resources Technology, Inc
-FY99 Incurred cost 30-MAR-01
2001-4 -00008 TALIB SYED & ASSOCIATES - FY 1997 Incurred Cost 30-MAR-01
2001-1-00008 Tetra Tech EM Inc-CACS 68-W0-0034 12-OCT-OO
2000-1-00353 Versar, Inc.-CACS 68-D9-0166 17-OCT-OO 6,439
2001-1-00011 CDM FEDERAL PROGRAMS-FY 1996 ARCS 68-W9-0021 24-OCT-OO 4,109
2001-1-00044 NUS Corporation-CACS 68-01-6699 22-NOV-OO 317,659
2001-1-00089 Black & Veaech Special Projects
-FY 1996 ARCS CAC 68-W9-0055 02-FEB-01 1,043
2001-1-00105 BLACK & VEATCH SPECIAL PROJ
.-FY 1996 ARCS 68-W8-0064 26-FEB-01 4,739
2001-1-00026 I T Group-FY2000 Accounting System Follow-up 30-OCT-00
2001-1-00030 I T Group-FY2000 Self Governance 30-OCT-00
2001-1-00027 I T Group-FY2000 Internal/External Audit 30-OCT-00
2001-1-00029 I T Group-FY2000 Billing System Follow-up 30-OCT-00
2001-1-00047 Battelle Memorial Inst-FY2000 Compensation ICR 28-NOV-OO
2001-1-00049 Battelle Memorial Inst
-FY 2000 Labor ICR Follow-up 05-DEC-00
2001-1-00052 Eastern Research Group-Bi11ing Sytem 06-DEC-00
2001-1-00093 Battelle Memorial Inst-FY2000 Indirect/ODC ICR 07-FEB-01
2001-1-00016 Battelle Memorial Inst-FY2000 CAS 412 26-OCT-OO
2001-1-00017 Battelle Memorial Inst-FY2000 CAS 413 26-OCT-OO
2001-1-00028 I T Group-CAS 407 30-OCT-OO
2001-1-00053 CDM CORP - CAS 403 06-DEC-00
2001-1-00106 Tetra Tech-CAS 403 26-FEB-01
2001-1-00003 Env Tech Inc(Earth Tech)
-DP 68-S2-3002 & 68-S1-4002 05-OCT-00
2001-1-00006 CH2M Hill Companies, Ltd.-CAS 416 ll-OCT-OO
2001-1-00007 Black & Veatch Special Projects
Corp-97 ARCS 68-W9-0055 ll-OCT-OO 887
2001-2-00001 CET Environmental Services Inc
-Review of Invoices 12-OCT-OO 820
2001-2-00002 CET Environmental Services Inc
-Review of Invoices 12-OCT-OO 619
2001-2-00003 CET Environmental Services Inc
-Review of Invoices 12-OCT-OO
2001-2-00004 CET Environmental Services Inc
-Review of Invoices 12-OCT-OO
Page 33 - OCTOBER 1,2000 THROUGH MARCH 31,2001
-------
Recommended
Questioned Costs Efficiencies
Final Report Ineligible Unsupported Unreasonable (Funds Be Put
Report Number Title Issued Costs Costs Costs To Better Use)
Inc
Inc
2001-1-00009 B&V Special Project Corp
-FY1996 RAC Closeout 68-W5-0004
2001-1-00010 CDM Federal Programs
-ARCS Closeout 68-W9-0056 FY1998
2001-1-00012 CET Environmental Services Inc
-Review of Invoices
2001-2-00005 CET Environmental Services
-Review of Invoices
2001-2-00006 CET Environmental Services
-Review of Invoices
2001-2-00008 CET Environmental Services Inc
-Review of Invoices
2001-1-00019 ABB Environmental Serivces-CAC 68-03-3452
2001-1-00022 ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL RES
-FY 1997 Incurred Cost
2001-1-00024 IT GROUP-Contractor Purchasing
2001-1-00025 IT GROUP-Labor Cost Charging
2001-1-00032 IT GROUP-Labor Floorcheck
2001-1-00034 CDM Federal Programs Corporation
-CACS 68-W9-0002
2001-1-00035 Grace Analytical Labs, Inc-FY2000 Floorcheck
2001-1-00038 Battelle Memorial Inst
-BMI-36 Rev Disc Statement
2001-1-00039 Battelle Memorial Inst-BCO
-56 Rev Disc Statement
2001-1-00043 ROY F WESTON-FY 1996 ARCS 68-W9-0022
2001-1-00040 Eastern Research Group-Compensation Review
2001-1-00048 Development Planning & Rsch Assoc-MAAR 6
2001-1-00050 Battelle Memorial Inst-FY99 Billing ICR
2001-1-00051 CDM Federal Programs Corp-FY98 RAC 68-W5-0022
2001-1-00054 OAO Corporation
-Timekeeping & Physical observation
2001-1-00055 ABT Associates Inc-Compensation Follow-up
2001-1-00057 ROY F. WESTON INC.
-FY 1996 ARCS Closeout 68-W8-0089
2001-1-00058 Tetra Tech NUS- FY 1996-98 RAC 68-W6-0045
2001-1-00060 Environmental Technology, Inc.
(Earth Tech)-Voucher Review
2001-1-00063 SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INST
-Budget and Financial Systems
2001-4-00004 ABT Associates Inc-Financial Capability
2001-2-00011 Jacobs Engineering Group-FY98 RAC 868-W5-0014
2001-1-00065 Computer Based Systems-CACS 68-W2-0011
2001-1-00066 CH2M Hi 11 -FY97„Home Office Allocation
2001-1-00070 IT Group-FY2000 Floorcheck
2001-1-00076 CET Environmental Services Inc
-FY2000 Floorcheck
2001-1-00079 Battelle Memorial Inst-BMI-37
Disclosure Statement
2001 -1 -0007*7 ABT Associates Inc.
- Accounting System Follow-up
2001-1-00080 Battelle Memorial Inst-BTSO-34
Rev Disclosure Statement
2001-1-00081 Battelle Memorial Inst
-FY2001 Bidding & Billing Rates
2001-1-00082 Battelle Memorial Inst
-FY2001 Bidding & Billing Rates
2001-1-00083 CH2M Hill Inc-FY2000 Forward Pricing Rates
2001-1-00084 Lockheed Martin Services, Inc
-FY 2000 Floorcheck
2001-1-00085 Lockheed Martin Svc
-FY2000 Budget & Planning System
2001-2-00012 CET Environmental Services Inc
-Review of Invoices
2001-1-00090 CH2M Hill Inc-Accounting System Follow-up
2001-1-00096 Battelle Memorial Inst
-Bidding & Billing Rates
2001-1-00098 IT Group, Inc-Internal Controls
19-OCT-00
24-OCT-00
25-OCT-00
2 5-OCT-00
2 5-OCT-00
25-OCT-OO
27-OCT-00
27-OCT-00
30-OCT-00
30-OCT-00
07 - NOV-00
08-NOV-00
08 - NOV-00
16-NOV-00
16 - NOV-00
16-NOV-00
16-NOV-00
28-NOV-00
05-DEC-00
05-DEC-00
06 - DEC-00
06-DEC-00
08 - DEC-00
08-DEC-00
08 - DEC-00
15 - DEC-00
15-DEC-00
21- DEC-00
04-JAN-01
04-JAN-01
09-JAN - 01
24-JAN-01
24-JAN-01
24-JAN-01
25-JAN - 01
25-JAN-01
25-JAN-01
25-JAN-01
26-JAN - 01
29-JAN - 01
01- FEB-01
02 - FEB-01
08-FEB-01
08 - FEB-01
47,836
2,644
115,684
215,862
http://www.epa.gov/oigearth - Page 34
-------
Recommended
Questioned Costs Efficiencies
Final Report Ineligible Unsupported Unreasonable (Funds Be Put
Report Number Title Issued Costs Costs Costs To Better Use)
2001-1-00099 Trinity Engineering Associates
-Accounting Sys Review 08-FEB-01
2001-2-00017 BG&G Emissions Testing Services-Labor Rate 05-MAR-01
2001-1-00110 Black & Veatch Special Proj Corp
-FY97 & 90 ARCS Closeout 05-MAR-01 11,271
2001-4-00009 IT Group, Inc
-FY2001 IT OATS Provisional Rates 30-MAR-01
TOTAL DCCA CONTRACT REPORTS = 133 1,780,100
2001-1-00107 2000 AGCY F/S - PREPARATION & REPORTING
- FAD (Master) 28-FEB-01
TOTAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT REPORTS = 1
2001-S-00001 South Carolina Clean Water SRF
2001-S-00002 Joint Review of the Management of
Superfund Collections and 02-JAN-01
2001-S-00003 Joint Review of the Management of
Superfund Collections and 19-JAN-01
2001-S-00004 Joint Review of the Management of
Superfund Collections and 19-JAN-01
2001-S-00005 Joint Review of the Management of
Superfund Collections and 19-JAN-01
2001-S-00007 EPA Actions Concerning Libby SF Site 31-MAR-01
2001-S-00006 Assistance Agreement Defalcation 29-MAR-01
11-OCT-00
TOTAL SPECIAL REVIEW REPORTS - 7
TOTAL REPORTS ISSUED =24 6
26,219,271
11,844,509
1,414,203
Page 35 - OCTOBER 1,2000 through MARCH 31,2001
-------
OIG MAILING ADDRESSES and TELEPHONE NUMBERS
OIG HOTLINE 1-888-546-8740 or (202) 260-4977
Headquarters
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW (2441)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260-3137
Atlanta
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
Audit: (404) 562-9830
Investigations: (404) 562-9857
Boston
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
One Congress St.
Suite 1100 (Mailcodc)
Boston, MA 02114-2023
Audit: (617)918-1470
Investigations:(617) 915-1481
Chicago
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
77 West Jackson Boulevard
13th Floor (IA-13J)
Chicago, IL 60604
Audit: (312)353-2486
Investigations: (312) 353-2507
Cincinnati
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
MS : Norwood
Cincinnati, OH 45268-7001
Audit: (513)487-2360
Investigations: (312) 353-2507 (Chicago)
Dallas
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General (60IG)
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Audit: (214) 665-6621
Investigations: (404) 562-9857 (Atlanta)
Denver
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
Audit: (303)312-6872
Investigations: (312) 353-2507 (Chicago)
Kansas City
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
901 N. 5th Street
Kansas City, KS 66101
Audit: (913) 551-7878
Investigations: (312) 353-2507 (Chicago)
New York
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
290 Broadway, Room 1520
New York, NY 10007
Audit: (212) 637-3080
Investigations: (212) 637-3041
Philadelphia
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
1650 Arch Street, 3rd Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
Audit: (215) 814-5800
Investigations: (215) 814-2361
Research Triangle Park
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
Catawba Building
Highway 54, Mail Drop 53
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Audit: (919) 541-2204
Investigations: (919) 541-1027
Sacramento
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
801 I Street, Room 264
Sacramento, CA 95814
Audit: (916) 498-6530
Investigations: (415) 744-2465 (SF)
San Francisco
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
75 Hawthorne St. (1GA-1)
7th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Audit: (415) 744-2445
Investigations: (415) 744-2465
Seattle
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
1200 6th Avenue, 19th Floor
Suite 1920, M/S OIG-195
Seattle, WA 98101
Audit: (206) 553-4033
Investigations: (206) 553-1273
http://WWW.EPA.GOV/OIGEARTH- PAGE 36
------- |