350R89101
Agency
&EPA Office of
4905
1989
c.l
Inspector General
Report to Congress
Ul
n
IG
[U]
n
II
Fiscal 1989
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
2,-Q S. --^. ,i:v -L_-.5et, Kaom 1670
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
-The Inspector General Act of 1978 (P L. 95-452), as
I amended, created the Office of Inspector General to
consolidate existing investigative and audit resources in
independent organizations headed by Inspectors General.
The OIG's role is to review EPA's financial transactions,
program, and administrative activities; investigate
allegations or evidence of possible criminal and civil
violations; and promote economic, efficient, and effective
operations within the Agency.
The EPA Inspector General reports directly to the
Administrator and the Congress and has the authority to:
Initiate and carry out independent and objective audits
and investigations,
Issue subpoenas for evidence and information,
Obtain access to any materials in the Agency,
Report serious or flagrant problems to Congress,
Select and appoint OIG employees,
Fill Senior Executive Service positions,
Administer oaths, and
Enter into contracts.
The Inspector General is appointed by, and can be
removed only by, the President. This independence
protects the OIG from interference and allows it to
function as the Agency's fiscal and operational watchdog.
Office of Inspector General - Headquarters
Office of Audit
Kenneth A Konz
Acting Assistant Inspector Genera
James O Rauch
Acting Deputy
Inspector General
John C Martin
Deputy Inspector General
Anna Hopkins Virbick
Office of Management
and Technical
Assessment
John C Jones
Office of Investigations
John E Barden
Daniel S Sweeney
Operations Staff
Elissa R Karpt
Director
Technical
Assistance Staff
Vacant
Diector
Planning and
Resources
Management Staff
Edward Gekosky
Ditec'pt
Technical Assessment and
Fraud Prevention Division
John C Jones
D.e.10
Administrative and
Management Services Division
Michael J Binder
Headquarters
Kenneth Hockman
Region 3
Paul R Gandolfo
Divisional Inspectors General
Region 5
Anthony C Carrollo
AuJ'
r<-or 3 ," j'"2-S6
Alex Falcon
Martin Squ.tien
Invest.gdiun
Regions 1 and 2
Paul McKechnie
irTi 01 21rii r)97 9V
Regions 4, 6, & 7
Mary Boyer
^ud ; >f TS 2' " 367", , r
Regions 8, 9, & 10
Truman R Beelcr
-------
invironmental Protection Agency
Dffice of Inspector General
Audit Operations
DIG Managed Audits
Questioned Costs*
' Recommended Efficiencies
(Funds be Put to Better Use)
' Costs Disallowed to be Recovered
(costs which EPA management agre
are unallowable and is committed
to recover or offset against
future payments)
Fiscal 1989
-Total $165.2 million
-Federal Share $124.2 million
-Total $ 19.7 million
-Federal Share $ 10.7 million
-Federal Share $ 40.5 million
Costs Disallowed as Cost Efficiencies
Recommended Efficiencies (funds made
available by EPA management's commitment
to implement recommendations in DIG audits)
-Federal Share $ 36.8 million
Other Audits
Questioned Costs*
Recommended Efficiencies
(Funds be Put to Better Use)
-Total $ 65 million
-Federal Share $ 5.7 million
-Total $418.8 million
-Federal Share $4188 million
* Costs Disallowed to be Recovered
(costs which EPA management agrees are
unallowable and is committed to recover
or offset against future payments)
Costs Disallowed as Cost Efficiencies
Recommended Efficiencies (funds made
available by EPA management's commitment
to implement recommendations in OIG audits)
-Federal Share $ 4 5 million
-Federal Share $ 24 6 million
Recoveries from Audit Resolutions of Current and
Prior Periods (cash collections or offsets to
future payments)**
EPA Audits Performed/Issued by the OIG
Audit Reports Resolved (agreement by Agency
officials to take satisfactory corrective action)
Investigative Operations
Fines and Recoveries (including civil)
Indictments/Convictions
Administrative Actions Taken Against EPA Employees
Fraud Detection and Prevention Operations
Debarments, Suspensions, Voluntary Exclusions, and
Settlement Agreements (actions to deny persons
or firms from participating in EPA programs or
operations because of misconduct or poor performance)
Hotline Complaints Received
Proposed Legislative and Regulatory Items Reviewed
Personnel Security Investigations Adjudicated
" Questioned Costs: Ineligible, Unsupported and Unnecessary/
treasonable; and Recommended Efficiencies (Funds be Put to
Better Use) are subject to change pending further review in
:he audit resolution process.
** Information was provided by the EPA Rnanclal Management
Division and is unaudited
$ 30.0 million
1,920
676
$5,433.251
74
34
82
117
600
-------
Questioned Costs and Recommended
Efficiencies by Type of Audit - FY 89
Non Federal Federal
Recommended Recommended
Efficiencies Efficiencies
Federal
Questioned
Examples of
Significant Audits
The following represents examples of some of our most
significant types of findings. They should not be
considered representative of the overall adequacy of EPA
management.
Penalties Against Polluters Greatly Reduced
Reductions to calculated penalties against polluters, as
much as 90 percent, far exceeded Agency guidelines, and
EPA consistently failed to maintain essential records
supporting these enforcement decisions. As a result, there
was little assurance that penalties assessed by EPA were
equitable or sufficient to deter violations of environmental
laws and regulations Also, EPA regional offices did not
always calculate and consider the economic benefit (the
potential financial gam the violator received from delayed
or avoided costs of compliance) and gravity (the reflection
of the actual or potential harm to the environment and the
size of the violator) in assessing penalties.
Hawaii Grant Programs Did Not Achieve
Environmental Goals
Region 9 did not effectively monitor Hawaii's
administration of over $60 million of program and
construction grants awarded during fiscal years 1986
through 1988. Specifically, we found neither the State nor
EPA demonstrated a serious commitment to establishing
an effective enforcement program and pursuing penalties
-------
against facilities with long histories of discharging water
and air pollutants in violation of environmental regulations.
Many facilities were deteriorated, and some were not
capable of functioning at their designed operating levels
Also, expiring National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System permits were not reviewed on a timely basis, and
two wastewater treatment facilities were allowed to
discharge without a valid NPDES permit or extension
Success of a New Imported Vehicle Inspection
Program Questioned
Foreign vehicles manufactured for sale overseas generally
do not conform to U.S. safety and emission standards.
However, these "gray market" vehicles may be imported
providing they are modified to meet U.S standards. A new
EPA gray market vehicle program reduces the Agency's
oversight, reduces or eliminates some major controls, and
allows importers to operate without prior on-site inspection
of their facilities For example, the new program makes
independent commercial importers (ICIs) responsible for
importing, modifying, and testing the vehicles Each ICI
would get permission to operate through a certificate of
conformity issued by EPA for each make, model year, and
engine type of vehicle being imported based solely on the
quality of changes made to a prototype vehicle Also, the
new program eliminated the Customs bond previously
required on each imported vehicle, reduced vehicle
inspection hold periods, and reduced test data submission
requirements The revised program does not have a formal
penalty policy to encourage program compliance and
ensure consistent, fair enforcement
Schools With More Serious Asbestos Hazards
Could Have Received EPA Funding
EPA needs to improve its management of the Asbestos
School Hazard Abatement Act loan and grant program so
that local educational agencies with the most serious
health hazards receive assistance in financing and
implementing their asbestos abatement projects as quickly
as possible Because the Agency did not solicit new
applications, but funded those already on hand, EPA
supported less worthy projects in fiscal 1987 and 1988,
while other projects with greater hazards were not
considered.
Stronger Enforcement Action Required by EPA
and States to Protect the Chesapeake Bay
The Chesapeake Bay Agreement, signed by EPA, the
States bordering the Bay, and the District of Columbia in
1983 and updated in 1987, pledges to reduce nutrient
loadings to the Bay by 40 percent, manage and control
conventional pollutants, and reduce toxic pollutants
entering the Bay We found that EPA and the States did
not effectively take enforcement actions against
-------
Chesapeake Bay dischargers violating their NPDES
permits. Even when the pollution was serious or
longstanding, States were slow to act against the permit
violators, assessing either insignificant penalties or no
penalty whatsoever. EPA did not fulfill its responsibility for
enforcement when the States failed to, and did not ensure
that the States expeditiously and aggressively control toxic
pollutants. For example, L A Clark, a Fredencksburg,
Virginia, wood preserving facility, consistently violated its
NPDES permit for 13 years without being assessed a
penalty. The facility caused numerous environmental
problems, including contamination of surface and ground
water, before finally being placed on the Superfund
National Priorities List in June 1986, with an estimated
cleanup cost of $23 million. Despite these environmental
problems, L.A Clark retained its NPDES permit for over 2
years after being declared a Superfund site.
EPA and States in Regions 2 and 4 Were Not
Enforcing the Clean Water Act
EPA and States in Regions 2 and 4 were not effectively
enforcing the Clean Water Act against violations of
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permits by publicly owned treatment works. We found
that enforcement actions taken by EPA and the States in
Regions 2 and 4 were inadequate or ineffective in
returning municipal violators to timely compliance. Regions
2 and 4 did not take timely and appropriate enforcement
actions against polluters when States failed to carry out
their permit enforcement responsibilities, resulting in
facilities continuing to discharge inadequately treated
effluent
Indecision of State and EPA Impeded Hazardous
Waste Cleanup in Arkansas
Inadequate administration and coordination by EPA and
Arkansas at two Superfund sites slowed cleanup actions
and increased costs by $6 million At the Vertac site in
Jacksonville, EPA and the State failed to agree on who
was responsible for the incineration of leaking drums The
State took over 2 years to hire an incineration contractor
while EPA paid $4.7 million to pack and store the drums
At the Gramlich site in Fort Smith, Region 6 requested
Headquarters' approval and $258,000 to conduct an
immediate removal of 800 cubic yards of
PCB-contaminated soil. EPA Headquarters denied the
request. The State conducted a $50,000 cleanup in
October 1982; the Region assumed this action cleaned up
the site. EPA's post-removal sampling in I988 determined
that only 200 of the 800 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated
soil had been removed by the State and that the
contamination had spread to an additional 2,000 cubic
yards at the site As a result, EPA had to spend $1.6
million to remove all 2,600 cubic yards of
PCB-contaminated soil.
-------
Improvements Still Needed in EPA's
Contract Management
Despite improving its contract monitoring process, EPA
was still not effectively administering contracts supporting
the Office of Solid Waste (OSW) EPA's failure to properly
manage contracts resulted in contractors performing
unauthorized and unfunded work We found that on 13 of
the 43 contract actions reviewed, OSW personnel
requested contractors to perform work before a formal
agreement was reached. On four other contract actions,
contractors performed work before funds were obligated
or work that exceeded the estimated cost As a result,
contractors incurred an estimated $532,723 in
unauthorized or unapproved costs. EPA paid $814,682 to
contractors for work completed before an agreement was
reached on how the work was to be performed and how
much it should cost Also, contractors were paid without
EPA adequately reviewing progress reports and billing
invoices.
New York Town Claims Over $2.9 Million
of Ineligible or Unsupported Costs
EPA awarded grants to the town of Amherst, New York,
for the construction of sanitary and interceptor sewers, a
lift and pump station, and additions and alterations to
treatment facilities. We questioned $2.9 million of the
costs claimed, $1 million as ineligible and $1 9 million as
unsupported costs. The ineligible costs included $698,150
of architectural engineering fees allocable to another grant,
costs claimed in excess of contract ceilings, and services
outside the scope of the grant As a result of our
recommendations, the Agency sustained for recovery
$1,392,996 of the $2 2 million Federal share of questioned
costs
Love Canal Superfund Costs
Not Adequately Supported
The New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation claimed $17,619,773 for credit under the
Superfund act of 1980 for non-Federal funds expended at
Love Canal between January 1, 1978, and December 11,
1980. The credit was claimed toward offsetting the State's
cost share requirement. We questioned $5,140,503 of the
net costs due to a lack of adequate documentation
supporting the reasonableness and acceptability of costs
claimed for property acquisitions, relocations,
administrative and personal service costs, payroll, fringe
benefits, supplies, and equipment The New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation has had ample
opportunity to provide the necessary documentation to
support the expenditures claimed As a result of our
recommendations, the Agency sustained for recovery
$3,940,503 that we questioned.
-------
Audit Resolution
During fiscal 1989, the Office of Inspector General issued
1,920 new audit reports, of which 621 required resolution,
and closed 676. Of the 357 audit reports in the follow-up
system at year end, 94 reports remained for which no
management decision was made within 6 months of
issuance.
Of the audits closed, $106 4 million of costs were disallowec
by EPA management, including $45 million to be recovered,
and $61.4 million were agreed to by management as funds to
be put to better use The Agency reported cost recoveries
from current and prior periods of $5 5 million in cash
collections, and $24 5 million in offsets against billings
Examples of Audit Resolution Actions
Orange County Claims $10 Million
of Ineligible Costs
EPA awarded grants to the Orange County Sanitation
District, Fountain Valley, California, for plans, design, and
major construction improvements at Plant Number Two
We questioned over $102 million of costs claimed,
including $6 2 million for construction in excess of
approved limits, and $2.7 million for work or services
performed after authorized completion dates, performed
before EPA approval, not approved or in excess of
amounts approved, or not allocable to the approved
project As a result of our recommendations, the Agency
sustained for recovery $7,146,238 of the $7 8 million
Federal share we questioned
Almost $1.7 Million of Ineligible and Unsupported Costs
Claimed in New Jersey
EPA awarded grants to the Western Monmouth Utilities
Authority, New Jersey, for the construction of interceptor
sewers, a pump station, force mam, and upgrade of an
existing secondary wastewater treatment facility to a
tertiary facility We questioned $730,000 of the grantee's
final claim as ineligible and $960,000 as unsupported As a
result of our recommendations, the Agency sustained for
recovery $678,062 of the $1,269,618 Federal share
questioned
-------
During this fiscal year, our investigative efforts resulted in 74
indictments and convictions and over $5.4 million of fines and
recoveries in criminal and civil actions and from persons or
firms who defrauded the Agency.
EPA Contractor Pleads Guilty To Being an Accessory to
Theft of Government Property
SCS Engineers, Inc., of Reston, Virginia, pled guilty in
November 1988 to charges of accessory after the fact to
theft of U.S. Government property As previously reported,
Gary L. Mitchell, a former staff engineer with SCS
Engineers, pled guilty in June 1988 to removing
confidential procurement information from an EPA facility
during 1985, before and during the solicitation for a
technical support contract valued at about $45 million The
investigation was based on an allegation from a competitor
that GCA Technology Division, Inc, of Bedford,
Massachusetts, possessed a copy of their bid proposal At
that time Mitchell was an SCS employee on an EPA
project for the Office of Solid Waste. Further investigation
determined that SCS Engineers knew of Mitchell's offense
after the fact and assisted Mitchell The information was
taken to benefit SCS as a potential subcontractor to GCA,
which subsequently received this information
Illegal "Gray Market" Cars
We continued to work with Federal and State agencies
investigating "gray market" auto dealers and emissions
modifications and testing facilities who illegally sell,
modify, or test imported cars that have been falsely
certified to meet Federal standards Gray market auto
dealers import cars to the United States, modify them to
meet U.S. safety and EPA emission standards, and resell
them for far less than U S franchised dealers However,
some importers and modifiers falsely certify or induce
others to falsely certify that the cars meet Federal Clean
Air Act standards
In one case, an importer was sentenced to two years
imprisonment, to be followed by a 5 year term of
probation, for illegally importing gray market Mercedes
Benz automobiles to the U S and making false statements
to EPA regarding such automobiles. The investigation
revealed that approximately 250 vehicles had been illegally
imported into the United States through the Port of
Jacksonville, Florida.
In another case, the owners of L&L International, Inc ,
Wilmington, North Carolina, and Auto Craft Canada and
Exotic Motors, Ontario, Canada, were indicted on charges
of mail fraud, forgery, currency violations, and violations of
EPA and DOT regulations, stemming from the import and
sale of foreign sports cars. L&L International imported
European luxury vehicles, made the modifications
necessary to convert them and resold them in the United
States.
-------
Bus Pass Money Taken by Region 6 Employee
In November 1988 a Region 6 employee was sentenced to
3 years probation, 100 hours of community service, and
was directed to enter a mental health program for keeping
$8,000 due the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) system
for bus passes sold to EPA employees. For over 8 months,
the employee received bus passes worth approximately
$71,500 from DART for resale to EPA employees The
unsold passes (but no money) were returned to DART in
March 1988, a month after the employee's resignation
from EPA. The Assistant U.S. Attorney asked that
restitution of the stolen money be part of the sentence,
but the judge declined because the employee did not have
any money. This investigation was a joint effort by EPA
OIG and the Department of Transportation OIG
Three EPA Headquarters Employees Sentenced in
AMTRAK Fraud Scheme
Three EPA Headquarters employees were sentenced in
Washington, D.C., on October 7, 1988, for their roles in an
attempt to defraud AMTRAK by submitting false lost
luggage claims. The total dollar amount of the fraud was
$5,000, representing 10 individual false claims.
One employee received a sentence of 2 years probation
and 100 hours of community service, plus restitution of
$4,750. The employee also received a 30 day suspension
from EPA Two other employees got 1-year probation, 50
hours of community service, and $100 restitution One
received a 7-day suspension from EPA, and the other
received a letter of reprimand.
-------
Former EPA Asbestos Inspector Pleads Guilty to
Conspiracy Charge
Howard Stacker, a former EPA Region 2 asbestos
inspector, pled guilty on June 26, 1989, to conspiracy to
accept bribes of more than $170,000 from asbestos
removal contractors from 1983 through 1987 Stecker was
bribed to overlook violations of EPA rules and regulations
regarding asbestos removal projects conducted by the
contractors, and to avoid job sites at which asbestos
removal projects were being carried out EPA regulations
require that specific practices be used during demolition
and renovation of structures containing asbestos to
minimize the potential exposure of workers and the
general public. A joint investigation of Stecker and
asbestos removal contractors in the New York
metropolitan area by the EPA Office of Inspector General
and the Office of Labor Racketeering of the U S
Department of Labor has resulted in the indictment of 28
contractors, representing 19 companies To date, $606,000
in fines have been assessed
Connecticut Quintet Pleads Guilty in Asbestos Case
James McGuire, president of the United Painting Co.,
Bethel, Connecticut, and four of his employees,
Christopher Weldon, Jennifer Gabaordi, Christopher
Gabaordi, and Steven Kovacs, pled guilty to charges arising
from United's use of workers who were neither trained
nor certified by an EPA-approved training program to
remove asbestos from public school buildings in Bethel
and Stamford, Connecticut. McGuire pled guilty to making
false statements to a Government agency, the employees
were charged with violating the Toxic Substances Control
Act
-------
Suspension and Determent Activities
EPA's policy is to do business only with contractors,
grantees, and persons who are responsible, honest, and
who comply with applicable rules and regulations. EPA
enforces this policy by suspending or debarring any
organization or person for acting improperly, having a
history of substandard work, or willfully failing to perform
on EPA or other Federally funded activities. Suspensions
and debarments deny participation in Agency programs
and activities to those who represent a risk of abuse to
the Government.
A nonprocurement debarment or suspension by one
Agency is effective in all. The General Services
Administration (GSA) publishes a "List of Parties Excluded
from Federal Procurement or Nonprocurement Programs."
In fiscal 1989, 72 debarment or suspension actions were
taken. Examples include:
EPA debarred B.E.S. Environmental Specialists (BES) and
its founder, Richard Baranowski, on June 12, 1989, for 21
months. BES was the emergency removal contractor on
the Brown's Battery site in Berks County, Pennsylvania.
Based on an EPA OIG investigation, the hearing officer found
that Baranowski had done free construction work on the
on-scene coordinator's house and had taken him on an
expense-paid Canadian vacation. BES' refusal to turn over
records to the Office of Inspector General for an audit was
another ground for debarment. Prior to the decision, BES
had been suspended for 11 months.
Denver Asbestos Control Technology, Inc , (DACT), Rocky
Mountain Applications, Environmental Contracting Services
and their officers, Joel Lederman and James Hellman,
have been debarred from participation in Federal
programs for 3 years. The debarment followed Lederman's
plea of guilty to submitting false statements certifying the
health conditions of DACT employees, and aiding and abetting
in connection with asbestos violations. Hellman pled guilty to
bribery and making false statements concerning loan or
credit applications in connection with the asbestos
program.
Eason & Smith Enterprises, Inc. (E&S) of Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma, signed a compliance agreement with EPA
excluding them from participation in EPA assistance
programs. E&S was convicted of unlawfully storing
hazardous wastes in violation of Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act requirements.
Paxson Electric Company of Jacksonville, Florida, was
debarred for two and one-half years on November 7, 1988.
Also debarred for the same period was Wesley C. Paxson,
Sr., president of the firm. The company and Mr. Paxson
had been convicted of bidriggmg and mail fraud resulting
10
-------
from their participation in a conspiracy to submit collusive,
complementary and rigged bids for electrical work at the
EPA-funded Snapfmger Creek Waste Water Treatment
Plant in DeKalb County, Georgia.
Three officials of the Denver Colorado Sanitary Company
were debarred on January'17, 1989, as accessories to the
company's conviction of making false statements and illegally
storing and transporting hazardous waste to an unpermitted
facility. The company also accepted a voluntary exclusion for
20 months.
Personnel Security Program Protects EPA
The Personnel Security Program is one ot the Agency's
first line defenses against fraud, using background
investigations to review the integrity of EPA employees
and contractors During fiscal 1989, 600 investigations
were reviewed, resulting in:
Fourteen EPA employees were required to submit
corrected SF-171s for failing to disclose previous
misdemeanors and convictions.
Two employees were suspended, for 7 days for
falsifying the SF-171, one for numerous arrests and
convictions while employed in a sensitive position and the
other for not listing a conviction for possession of
controlled substances when applying for a promotion.
One employee was suspended for 14 days for omitting
previous convictions and prior firings in applying for
employment with EPA on a SF-171
Two employees were terminated during the
probationary periods, one for unprofessional conduct, the
other for materially falsifying the SF-171
Committee on Integrity and Management
Improvement (CIMI)
The Committee on Integrity and Management
Improvement coordinates the Agency's efforts to minimize
the opportunities for fraud, waste, and mismanagement
and advises the Administrator on policies to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of EPA's programs and
operations Chaired by the Inspector General, CIMI
completed several projects, including Awareness Bulletins
on bribes and gratuities and disposition of office! records
and personal papers, a leaflet on the Federal
Telecommunications Systems, a computer security
advisory, special events during Public Service Recognition
Week, and three posters designed to increase employee
awareness of ethics.
11
-------
Human Resources Council (HRC)
The OIG HRC, composed of 16 OIG employees
representing all grade levels and geographical locations,
advises and assists the Inspector General in developing
effective policies, strategies, and programs for employee
development and work force management. Some of the
HRC's significant accomplishments during fiscal 1989
included developing a booklet which describes the physical
exam, counseling, and fitness services available at
Headquarters and each EPA region; and an orientation
session for new OIG employees at Headquarters. Also, as
a result of an HRC project, the OIG initiated a 5/4-9
compressed work schedule This schedule has since been
adopted by nearly all EPA Headquarters offices.
12
-------
The DIG Hotline Center received 82 new complaints and
closed 72 cases during fiscal 1989. Of these, 19 resulted
in environmental, administrative, or prosecutive action. We
also received 1,496 calls in which callers were referred to
the appropriate program office, State agency, or other
Federal agency for assistance.
The following are examples of corrective action taken as
a result of information provided to the hotline center.
A complaint alleged that an EPA manager used
Government materials and employees to perform work at
his home on government time. A review of the complaint
disclosed that the manager used government employees
to perform repairs and maintenance on his home on three
occasions. In addition, a government employee and
government materials were used to construct a personal
item for the manager on government time As a result of
this misuse of government personnel and property, the
manager's employment with EPA was terminated.
A complaint alleged that medical waste was being
improperly burned and that the particles emitted were
endangering nearby homes and foliage. A review of the
complaint disclosed that a local hospital had been ordered
by the State to extend its incinerator stack. The hospital
complied but failed to extend the stack high enough to
prevent a downwash of emissions into the surrounding
community. The State subsequently required the hospital
to develop a plan to reduce emissions from its incinerator
and to increase the height of the incinerator stack to
prevent pollution of the neighborhood. The State also
drafted new regulations for hospital waste incinerators.
A complaint alleged waste of Government funds. A
review of the complaint disclosed that new file cabinets
were repainted and new desk tops were provided for
Superfund work stations to coordinate the color scheme,
at a cost of $27,225, plus $350 for overtime of personnel
to supervise the repainting. The complaint also disclosed
that unserviceable excess furniture had been shipped
between Regions and then stored in a commercial
warehouse for 4 months, at a cost of $10,738, pending
GSA approval for disposal since it had no market value.
The office that transported the furniture continued to carry
the items on the property records because property
transfer documents were not prepared As a result of this
complaint, the Agency improved the controls over the
procurement and management of property, furniture, and
equipment.
U.S. Fnvi rodent nl Protection Ageacy
30
V llO -YT<
13
-------
If you are aware of any fraud, waste, or
mismanagement, please contact the EPA Inspector
General Hotline or the appropriate Divisional
Inspector General listed on the second panel of this
brochure.
Information is confidential.
Caller may be anonymous.
Call can be made from anywhere toll
free.800-424-4000 and 202 (or 8 if FTS) 382-4977
Remember, Act Like It's Your MoneyIt Is!
------- |