United States
     Environmental Protection
     Agency
               EPA-350-K-96-001
               February 1996
    EPA Office of the
    Inspector General
    Report to Congress
-TU
IG
11
     Fiscal 1995

-------
        Office of  Inspector General
The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, created Offices
of Inspector General (OIG) to consolidate existing investigative and
audit resources in independent organizations headed by Inspectors
General.  For fiscal  1995, the EPA OIG received $44.5 million and
a funded staffing level of 447 FTE.  The Inspector General (IG) is
appointed by, and can be removed only by, the President.  The
mission of the OIG, as stated in the Act, is to:
•   Conduct  and supervise independent and objective audits and
    investigations  relating to agency programs and operations.
•   Promote  economy,  effectiveness,  and efficiency within  the
    agency.
•   Prevent  and  detect  fraud,  waste,   and  abuse  in  agency
    programs.
•   Review and make recommendations  regarding existing and
    proposed legislation  and  regulations  relating to  agency
    programs and  operations.
•   Keep the agency head and the Congress fully and currently
    informed of  problems in agency programs.

To ensure objectivity, the Act provides the IGs:
•   Independence  to determine what reviews to perform.
•   Access to all information necessary for the reviews.
•   Authority to publish findings and recommendations.
                        Who's Who
                     Inspector General
                     John C. Martin

                     Deputy Inspector General
                     Nikki L. Tinsley
  ffice of Audit

  enneth A. Konz
  ssistant IG

  ames O. Rauch
  rincipal Deputy

  issa R. Karpf
  eputy for Acquisition &
 Assistance Audits

 rtichaei D. Simmons
  eputy for Internal &
  'erformance Audits
Office of Management

John C. Jones
Assistant IG
Office of Investigations

Allen P. Fallin
Assistant IG

Emmett D. Dashiell Jr.
Deputy Assistant IG
    John T. Walsh
    Director
    Program Management Division

    Michael J. Binder
    Director
    Resources Management Division
   Kenneth D. Hockman, Policy & Resources Mgmt

   Robert F. Eagen, Engineering & Scientific Assistance

   Patricia H. Hill, ADP Audits and Assistance

   Gordon C. Milbourn III, Special Projects & Reviews

-------
   OIG  Streamlining  and Management
   Improvements
 Within the OIG

 The EPA OIG embraced the concept of streamlining and reinvention
 with decisive action for greater staff empowerment, operational
 efficiency, improved work processes, and  a more consultative
 approach  in working  with the  Agency.to  promote economy,
 efficiency, and effectiveness. The real challenge of our reinvention
 and change was  performing a rigorous examination of  ways to
 reduce costs, assess risks, identify customer needs, and  measure
 performance.  We accomplished this successfully and identified
 areas to  further  improve  our  own economy,  efficiency,  and
 effectiveness  by  reducing  our  investment in  administrative
 functions  while maximizing our  application of resources to the
 Agency's greatest needs.

 Specifically, the EPA OIG continued the process of reinvention by
 carefully examining the administrative functions and processes of
 our organization.   We  particularly focused  on  administrative
 activities that are performed at more than one location  with an
 emphasis  on eliminating any unnecessary duplication.   We also
 examined  all of our operational costs and expenses, looking for
 opportunities and alternatives for savings.  As a result, we are
 restructuring our  Headquarters  organization  and  functional
 responsibilities  to  accrue improved efficiency  by   reducing
 Headquarters staff and reassigning personnel to our core audit and
 investigative functions.  Also, in response to other actions we
 previously identified as needed to bring our streamlining initiatives
 to  fruition,  OIG   staff  have   begun   conducting   Team
 Effectiveness/Team  Leadership  seminars.  These seminars are
 designed to help the OIG develop self-guided teams with  a strong
 emphasis on customer service.

Assisting the Agency

We also assisted  the  Agency in furthering its streamlining and
reinvention initiatives. For example, OIG efforts were instrumental
in EPA's development of performance measurement information for
inclusion in the Agency's  fiscal  1994 financial statements, audited
during fiscal 1995.  The OIG assisted one office in revising its
measures for a loan  and grant program, and EPA  used the results
of a performance audit of another program as a mechanism to
evaluate its  performance, as   required  by  the  Government
Performance and  Results  Act.   In  addition,  we are leading a
government-wide  President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency
audit of  computer application software maintenance which in EPA
resulted in the development of system performance indicators.

-------
   Profile of Activities  and Results
                                                     Fiscal 1995
                                                 (dollars in millions)
Audit Operations	                  '	
• Questioned Costs (Ineligible, Unsupported and
  Unnecessary/Unreasonable)
 -Total'                                                  $167.2
 - Federal Share                                            $120.2

• Recommended Efficiencies
  (Funds be Put to Better Use)
 -Total*                                                  $330.4
 - Federal Share                                            $330.2

• Costs Disallowed to be Recovered
 - Federal Share                                            $120.3
   (costs which EPA management
   agrees are unallowable and
   is committed to recover or
   offset against future payments)

• Costs Disallowed as Cost Efficiency
 -Federal Share                                              $18.0
   (funds made available by EPA
   management's commitment to
   implement DIG recommendations)

• Recoveries from Audit                                       $89.9
  Resolutions of Current and Prior
  Periods (cash collections or offsets
  to future payments)* *

• EPA Reviews Performed/Issued by OIG                         896

Investigative Operations               	

• Fines and Recoveries (including civil)                           $4.3
• Investigations Opened                                        177
• Investigations Closed                                         153
• Indictments of Persons or Firms                                 16
• Convictions of Persons or Firms                                 13
• Administrative Actions Taken against
  EPA Employees                                               17

Fraud Defection and Prevention Operations
• Debarments, Suspensions, and
  Compliance Agreements                                       44
  (actions to deny persons or firms from
  participating in EPA activities
  because of misconduct or poor
  performance)
• Hotline Cases Opened                                         42
• Hotline Cases Processed and Closed                             50
• Legislative and Regulatory Items Reviewed                      149
• Personnel Security Investigations Adjudicated                   696

 *  Questioned Costs and Recommended Efficiencies are subject to
   change in the audit resolution process.
* * Information on recoveries is provided by thi EPA Financial
   Management Division and is unaudited.

-------
   Audit Activities
During this fiscal year, our audit efforts resulted in more than $330
million in recommended efficiencies, $167 million in questioned
costs,  and  nearly $90 million in Agency recoveries from audit
resolutions.  The following represents some of our most significant
findings which resulted from audits and reviews performed by or
fortheOIG.

EPA $126 Million Short of Congressional User Fee Targets
The Agency had not identified all potential new user fees because
Agency  personnel  were  not  aware   of  updated  Office  of
Management and Budget requirements.  Further, the Agency was
reluctant to use its existing statutory authority, collecting only $22
million of the  congressionally directed $148 million in new user
fees for fiscal 1991 through 1 994. By not updating statutory caps
on Pre-Manufacture  Notice  (PMN) fees  set  in 1976, inflation
lowered the value of maximum fees EPA could charge for PMN
processing  by 61 percent.  If the Agency had  requested a timely
adjustment for inflation to tee caps, it could  have collected  $4
million more in fiscal  1994 alone. In addition, program offices had
insufficient  or outdated information to support  fees charged. The
Agency generally agreed to take appropriate actions to resolve  the
audit issues.

Improved Controls Needed to Track Hazardous Waste
The manifest system for controlling the  movement of hazardous
waste did not always ensure that generators,  EPA, or the states
track  waste from generation to disposal.  The system  is self-
initiated and self-monitored with limited oversight by Federal and
state authorities.  There are economic incentives for generators to
avoid the high costs of compliance with regulations for hazardous
waste shipped off site." Under certain conditions, new manifests
were created and, since there was no requirement to link original
and new manifests,  the generators  were unable to  track  the
disposition  of their wastes.  EPA instructions did not clearly state
when generators must obtain new identification numbers, which
resulted in  inaccurate data on generators in EPA's data base.  In
addition, the Agency's limited inspection  resources  were  not
always  used  effectively,  and  some  inspection  reports  were
inadequately documented.  The Agency agreed to consider  the
recommended 'actions.

Millions in  Savings Possible Through Improved Subcontract
Competition and Oversight
Prime  contractor  actions  in obtaining  subcontracts, and  the
Agency's review  of  these  actions, did  not  ensure  technically
competent  subcontractors,  reasonable  prices,  and  effective
subcontract competition. Contracting officers routinely consented
to prime contractor requests for sole source subcontracts without
adequate justification.  For just the five  prime contracts reviewed,
we estimated that EPA could reduce costs by up to $55  million
through improved subcontract competition and oversight. Further,
for those same five prime contracts, subcontracts increased  the
prime contractors' costs an estimated 27,9  percent,  or  $86.5

-------
million, without any identifiable vafue.   Certain subcontractors
performed services for so long  and so extensively that separate
prime contracts were justified. Also, EPA program managers used
prime  contractors as  subcontract  brokers, avoided  competition
requirements for direct Federal procurements, and noncompetitively
obtained the services of desired subcontractors through directed
subcontract awards.  The Agency intends to reduce the scope of
selected prime contracts and  award more prime contracts  to
increase competition, which could reduce the need for extensive,
costly subcontracts.

Better Drinking Water Data  Can Reduce the Risk of Diseases
and Illnesses
Although community, surface public water systems (PWS) serve a
small total population, they are more likely to report invalid water
quality test data. Nationwide,  about 12 percent of PWSs reported
invalid or potentially falsified data  at least once from  1991  to
1994.  Operators at small  PWSs often reported invalid data
because they  lacked training or had malfunctioning equipment.
Some  operators may have reported falsified data to cover up
problems at PWSs or to avoid additional requirements or corrective
actions.  EPA and states placed  low priority on reviewing records
for invalid or falsified data and  did not believe falsification was
widespread. Without state or EPA  officials reviewing the validity
of data, serious health risks could go undetected and negate EPA's
and the states' ability to prevent water contamination.  The Agency
generally agreed with our recommendations but did not commit to
implement all of them because of budget concerns.

Despite Improvements,  the  Environmental,  Safety  and
Health Program at EPA Laboratories Remains Inadequate
The Agency's Environmental, Safety and Health (ESH) program at
laboratories, while improving, is inadequate to protect employees,
facilities, and the environment. All five  of the EPA laboratories we
visited were rated inadequate  and vulnerable to danger in at least
two of ten critical ESH elements, and one  laboratory was rated
inadequate in nine of the  teri. In addition, the ESH audit process
had  many deficiencies,   limiting  its effectiveness.   Agency
laboratory managers criticized the current process, citing problems
with  the  timeliness  of  reports, responsiveness  to  laboratory
comments on reports, and contractor expertise.  We found many
of these concerns were valid  and determined that there was no
established system to elevate them to the attention of top Agency
officials. The Agency is taking appropriate corrective actions.

Interagency  Agreements Used  Without  Adequate  Cost
Consideration
The Agency often executed Economy Act Interagency Agreements
(lAGs), rather than using  its own procurement process, without
adequately considering the reasonableness of cpsts because it was
easier to do so.  Despite statutory and Agency requirements for full
cost recovery, EPA did not bill  other Federal agencies between $5
million and $23 million for  indirect costs related to performing work
or furnishing materials.  For disbursement lAGs, project officers
were generally not obtaining and  reviewing  cost information before
approving invoices for payment.  Most project officers interviewed
acknowledged that they did not know the basis for the amounts

-------
 invoiced by  performing  agencies,  but  approved the  invoices
 anyway. The Agency agreed to take corrective actions.

 Lab Quality  Assurance Program Saved Over $1.5 Million
 The  Risk  Reduction  Engineering  Laboratory  
-------
improve its quality assurance project plans (QAPP).  Partly as a
result of this, hazardous waste cleanups at five DOD Superfund
sites in Region 9 were delayed up to 2Vi years, and $5.5 million in
data were rejected due to the poor quality of laboratory analyses.
At one DOD base, extensive laboratory fraud was found, and DOD
later  determined  that  the laboratory  involved  had  performed
analyses for 24 military  installations in the Region since 1989. The
Region's remedial project managers were unfamiliar with DOD's
specific laboratory quality assurance procedures, and accepted
descriptions  of them  from  DOD at face value.   QAPPs  were
typically not designed to detect poor laboratory work, and were not
always approved or fully implemented.  In addition, Region  9 did
not effectively monitor compliance with QAPPs, perform sufficient
oversight to verify laboratory data quality, or ensure that QAPPs
were modified to correct deficiencies.  The Agency identified ten
ongoing and planned corrective actions to improve data quality.

Higher  Priority  Needed  for  Reviews of Superfund  Site
Remedies
A substantial increasing backlog of required five-year reviews of
Superfund  site remedial  actions  exists  due to the low  priority
placed by Agency management. The completion of  five-year
reviews  is  not  a  target  in  the  Superfund  Comprehensive
Accomplishments Plan nor a goal of regional and Headquarters
officials.   In addition. Agency guidance did  not require that the
reviews result in a final  determination about the protectiveness of
remedies.  Some reports did not contain any information regarding
the need for timely  corrective  action,  rendering EPA unable to
adequately assure the continued effectiveness of remedies. Also,
Agency guidance for an abbreviated review  does  not require  a
description of the conditions found at the site or adequate technical
data. The Agency agreed to give increased attention to the five-
year reviews and to make appropriate changes to the guidance.

Better Controls Needed Over Assistance Agreements
Grants Administration  Division  (GAD)  personnel  did  not give
sufficient priority to managing assistance agreements or complying
with EPA  policies and procedures. In each of the last two fiscal
years, GAD's grant specialists processed  over 2,000 awards and
amendments  with annual, values over $300  million.   Similar to
GAD, project officers  did not  follow EPA's requirements for
managing assistance agreements.  Most  project officers did not
visit or correspond with recipients, review financial matters and
audit reports, notify GAD that projects were completed, or maintain
adequate documentation of actions to monitor recipient progress
and ensure that EPA received what it paid for.  In some cases, the
project officers destroyed or lost the Agency's records.  In addition,
EPA needs to close 5,000 inactive assistance agreements.  By not
closing these agreements timely, the Agency could not ensure that
all technical work and administrative requirements were completed.
We estimated that by  closing these agreements,  $33 million of
unused funds may be used to pay for other projects or programs.
The Agency informed us that action was taken, to streamline the
processor closing agreements quicker, deobligate unused funds
and alleviate the backlog.

-------
   Investigative Activities
During this^ fiscal year, our investigative efforts resulted in 16
indictments,  13  convictions' and  $4.3  million  of fines  and
recoveries from persons or firms who defrauded the Agency.

Former Maryland  Department of the Environment Chief
Fiscal Officer Ordered to Repay $1.2 Million

Rufus 0. Ukaegbu,  former  chief fiscal officer for the  State of
Maryland Department of the Environment, Water Quality Financing
Administration (WQFA), was sentenced in October 1994 on Federal
charges to  41   months  imprisonment  and repaid the  state
$100,000.  In November 1994, Ukaegbu was sentenced on state
charges to 20 years imprisonment (10 years suspended), five years
probation, and was  ordered to pay the remaining  restitution of
$1,105,901.  Ukaegbu used his  position to cause the WQFA's
bank to generate fraudulent payment, authorizations in names
similar to legitimate contractors,  but with addresses of bank
accounts that he controlled.  The stolen  funds  were  used to
purchase numerous  automobiles  and other personal items.  This
case was investigated jointly by the EPA DIG, the FBI,  and the
Maryland State Police.

Project Manager Sentenced; Convicted of Theft of Funds

James.Speer, project manager with  Olympic View Environmental
Review  Council  (OVER-C),  Kitsap  County, Washington,  was
sentenced to 66 months imprisonment and ordered to pay $57,221
in restitution as a. result  of his earlier conviction of felony theft.
OVER-C was awarded an  EPA technical assistance grant.  Speer,
who had gained  control  of the  organization's finances, wrote
OVER-C  checks,  obtained  the  board members'  authorization
signatures,  and then replaced the names of legitimate payees on
the check with his own name for amounts  totalling over $86,000.
Speer had paid portions of legitimate expenses while holding back
funds for himself which  allowed  him to continue obtaining and
using additional Federal, state, and private funds. The investigation
was conducted by the EPA OIG and the Kitsap County Prosecuting
Attorney's Office.

Former Water Association Official  Found Guilty

Brian  Burns, a former program manager  of  the Northeast Rural
Water Association (NERWA), was convicted in July 1995 of felony
fraud, including false statements and wire fraud.  NERWA was
funded by EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to
provide training and technical assistance in safe drinking water and
wastewater matters. Burns concealed and/or manipulated material
information provided to  the National Rural Water Association,
NERWA's oversight organization, by misrepresenting his work on
daily time logs. Burns used Federal funds of approximately $7,000
to pay for an apartment,  $10,000 in travel expenses for trips to
attend Harvard, and $30,000 in salary paid while attending school.
The case was investigated by the EPA OIG with the assistance of

-------
the IRS Criminal Investigation. Division and the USDA OIG.

Superfund Site Subcontractor Sentenced

After pleading guilty to theft of government property in January
1995, Robert Lestuk, president and owner  of Unicon, Inc., was
sentenced in April 1995 to two years probation and 100 hours of
community service, and fined $2,000.  Unicon agreed to make
restitution in  the amount of  $141,000.  Unicon, a subcontractor
responsible for  the installation of metal tank covers and a vapor
emission system at a New Jersey Superfund site, submitted false
certifications regarding hazardous materials training required by the
contract.  The case was investigated jointly by the EPA OIG and
the DOD OIG-DCIS.

Former Employee Pleads Guilty in American Express Scam

Jean Stafford, a former EPA secretary, pleaded guilty to fraud in
August 1995  after an investigation disclosed a scheme to traffic in,
use, and cause to be used  at least eight  fraudulently obtained
American Express government travel cards. The case was initiated
based on information that an unknown EPA employee had obtained
an EPA American Express government credit card  by  using false
identification  and charged over $10,000  in goods and services
over a three  week period.   As a  result, the Agency's Financial
Management  Division instituted a retail block on all Headquarters
American Express accounts to prohibit purchases in retail facilities.
The case was investigated jointly by the EPA OIG, Secret Service,
and the Postal Inspection  Service.

Firm and President Sentenced

T. Head and Company, Inc.,  known as  THI, and Toney Head, Jr.,
the firm's owner,  president, and  chief executive officer, were
sentenced in  October'1994 after being convicted of filing 41 false
claims.  Head was sentenced to four months  imprisonment in a
work release program, four months home confinement, two years
probation, and ordered to pay restitution of $18,515 and a $2,000
special assessment.  In addition,  Head and THI agreed to pay
$100,000 to settle a civil False Claims Act  case.  THI  was fined.
$10,000 and ordered to pay an $8,000 special assessment. THI,
a subcontractor on an EPA contract, was to establish and monitor
national accounts for  shipping laboratory samples of hazardous
waste and other materials.  Head directed former THI employees to
falsify the number of hours these employees worked on the EPA
contract to inflate numerous THI invoices submitted to EPA, by
approximately $70,000.

Three Public Health Officers Guilty of Hiding Interest in EPA
Contractor

Scott R. Rippey and William D. Watkins, Commissioned  Officers of
the U.S. Public Health Service assigned to the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) in Rhode Island, and William Burkhardt III, an
FDA employee, pleaded guilty to knowingly filing false confidential
statements  of employment  and  financial  interests.   All three
willfully  failed  to disclose  their  controlling  ownership  and

-------
employment interest in Biosearch Limited, New England Scientific,
and  Biological  Analytical  Laboratories (BAD.   BAL received
contracts and funds from EPA for work on the Narragansett Bay
Project through one of the defendants and used equipment and
supplies from the FDA. Each defendant was fined $500 plus a $25
assessment.  The case was investigated jointly by the EPA  01G,
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services DIG, and the Postal
Inspection Service.

-------
   Fraud  Prevention Activities
Suspension and  Debarment Activities
EPA's policy is to do business only with contractors and grantees
who are honest  and responsible.   EPA enforces this policy  by
suspending or debarring contractors or grantees, or individuals
within those organizations, from further contracts or assistance for
acting improperly, having a history of substandard work, or willfully
failing to perform on EPA or other federally-funded activities. Both
procurement and nonprocurement debarments or suspensions  by
one agency are effective in all agencies.

In  fiscal 1995,    44  debarment,  suspension,  or compliance
agreement  actions  were taken, based  on  the work of  the OIG,
including the following:

 •  Mr.  Self was convicted of dumping  hazardous waste in diesel
    automobile tanks and  ordering the falsification of documents
    regarding its disposal.  In  addition, he was responsible for
    illegal discharge of oil, grease, and industrial wastewater into
    the  Salt Lake City sewer system  in violation of the Clean
    Water. Act, Clean Air Act, and Resource Conservation and
    Recovery Act.

 •  On November 21,1 994,  EPA debarred Stanley L. Peters and
    Stanley L. Peters and Associates, Inc., for three years.  On
    January 31, 1995,.AET Collaborative Inc., of which Mr. Peters
    was president, was debarred for three years. A joint OIG and
    FBI  investigation resulted in criminal charges that Mr. Peters
    had received  kickbacks  from Nebraska schools  for  his
    assistance in obtaining Asbestos  School Hazardous Abatement
    Act grants/loans from EPA. He was convicted of conspiracy
    to defraud for submitting false and fraudulent claims, and theft
    of government funds:   Dean Curtis, a co-conspirator,  was
    debarred effective October 31, 1994..

 •  On  July 3,  1995,  EPA suspended  William. R. Maxon, site
    manager, and  Craig  V. Wright,  site foreman, of  Riedel
    Environmental  Services,  Inc.  (RES)  at  the  Sharon  Steel
    Superfund site.  EPA's  investigation substantiated that Maxon
    and  other RES employees stole approximately  $2,000 worth  of
    copper from the site and that Maxon used RES equipment and
    employees to do personal  work at his residence while charging
    the costs to the EPA contract.

 •  On March 7,  1995, EPA approved a compliance agreement
    with PRC Environmental Management,  Inc. (PRC  EMI),  in
    which  PRC  EMI  agreed  to reimburse EPA $300,000 for
    damages  resulting from its submittal  of premature bills for
    subcontractor  costs.   PRC EMI also  agreed  to  implement
    several   remedial  measures  to  ensure  that  its  future
    performance  and administration of Federal  contracts  and
    assistance agreements comply fully with  all applicable laws
    and  regulations.

-------
Personnel Security Program
The Personnel Security Program is one of the Agency's first lines
of defense against fraud, using background investigations to review
the  integrity of EPA employees and  contractors.  During fiscal
1995,    696  investigations were reviewed  and  adjudicated.
Appropriate actions were taken where needed.

Hotline Activities
The'OIG Hotline Center opened  42 new cases and. completed and
closed  50 cases during fiscal 1995. Of the 50 cases closed, 11
resulted in environmental,  administrative,  or prosecutive action.
We also referred 5,278 callers to the  appropriate program office,
state agency, or other Federal agency  for assistance.

The following are examples of corrective action resulting from calls
to the DIG Hotline Center:
    A  complainant  alleged  various  environmental  concerns,
    including  spills  from  oil  drums,  erosion,  and  possible
    degradation of a wetland.  The North Carolina Division of Land
    Resources required the company to clean up the environmental
    damage found.

    A complainant alleged that an EPA employee obtained travel
    advance funds without authorization by forging a supervisor's
    signature.  An inquiry determined that the employee had
    obtained  funds  without  authorization on  four  separate
    occasions.. Three of the four advances were repaid to the
    imprest fund before the employee became  aware of the
    inquiry.  The fourth repayment  was made by the employee
    after  being  confronted by  management.   The employee
    received a 60-day suspension.

    A complainant alleged that an oil company in Ford,  Virginia,
    was operating in violation of EPA regulations.  Inspections of
    the company's facilities disclosed that the company had  failed
    to prepare, certify, and implement Spill Prevention, Control,
    and Countermeasures  plans.  The company was  issued a
    notice of non-compliance and given a grace period of 120 days
    to achieve compliance.

    A complainant alleged that an EPA employee  failed to charge
    leave   and used  a  government  travel card  for  personal
    expenses.  An inquiry substantiated the allegations.   As a
    result, the travel  card was cancelled and  the employee
    received a formal letter of reprimand and was required to  repay
    124 hours of annual leave.

-------
   Divisional  Inspectors General
               Audit

Headquarters     Headquarters Audit Division
                Edward Gekosky
                Financial Audit Division
                Melissa M. Heist

Regions 1 & 2    Eastern Audit Division
                Paul D. McKechnie
Region 3
Mid-Atlantic Audit Division
Paul R. Gandolfo
Regions 4 & 6    Southern Audit Division
                Mary M. Boyer
Region 5
Northern Audit Division
Anthony C. Carrollo
Regions 7 & 8    Central Audit Division
                Bennie S. Salem (Acting)

Regions 9 & 10   Western  Audit Division
                Truman R. Beeler
(703} 308-8222


(202) 260-1497


(617) 565-3160


(215) 597-0497


(404) 331-6099


(312) 353-2486


(913) 551-7824


(415) 744-2445
Headquarters
Regions 1, 2
& 3
Investigations

Washington Field Division
Adrienne R. Rish (Acting)

Eastern Investigations
Division
Thomas L. Papineau
Regions 4, 5,     Western Investigations
6, 7, 8, 9 & 10   Division
                Ailverdes Cornelious
(703) 308-8282


(617) 565-3925



 (404) 331-6016
If you are aware of any fraud, waste, or mismanagement, please
contact the EPA Inspector General Hotline or the appropriate
Divisional Inspector General.

 •  Information is confidential.

 •  The Hotline may be reached at (202) 260-4977.

                     Remember:
         Act Like  It's Your Money- It Is!

-------
   MAKE  A  WORLD
   OF  DIFFERENCE!
REPORT FRAUD. WASTE, OR ABUSE TO THE

  INSPECTOR GENERAL


       HOTLINE

  • INFORMATION IS CONFIDENTIAL


       202-260-4977

L-S-F,.SV]RO^MCftTALPROTF.CTlON ACENCY • OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 9 UJI M STR£tTS..W. WASHINGTON, O.C. M-UO
           V>EPA  INTERNET: *Bl«ti.john
-------