Audit Follow-Up Process Needed for the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board


# A \
l W.'
v
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Audit Follow-Up Process
Needed for the
U.S. Chemical Safety and
Hazard Investigation Board
Report No. 13-P-0128
February 1, 2013
Scan this code to
learn more about
the EPA OIG.

-------
Report Contributors:
Gloria Taylor-Upshaw
Richard Eyermann
Michael Davis
Bettye Bell-Daniel
Michael Binder
Abbreviations
CSB	U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
EPA	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY	Fiscal Year
GAO	U.S. Government Accountability Office
IG	Inspector General
MATS	Management Audit Tracking System
OIG	Office of Inspector General
OMB	Office of Management and Budget
Hotline
To report fraud, waste, or abuse, contact us through one of the following methods:
e-mail:	OIG Hotline@epa.gov	write: EPA Inspector General Hotline
phone:	1-888-546-8740	1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
fax:	202-566-2599	Mailcode 2431T
online:	http://www.epa.gov/oiq/hotline.htm	Washington, DC 20460

-------
^tDsrx
• A v
iSi
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
At a Glance
13-P-0128
February 1, 2013
Why We Did This Review
We developed this report
based on observations made
while preparing the
recommended fiscal year 2012
management challenges and
internal control weaknesses for
the U.S. Chemical Safety and
Hazard Investigation Board
(CSB). Our objective for the
review was to assess the
current CSB audit follow-up
process. CSB is an
independent federal agency
authorized by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990. The
Office of Inspector General
(OIG) of the U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency serves as the Inspector
General for CSB. The OIG's
Office of the Chief of Staff is
responsible for reviewing
CSB's performance in taking
agreed-to corrective actions on
OIG recommendations.
This report addresses the
following CSB Goal:
• Preserve the public trust by
maintaining and improving
organizational excellence
Audit Follow-Up Process Needed for the
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
What We Found
CSB does not have a follow-up process to allow for prompt implementation of
agreed-to OIG audit recommendations. CSB had unimplemented audit
recommendations from an OIG fiscal year 2011 audit report for over a year past
the agreed-to dates for implementation. Also, CSB's tracking system did not
assist in the prompt resolution and implementation of audit recommendations.
By not having a follow-up process, controls over promoting efficiency and
effectiveness within CSB's operations are weakened.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-50, Audit Follow-up, states
that "[ajgency heads are responsible for: (1) Designating a top management
official to oversee audit follow-up, including resolution and corrective action and
(2) Assuring that management officials throughout the agency understand the
value of the audit process and are responsive to audit recommendations." In
addition, "the audit follow-up official has personal responsibility for ensuring that
(1) systems of audit follow-up, resolution, and corrective action are documented
and in place, (2) timely responses are made to all audit reports, (3) disagreements
are resolved, (4) corrective actions are actually taken, and (5) semiannual reports
required by paragraph 8.a. (8) below are sent to the head of the agency."
OMB Circular A-123, Management's Responsibility for Internal Control, Section 5,
states "Agency managers are responsible for taking timely and effective action to
correct deficiencies.... Management should track progress to ensure timely and
effective results.... Management has a responsibility to complete action, in a
timely manner, on audit recommendations on which agreement with the IG has
been reached."
Recommendation
We recommended that the CSB Chairperson develop and implement a follow-up
system as required by OMB Circulars A-50 and A-123. CSB disagreed with our
recommendation.
For further information, contact
our Office of Congressional and
Public Affairs at (202) 566-2391.
The full report is at:
www.epa.qov/oiq/reports/2013/
20130201-13-P-0128.pdf

-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
February 1, 2013
The Honorable Rafael Moure-Eraso, Ph.D.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
2175 K Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20037-1809
Dear Dr. Moure-Eraso:
This is our report on the audit follow-up process needed for the U.S. Chemical Safety and
Hazard Investigation Board (CSB), based on a review conducted by the Office of Inspector
General (OIG) of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This report contains findings the
OIG has identified and corrective actions the OIG recommends. This report represents the
opinion of the OIG and does not necessarily represent the final CSB position on the subjects
reported. CSB managers will make the final determination on matters in this report.
CSB disagreed with both of our draft report recommendations, one of which we removed.
Resolution efforts are in progress on the remaining recommendation. Please provide a written
response to this final report, including a proposed corrective action, within 60 calendar days of
the report date. We request that CSB provide in its response support for how CSB complies with
OMB Circular A-50. The response will be posted on the OIG's public website, along with our
memorandum commenting on the response. The response should be provided as an Adobe PDF
file that complies with the accessibility requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended. The final response should not contain data that should not be released to the
public; if the response contains such data, the data for redaction or removal should be identified.
We have no objections to the further release of this report to the public. We will post this report
on our website at http://www.epa.gov/oig.
If you or your staff have any questions regarding this report, please contact Melissa Heist,
Assistant Inspector General for Audit, at (202) 566-0899 or heist.melissa@epa.gov: or
Michael Davis, Product Line Director, at (513) 487-2363 or davis.michaeld@epa.gov.
Sincerely,
Arthur A. Elkins, Jr.

-------
Audit Follow-Up Process Needed for the	13-P-0128
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
	 Table of C	
Purpose		1
Background 		1
Audit Follow-Up Criteria		2
Scope and Methodology		3
Results of Review 		3
Recommendation 		5
CSB Comments and OIG Evaluation		5
Status of Recommendations and Potential Monetary Benefits		7
Appendices
A Status of CSB Corrective Actions to Prior Audit Recommendations		8
B CSB Response to Draft Report		14
C Distribution		16

-------
Purpose
While preparing the recommended fiscal year (FY) 2012 management challenges
and internal control weaknesses for the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board (CSB), we noted areas of concern with CSB's follow-up
process and status of unimplemented audit recommendations. Our objective for
this review was to assess the current CSB audit follow-up process. We developed
this report so that CSB can formally address our concerns.
Background
CSB is an independent federal agency authorized by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990. The Act directs CSB to (1) investigate and report on the
cause or probable cause of any accidental chemical release resulting in a fatality,
serious injury, or substantial property damage; (2) make safety recommendations
to reduce the likelihood or consequences of accidental chemical releases and
propose corrective measures; and (3) establish regulations for reporting accidental
releases. CSB became operational in January 1998. CSB's authorizing statute
provides for five board members, including a chairperson, all appointed by the
President of the United States, with the consent of the Senate. As of May 2012,
the board had 3 appointed members and a professional staff of 38.
The Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) assumed inspector general oversight responsibility for CSB in
FY 2004. Previously, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security had the OIG oversight responsibility for
CSB. The OIG's Office of the Chief of Staff is responsible for reviewing CSB's
performance in taking agreed-to corrective actions on OIG recommendations
based on requirements of the Inspector General Act, the Federal Managers'
Financial Integrity Act, and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circulars
A-50 and A-123.
The OIG reported in an OIG FY 2011 audit report, Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board Did Not Take Effective Corrective Actions on Prior Audit
Recommendations (Report No. 1 l-P-0115, dated February 15, 2011), that CSB
did not take timely corrective actions to address 34 audit recommendations from
3 OIGs and the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). In four instances,
it took CSB 4 years beyond the agreed-to corrective actions date (or report date)
to implement corrective actions. CSB's actions to address 13 recommendations
were not completely effective and required additional corrective actions, and
7 recommendations were not yet completed. The FY 2011 audit report resulted in
seven recommendations, and one of the seven has five detailed recommended
actions for CSB to address.
13-P-0128
1

-------
Audit Follow-Up Criteria
OMB Circular A-50, Audit Follow-up, affirms that corrective action by
management on resolved findings and recommendations is essential for
improving the effectiveness and efficiency of government operations.
Specifically, Section 5 states:
[e]ach agency shall establish systems to assure the prompt and
proper resolution and implementation of audit recommendations.
These systems shall provide for a complete record of action taken
on both monetary and non-monetary findings and
recommendations.
Section 8(a) outlines numerous requirements for agency follow-up systems. It
states that follow-up systems for resolution and corrective action must require
prompt resolution and corrective actions on audit recommendations. Resolution
shall be within a maximum of 6 months after issuance of a final report and
corrective action should proceed as rapidly as possible. Also, the follow-up
system should "[mjaintain accurate records of the status of audit reports or
recommendations through the entire process of resolution and corrective action.
Such records shall include appropriate accounting and collection controls over
amounts determined to be due to the Government." In addition, the system should
"[pjrovide semi-annual reports to the agency head on the status of all unresolved
audit reports over six months old, the reasons therefore], and a timetable for their
resolution."
The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, states in Section 2(3) that one of
the purposes of inspectors general is "to provide a means for keeping the head of
the establishment and the Congress fully and currently informed about problems
and deficiencies relating to the administration of such programs and operations
and the necessity for and progress of corrective action."
GAO, in its Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government,
emphasizes that internal controls are a major part of managing an organization.
OMB Circular A-123, Management's Responsibility for Internal Control,
Section 5, states, "[ajgency managers are responsible for taking timely and
effective action to correct deficiencies.... Management should track progress to
ensure timely and effective results.... Management has a responsibility to
complete action, in a timely manner, on audit recommendations on which
agreement with the IG has been reached. Management must make a decision
regarding IG audit recommendations within a six month period after issuance of
the audit report and implement management's decision within one year to the
extent practicable."
13-P-0128
2

-------
Having an audit follow-up system is an important control that will provide an
avenue for the agency to ensure audit recommendation implementation and the
achievement of agency objectives.
Scope and Methodology
We conducted this limited-scope review from April 2012 to October 2012. We
performed this review in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards, except we did not review additional management controls, or evaluate
unimplemented recommendations in all CSB audit reports. These limits were
outside our scope and did not affect our review. We are reporting on our
observations made while preparing CSB's 2012 management challenges and
internal control weaknesses. We believe that our observations provide a
reasonable basis for our conclusions.
During a meeting on CSB's 2012 management challenges and internal control
weaknesses, we observed that prior audit recommendations from a FY 2011 audit
report remain unimplemented and there was no agreed-to process in place
between the OIG and CSB to facilitate implementation. We issued a finding
outline to CSB in May 2012.
Our scope was limited to the current process between CSB and the OIG. We
included the FY 2011 report's audit recommendations and CSB's response and
status of those recommendations as of February 2012, and analyzed CSB's
responses. We reviewed OMB Circular A-50, Audit Follow-up, the Inspector
General Act of 1978; GAO's Standards for Internal Control in the Federal
Government; and OMB Circular A-123, Management's Responsibility for
Internal Control. We held a meeting with CSB and the OIG's Office of the Chief
of Staff on their internal processes. We also reviewed the OIG's FY 2011 EPA
Semiannual Reports to Congress and accompanying Compendiums of
Unimplemented Recommendations.
Results of Review
CSB does not have an agreed-to follow-up process to ensure prompt
implementation of audit recommendations. CSB had unimplemented audit
recommendations from an OIG FY 2011 audit report more than a year past the
agreed-to date for implementation. Also, CSB's tracking system did not assist in
the prompt and proper resolution and implementation of audit recommendations.
We believe that CSB's lack of an audit follow-up process is an internal control
weakness. Several authorities provide for follow-up activities for federal agencies,
including OMB Circular A-50, the Inspector General Act, and OMB Circular
A-123. By not having a follow-up process, controls to promote efficiency and
effectiveness within CSB's operations are weakened.
13-P-0128
3

-------
CSB does not have a follow-up process to resolve OIG audit recommendations
and complete corrective actions for agreed-to unimplemented recommendations.
Since 2004, the OIG has issued 21 reports to CSB. As requested by the OIG, CSB
provided the status of recommendations from an OIG FY 2011 audit report (see
appendix A). As of February 2012, CSB had only implemented the agreed-to
corrective actions for two of the seven audit recommendations (#4 and #7 in
appendix A) and for two corrective actions for one other recommendation (#6a
and #6b in appendix A). CSB is close to a year past the agreed-to date on fully
implementing three of the remaining four recommendations. Our review of CSB's
FY 2012 status report showed that CSB changed or updated its response to two of
four unimplemented recommendations. For one, CSB did not notify the OIG that
it had revised a corrective action noting that completion was no longer applicable
(#6e in appendix A). For the other, CSB noted that the recommendation (#3 in
appendix A) should be closed but kept it open with a revised corrective action
date because activities were planned to be completed in April 2012. Those
activities remained unimplemented as of May 2012.
In September 2011, we provided CSB with a spreadsheet listing the
recommendations, due dates, status, and CSB's action plan from its response to
the audit report. In February 2012, CSB provided OIG an update to the
spreadsheet noting the current status for the audit recommendations.
CSB's internal process included a review of the status of audit recommendations
and follow-up with senior management around the recommendation due dates.
In addition to the spreadsheet, CSB should have a follow-up system that should
include at a minimum a policy, a designated audit follow-up official, roles and
responsibilities, and reporting requirements to allow for prompt resolution of
recommendations and implementation of agreed-to corrective actions, which is
required by OMB Circular A-50.
The OIG prepares a compendium of unimplemented recommendations for EPA
on a semiannual basis to supplement our Semiannual Reports to Congress. The
EPA compendiums highlight significant recommendations that have remained
unimplemented past the date agreed upon by EPA and the OIG. The OIG
considers a recommendation to be past due if the associated corrective action was
not completed within 1 year of the original agreed-upon date or the extended date
established by September 30, 2011. The compendium provides a listing of all of
the other significant recommendations with future completion dates as reported in
the EPA Management Audit Tracking System.
In the past, for prior periods to March 31, 2012, the OIG did not prepare a
semiannual report or compendium for CSB. The OIG's semiannual report for
EPA listed audit reports addressed to CSB. The compendium helps EPA
management stay informed about outstanding commitments and its progress on
corrective actions. For the first time, for the period April 1 through September 30,
2012, the OIG prepared a separate semiannual report for CSB that included a list
of "Reports With Corrective Action Not Completed." CSB should ensure a
13-P-0128
4

-------
follow-up process is in place as required by OMB Circular A-50. The lack of a
follow-up process affects the ability of CSB to promote efficiency and
effectiveness and to assure accountability for taking the agreed-to corrective
actions by agreed-to dates. We consider not having a process for following up on
recommendations to be an internal control weakness for CSB. Addressing this
control weakness would help ensure that CSB is achieving its objectives, is
efficiently and effectively using its resources, and is complying with OMB
Circular A-50 and A-123.
The OIG reported CSB's unimplemented recommendations using an agreed-to
interim method for tracking the status of recommendations, which is part of a
follow-up system. During a May 2012 meeting, CSB agreed to continue to update
the OIG's spreadsheet for the status of unimplemented recommendations. CSB
stills needs a complete follow-up system that addresses the requirements of OMB
Circular A-50.
Recommendation
We recommend that the Chairperson, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board:
1. Develop and implement a follow-up system as required by OMB Circulars
A-50 and A-123 that includes establishing a policy that identifies an audit
follow-up official, roles and responsibilities, required documentation, and
reporting requirements, to allow for prompt resolution of
recommendations and implementation of agreed-to corrective actions.
CSB Comments and OIG Evaluation
CSB disagreed with both of our draft report recommendations, and noted the
following in its response:
The CSB has reviewed draft report OA-FY12-0492 produced by
your office. We do not concur in its findings or recommendations.
We believe that the CSB has an adequate audit tracking system in
place that meets the requirements of Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) Circular A-50, "Audit Follow-Up." As to the
development of an audit follow-up process as recommended by
your office, we believe that your recommendations would
essentially substitutes (sic) the judgment of the IG for that of the
CSB, as a collegial body, and intrude upon the CSB's policy
prerogatives.
We believe that your office is simply mistaken as to the level of
documentation and necessary actions that the CSB should take to
review and address EPA IG recommendations. Your staff
13-P-0128
5

-------
continues to insist on the development of a more formalized and
labor-intensive tracking and follow-up process than is necessary
for an agency with approximately 40 employees and an
$11 million annual budget.
We agree that a more formalized audit tracking system may be labor-intensive for
CSB. We did not make such a recommendation in our draft report, and have
adjusted wording in our final report to avoid such an implication. We disagree
that CSB has an adequate follow-up process or system in place, since agreed-to
recommendations from FY 2011 remain unimplemented in FY 2013.
OMB Circular A-50 "provides the policies and procedures for use by executive
agencies when considering reports issued by the Inspectors General (IGs), other
executive branch organizations, the General Accounting Office (GAO) and non-
Federal auditors where audit follow-up is necessary" and "Agency heads are
responsible for: (1) Designating a top management official to oversee audit
follow-up, including resolution and corrective action." In addition, "the audit
follow-up official has personal responsibility for ensuring that (1) systems of
audit follow-up, resolution, and corrective action are documented and in place,
(2) timely responses are made to all audit reports, (3) disagreements are resolved,
(4) corrective actions are actually taken, and (5) semiannual reports required by
paragraph 8.a. (8) below are sent to the head of the agency." We recommended
these requirements in recommendation 1. The OMB circular does not define
requirements based on agency size or budget. CSB did not provide details that
show how its current follow-up system supports these requirements, hence our
recommendation. We request that CSB's 60-day response include details on how
its follow-up system meets the requirements of OMB Circular A-50.
Recommendation 2 in our draft report was the OIG's effort to address
recommendations in which CSB has changed the resolution status. We have
removed this recommendation because it is not a requirement in OMB Circular
A-50.
In conclusion, we disagree with CSB that many of the unimplemented
recommendations are over-reaching; rather, they are necessary to manage CSB's
program operations. CSB initially agreed with the recommendations, but has since
decided the recommendations were not necessary and left them unresolved. We
believe that this further supports the need for CSB to appoint an audit follow-up
official and implement a policy to address the resolution process.
13-P-0128
6

-------
Status of Recommendations and
Potential Monetary Benefits
RECOMMENDATIONS
POTENTIAL MONETARY
BENEFITS (In $000s)
Rec.
No.
Page
No.
Subject
Status1
Action Official
Planned
Completion
Date
Claimed
Amount
Agreed-To
Amount
Develop and implement a follow-up system as
required by OMB Circulars A-50 and A-123 that
includes establishing a policy that identifies an
audit follow-up official, roles and responsibilities,
required documentation, and reporting
requirements, to allow for prompt resolution of
recommendations and implementation of agreed-
to corrective actions.
Chairperson,
U.S. Chemical Safety and
Hazard Investigation Board
1 0 = recommendation is open with agreed-to corrective actions pending
C = recommendation is closed with all agreed-to actions completed
U = recommendation is unresolved with resolution efforts in progress
13-P-0128
7

-------
Appendix A
Status of CSB Corrective Actions to Prior Audit Recommendations
Recommendations from Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board Did Not Take Effective Corrective
Actions on Prior Audit Recommendations, Report No. ll-P-0115, February 15, 2011
#
Audit Recommendations
CSB Response from Final
Report
CSB
Estimated
Completion
Date
OIG
Status
Status as of February 14,2012
1
Develop and implement a
management control plan that
documents and addresses the five
internal control standards in
accordance with OMB Circular A-
123 and GAO's Standards for
Internal Controls in the Federal
Government. The plan should
include an effective monitoring
system to track corrective actions to
address and implement audit
recommendations. The plan is to
include
a. A database to track all prior audit
recommendations, planned
milestone completion dates, and
corrective actions taken.
b. Procedures for conducting
periodic internal control reviews
and properly documenting those
reviews, including verifying and
ensuring that audit
recommendations are resolved
promptly.
We agree with the
recommendation and developing
a management control plan will
be an initiative in our fiscal year
(FY) 2011 Action Plan.
2/28/2011
Open
The management control plan is being
developed in conjunction with the
strategic plan. The internal control
framework will stem from the
strategic plan framework.
Specifically, the strategic plan will
cascade into a redesigned action plan,
which will then flow to individual
performance plans.
In addition, the management control
plan will look at the Board Orders and
address their revision as well as new
"operating procedures" which do not
require board vote themselves but
provide administrative guidance to
staff.
13-P-0128
8

-------
Recommendations from Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board Did Not Take Effective Corrective
Actions on Prior Audit Recommendations, Report No. ll-P-0115, February 15, 2011
#
Audit Recommendations
CSB Response from Final
Report
CSB
Estimated
Completion
Date
OIG
Status
Status as of February 14,2012
2
Develop and publish a regulation
requiring persons to report
chemical accidents, as required by
the CAA (Clean Air Act).
We agree with the
recommendation and issuing a
proposed rule on accident
reporting will be an initiative in
our FY 2011 Action Plan.
9/30/2011
Open
After further considering this issue,
CSB believes that it receives adequate
incident notifications through constant
media and Internet searches, as well as
existing Federal sources such as the
National Response Center. In 2011,
CSB recorded 282 high-consequence
incidents using these data sources; of
these, CSB deployed investigators to
five sites. Accordingly, the CSB will
consult with its congressional
committees of jurisdiction by
April 30, 2012, requesting
clarification on whether there is a
desire to preserve the mandate in the
existing statute. In addition, as a
prelude to a possible reporting rule,
the CSB will develop a letter with
questions to be sent to companies that
have experienced incidents.
Responses to the letter will inform the
design of a future reporting form. The
letter will be developed by July 31,
2012.
13-P-0128
9

-------
Recommendations from Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board Did Not Take Effective Corrective
Actions on Prior Audit Recommendations, Report No. ll-P-0115, February 15, 2011
#
Audit Recommendations
CSB Response from Final
Report
CSB
Estimated
Completion
Date
OIG
Status
Status as of February 14,2012
3
Follow up with Congress on the
CSB request for clarification of its
statutory mandate. Upon receipt of
the response, develop a plan to
describe and address the
investigative gap, address prior
audit recommendations and request
the necessary resources to meet
CSB's statutory mandate.
We agree with the
recommendations. Under our
2011 action plan, we will
transmit a formal package of
suggested legislative
improvements to the CSB's
Congressional authorizing
committees. The package will
include language to clarify the
statutory mandate to investigate
[chemical accidents]. The CSB
is not in a position, however, to
guarantee a Congressional
response as indicated in the OIG
recommendation.
4/30/2011
Open
CSB believes this recommendation
should be closed since CSB raised the
statutory issue with Congress by letter
in November 2009. In addition, the
letter from then-Chairman Bresland
stated, "Pending any further direction
from Congress, the CSB will continue
to adhere to its interpretation of its
statutory authority and mandate."
Nonetheless, CSB will remind the
relevant committees of this issue when
it writes concerning the incident report
rule, by April 30, 2012.
4
Ensure that the responsibilities of
the Managing Director include:
a. Establishing performance goals,
holding program managers
accountable for meeting those
goals, and demonstrating
improvement in the Board's ability
to meet it statutory mandates over
time, as recommended by GAO.
b. Developing and implementing an
executive succession and transition
planning strategy that ensures a
sustained commitment and
continuity of leadership operations.
We agree with the
recommendation. We will
review the Managing Director's
position description and make
any necessary modifications to
ensure these responsibilities are
included.
3/31/2011
Closed
4a was completed in January 2011.
4b is addressed as part of the Human
Capital Plan (see recommendation #7-
completed November 16, 2011).
13-P-0128

-------
Recommendations from Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board Did Not Take Effective Corrective
Actions on Prior Audit Recommendations, Report No. ll-P-0115, February 15, 2011
#
Audit Recommendations
CSB Response from Final
Report
CSB
Estimated
Completion
Date
OIG
Status
Status as of February 14,2012
6b
Board Order 040, "Investigation
Protocol," to govern employees
retaining memberships in societies
or organizations to which the CSB
issues recommendations.
We agree with the
recommendation. Specifically,
we will either update Board
Order 40 or develop a specific
Board Order to address
employee participation and
memberships in professional
associations.
9/30/2011
Closed
Board Order 040 was amended by
notation item 894 on December 7,
2011, to address employee
memberships in outside organizations
to which the CSB may issue
recommendations.
6c
Board Order 027, "Roles,
Responsibilities, and Standards of
Conduct in Procurement
Activities," to reflect current
procurement practices and
processes to ensure consistency in
the procurement process.
We agree with the
recommendation. Specifically,
improving the procurement
program will be an initiative in
the FY 2011 Action Plan. As
part of this initiative, we will
update Board Order 027 as
appropriate.
3/31/2011
Open
CSB is analyzing a way to
administratively correct Board Orders
when offices or positions are
eliminated. Responsibilities will
likely be transferred back to the
Chairperson who can redelegate as
appropriate.
6d
Board Order 022,
"Recommendation Program," to
include new practices adopted for
following up on safety
recommendations, to include a
quality review program to ensure
timely follow-up on closed safety
recommendations.
We agree with the
recommendation. Specifically,
Board Order 022,
"Recommendations Program," is
currently under review and we
will consider including a quality
review program to ensure timely
follow-up on safety
recommendations. We are also
updating our Recommendation
Office "Standards of Practice"
document and expect that the
Board Order will contain general
guidance and the Standards of
Practice will include detailed
procedures.
9/30/2011
Open
Awaiting new OIG audit
recommendations on the CSB's
Recommendation Program so that
Board Order 022 can have a single
comprehensive revision.
13-P-0128

-------
Appendix B
CSB Response to Draft Report
November 26, 2012
Honorable Arthur A. Elkins, Jr.
Inspector General
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
Re: U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) Response to EPA
OIG Project No. OA-FY12-0492
Dear Mr. Elkins:
The CSB has reviewed draft report No. OA-FY12-0492 produced by your office. We do not
concur in its findings or recommendations. We believe that the CSB has an adequate audit
tracking system in place that meets the requirements of Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Circular A-50, "Audit Follow-Up." As to the development of an audit follow-up process
as recommended by your office, we believe that your recommendations would essentially
substitute the judgment of the IG for that of the CSB, as a collegial body, and intrude upon the
CSB's policy prerogatives.
We believe that your office is simply mistaken as to the level of documentation and necessary
actions that the CSB should take to review and address EPA IG recommendations. Your staff
continues to insist on the development of a more formalized and labor-intensive tracking and
follow-up process than is necessary for an agency with approximately 40 employees and an $11
million annual budget. Indeed, we perceive layer upon layer of bureaucratic burdens proposed
by your office, with little focus on anything that might actually assist the agency in its mission.
Moreover, we note that none of the IG's audit findings have any potential monetary impact, and
we believe that many of the "unimplemented recommendations' unnecessarily delve into matters
that go beyond management efficiency issues and intrude upon Board's substantive mission and
program.
For example, the IG's recommendation that the Board seek Congressional clarification of its
statutory mandate - concerning whether the CSB is hypothetically required to investigate all
accidental chemical releases in its jurisdiction - is not a management deficiency. That represents
a policy judgment that the CSB does not agree with. Similarly, the IG's recommendation that
the CSB publish a chemical incident reporting rule, while perhaps having merit, represents not a
management deficiency, but the substitution of the IG's judgment for that of the CSB.
13-P-0128
14

-------
To the extent that your office continues to insist on "form over substance" in its evaluation of the
CSB's work, and the substitution of its judgment for that of the CSB as a whole, we will
continue to respectfully nonconcur in the recommendations your have proffered.
Sincerely,
/Signed/
Rafael Moure-Eraso, Ph.D.
Chairperson
13-P-0128
15

-------
Appendix C
Distribution
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
Managing Director, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
Deputy Managing Director, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
Counselor to the Chair, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
Director of Administration and Audit Liaison, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board
General Counsel, Office of General Counsel, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board
Director, Office of Recommendations, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
Communications Manager, Office of Congressional, Public, and Board Affairs,
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
13-P-0128
16

-------