i	y
» \CCOA;a/^
• /> A

OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL
fv '-1A
t M \i ^ ^
> JflOJ
i \F T T \T
Semiannual
Report to Congress
October 1, 2019-March 31, 2020
350-R-20-001
May 2020

-------
Index of Reporting Requirements
Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended
Section 5(a
Significant recommendations for corrective action
12-25, 31-32
Section 5(a
Matters referred to prosecutive authorities
26-28, 39-40
59-66
Section 5(a
List of reports issued
41-42
Section 5(a
Audit, inspection, and evaluation reports—questioned costs
Section 5(a
Prior audit, inspection, and evaluation reports unresolved
28-29, 43-58
Section 5(a
Significant management decisions with which OIG disagreed
None
Section 5(a
17-18) Statistics on investigative reports, referrals, prosecutions, and indictments 39
Section 5(a
20)
Description of whistleblower retaliation
Section 5(a
22)
Closed audits, evaluations, and investigations not disclosed to public
38, 59
Section 5(a
Information or assistance refused
10-11
Section 5(a
Any establishment attempts to interfere with independence
10-11
Section 5(a
14-16) Peer reviews conducted
67
Section 5(a
Significant revised management decisions
None
Section 5(a
Audit, inspection, and evaluation reports—funds to be put to better use
Section 5(a
Substantiated Investigations involving senior government employees
Section 5(a
Summaries of significant reports
12-25, 31-32
Section 5(a
Reports with corrective action not completed
3-7, 46-58
Section 5(a
Requirement
Subject
Significant problems, abuses, and deficiencies
Page
12-31
Abbreviations
CSB	U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
C.F.R.	Code of Federal Regulations
EPA	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY	Fiscal Year
OIG	Office of Inspector General
U.S.C.	United States Code
SES	Senior Executive Service
Are you aware of fraud, waste, or abuse in an
EPA or CSB program?
EPA Inspector General Hotline
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW(2431T)
Washington, D.C. 20460
(888) 546-8740
(202) 566-2599 (fax)
OIG Hotline@epa.gov
Learn more about our OIG Hotline.
EPA Office of Inspector General
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2410T)
Washington, D.C. 20460
(202) 566-2391
www.epa.gov/oiq
Subscribe to our Email Updates
Follow us on Twitter @EPAoig
Send us your Project Suggestions

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Message to Congress
It is truly an honor to have been appointed as the inspector general for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board. Although most of the work detailed within the pages of this
Semiannual Report to Congress was either initiated or completed before I took the
helm, this report showcases the extraordinary dedication of OIG staff. I would like
to thank the Office's tireless employees and leaders—including Deputy Inspector
General Charles J. Sheehan, who served as the acting inspector general—for
remaining focused on our critical mission to fight waste, fraud, and abuse in and
promote economy, efficient, and effectiveness of Agency programs and operations.
I am proud to now count these exceptional civil servants as my colleagues. I look
forward to all that we will accomplish together.
Preservation and Perseverance: The COVID-19 Pandemic. While our work is important, the
wellbeing of our employees and their families takes precedence. The OIG has implemented measures to
mitigate the risks of the COVID-19 virus, including unscheduled telework, and has offered increased
flexibilities to our employees to help them through these challenging times, such as greatly expanded core
hours. Despite the dual challenges of being a temporarily virtual workforce and of managing personal health
and safety in these uncertain times, our staff has come together in unique and creative ways. We may not
be conducting business in our usual environment, but I am pleased to report that we are conducting business
with our usual vigor.
The OIG continues to move steadily forward, conferring with congressional and Agency leadership; issuing
reports; and investigating waste, fraud, and abuse. Congress and the public rely on our independent
oversight mission even more so in times of crisis, depending on us to ensure that the Agency continues,
unabatedly, to protect human health and the environment. As such, we have started examining and
identifying how the pandemic has impacted Agency programs and operations, from water infrastructure
worries to air quality enforcement. The public can rest assured that our oversight mission will continue
undeterred and undiminished.
Fight Against Waste, Fraud, and Abuse. Even before the onslaught of COVID-19, I prioritized
reinvigorating the OIG's fight against waste, fraud, and abuse. The most successful OIGs are those that
employ each of their parts to support their overall mission. Our Office of Investigations is increasingly
focusing on grant and contract fraud. To doggedly investigate instances of fraud, waste, or abuse, our special
agents are employing all of the investigative tools at our disposal. We are also hiring investigative counsel
to support our special agents. Our Office of Audit and Evaluation is examining grants and contracts where
we suspect there may be issues. Our Office of Management is creating a data analytics/data mining unit
that will analyze Agency data to identify possible problems. These capabilities serve to enhance our
responsibility to provide independent oversight of the EPA and the CSB.
Significant Partners: Whistleblowers and Agencies. The OIG cannot effectively and faithfully carry
out its mission to fight waste, fraud, and abuse without the support of EPA and CSB employees, contractors,
subcontractors, and grantees. It was my goal to, within the first month of my tenure, make all these
stakeholders aware of their whistleblower rights and the safeguards in place to protect whistleblowers. To
that end, I widely and publicly distributed a letter outlining how these stakeholders may confidentially
report waste, fraud, and abuse, and I provided resources for those who believe they have been retaliated
against for protected whistleblowing activities. For example, I updated the OIG's website to include
Sean W. O'Donnell

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
information about protections to contractors, subcontractors, and grantees, and I directed our whistleblower
protection coordinator to expand support to these important stakeholders.
Other allies in our fight against misuse of taxpayer dollars are the EPA and the CSB. It is important to note
that the Agency and OIG missions are closely linked. By faithfully executing our mission to promote
economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the EPA's operations and programs, for example, we enable the
Agency to successfully execute its mission to protect human health and the environment. By working with
the Agency to clearly explain our findings and recommendations, we hope to help shape improvements. By
the same token, the Agency must provide us with timely access to all requested information, so that we can
produce the most benefit to our common customer: the American public.
Projects and Investigations of Note. In this semiannual reporting period, the OIG has seen several
projects come to fruition that warrant notice. Based on a tip provided to the OIG Hotline, we investigated
a company for fraudulently certifying to the EPA that 830 homes in Florida met ENERGY STAR standards.
In October 2019, the company's owner was sentenced to 36 months of probation and fined $31,125 for
making a false statement to the EPA. As a direct result of this investigation, in March 2020, the EPA
debarred both the owner and his company from participating
in federal contracts and assistance activities for three years.
This investigation illustrates how our work is not done in a
vacuum and how working collaboratively with hotline
complainants, whistleblowers, and the Agency helps us both
detect and prevent fraud.
Our audits and evaluations completed this reporting period
have had similar impact. One audit found that, when working
to repeal the rule that glider trucks must comply with
emissions standards, the EPA did not conduct an evaluation of
the environmental health risks to children, as required by
executive order. We recommended that the EPA conduct the
required analyses before finalizing the repeal. We conducted
three audits of the EPA's emergency efforts in response to the 2017 hurricane season and made various
recommendations to help the Agency improve how it will monitor air quality and assess drinking water and
wastewater systems in the aftermath of future disasters. Our auditors completed the first of a two-part series
examining the EPA's enforcement actions, noting that nationwide, the numbers of inspections of regulated
entities such as pesticide manufacturers and oil refineries have steadily decreased since 2007. These projects
are in addition to audits focused on Agency operations—such as grant closeouts, timekeeping practices,
and use of time-off awards—that nevertheless carry great implications in terms of the Agency being a
financial steward of taxpayer dollars.
Closing Thoughts. The most successful OIG is a healthy and productive one. The most successful
OIG projects spur action and growth. And the most successful governmental agency operates efficiently,
effectively, and with integrity. As the inspector general for the EPA and CSB, I am excited to continue the
fine work of this reputable Office, and I am proud to be in service and of service to the American people.
IY\ fO&Jf
Sean W. O'Donnell
Inspector General
OIG Accomplishments
(October 1, 2019-March 31, 2020)
•	Questioned costs and potential monetary
benefits (includes results from single audits):
$60.59 million
•	Total fines and recoveries (includes
EPA-only and joint investigations):
$.03 million
•	Reports issued: 25
•	Investigative cases closed: 70
•	Administrative actions resulting from
investigative cases: 24
•	Hotline inquiries referred for action: 196

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Table of Contents
About EPA and Its Office of Inspector General	 1
Scoreboard of Results	 2
Status of OIG Unimplemented Recommendations	 3
Furthering EPA's Efforts to Protect Human Health and Environment	 8
Status of Whistleblower Retaliation and Interference with Independence	 10
Significant OIG Activity	 12
Conqressionallv Requested Activities	 12
EPA's Response Efforts Related to 2017 Hurricane Season	 15
Human Health and Environmental Issues	 17
Agency Business Practices and Accountability	 21
Investigations	 26
Hotline Activities	 28
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board	 31
Other Results of OIG Work		33
Follow-Up Is Important Aspect of OIG Efforts		33
Single Audit Reporting Efforts Make Impact		35
Agency Best Practices		36
Statistical Data		37
Profile of Activities and Results		37
Audit Report Resolution		38
Summary of Investigative Results		39
Appendices		41
Appendix 1—Reports Issued		41
Appendix 2—Reports Issued Without Management Decisions		43
Appendix 3—Reports with Corrective Action Not Completed		46
Appendix 4—Closed Investigations		59
Appendix 5—Peer Reviews Conducted		67
Appendix 6—OIG Mailing Addresses and Telephone Numbers		68

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
About EPA and Its
Office of Inspector General
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The mission of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is to protect human health and
the environment. As America's steward for the environment since 1970, the EPA has
endeavored to ensure that the public has air that is safe to breathe, water that is clean and
safe to drink, food that is free from dangerous pesticide residues, and communities that
are protected from toxic chemicals.
EPA Office of Inspector General
The Office of Inspector General, established by the Inspector General Act of 1978, as
amended, 5 U.S.C. app., is an independent office of the EPA that detects and prevents
fraud, waste, and abuse to help the Agency protect human health and the environment more
efficiently and effectively. OIG staff are located at EPA headquarters in Washington, D.C.;
the EPA's ten regional offices; Research Triangle Park, North Carolina; and Cincinnati,
Ohio. The EPA inspector general also serves as the inspector general for the U.S. Chemical
Safety and Hazard Investigation Board. Our vision, mission, and goals are as follows:
Vision
Be a premier oversight organization trusted to speak the truth, promote good
governance, and contribute to improved human health and the environment.
Conduct independent audits, evaluations, and investigations; make evidence-based
recommendations to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness; and prevent and
detect fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, and misconduct for the EPA and the CSB.
Goals
1.	Contribute to improved EPA and CSB programs and operations protecting human
health and the environment, and enhancing safety.
2.	Conduct audits, evaluations, and investigations that enable the EPA and the CSB
to improve business practices and accountability.
3.	Improve OIG processes, resource allocation, and accountability to meet
stakeholder needs.
1

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Scoreboard of Results
The information below shows return on investment to the taxpayer for work performed by the EPA OIG during the first
half of fiscal year 2020 compared to FY 2020 annual performance goal targets. All results reported are based on goals
and plans established under the Government Performance and Results Act.
Annual Performance Goal 1:
Environmental and business outcome actions taken; changes, corrections, or improvements made;
risks reduced, eliminated, or influenced by OIG work
Target: 196
Reported: 51
(26.02% of goal)
Supporting measures
6 Environmental/health improvements realized or influenced by OIG work
45 Environmental, chemical safety, or business policy, practice, or process change made,
or decision implemented
0 Legislative or regulatory changes
Annual Performance Goal 2:
Recommendations, challenges, best practices, or risks identified for action
Target: 460
Reported: 364
(79.13% of goal)
Supporting measures
*11 Certifications, verifications, and validations
*118 Recommendations for improvement (including risk identified)
6 Referrals for Agency action
*229 OIG-identified findings in external reports impacting EPA
Annual Performance Goal 3:
Return on investment: potential dollar return as percentage of OIG budget
Target: $80,427,200
(160% of budget)
Reported: $61,083,194
(75.95% of target)
Supporting measures fin millions)
OIG budget: $53.1
Potential return: $61.1
*$1,151 Questioned costs
$49,585 Potential monetary benefits identified in reports—excluding questioned costs
$9,853 Monetary actions taken or resolved prior to report issuance
$0 Actual cost saved identified after report issuance
$0,462 Cost avoidance savings/cost savings identified after report issuance or based on
investigative results
$0,031 Fines, penalties, settlements, and restitutions resulting from EPA OIG investigations
$0,001 Fines, penalties, settlements, and restitutions resulting from joint investigations
between EPA OIG and other entities
Annual Performance Goal 4:
Criminal, civil, and administrative actions reducing risk, and loss of resources
and operational integrity taken or influenced by OIG work
Target: 200
Reported: 128
(64% of goal)
Supporting measures
28 Allegations disproved
5 Indictments, informations, and complaints
3 Criminal convictions
0 Civil actions
17 Administrative actions taken (other than debarments or suspensions)
7 Suspension or debarment actions
68 Fraud briefings conducted
Other (no targets established)
Savings and recommendations sustained:
•	*128 sustained environmental or business recommendations (resolved or agreed-to) for action
•	*$0 million in sustained questioned costs
•	$51,156 million in sustained potential monetary benefits
Sources: The OIG Performance Measurement Results System and the Inspector General Enterprise Management System.
* These measures include single audits, which are audits of nonfederal entities performed by private firms.
2

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Status of OIG Unimplemented
Recommendations
OIG audits and evaluations provide recommendations to improve EPA program offices and
regions. Both the Agency and the public benefit from the implementation of these
recommendations. We have analyzed the list of unimplemented recommendations in
Appendix 3 and provide the results of that analysis below. Unimplemented
recommendations include those for which implementation is past due, as well as those that
are due in the future. Recommendations that are unresolved—that is, not agreed to by the
Agency—are not counted as unimplemented recommendations. Recommendations that
remain unresolved after six months of a final report being issued are listed in Appendix 2.
Unimplemented recommendations as of March 31, 2020
(presented by fiscal year issued)
80
FY 2008- FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019
2013
For the semiannual reporting period ending March 31, 2020, 116 recommendations to the
EPA remain unimplemented, and two recommendations to the CSB remain
unimplemented. If implemented, these recommendations have the potential to result in
$70 million in benefits for the EPA and $349,000 for the CSB. We divide these
unimplemented recommendations into six categories in the table below.
3

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020

Total

Number of
Potential
Category
unimplemented
recommendations
monetary benefits
(in $000s)
EPA Unimplemented Recommendations
1. Management and Operations
31
$38,917
2. Water Issues
16
0
3. Environmental Contamination and Cleanup
15
27,800
4. Toxics, Chemical Safety, and Pesticides
19
0
5. Air Quality
27
2,905
6. Research and Laboratories
8
0
EPA subtotal
116
69,622
CSB Unimplemented Recommendations
Management and Operations
2
349
CSB subtotal
2
349
TOTAL
118
$69,971
Category 1—Management and Operations
We issued the 33 unimplemented recommendations in this category within the following
15 reports. When implemented, these recommendations will lead to more effective and
efficient operations and potential monetary benefits of $38.9 million for the EPA and
$349,000 for the CSB:
• Improve oversight of:
o Records management policy (Report No. 19-P-0283).
o Senior Environmental Employment program (Report No. 19-P-0198).
o Improper payments review process and compliance with sampling and
estimating plan (Report No. 19-P-0163). The potential monetary benefit of this
unimplemented recommendation is $1,912,000.
o Overpaid invoices (Report No. 19-P-0157). The potential monetary benefit of
this unimplemented recommendation is $5,000.
o Administrator's and associated staff s travel (Report No. 19-P-0155).
o Law Enforcement Availability Pay control processes (Report No. 19-P-0001).
o Companies with multiple cleanup liabilities that self-insure
(Report No. 18-P-0059).
o CSB's agency governance and operations (Report No. 16-P-0179).
The potential monetary benefit of this unimplemented recommendation is
$349,000.
o Grants execution in the U.S. Virgin Islands (Report No. 15-P-0137).
The potential monetary benefit of this unimplemented recommendation is
$3 7 million.
o Emergency and rapid response contracts (Report No. 14-P-0109).
4

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
• Implement better processes for information technology regarding:
o Enterprise customer service solution oversight (Report No. 19-P-0278).
o Pesticide registration fee, vulnerability mitigation, and database security
controls for the EPA's Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and
Pesticide Registration Improvement Act systems (Report No. 19-P-0195).
o Combatting cyberthreats due to insufficient practices for managing known
security weaknesses and system settings (Report No. 19-P-0158).
o CSB's "Incident Response" and "Identity and Access Management"
information security functions (Report 19-P-0147).
o Individual personal identity verification cards and access to computer
equipment (Report No. 19-F-0003).
Category 2—Water Issues
We issued the 16 unimplemented recommendations in this category within the following
seven reports. When implemented, these recommendations will lead to improved human
health and environment, as well as more effective and efficient operations:
•	Improve oversight of notice to the public on drinking water risks to better protect
human health (Report No. 19-P-0318).
•	Improve emergency outreach to disadvantaged communities
(Report No. 19-P-0236).
•	Act on transfer request and petition regarding Ohio's concentrated animal feeding
operation permit program (Report No. 19-N-0154).
•	Strengthen oversight of state drinking water programs to improve response to
drinking water contamination emergencies like in Flint, Michigan
(Report No. 18-P-0221).
•	Provide leadership and better guidance to improve fish advisory risk
communications (Report No. 17-P-0174).
•	Improve management of the Oil Pollution Prevention program
(Report No. 12-P-0253).
•	Revise outdated or inconsistent EPA-state clean water memorandums of agreement
(Report No. 10-P-0224).
Category 3—Environmental Contamination and Cleanup
We issued the 15 unimplemented recommendations in this category within the following
four reports. When implemented, these recommendations will lead to improved human
health and environment, more effective and efficient operations, and potential monetary
benefits of $27.8 million:
5

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
•	Implement more efficient and effective methods to assess the impact of unregulated
pollutants in land-applied biosolids (Report No. 19-P-0002).
•	Finish prioritization and resource allocation methodologies for abandoned uranium
mine sites on or near Navajo lands (Report No. 18-P-0233).
•	Revise risk management inspection guidance to recommend minimum inspection
scope and provide detailed examples of minimum reporting
(Report No. 13-P-0178).
•	Make better use of Stringfellow Superfund Special Accounts
(Report No. 08-P-0196). The potential monetary benefit of this unimplemented
recommendation is $27.8 million.
Category 4—Toxics, Chemical Safety, and Pesticides
We issued the 19 unimplemented recommendations in this category within the following
seven reports. When implemented, these recommendations will lead to improved human
health and environment:
•	Effectively implement the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
(Report No. 19-P-0302).
•	Determine strategies and level of support for overseeing State Managed Pollinator
Protection Plans (Report No. 19-P-0275).
•	Improve measures and management controls over the pesticide emergency
exemption process (Report No. 18-P-0281).
•	Better manage state pesticide cooperative agreements to more effectively use funds
and reduce risk of pesticide misuse (Report No. 18-P-0079).
•	Reduce risks from illegal pesticides by effectively identifying imports for
inspection and sampling (Report No. 17-P-0412).
•	Manage pesticide funds more efficiently (Report No. 17-P-0395).
•	Evaluate structural fumigation treatment incidents (Report No. 17-P-0053).
Category 5—Air Quality
We issued the 27 unimplemented recommendations in this category within the following
ten reports. When implemented, these recommendations will lead to improved human
health and the environment, as well as potential monetary benefits of $2.9 million:
•	Improve the 2017 glider vehicle testing policy and processes to make them
consistent with the Clean Air Act (Report No. 19-P-0252).
•	Improve oversight for particulate matter emissions compliance testing
(Report No. 19-P-0251).
6

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
•	Enhance verification of continuous monitoring system performance for air
emissions data (Report No. 19-P-0207).
•	Improve the on-road heavy-duty vehicle compliance program
(Report No. 19-P-0168).
•	Collect additional performance data from states to better assess the effectiveness of
vehicle inspection and maintenance programs (Report No. 18-P-0283).
•	Strengthen the process for revising air quality dispersion models that predict impact
of pollutant emissions (Report No. 18-P-0241).
•	Improve controls to address strategic risks in the light-duty vehicle compliance
program and achieve compliance with mobile source regulations
(Report No. 18-P-0181).
•	Improve data and oversight to assure compliance with the standards for benzene
content in gasoline (Report No. 17-P-0249).
•	Meet certain statutory requirements to identify environmental impacts of the
Renewable Fuel Standard (Report No. 16-P-0275).
•	Provide a verifiable and enforceable remedy to reduce diesel emissions in the
Baton Rouge ozone nonattainment area (Report No. 13-R-0297). The potential
monetan> benefit of this unimplemented recommendation is $2.9 million.
Category 6—Research and Laboratories
We issued the eight unimplemented recommendations in this category within the following
two reports. When implemented, these recommendations will lead to improved human
health and environment, as well as more effective and efficient operations:
•	Improve regional research programs with enhanced project tracking
(Report No. 19-P-0123).
•	Develop a comprehensive vision and strategy for citizen science that aligns with
the Agency's strategic objectives on public participation
(Report No. 18-P-0240).
7

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Furthering EPA's Efforts to Protect
Human Health and Environment
When conducting audits and evaluations, we consider how our efforts support both the OIG's mission to promote
economy and efficiency in Agency operations and the EPA's mission to protect human health and the
environment. The table below shows how our reports issued during the first half of FY 2020 support the Agency
and OIG missions.
OIG-lssued Reports Related to EPA Programs and Operations
OIG Report
Report
No.
Improving
air quality
Ensuring
clean/safe
water
Cleaning up/
revitalizing
land
Ensuring
safety of
chemicals
Improving
EPA research
programs
Compliance
with the law
Partnering
with states/
others
Operating
efficiently/
effectively
Region 4 Quickly Assessed Water
Systems After Hurricane Irma but Can
Improve Emergency Preparedness
20-P-0001

X




X
X
EPA's Purchase Card and Convenience
Check Program Merits an Audit in Fiscal
Year 2020
20-P-0006







X
Management Alert: EPA Still Unable to
Validate that Contractors Received Role-
Based Training for Information Security
Protection
20-P-0007







X
EPA Adequately Managed Hurricane
Harvey Funding Received from FEMA
20-P-0010







X
While EPA Regions Enforce at Six
Superfund Sites Reviewed, Four of
Those Sites Remain in Significant
Noncompliance, and Nationwide
Reporting and Tracking Can Be
Improved
20-P-0011


X





Tribal Pesticide Enforcement Comes
Close to Achieving EPA Goals, but
"Circuit Rider" Inspector Guidance
Needed
20-P-0012



X


X

EPA Budget Systems Need Improved
Oversight of Security Controls Testing
20-P-0015







X
EPA's Fiscal Year 2019 First Quarter
Compliance with the Digital
Accountability and Transparency Act of
2014
20-P-0026





X

X
Management Alert: Unapproved Use of
Slag at Anaconda Co. Smelter
Superfund Site
20-N-0030


X


X


EPA's Fiscal Years 2019 and 2018
(Restated) Consolidated Financial
Statements
20-F-0033







X
EPA Failed to Develop Required Cost
and Benefit Analyses and to Assess Air
Quality Impacts on Children's Health for
Proposed Glider Repeal Rule Allowing
Used Engines in Heavy-Duty Trucks
20-P-0047
X



X
X


Despite Requirements of Inspector
General Act, Chief of Staff Refuses to
Provide Agency Information for OIG
Evaluation; Required Whistleblower
Training Does Not Address Interference
with or Intimidation of Congressional
Witnesses
20-E-0053





X


EPA Needs to Improve Its Emergency
Planning to Better Address Air Quality
Concerns During Future Disasters
20-P-0062
X







8

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
OIG Report
Report
No.
Improving
air quality
Ensuring
clean/safe
water
Cleaning up/
revitalizing
land
Ensuring
safety of
chemicals
Improving
EPA research
programs
Compliance
with the law
Partnering
with states/
others
Operating
efficiently/
effectively
Outdated EPA Leave Manual and
Control Weaknesses Caused
Irregularities in the Office of Air and
Radiation's Timekeeping Practices
20-P-0063







X
EPA Needs to Improve Management and
Monitoring of Time-Off Awards
20-P-0065







X
EPA Can Improve Incident Readiness
with Better Management of Homeland
Security and Emergency Response
Equipment
20-P-0066


X



X
X
EPA Should Improve Oversight of Mobile
Phones
20-P-0068







X
Management Controls Needed to Verify
and Report Border 2020 Program
Accomplishments
20-P-0083
X
X
X



X
X
EPA Needs to Improve Its Risk
Management and Incident Response
Information Security Functions
20-P-0120





X

X
EPA Did Not Accurately Report Under
the Grants Oversight and New Efficiency
Act and Needs to Improve Timeliness of
Expired Grant Closeouts
20-P-0126







X
Management Alert: Prompt Action
Needed to Inform Residents Living Near
Ethylene Oxide-Emitting Facilities About
Health Concerns and Actions to Address
Those Concerns
20-N-0128
X







EPA's Compliance Monitoring Activities,
Enforcement Actions, and Enforcement
Results Generally Declined from Fiscal
Years 2006 Through 2018
20-P-0131





X


9

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Status of Whistleblower Retaliation and
Interference with Independence
Whistleblower Retaliation
Section 5(a)(20) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, requires a detailed
description of any instances of whistleblower retaliation noted by the EPA OIG.
This requirement includes reporting information about an official found to have engaged
in retaliation and the consequences the Agency imposed to hold that official accountable.
There were no whistleblower retaliation cases closed within the semiannual period
ending March 31, 2020. No officials were found to have engaged in retaliation.
Interference with Independence
Section 5(a)(21) of the Inspector General Act requires a detailed description of any
attempt by the establishment to interfere with the independence of the EPA OIG. This
requirement includes budget constraints designed to limit the OIG's capabilities and
incidents where the Agency resisted OIG oversight or delayed OIG access to information.
Additionally, Section 5(a)(5) requires a summary of any report issued to the head of the
establishment outlining any circumstances where the Agency unreasonably refused to
provide information or assistance to the OIG during the reporting period.
The OIG's ability to conduct investigative and audit work was impeded during this
semiannual reporting period when the now former chief of staff refused to fully cooperate
and provide information to the OIG in an investigation and an audit.
During an administrative investigation, the chief of staff refused to cooperate with OIG
investigators. The chief of staff terminated an initial interview with OIG investigators
before it could be completed. When contacted to schedule a second interview, the chief of
staff first delayed and then refused to submit to an interview unless he was informed in
advance of the subject matter. And during an audit based on a congressional request, OIG
auditors asked the chief of staff to identify who had provided him an advance copy of
witness testimony given before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology. The chief of staff stated that he would not answer the question.
After unsuccessfully appealing to the associate deputy administrator and ultimately the
administrator to compel the chief of staff s cooperation in both matters, on October 29,
2019, the OIG issued a "Seven-Day Letter" to the administrator. Section 5(d) of the
Inspector General Act requires an inspector general to report to the head of the agency
"whenever the Inspector General becomes aware of particularly serious or flagrant
problems, abuses, or deficiencies relating to the administration of programs and
10

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
operations of such [agency]." The Seven-Day Letter outlined the chief of staff s refusal to
fully cooperate and provide information in the OIG investigation and audit, as well as
how that refusal undermined the OIG's right under the Inspector General Act to timely
access to all records and other materials relating to Agency programs or operations.
As to the investigation, following the Seven-Day Letter, the chief of staff agreed to sit for
an interview. The OIG declined his requests that Agency counsel be present with him
during the interview and that he be informed in advance of the topics to be covered. The
interview of the chief of staff was conducted on December 18, 2019. Although the OIG
considers the chief of staff s cooperation with regard to the investigation to be complete,
his actions did not fulfill the Inspector General Act's requirement of "timely" cooperation
under Section 6(a)(1)(A).
As to the audit, however, the chief of staff never answered the question as to who
provided him with an advance copy of the testimony. Accordingly, as discussed on the
next page, OIG Report No. 20-E-0053. Despite Requirements of Inspector General Act,
Chief of Staff Refuses to Provide Agency Information for OIG Evaluation; EPA
Whistleblower Training Does Not Address Interference with or Intimidation of
Congressional Witnesses, issued December 10, 2019, addressed only one of two stated
objectives.
11

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Significant OIG Activity
Congressionally Requested Activities
Reports
Despite Requirements of Inspector General Act, Chief of Staff Refuses to Provide
Agency Information for OIG Evaluation; Required Whistleblower Training Does
Not Address Interference with or Intimidation of Congressional Witnesses
Report No. 20-E-0053, issued December 10, 2019
The OIG reviewed how a senior political appointee obtained a copy of a congressional
witness's testimony prior to the hearing, as well as reviewed whether employees in the
Office of the Administrator received whistleblower training on federal prohibitions against
interfering with or intimidating individuals who testify before Congress.
We confirmed with the then chief of staff that he had received a copy of the witness
testimony prior to the congressional hearing; however, he did not provide us with
information we requested, contrary to the Inspector General Act and the administrator's
earlier memorandum urging all EPA staff to
cooperate with the OIG. After several failed
attempts to obtain the requested information,
the then acting inspector general issued a
"Seven-Day Letter" on October 29, 2019, in
accordance with Section 5(d) of the Inspector
General Act.
What Is a "Seven-Day Letter"?
Section 5(d) of the Inspector General Act requires an
inspector general to report to the head of the agency:
whenever the Inspector General becomes aware of
particularly serious or flagrant problems, abuses, or
deficiencies relating to the administration of
programs and operations of such establishment.
The head of the establishment shall transmit any
such report to the appropriate committees or
subcommittees of Congress within seven calendar
days, together with a report by the head of the
establishment containing any comments such head
deems appropriate.
In addition, we found that all EPA employees,
including political appointees, are required to
complete whistleblower protection training and
review other materials that relate to prohibited
personnel practices. However, the training and
materials do not specifically address interfering with or intimidating individuals who seek
to communicate with or testify before Congress. We also determined that the Agency's
ethics office has no role in whistleblower training.
This type of report is commonly called a "Seven-Day Letter.'
12

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October '!, 2019—March 31, 2020
EPA Failed to Develop Required Cost and Benefit Analyses and to Assess Air
Quality Impacts on Children's Health for Proposed Glider Repeal Rule Allowing
Used Engines in Heavy-Duty Trucks
Report No, 20-F-0047, issued December 5, 2019
When developing and issuing the proposed Glider Repeal Rule, which
would relieve the glider industry of complying with emissions standards
and production limits, the EPA did not comply with:
•	Executive Order 12866, which triggers an assessment of the anticipated costs,
benefits, and any reasonable alternatives for any regulatory action deemed
"economically significant" under the Order.
•	Executive Order 13045, which requires—for any "economically significant"
regulatory actions that "concern an environmental health or safety risk that an
agency has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children"—an
evaluation of the environmental health risks to children and an explanation of
why the planned regulation is preferable to alternatives.
Although EPA officials were aware that the proposed Glider Repeal Rule could be
"economically significant," the then EPA administrator directed the Office of Air and
Radiation to develop the proposed rule without conducting analyses required by the
Executive Orders. Additionally, the EPA did not follow its principal rulemaking guidance
in developing the proposed Glider Repeal Rule, nor did it meet Federal Records Act
requirements. The lack of analyses resulted in the public not being informed of the
proposed rule's costs, benefits, potential alternatives, and impacts on children's health. We
issued three recommendations to the Agency, including that it conduct the required
analyses prior to finalizing the repeal and provide the public a means to comment on the
analyses supporting the rulemaking. The Agency agreed with two recommendations, while
one recommendation is unresolved with resolution efforts in progress.
What are heavy-duty "glider vehicles" arid "glider kits"?
The term "glider kit" is used in the heavy-duty vehicle industry to describe a chassis and cab
assembly that is generally produced by a vehicle manufacturer without a new engine,
transmission, or rear axle. A third party then typically installs a used engine, transmission,
and/or rear axie to complete assembly of the
vehicle. The terms "glider vehicle" and "glider"
are typically used for the completed vehicles.
Historically, gliders have been used to
salvage valuable components, such as used
engines, transmissions, and axles, from
vehicles that were badly damaged in
collisions. Atypical glider kit configuration is
pictured to the right. (EPA photo)
Podcast
©
13

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Briefings, Requests, and Inquiries
During this reporting period, the OIG provided 55 briefings to Congress on the OIG's
work. Several briefings involved Inspector General Sean W. O'Donnell meeting with
members of Congress on a bipartisan basis to better understand their perspectives, obtain
feedback on the OIG, and establish the foundation for an open dialogue. Other briefings
included ongoing OIG work related to trends in environmental enforcement, the EPA's
implementation of Title VI, the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards" actions to
address air toxics emissions through its Residual Risk and Technology Review program,
and the EPA's Action Development Process for rulemaking. During the reporting period,
the OIG also received eight congressional requests.
14

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October '!, 2019—March 31, 2020
EPA's Response Efforts Related to 2017 Hurricane Season
EPA Needs to Improve Its Emergency Planning to Better Address Air Quality
Concerns During Future Disasters
Report No. 20-P-0062. issued December 16, 2019
Air monitoring activities were not initiated in time to assess air quality
during most of the emission incidents that occurred when Hurricane
Harvey hit the U.S. Gulf Coast in August 2017. The majority of these
incidents were due to industrial facilities shutting down and later restarting
operations. In addition, monitoring efforts did not always generate suitable
data to make health-based assessments. There was also a lack of guidance
outlining how agencies and other partners should monitor air quality
following an emergency. Although we did not identify any inaccurate
communication from the EPA to the public regarding air quality, there was
limited communication of air monitoring results. We made six
recommendations to the Agency, two of which the EPA agreed with and four of which
are unresolved with resolution efforts in progress.
Montgomery
Greater
Houston Area
LjUitefig'
o W
° Waller*
Austin	1
0 115230
Harris •
Chambers
Houston population estimates and industrial air polluter locations, as of 2017 and 2019,
respectively. (OIG analysis using Esri's ArcMap)
Video
a
Podcast
Translation
Espanol
Tieng Viet
15

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October '!, 2019—March 31, 2020
Region 4 Quickly Assessed Water Systems After Hurricane Irma but Can
Improve Emergency Preparedness
Report No. 20-P-0001. issued October 7, 2019
The EPA successfully assessed water systems within the mandated 15-day period after
Hurricane Irma struck Florida in September 2017. However, some EPA staff members
were unfamiliar with some of EPA Region 4's internal emergency response protocols,
and more exercises could be conducted with the EPAs Florida partners. We
recommended that the EPA Region 4 regional administrator direct the Water Division to
finalize its standard operating procedure for disaster response and conduct annual
hurricane emergency response exercises with state partners. Hie EPA agreed with our
recommendations.
EPA Region 4 mobile command post in St. Petersburg, Florida. (EPA photo)
EPA Adequately Managed Hurricane Harvey Funding Received from FEMA
Report No. 20-P-Q01Q, issued October 23, 2019
The EPA effectively managed the more than $11 million in Hurricane Flarvey Disaster
Relief Funding it received from FEMA for emergency response efforts. Hurricane
Harvey struck Texas and Louisiana in late
August 2017. Previously, in response to prior
OIG audits about the Agency's emergency
response efforts, the EPA had identified
strengths and areas for improvement, as well
as implemented corrective actions. During
this audit, we did not identify any additional
significant issues in the EPA's contracting^
logistics, or resource acquisition processes,
Local Emergency Operation Centers and Federal Emergency	,	,	, .
Management Agency Disaster Recovery Centers conducted joint 311(1 we made 110 recommendations,
efforts—pictured here at a base at the Harris County Greensport
Mall in Houston, Texas—to disseminate information to residents.
EPA photo)
16

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October '!, 2019—March 31, 2020
Human Health and Environmental Issues
While EPA Regions Enforce at Six Superfund Sites Reviewed, Four of Those
Sites Remain in Significant Noncompliance, and Nationwide Reporting and
Tracking Can Be Improved
Report No. 20-P-0011. issued October 24, 2019
EPA regions enforced compliance with terms of enforcement instruments, as described in
the table below, at the six Superfund sites we reviewed. However, four of those sites were
in substantial noncompliance and were erroneously coded in EPA databases as not in
substantial noncompliance. The EPA's ineffective tracking of compliance with
enforcement instruments at Superfund sites limited its ability to measure whether and
how well the regions addressed instances of noncompliance. Furthermore, the EPA's
guidance for tracking and monitoring compliance allows for overly subjective
determinations of substantial noncompliance. The EPA agreed to take action to improve
its guidance and correct status codes as needed.
EPA's three primary enforcement instruments
Administrative
Order on
Consent
A legal document that formalizes an agreement between the EPA and one
or more potentially responsible parties that obligates action or
reimbursement of costs to the government.
Consent
Decree
A legal agreement between the United States (through the EPA and
Department of Justice) and the potentially responsible parties entered by a
court.
Unilateral
Administrative
Order
An order against a noncomplying potentially responsible party to perform
the cleanup work; the EPA may subsequently seek to recover needed funds
from the party.
Source: QiG analysis.
Management Controls Needed to Verify and Report Border 2020 Program
Accomplishments
Report No. 20-P-QQ83. issued February 18, 2020
Podcast
©
The EPA needs to publicly share essential documentation
and products regarding the activities of the Border 2020:
U.S.-Mexico Environmental Program, an eight-year
binational plan executed in 2012 to protect the environment
and public health in the border region. The Agency also
needs to provide sufficient resources to the program so that
it can provide reliable information on the status and trends
on environmental quality in the U.S.-Mexico border region. The EPA
agreed with our five recommendations.
Translation
Espanol
Tijuana River National
Estuarine Research Reserve.
(EPA OIG photo)
17

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October '!, 2019—March 31, 2020
Management Alert: Prompt Action Needed to Inform Residents Living Near
Ethylene Oxide-Emitting Facilities About Health Concerns and Actions to
Address Those Concerns
Report No, 20-N-0128. issued March 31, 2020
The EPA has prioritized activities to more fully assess ethylene oxide
emissions and the associated health risks to the public for 25 ethylene
oxide-emitting facilities that contribute to elevated estimated cancer risks.
Ethylene oxide, which the Agency characterizes as "carcinogenic to
humans," is a gas used to manufacture a variety of products and to sterilize
medical equipment. The EPA or state personnel, or both, have met with
residents living near only nine of the 25 high-priority facilities about the
health risks and actions being taken to address those risks. Our recommendation that the
EPA communicate with residents near all high-priority facilities is unresolved with
resolution efforts in progress.
•
•	r i-
•
•
•
^E£rv-""
•
•
The EPA identified census tracts in 17 metropolitan areas with elevated estimated cancer risks
primarily driven by ethylene oxide emissions. (OIG-developed image based on the 2014 NATA and
information from the EPA)
Management Alert: Unapproved Use of Slag at Anaconda Co. Smelter
Superfund Site
Report No. 20-N-0030, issued November 18, 2019
During an audit of the Agency's risk communication efforts at contaminated sites, we
discovered that slag—a waste material produced from historical mining and smelting
operations at the Anaconda Co. Smelter Superfund Site in Montana—was being used or
sold as souvenirs. This use of slag has not been approved by the EPA, and the public
risks exposure to contamination. We made various recommendations in a management
alert so that the Agency could immediately address these concerns while our overall audit
work continued.
f	
Podcast
©
,	^
Translation
Espanol
18

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress	October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
EPA's Compliance Monitoring Activities, Enforcement Actions, and
Enforcement Results Generally Declined from Fiscal Years 2006 Through 2018
Report No. 20-P-0131, issued March 31, 2020
The EPA conducts monitoring activities to verify that regulated entities—such as
pesticide manufacturers or oil refineries—comply with environmental laws and
regulations; when the Agency identifies noncompliance, it takes enforcement actions to
return those regulated entities to compliance. The EPA's annual level of compliance
monitoring activities, enforcement actions, and enforcement results generally declined
during the period we reviewed. Specifically, during our audit period,1 the number of:
•	Inspections decreased by 33 percent.
•	Enforcement actions initiated decreased by 52 percent.
•	Enforcement actions concluded decreased by 51 percent.
•	Concluded enforcement actions with the following results also decreased:
injunctive relief (58 percent); penalties (53 percent); supplemental environmental
projects (48 percent); and commitments to reduce, treat, or eliminate pollutants
(31 percent).
Additionally, funding for the EPA's enforcement program and the number of
enforcement staff decreased by 18 percent and 21 percent, respectively. In FY 2019,
enforcement funding and number of enforcement staff continued to decrease in
comparison to FY 2018. Eleven of the analyzed enforcement measures also continued to
decrease in FY 2019, while four measures increased.
ENFORCEMENT MEASURE DECREASE
- INSPECTIONS —	—433%-*
ENFORCEMENT CASES INITIATED	-452% •
Because this report focused on
identifying national trends, we made no
recommendations. A forthcoming
report will discuss regional and statute-
specific trends, identify key factors
contributing to these and national
enforcement cases concluded	451% •	trends, and make resulting
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS WITH INJUNCTIVE RELIEF -|58% •	recommendations to the Agency.
¦ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS WITH PENALTIES --153%-#
— SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS —4 48%-*
The EPA's enforcement measures decreased when comparing
FYs 2007 and 2018. (OIG graphic)
1 Due to an unusually high number of enforcement efforts in FY 2006, we based all of our analyses on the
FYs 2007-2018 time frame, except for enforcement funding and staff (FYs 2006-2018) and for the three
environmental benefit measures (FYs 2012-2018).
19

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October '!, 2019—March 31, 2020
Tribal Pesticide Enforcement Comes Close to Achieving EPA Goals,
but "Circuit Rider" Inspector Guidance Needed
Report No. 20-P-0012. issued October 29, 2019
The EPA"s negotiation, review, and approval of tribal pesticide cooperative agreement
work plans—which outline the planned inspections and other work under the cooperative
agreement—came close to supporting Agency goals to protect human health and the
environment. For FYs 2016-2017, the
EPA entered into cooperative agreements
with 17 tribes so that they could conduct
pesticide compliance and enforcement
activities. These 17 tribes completed
87 percent of the projected inspections
and met 86 percent of the applicable
work plan requirements. However, tribes
that used "circuit riders"—a tribal
inspector shared among two or more
tribes—may not be fully aware of the scope or outcome of activities conducted by the
circuit riders. The Agency agreed with our three recommendations.
Farm workers on Navajo Nation land. (EPA photo)
20

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October '!, 2019—March 31, 2020
Agency Business Practices and Accountability
EPA Can Improve Incident Readiness with Better Management of Homeland
Security and Emergency Response Equipment
Report No. 20-P-0066, issued January 3, 2020
am
B
ass



Jl
The EPA needs to improve its management
of its homeland security and emergency
response equipment so that the Agency can
cost-effectively fulfill its responsibilities
during an incident. The EPA should also
use all the functions of its Agency Asset
Management System, which has the ability
to manage and track the EPA's equipment.
The Agency agreed with two of our
recommendations but did not provide
corrective actions. It disagreed with the remaining three recommendations. All five
recommendations are unresolved with resolution efforts in progress.

A Region 10 emergency response vehicle in
Seattle, Washington. (EPA OIG photo)
EPA Did Wot Accurately Report Under the Grants Oversight and New Efficiency
Act and Needs to Improve Timeliness of Expired Grant Closeouts
Report No. 20-P-0126, issued March 31, 2020
The EPA complied with the Grants Oversight and New Efficiency Act by submitting
the required information to Congress and the Department of Health and Human Services
in a timely manner. However, the Agency reported inaccurate counts of expired grant
awards. In addition, the EPA did not always close out grants in a timely manner, require
underperfonning regions to submit grant closeout improvement strategies, or have a
process for regions to escalate difficult
grant closeouts to headquarters. The
Agency had $8.3 million in unliquidated
obligations that expired more than
one year earlier. The EPA agreed with
two recommendations, while two
recommendations remain unresolved with
resolution efforts in progress.

JULY
AUGUST
2 0 19
SEPTEMBER
6

i =
EXPIRED GRANT AWARDS
$8.3 million
unliquidated obligations
-b
As of September 6, 2019, the EPA had approximately $8.3 million
in ULOs (i.e., undisbursed balances) for grant awards that expired
more than one year prior to September 1, 2019. (OIG image)
21

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Outdated EPA Leave Manual and Control Weaknesses Caused Irregularities in
the Office of Air and Radiation's Timekeeping Practices
Report No. 20-P-0063, issued December 19, 2019
The EPA did not formalize entitlements under the
Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 in its Leave
Manual, so staff and supervisors may not be aware
of or fully understand these entitlements. The EPA
also allowed untimely adjustments to time and
attendance records of prior pay periods, which
resulted in salary overpayments, and improperly
approved Travel Compensatory Time Off. Of our
five recommendations, the Agency agreed with two and already completed corrective
actions for one. The remaining three are unresolved with resolution efforts in progress.
Policies provide critical direction and
information. (OIG graphic)
EPA Needs to Improve Management and Monitoring of Time-Off Awards
Report No. 20-P-0065, issued December 30, 2019
The EPA successfully implemented interim policies and procedures for reviewing and
approving monetary awards that total more than $5,000 in a fiscal year for any one
employee. However, the Agency does not follow U.S. Office of Personnel Management
guidance and assess a value for time-off awards as part of its awards program. The
Agency therefore cannot determine whether its time-off awards are consistently assessed,
approved at the appropriate level when combined with monetary awards, and
commensurate with employee achievements. The Agency also does not monitor time-off
awards as a resource. Our three recommendations are unresolved with resolution efforts
in progress.
¦ Headquarters
fcaa»fcfcEbn
Award hours
Regions
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
Total: 117,016
86,213
Number of awards *
I Headquarters ¦ Regions
Total: 11,685 ¦ Total: 10,566
5,000
,605
1,000
4,267
4,000
3,000
2.000
704
Time-off awards
comparison by
headquarters and
regions for calendar
years 2015-2017.
(OIG analysis of Agency
award data)
* The total number of
individual awards
granted per calendar
year, not the number of
employees receiving
awards. An employee
may receive multiple
individual awards.
2015
2016
2017
2015
2016
2017
22

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Management Alert: EPA Still Unable to Validate that Contractors Received
Role-Based Training for Information Security Protection
Report No. 20-P-0007, issued October 21, 2019
Despite recommendations in a prior OIG report, the EPA
continued to lack information about whether contractor
personnel comply with training requirements based on their
job functions and responsibilities. Specifically, the EPA did
not confirm that contractor personnel completed required
training, include role-based training provisions in existing
contracts, or maintain a list of contractor personnel required to
complete role-based training. As a result, the EPA had limited assurance that contractor
personnel can protect Agency systems and sensitive information. The EPA agreed with
our four recommendations and already completed corrective actions for three.
Role-based training is
role-specific training for
an individual based on
the person's functional
job and responsibilities;
through continuous
education, the person's
knowledge, skills and
abilities are enhanced.
EPA Needs to Improve Its Risk Management and Incident Response
Information Security Functions
Report No. 20-P-0120, issued March 24, 2020
A
Each year, as required by the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014,
we assess the EPA's information systems security protections. We assessed the
"maturity" of the EPA's information security program in FY 2019 at Level 3,
Consistently Implemented, which means that the EPA's policies, procedures, and
strategies are consistently implemented
but quantitative and qualitative
effectiveness measures are lacking.
Improvements are still needed in risk
management and incident response. The
Agency agreed with our three
recommendations.
¦ Needs Improvement ¦
Risk
Management
. Needs Improvement



Level 1: Ad hoc

Level 2: Defined
Level 3: Consistently Implemented
Level 4: Managed and Measurable
Level 5: Optimized
OIG assessment of the EPA's FISMA function areas and domains.
(OIG graphic)
23

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October '!, 2019—March 31, 2020
EPA Budget Systems Need Improved Oversight of Security Controls Testing
Report No. 20-P-0015. issued November 1, 2019
The Office of the Chief Financial Officer identified the required security controls needed
for the Agency's legacy and replacement budget systems, both of which were in use
during our audit fieldwork. However, the Office and its service providers did not always
test the security controls for the Agency's legacy budget system. In addition, for the
Agency's replacement budget system, the EPA did not maintain documentation to
substantiate whether (1) the service provider tested and implemented the required
security controls or (2) the controls were working as intended to protect Agency data.
The Office of the Chief Financial Officer also did not always correctly assign and
document responsibility for testing security controls and did not always review security
reports in a timely manner. The Agency agreed with and completed one of our two
recommendations. The remaining recommendation is unresolved with resolution efforts
in progress.
Inherited controls

2016
2017
Total population of security controls scheduled to be tested
103
87
Controls in OIG sample
20
17
Controls in our sample tested by the control provider
20
14
Percent tested by the control provider
100%
82%
Controls in our sample not tested by the control provider
0
3
Percent not tested by the control provider
0%
18%
Testing of the inherited security controls in the Agency's legacy budget system. The National
Institute of Standards and Technology defines inherited security controls as a security capability
that is provided by another entity. (OIG analysis)
EPA Should Improve Oversight of Mobile Phones
Report No. 20-P-0068. issued January 10, 2020
The EPA 's Office of Information Technology Operations did not require justifications for
mobile phone use; determine whether the program and regional offices had standard
operating procedures to manage mobile
phones; confirm that the required
acknowledgment forms were signed and
completed before processing mobile phone
orders; or inform Agency mobile phone
users about what types of calls do not count
toward the monthly ceiling of voice and data
limits. The Agency agreed with our three
recommendati ons.

EPA-issued mobile phone and smartphone at
EPA Region 4. (OIG photos)
24

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
EPA's Fiscal Year 2019 First Quarter Compliance with the Digital Accountability
and Transparency Act of 2014
Report No. 20-P-0026, November 8, 2019
The EPA's 2019 first quarter financial and award data were of "higher" quality,
according to the requirements of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of
2014 audit guide. Overall, the Agency has complied with the requirements of the Act.
However, inconsistencies in processing data caused reporting errors in terms of
completeness, accuracy, and timeliness, and the EPA did not have standard operating
policies and procedures for reporting under the Act. The Agency agreed with our two
recommendations.
EPA's Fiscal Years 2019 and 2018 (Restated) Consolidated Financial Statements
Report No. 20-F-0033, issued November 19, 2019
We rendered an unmodified opinion on the EPA's consolidated financial statements for
FYs 2019 and 2018 (restated), meaning they were fairly presented and free of material
misstatement. We noted one material weakness: that the EPA needs to improve its
financial statement preparation process. In addition, we noted that:
•	The EPA improperly recorded e-Manifest receivables and earned revenue.
•	The EPA misclassified e-Manifest user fee revenue.
•	The EPA understated its contract accrued liabilities.
•	The EPA needs to improve the process to disable user accounts for financial and
mixed financial systems.
•	The EPA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer needs to protect personally
identifiable information on its server used to transfer data with vendors.
The Agency agreed with all 17 of our recommendations.
EPA's Purchase Card and Convenience Check Program Merits an Audit in Fiscal
Year 2020
Report No. 20-P-0006, issued October 18, 2019
The EPA certified that it implemented corrective actions—including the
establishment of additional internal controls—in response to our FY 2018
audit of the Agency's purchase card and convenience check program.
However, some of these internal controls were not fully implemented
during the EPA's FY 2019 transition to a new commercial purchase card
contract. As a result, we assessed that the Agency's risk of illegal,
improper, and erroneous purchases is high enough for us to conduct an
audit of its purchase card and convenience check program in FY 2020.

Smart Pay 3 United States of America g ^
U. S. Government Tai Exempt
1234 5b7fl ID12 345b
	12^1/26
II
Sample government purchase
card. (U.S. General Services
Administration)
25

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Investigations
Significant Investigations
Man Debarred After Illegally Disassembling Bridge, Which Damaged
EPA-Owned Water Monitors
On March 2, 2020, Kenneth Morrison and TK Metals Contracting were debarred from
federal contracts and assistance activities for 13 years, ending August 7, 2033. In
addition, in 2019, Morrison was sentenced in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Indiana to two years" imprisonment, followed by two years of supervised
release, and ordered to pay over $54,000 in restitution. In 2018, Morrison was convicted
of interstate transportation of stolen goods. In 2015, Morrison was arrested by the Indiana
Department of Natural Resources Police Department for illegally disassembling a city
rail bridge and stealing the scrap metal for resale. The disassembly of the bridge caused it
to collapse into the Grand Calumet River. The OIG investigation found that, as a result of
the bridge collapse, several EPA-owned water monitors were damaged. The debris
removal process also delayed a $12 million EPA dredging project.
Man Sentenced and Fined for Mailing Threatening Communications
On January 31, 2020, Brian C. Charles was sentenced in the U.S. District Court of New
Mexico to 18 months in prison with time served and three years" supervised release. He
was also fined $500.00. On September 10, 2019, Charles pleaded guilty to five counts of
mailing threatening communications to officers in the Albuquerque Police Department.
This investigation was predicated based on information that the OIG received in
October 2015 regarding numerous threatening letters that Charles allegedly mailed to the
then EPA administrator's private residence. Additionally, Charles allegedly made threats
to other government officials, including former Secretary of State John Kerry.
The investigation leading to these outcomes was conducted jointly by the EPA OIG and
the U.S. Department of State Diplomatic Security Service.
Reports of investigation—Employee integrity
A Report of Investigation documents the facts and findings of an OIG investigation and
generally involves an employee integrity matter. When the OIG's Office of Investigations
issues a Report of Investigation that has at least one "supported" allegation, it requests
that the entity receiving the report—whether it is an office within the OIG, the EPA, or
the CSB—provide a notification to the OIG within 60 days regarding the administrative
action taken or proposed to be taken in the matter. This section provides information on
26

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
how many Reports of Investigation with at least one supported allegation were issued to
the EPA, the CSB, or the OIG, and for how many of those Reports of Investigation a
response was not received within a 60-day period.
For the reporting period ending March 31, 2020, the Office of Investigations issued
five Reports of Investigation and received no responses outside the 60-day window:
Agency and OIG Reports of Investigation
Number of Reports of
Agency

OIG

Investigation issued
response*
Awaiting
response*

during reporting period
received after
Agency
received
Awaiting OIG
with findings
60 days
response
after 60 days
response
5
0
0
0
0
* Agency or the OIG will or will not take an action, or will conduct a supplemental investigation.
27

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Hotline Activities
The Inspector General Act of 1978 requires each OIG to manage a hotline. The purpose
of the hotline is to receive complaints of fraud, waste, or abuse in EPA and CSB
programs and operations, including mismanagement or violations of law, rules, or
regulations by Agency employees or program participants. The hotline also encourages
suggestions for assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of Agency programs.
Complaints and requests may be submitted by anyone, including EPA and CSB
employees, participants in EPA and CSB programs, Congress, organizations, and the
public. As a result of these contacts, the OIG may conduct audits, evaluations, and
investigations.
Significant Investigations Initiated via OIG Hotline
Company and Officer Debarred After Fraudulently Certifying That Homes Met
ENERGY STAR Standards
On March 25, 2020, Home Energy Services Inc. and one of its corporate officers were
debarred from participating in federal contracts and assistance activities for three years.
On October 21, 2019, the officer was sentenced in the U.S. District Court for the Middle
District of Florida to probation for a term of 36 months and fined $31,125. On July 26,
2019, the officer pleaded guilty to one count of making a false statement to the EPA
relating to the ENERGY STAR Certified Homes program. As part of the plea agreement,
the officer acknowledged that beginning in September 2012 and possibly earlier, the
officer and/or the company fraudulently certified to the EPA that approximately
830 homes in Florida met ENERGY STAR standards.
Hotline Statistics
The OIG Hotline receives complaints of fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, and
misconduct in EPA and CSB programs and operations. The figures below detail the
number and type of complaints that the hotline received and referred for review by OIG
investigation, audit, and evaluation staff; EPA program offices; and other government
agencies during the first half of FY 2020.
28

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Hotline complaints referred: October 1, 2019-March 31, 2020
200
150
100
50
196
164
Total complaints
referred
Referrals to
OIG offices
44
Referrals to
EPA program offices
Referrals to other federal,
state, and local agencies
Note: Hotline complaints may be referred to more than one entity, so the number of referrals made to
individual entities may be higher than the total number of complaints referred.
Categories of hotline complaints referred to OIG offices
Abuse of power
Computer - security
Computer crimes
Computer fraud
Conflict of interest
Contract fraud
Contract improprieties - other
Employee - personnel hiring
Employee ethics
Employee misconduct
Employee time/attendance
Employee - other
Environmental - Clean Air Act
Environmental - Safe Drinking Water Act
Environmental - Toxic Substances Control Act
Environmental - other
False statements
Falsifying official documents
Fraud
Grant fraud
Harassment
Lab fraud
Lost credentials/government equipment
Misconduct - Personnel
Mismanagement
Programmatic and operational issues
Scientific misconduct/integrity
Stolen credentials/government equipment
Threats and workplace violence
Whistleb lower-related | 1
Note: Because hotline complaints may be referred to more than one OIG office, the number of
complaints in this chart may not equal the total number of referrals made to OIG offices.
29

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Hotline Confidentiality
Individuals who contact the hotline are not required to identify themselves and may
request confidentiality when submitting allegations. However, the OIG encourages those
who report allegations to identify themselves so that they can be contacted if the OIG has
additional questions. Pursuant to Section 7 of the Inspector General Act, the OIG will not
disclose the identity of an EPA employee who provides information unless that employee
consents or the inspector general determines that such disclosure is unavoidable during
the course of an investigation, audit, or evaluation. As a matter of policy, the OIG will
provide comparable protection to employees of contractors, grantees, and others who
provide information to the OIG and request confidentiality. Individuals concerned about
the confidentiality or anonymity of electronic communication may submit allegations by
telephone or mail.
EPA OIG Hotline
To report fraud, waste, or abuse, contact us through one of the following methods:
Email:	OIG Hotline@epa.qov
Phone:	(888) 546-8740 or (202) 566-2476
Fax:	(202)566-0814
Online:	EPA OIG Hotline
Mail: EPA OIG Hotline
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Mail Code 2431T
Washington, DC 20460
EPA Whistleblower Protection Coordinator
To contact the EPA Whistleblower Coordinator:
Phone: (202)566-1513
Online: EPA Whistleblower Protection
30

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
The CSB was created by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990. The CSB's mission is to
investigate accidental chemical releases at facilities,
report the root causes to the public, and recommend
measures to prevent future occurrences. In FY 2004,
Congress designated the EPA inspector general to
serve as the inspector general for the CSB. As a result, the EPA OIG has the
responsibility to audit, evaluate, inspect, and investigate the CSB's programs and to
review proposed laws and regulations to determine their potential impact on the CSB's
programs and operations. Details on our work involving the CSB are available on this
OIG webpage.
CSB Audit Reports
CSB's Information Security Program Is Defined, but Improvements Needed in
Risk Management, Identity and Access Management, and Incident Response
Report No. 20-P-0077, issued February 12, 2020
Each year, as required by the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014,
we assess the CSB's information systems security protections. We assessed the
"maturity" of the CSB's information security program in FY 2019 at Level 2, Defined,
which means that the CSB's policies, procedures, and strategies are formalized and
documented but not consistently implemented. Improvements are needed in the CSB's
risk management, identity and access management, and incident response. The CSB
agreed with our two recommendations.

Function
area
Domain
Federal Information Security Modernization Act
questions that need improvement
Identify
Risk Management
The CSB neither identified nor defined its risk
management procedures for identifying, assessing, or
managing supply chain risk.
Protect
Identity and Access
Management
The CSB did not fully define or implement processes for
the use of Personal Identity Verification cards for logical
access. This issue was identified in a previous audit,
and the CSB plans to complete corrective actions to
resolve the deficiency by March 31, 2020.
Respond
Incident Response
The CSB did not define incident response processes for
the eradication of security incidents, as required by the
National Institute of Science and Technology, Special
Publication 800-53, Revision 4, Security Control:
Incident Response-4.
CSB domains that require further improvement. (OIG analysis)
31

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Audit of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board's Fiscal
Years 2019 and 2018 Financial Statements
Report No. 20-F-0032, issued November 19, 2019
The firm contracted by the OIG that audited the CSB's financial statements for FYs 2019
and 2018 on behalf of the EPA OIG found the statements to be fairly presented and free
of material misstatements. The firm noted no matters involving internal control and CSB
operation that it considered to be a material weakness or a significant deficiency.
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board's Compliance in Fiscal
Year 2019 with Improper Payments Legislation and Guidance
Report No. 20-N-0064, issued January 23, 2020
We found that the CSB was fully compliant with the Improper Payments Elimination and
Recovery Act of 2010 and related guidance.
32

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Other Results of OIG Work
Follow-Up Is Important Aspect of OIG Efforts
It is important for an OIG to follow up on certain previously issued reports to ensure that
appropriate and effective corrective actions have been taken. The following reports issued
during the semiannual reporting period ending March 31, 2020, involved follow-up on
prior OIG reports.
Report number
Report title
Date issued
20-P-0120
EPA Needs to Improve Its Risk Management and
Incident Response Information Security Functions
March 24, 2020
20-P-0083
Management Controls Needed to Verify and
Report Border 2020 Program Accomplishments
February 18, 2020
20-P-0077
CSB's Information Security Program Is Defined,
but Improvements Needed in Risk Management,
Identity and Access Management, and Incident
Response
February 12, 2020
20-N-0064
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation
Board's Compliance in Fiscal Year 2019 with
Improper Payments Legislation and Guidance
January 23, 2020
20-P-0068
EPA Should Improve Oversight of Mobile Phones
January 10, 2020
20-P-0066
EPA Can Improve Incident Readiness with Better
Management of Homeland Security and
Emergency Response Equipment
January 3, 2020
20-P-0065
EPA Needs to Improve Management and
Monitoring of Time-Off Awards
December 30, 2019
20-P-0063
Outdated EPA Leave Manual and Control
Weaknesses Caused Irregularities in the Office of
Air and Radiation's Timekeeping Practices
December 19, 2019
20-P-0062
EPA Needs to Improve Its Emergency Planning to
Better Address Air Quality Concerns During
Future Disasters
December 16, 2019
20-F-0033
EPA's Fiscal Years 2019 and 2018 (restated)
Consolidated Financial Statements
November 19, 2019
20-F-0032
Audit of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board's Fiscal Years 2019 and 2018
Financial Statements
November 19, 2019
20-P-0026
EPA's Fiscal Year 2019 First Quarter Compliance
with the Digital Accountability and Transparency
Act of 2014
November 8, 2019
20-P-0015
EPA Budget Systems Need Improved Oversight
of Security Controls Testing
November 1, 2019
20-P-0011
While EPA Regions Enforce at Six Superfund
Sites Reviewed, Four of Those Sites Remain in
Significant Noncompliance, and Nationwide
Reporting and Tracking Can Be Improved
October 24, 2019
20-P-0010
EPA Adequately Managed Hurricane Harvey
Funding Received from FEMA
October 23, 2019
33

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report number
Report title
Date issued
20-P-0007
Management Alert: EPA Still Unable to Validate
that Contractors Received Role-Based Training
for Information Security Protection
October 21, 2019
20-P-0006
EPA's Purchase Card and Convenience Check
Program Merits an Audit in Fiscal Year 2020
October 18, 2019
34

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Single Audit Reporting Efforts Make Impact
In accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984 and Office of Management and Budget
guidance, nonfederal entities that expend more than $750,000 in federal funds are required to
have a comprehensive annual audit of their financial statements and compliance with major
federal program requirements. The entities receiving the funds include states, local
governments, tribes, and nonprofit organizations. The Act provides that grantees are to be
subject to one annual comprehensive audit of all their federal programs versus a separate
audit of each federal program, hence the term "single audit." The single audits are performed
by private firms. Federal agencies rely upon the results of single audit reporting when
performing their grants management oversight of these entities.
The OIG provides an important customer service to the EPA by performing technical
reviews of single audit reports, and we issue memorandums to the EPA for audit
resolution and corrective action. These memorandums recommend that EPA action
officials confirm corrective actions have been taken. If the corrective actions have not
been implemented, the EPA needs to obtain a corrective action plan, with milestone
dates, for addressing the findings in a single report. The following is a summary of single
audit reporting actions during the semiannual reporting period ending March 31, 2020.
Summary of single audit activity in first half of FY 2020

October 1,2019-
March 31, 2020
No. of single audit memorandums issued to EPA
107
No. of single audit findings reported to EPA
265
Questioned costs reported to EPA
$1,150,644
No. of quality reviews of single audits reports done by OIG
2
Deficiency letters issued to single auditors by OIG
2
Source: EPA OIG analysis.
The OIG also provides technical assistance and advice to the EPA, single auditors, and
others involved with the single audit process.
35

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Agency Best Practices
During this semiannual reporting period, OIG reports highlighted Agency best practices
that have potential value and applicability to other components in the EPA or elsewhere:
•	In 2019, the EPA streamlined its processing of monetary and time-off awards.
According to the Agency, this streamlined process reduced the overall costs of
processing awards by 31.3 percent, or $1.33 million annually.
(Report No. 20-P-0065)
•	EPA Region 6 deployed more than 80 community liaisons to the region impacted
by Hurricane Harvey, representing—according to an EPA staff person—the first
instance in which so many liaisons were used by the Agency to respond to a
disaster. (Report No. 20-P-0062)
•	The Office of Emergency Management solicited input from responding and
impacted personnel through interviews, surveys, and feedback to provide an
overall review of the EPA's emergency response efforts. This information was
consolidated into the 2017 Hurricane and Wildfire Response After-Action Report
that highlighted strengths, best practices, areas for improvement, and corrective
action recommendations. The EPA collected feedback on its relief efforts, which
can impact future disaster relief efforts. (Report No. 20-P-0010)
36

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Statistical Data
Profile of Activities and Results
OIG audits and evaluations3
($ in millions)
October 1,2019-
March 31,2020
Questioned costsb	$1,151
Potential monetary benefits0	$59,438
Audit and evaluation reports issued by OIGd	22
a Section 5(a)(22) requires detailed descriptions of the particular
circumstances of each inspection, evaluation, and audit conducted
by the OIG that was closed and not publicly disclosed. There were
no instances of inspections, evaluations, or audits that were closed
and not publicly disclosed during the semiannual period ending
March 31, 2020. Investigations that were closed during this
semiannual reporting period are found in Appendix 4.
b This measure includes single audits, which are audits of nonfederal
entities performed by private firms.
c This measure includes potential monetary benefits identified in
reports and monetary actions taken or resolved prior to report
issuance.
d This measure includes performance and financial audits conducted
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards, as well as evaluations conducted in accordance with the
Quality Standards of Inspection and Evaluation. Appendix 1 lists all
reports issued.
Investigative operations


($ in millions)



October 1, 2019-March 31, 2020

EPA OIG



only
Joint*
Total
Total fines and recoveries
$0,031
$0,001
$0,032
Cost savings
$0,377
$0,085
$0,462
Civil settlements
$0,000
$0,000
$0,000
Cases opened during period
53
10
63
Cases closed during period
56
14
70
Indictments/informations/complaints
0
5
5
Convictions
0
3
3
Civil judgments/settlements/filings
0
0
0
* With one or more federal agencies.
37

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Audit Report Resolution
Table 1: OIG-issued reports with questioned costs for semiannual period ending
March 31, 2020 ($ in thousands)
Report category
Number
of reports
Questioned
costs *
Unsupported
costs
A.
For which no management decision was made by
October 1, 2019**
8
$3,332
$3,037
B.
New reports issued during period
25
0
0
Subtotals (A + B)
33
$3,332
$3,037
C.
For which a management decision was made during
the reporting period:
22


(i) Dollar value of disallowed costs

0
0

(ii) Dollar value of costs not disallowed

$3,102
$3,037
D.
For which no management decision was made by
March 31, 2020
11
$230
$0
* Questioned costs include unsupported costs.
** Any difference in the number of reports and the amounts of questioned costs between this report and our previous
semiannual report results from corrections made to data in our audit tracking system.
Table 2: OIG-issued reports with recommendations that funds be put to better use for
semiannual period ending March 31, 2020 ($ in thousands)
Report category
Number of
reports
Funds to put to
better use
A. For which no management decision was made by October 1, 2019 *
8
$3,332
B. New reports issued during the reporting period
25
$59,439
Subtotals (A + B)
33
** $62,770
C. For which a management decision was made during the reporting period:
22

(i) Dollar value of recommendations from reports that were
agreed to by management
11
$9,865
(ii) Dollar value of recommendations from reports that were
not agreed to by management
$3,102
D. For which no management decision was made by March 31, 2020
$49,803
* Any difference in the number of reports and the amounts of funds put to better use between this report and our previous
semiannual report results from corrections made to data in our audit tracking system.
** Due to rounding, this number may not appear to be the exact sum.
38

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Summary of Investigative Results
Summary of investigative activity for semiannual period ending March 31, 2020
Cases open as of October 1, 2019*
142
Cases opened during period
63
Cases closed during period
70
Cases open as of March 31, 2020
135
Complaints open as of October 1, 2019
22
Complaints opened during period
44
Complaints closed during period
48
Complaints open as of March 31, 2020
18
* Adjusted from prior period.
Results of prosecutive actions

EPA OIG only
Joint *
Total
Criminal indictments/informations/complaints **
0
5
5
Convictions
0
3
3
Civil judgments/settlements/filings
0
0
0
Criminal fines and recoveries
$31,225
$500
$31,725
Civil recoveries
$0
$0
$0
Prison time
0 months
18 months
18 months
Prison time suspended
0 months
0 months
0 months
Home detention
0 months
0 months
0 months
Probation
36 months
36 months
72 months
Community service
0 hours
15 hours
15 hours
* With one or more federal agencies.
** Sealed indictments are not included in this category.
Administrative actions

EPA OIG only
Joint *
Total
Suspensions
0
2
2
Debarments
3
2
5
Other administrative actions
14
3
17
Total
17
7
24
Administrative recoveries
$0
$0
$0
Cost savings
$377,204
$85,121
$462,325
* With one or more federal agencies.
39

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress	October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Summary of investigative reports issued and referrals for prosecution *
Number of Investigative Reports issued **
5
Number of persons referred to U.S. Department of Justice for criminal prosecution
24
Number of persons referred to state and local authorities for criminal prosecution
2
Number of criminal indictments and informations resulting from any prior referrals to
prosecutive authorities
2
* Investigative reports comprise final, interim, and supplemental Reports of Investigation, as well as Final Summary
Reports.
** Reports of Investigation issued may differ from the numbers reported in the Reports of Investigation section.
In calculating the number of referrals, corporate entities were counted as "persons."
Employee integrity cases*

Political
appointees
SES
GS-14/15
GS-13 and
below
Misc.
Total
Pending as of October 1, 2019
6
5
7
26
5
49
Opened*
2
1
6
7
0
16
Closed*
0
4
6
13
2
25
Pending March 31, 2020 **
8
3
7
21
3
42
* Employee integrity investigations involve allegations of criminal activity or serious misconduct by Agency employees that
could threaten the credibility of the Agency, the validity of executive decisions, the security of personnel or business
information entrusted to the Agency, or financial loss to the Agency (such as abuse of government bank cards or theft of
Agency funds). Allegations against former employees are included under "Misc."
** Pending numbers as of March 31, 2020, may not add up due to investigative developments resulting in subjects being
added or changed.
The chart below provides a breakdown by grade and number of employees who are the subject of
employee integrity investigations.
Employee integrity cases: Breakdown by grade and number of employees
21
¦	Political Appointees
¦	SES
¦	14/15
¦	13 and below
¦	Misc
40

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Appendices
Appendix 1—Reports Issued
Section 5(a)(6) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, requires a listing, subdivided according to subject matter, of each
report issued by the OIG during the reporting period. For each report, where applicable, the Inspector General Act also requires a listing
of the dollar value of questioned costs and the dollar value of recommendations that funds be put to better use.
Questioned costs
Report
number
Report title
Date
	 Potential
monetary
Ineligible Unsupported Unreasonable	benefits
EVALUATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH
QUALITY STANDARDS FOR INSPECTION AND EVALUATION
20-E-0053 Despite Requirements of Inspector General Act, Chief of Staff Refuses
to Provide Agency Information for OIG Evaluation; EPA Whistleblower
Training Does Not Address Interference with or Intimidation of
Congressional Witnesses
SUBTOTAL = 1
12/9/19
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
FINANCIAL AUDITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH
GENERALLY ACCEPTED GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
20-F-0032 Audit ofthe U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board's	11/19/19
Fiscal Years 2019 and 2018 Financial Statements
20-F-0033 EPA's Fiscal Years 2019 and 2018 (Restated) Consolidated Financial	11/19/19
Statements
9,853,030
SUBTOTAL = 2
$0
$0
$0
$9,853,030
PERFORMANCE AUDITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH
GENERALLY ACCEPTED GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
20-P-0001 Region 4 Quickly Assessed Water Systems After Hurricane Irma but	10/7/19
Can Improve Emergency Preparedness
20-P-0006 EPA's Purchase Card and Convenience Check Program Merits an Audit	10/18/19
in Fiscal Year 2020
20-P-0007 Management Alert: EPA Still Unable to Validate that Contractors	10/21/19
Received Role-Based Training for Information Security Protection
20-P-0010 EPA Adequately Managed Hurricane Harvey Funding Received from	10/23/19
FEMA
20-P-0011 While EPA Regions Enforce at Six Superfund Sites Reviewed, Four of	10/24/19
Those Sites Remain in Significant Noncompliance, and Nationwide
Reporting and Tracking Can Be Improved
20-P-0012 Tribal Pesticide Enforcement Comes Close to Achieving EPA Goals, but	10/29/19
"Circuit Rider" Inspector Guidance Needed
20-P-0015 EPA Budget Systems Need Improved Oversight of Security Controls	11/1/19
Testing
20-P-0026 EPA's Fiscal Year 2019 First Quarter Compliance with the Digital	11/8/19
Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014
20-P-0047 EPA Failed to Develop Required Cost and Benefit Analyses and to	12/5/19
Assess Air Quality Impacts on Children's Health for Proposed Glider
Repeal Rule Allowing Used Engines in Heavy-Duty Trucks
20-P-0062 EPA Needs to Improve Its Emergency Planning to Better Address Air	12/16/19
Quality Concerns During Future Disasters
20-P-0063 Outdated EPA Leave Manual and Control Weaknesses Caused	12/19/19
Irregularities in the Office of Air and Radiation's Timekeeping Practices
20-P-0065 EPA Needs to Improve Management and Monitoring of Time-Off Awards	12/30/19
20-P-0066 EPA Can Improve Incident Readiness with Better Management of	1/3/20
Homeland Security and Emergency Response Equipment
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
41,291,000
41

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Questioned costs
Report
number
Report title
Date
Ineligible Unsupported Unreasonable
Potential
monetary
benefits
20-P-0068 EPA Should Improve Oversight of Mobile Phones	1/9/20
20-P-0077 CSB's Information Security Program Is Defined, but Improvements	2/12/20
Needed in Risk Management, Identity and Access Management, and
Incident Response
20-P-0083 Management Controls Needed to Verify and Report Border 2020	2/18/20
Program Accomplishments
20-P-0120 EPA Needs to Improve Its Risk Management and Incident Response	3/24/20
Information Security Functions
20-P-0126 EPA Did Not Accurately Report Under the Grants Oversight and New	3/31/20
Efficiency Act and Needs to Improve Timeliness of Expired Grant
Closeouts
20-P-0131 EPA's Compliance Monitoring Activities, Enforcement Actions, and	3/31/20
Enforcement Results Generally Declined from Fiscal Years 2006
Through 2018
SUBTOTAL = 19
PROJECTS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH
GENERALLY ACCEPTED GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
OR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR INSPECTION AND EVALUATION
$0
$0
0
$0
12,000
0
0	0
0	0
0	8,282,470
0
$49,585,470
20-N-0030 Management Alert: Unapproved Use of Slag at Anaconda Co. Smelter	11/18/19
Superfund Site
20-N-0064 U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board's Compliance in	12/19/19
Fiscal Year 2019 with Improper Payments Legislation and Guidance
20-N-0128 Management Alert: Prompt Action Needed to Inform Residents Living	3/31/20
Near Ethylene Oxide-Emitting Facilities About Health Concerns and
Actions to Address Those Concerns
SUBTOTAL = 3
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
TOTAL REPORTS ISSUED = 25
$0 $59,438,500
42

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Appendix 2—Reports Issued Without Management Decisions
For Reporting Period Ended March 31, 2020
Section 5(a)(10)(B) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, requires a summary of each audit, inspection,
and evaluation report issued during the reporting period for which no establishment comment was returned within
60 days of providing the report to the establishment. The literal language of Section 5(a)(10)(B) requests the OIG to
track reports issued prior to commencement of the reporting period. However, given that this provision was intended
to codify the February 27, 2015 semiannual requests from Senators Grassley and Johnson, the OIG interprets this
provision to apply to reports within the semiannual period. There were two reports for which we did not receive a
response within 60 days during the semiannual period. We discuss these reports in the "Reports for Which No
Response Was Received Within 60 Days" section at the end of this appendix.
Section 5(a)(10)(A) of the Inspector General Act requires a summary of each audit, inspection, and evaluation report
issued before the commencement of the reporting period for which no management decision had been made by the
end of the reporting period, an explanation of the reasons such management decision had not been made, and a
statement concerning the desired timetable for achieving a management decision on each such report. Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-50 requires resolution within six months of a final report being issued. In this
section, we report on audits and evaluations with no management decision or resolution within six months of final
report issuance. In the summaries below, we provide the resolution status of management decisions not made as of
March 31, 2020, which the OIG desires to resolve as soon as possible.
Office of the Administrator
Report No. 19-P-0318. EPA Must Improve Oversight of Notice to the Public on Drinking Water Risks to Better
Protect Human Health, September 25, 2019
Summary: Primacy agencies have the responsibility to oversee whether public water systems meet federal
requirements, including notifying consumers of certain situations regarding their drinking water. We found that some
primacy agencies do not consistently fulfill their responsibility to enforce drinking water public notice requirements.
Specifically, some primacy agencies do not consistently record violations, nor do they track the need for and issuance
of public notices. In addition, the EPA's protocol for assessing primacy agency oversight does not fully cover all public
notice requirements. As a result, not all primacy agencies know whether public water systems under their supervision
appropriately notify consumers about drinking water problems, and the EPA and primacy agencies do not hold all
public water systems to the same compliance standards. Of nine recommendations issued to the Office of the
Administrator, three remain unresolved.
Resolution Status: The OIG has not received proposed corrective actions for the unresolved recommendations from
the action official.
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Report No. 18-P-0239. EPA Asserts Statutory Law Enforcement Authority to Protect Its Administrator
but Lacks Procedures to Assess Threats and Identify the Proper Level of Protection, September 4, 2018
Summary: We found that the Protective Service Detail for the EPA administrator had no approved standard
operating procedures to address the level of protection required for the administrator or how those services were to
be provided. As a result, the detail incurred over $3.5 million in costs from February 1, 2017, through December 31,
2017, for the then EPA administrator—an increase of over 110 percent compared to the prior period's costs of
$1.6 million for the previous administrator—without documented justification. We also found that agents worked
overtime without proper justification, resulting in improper payments. We recommended that the EPA implement new
policies, procedures, and guidance for Protective Service Detail operations and agents; regularly complete a threat
analysis to identify the proper protection required for the administrator; and identify and report any improper
payments to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer. Of seven recommendations issued to the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance, three remain unresolved.
Resolution Status: The Agency provided responses on August 29, 2019, and October 4, 2019. In addition, other
information was provided to us by the Office of General Counsel and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer. The
Agency provided another response on March 31, 2020. That response is currently under review by the OIG.
43

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Office of the Chief Financial Officer; Office of Chief of Staff
Report No. 19-P-0155. Actions Needed to Strengthen Controls over the EPA Administrator's and Associated
Staff's Travel, May 16, 2019
Summary: The OIG identified 40 trips and $985,037 in costs associated with the former administrator's travel for the
ten-month period from March 1, 2017, to December 31, 2017. This audit covered 34 completed and six canceled trips
and included costs incurred not only by the former administrator but also by his Protective Service Detail and other
staff. We estimated excessive costs of $123,942 regarding use of first or business-class travel by the former
administrator and accompanying Protective Service Detail agents; an exception that allowed for a travel
accommodation was granted without sufficient justification and, initially, without appropriate approval authority.
Although the EPA's travel policy is sufficiently designed to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse and is consistent with the
Federal Travel Regulation, we found that the policy did not initially outline who had the authority to approve the
administrator's travel authorizations and vouchers. This report made recommendations to two offices that remain
unresolved:
•	Office of the Chief Financial Officer: Often recommendations issued to the Office of the Chief Financial
Officer, eight remain unresolved.
Resolution Status: The Office of the Chief Financial Officer provided a response on March 31, 2020. It is
currently under review by the OIG.
•	Office of Chief of Staff: Two recommendations issued to the Office of Chief of Staff remain unresolved.
Resolution Status: Resolution efforts are ongoing.
Total reports issued before reporting period for which
no management decision had been made as of March 31, 2020 = 3
Reports for Which No Response Was Received Within 60 Days
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Report No. 20-P-0015. EPA Budget Systems Need Improved Oversight of Security Controls Testing,
November 1, 2019
Summary: We found that the Office of the Chief Financial Officer lacked internal controls needed to make informed,
risk-based decisions regarding the security of the Agency's budget systems. We recommended that the chief
financial officer update the Budget Automation System security planning documents to specify who is responsible for
testing information system security controls, as required by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. We
also recommend that the chief financial officer implement a process for obtaining and documenting the timely review
of all Budget Automation System and Budget Formulation System security reports. The EPA agreed with our
recommendations. The Agency provided sufficient evidence that it completed corrective actions for
Recommendation 1, and the recommendation is resolved. The Agency did not provide a milestone date or acceptable
documentation to support that it completed corrective actions for Recommendation 2, and that recommendation is
unresolved. In the final report, the Agency was advised that a written response to the report was required within
60 calendar days.
Status of Agency Response: The response was due on January 1, 2020. While the Agency did not provide a
response within 60 days of the final report issuance, the EPA did provide a proposed corrective action on January 8,
2020, in response to the final report. Subsequently, the Agency provided a formal response on April 3, 2020. The
response is currently under review by the OIG.
44

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Office of Land and Emergency Management; Region 6 Regional Administrator
Report No. 20-P-0062. EPA Needs to Improve Its Emergency Planning to Better Address Air Quality Concerns
During Future Disasters, December 16, 2019.
Summary: Most air toxic emission incidents during Hurricane Harvey occurred within a five-day period of the storm's
landfall. The majority of these emissions were due to industrial facilities shutting down and restarting operations in
response to the storm and storage tank failures. However, state, local, and EPA mobile air monitoring activities were
not initiated in time to assess the impact of these emissions. The air monitoring data collected did not indicate that the
levels of individual air toxics after Hurricane Harvey exceeded the health-based thresholds established by the State of
Texas and the EPA. However, these thresholds do not consider the cumulative impact of exposure to multiple air
pollutants at one time. Consequently, the thresholds may not be sufficiently protective of residents in communities
that neighbor industrial facilities and experience repeated or ongoing exposures to air toxics.
We did not identify instances of inaccurate communication from the EPA to the public regarding air quality after
Hurricane Harvey. However, public communication of air monitoring results was limited.
We recommended that the assistant administrator for Land and Emergency Management develop guidance for
emergency air monitoring in heavily industrialized areas, develop a plan to provide public access to air monitoring
data, and assess the availability and use of remote and portable monitoring methods. We also recommended that the
Region 6 regional administrator develop a plan to inform communities near industrial areas of adverse health risks
and to limit exposure to air toxics in these communities and conduct environmental justice training. We recommend
that the associate administrator for Public Affairs establish a process to communicate the resolution of public
concerns. Four recommendations, which we revised after we issued our draft report, remain unresolved. In the final
report, the Agency was advised that a written response to the report was required within 60 calendar days.
Status of Agency Response: The response was due on January 14, 2020. While the Agency did not provide a
response within 60 days of the final report issuance, the Agency requested an extension on February 12, 2020, to
coordinate its response with other EPA offices. The OIG granted a two-week extension. The EPA provided a formal
response on February 28, 2020. The response is currently under review by the OIG.
Total reports issued during the reporting period for which the Agency did not provide a written response
within 60 days, as of March 31, 2020 = 2
45

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Appendix 3—Reports with Corrective Action Not Completed
In compliance with reporting requirements of Sections 5(a)(3) and 5(a)(10)(C) of the Inspector General Act of 1978,
as amended, we are to identify each significant recommendation described in previous semiannual reports on which
corrective action has not been completed, and a summary of each audit, inspection, and evaluation report for which
there are any outstanding unimplemented recommendations. We are also to identify the aggregate potential
monetary benefits of the unimplemented recommendations.
This appendix contains separate tables of unimplemented recommendations described in previous semiannual
reports for the EPA and the CSB from 2008 to September 31, 2019, in 49 OIG audit reports.
There is a total of 116 current and unimplemented recommendations for the EPA with total potential monetary
benefits of approximately $70 million, $37 million of which was sustained and redeemed by the Agency. Sustained
cost is the dollar value of questioned costs or monetary benefits identified by the OIG during an audit or evaluation
and agreed to in whole or in part by the Agency. There were two CSB recommendations with $0,349 million of
sustained monetary benefits.
Below is a list of the responsible EPA offices and regions responsible for the recommendations in the following
tables. While a recommendation may be listed as unimplemented, the Agency may be on track to complete agreed-
upon corrective actions by the planned due date.
Responsible EPA Offices:
DA	Deputy Administrator (within the Office of the Administrator)
OAR	Office of Air and Radiation
OCFO	Office of the Chief Financial Officer
OCSPP	Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
OECA	Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
OGC	Office of General Counsel
OITA	Office of International and Tribal Affairs
OLEM	Office of Land and Emergency Management
OMS2	Office of Mission Support
ORD	Office of Research and Development
OW	Office of Water
Region 2
Region 5
Region 6
Region 9
Region 10
2 Effective November 26, 2018, the former Office of Environmental Information and Office of Administration and
Resources Management were merged into the new Office of Mission Support. In this appendix, any
recommendations originally issued to the former offices will be listed as under the purview of the new office.
46

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress	October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
EPA Reports with Unimplemented Recommendations
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
Category 1—Management and Operations
Follow-Up Audit - EPA Took
Steps to Improve Records
Management
19-P-0283.Auaust27.2019
OGC
1. Issue an updated Agency Freedom of Information Act policy and
procedure.
12/5/19
3/31/20

EPA Oversight over Enterprise
Customer Service Solution
Needs Improvement
19-P-0278.Auaust19.2019
OMS
6. Update the Capital Planning and Investment Control policy and
procedure to incorporate the existing requirement for the Agency to
document its formal evaluations of Capital Planning and Investment Control
"medium" and "lite" investments.
U
9/30/20

EPA Needs to Improve
Oversight of the Senior
Environmental Employment
Program
OMS
1. Implement Senior Environmental Employment program internal controls
to verify that required annual monitoring reports are placed into the Grantee
Compliance Database in a timely manner, and that grantees receive timely
notification of results.
4/30/20


19-P-0198. June 24. 2019

3. Implement additional communication and guidance for monitors
regarding Senior Environmental Employment Program policies and
procedures.
7/18/19




4. Issue a memorandum to the leadership of program and regional offices
that participate in the Senior Environmental Employment Program to
emphasize compliance with guidance and communication provided by the
program.
6/7/19




5. Revise the Senior Environmental Employment Guidance and Procedures
Manual to include internal controls related to reviewing and setting wage
rates, the timing for pay scale reviews, and responsibilities.
4/30/20


Pesticide Registration Fee,
Vulnerability Mitigation and
Database Security Controls for
EPA's FIFRA and PRIA Systems
Need Improvement
19-P-0195. June 21. 2019
OCSPP
2. Complete the actions and milestones identified in the Office of Pesticide
Programs' PRIA Maintenance Fee Risk Assessment document and
associated plan regarding the fee payment and refund posting processes.
12/31/20


EPA Complied with Improper
Payments Legislation but
Stronger Internal Controls Are
Needed
19-P-0163. Mav31. 2019
OCFO
1. Revise the Office of the Chief Financial Officer's grant improper
payments review process to include internal controls for training reviewers
and annually verifying that reviewers are knowledgeable and proficient in
the identification and reporting of improper payments.
In this Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 audit, the
EPA certified that corrective actions were complete. On the IPERA audit
ongoing as of March 31, 2020, the OIG has found similar problems and will
make recommendations as appropriate. The timing of the
recommendation(s) and resolution(s) will determine whether this issue is
presented in any future semiannual report.
4/30/19

$1,912
47

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
Insufficient Practices for
Managing Known Security
Weaknesses and System
Settings Weaken EPA's Ability to
Combat Cyber Threats
19-P-0158. Mav21. 2019
OMS
1. Establish a control to validate that Agency personnel are creating the
required plans of action and milestones for those weaknesses identified
from the vulnerability testing but not remediated within the Agency's
established time frames per the EPA's information security procedures.
12/31/21


2. Establish a process to periodically review the Agency's information
security weakness tracking system's settings to validate that each setting is
appropriately implemented and compliant with the Agency's standards.
10/31/19


3. Collaborate with the vendor of the Agency's information security
weakness tracking system to determine whether audit logging to capture
"all data changes" is an available security feature within the Agency's
information security weakness tracking system and, if so, activate the audit
log settings to capture all data changes. If audit logging is not available,
establish compensating controls within the Agency's information security
weakness tracking system that would record or describe what data has
been changed.
11/30/19


EPA Overpaid Invoices Due to
Insufficient Contract
Management Controls
19-P-0157. Mav 20. 2019
OMS
2. Establish internal controls to verify that all required Contractor
Performance Assessment Reporting System reports are finalized.
Complete fiscal years 2016 and 2017 reports for the contract audited.
6/28/19


4. Require the contractor to refund the $5,158.29 fixed fee overbilled to the
EPA under Task Order 12.
9/30/19

$5

5. Prior to contract closeout, review all Task Order 12 invoices to verify that
costs billed on the contract (e.g., indirect costs) are allowable. Report any
improperly paid costs to the OIG and recoup overpayments.
9/30/19

TBD
6. Revoke the certification of the contract-level contracting officer's
representative responsible for paying invoices without adequate review.
6/28/19


7. Investigate the circumstances surrounding the then Office of
Environmental Information manager involved with these contract
transactions and determine whether the manager's actions were
appropriate. If not, implement appropriate actions.
6/28/19


Actions Needed to Strengthen
Controls over the EPA
Administrator's and Associated
Staffs Travel
19-P-0155. Mav 16. 2019
OITA
10. Clarify the requirement and importance of trip reports for all
international travel.
9/30/19
4/30/20

11. Implement controls to verify that international trip reports are accurate
and complete.
9/30/19
4/30/20

EPA's Fiscal Years 2018 and
2017 Consolidated Financial
Statements
19-F-0003. November 14.2018
OMS
14. Implement controls to enforce the required verification of individuals'
identity every time individuals enter the computer rooms.
3/31/20


15. Perform a review of system requirements and evaluate the suitability of
existing technology to replace or implement updates to the computer
room's surveillance system and generators. Update or replace, if
warranted, the equipment based on the results of the evaluation.
1/15/22



EPA Law Enforcement
Availability Pay Properly
Certified but Controls over
Process Could Be Improved
19-P-0001. November 6.2018
OECA
1. Enforce compliance by the investigators to submit, and the supervisors to
approve, the monthly activity reports supporting Law Enforcement
Availability Pay within the required time frames in the Monthly Activity
Reporting System Purpose, Requirements and Procedures Manual.
10/1/19
4/1/20

2. Implement controls to improve timeliness of the annual certification
process for Law Enforcement Availability Pay.
10/1/19
4/1/20


48

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
Self-Insurance for Companies
with Multiple Cleanup Liabilities
Presents Financial and
Environmental Risks for EPA
and the Public
18-P-0059. December 22.2017
OLEM
2. Once the study in Recommendation 1 is complete, use the information to
develop appropriate risk management actions to mitigate any identified
problems in line with Agency practices for enterprise risk management
under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-123, and determine
whether additional controls, such as the requirement for full disclosure of all
self-insured environmental liabilities over corporate self-insurance, should
be implemented and if corporate self-insurance should continue as an
option.
9/30/20


3. Update standard operating procedures and data systems to
accommodate the implemented risk management actions.
9/30/21


OLEM
OECA
4. Train staff on the implemented risk management actions.
12/31/21


OLEM
5. Develop or update existing standard operating procedures to outline the
Office of Land and Emergency Management and Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance roles and responsibilities for overseeing the validity
of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Superfund financial
assurance instruments, where needed.
6/30/20


6. Develop and include procedures for checking with other regions for
facilities/sites with multiple self-insured liabilities in the standard operating
procedures created for Recommendation 5.
6/30/20


7. Develop and include instructions on the steps to take when an invalid
financial assurance instrument (expired, insufficient in dollar amount, or not
provided) is identified in the standard operating procedures created for
Recommendation 5 collect information on the causes of invalid financial
assurance.
6/30/20


8. Train staff on the procedures and instructions developed for
Recommendations 5 through 7.
9/30/20


Conditions in the U.S. Virgin
Islands Warrant EPA
Withdrawing Approval and
Taking Over Management of
Some Environmental Programs
and Improving Oversight of
Others
15-P-0137. April 17.2015
Region
2
18. Develop a plan to address currently uncompleted tasks and activities
and develop a schedule for reprogramming grant funds to accomplish these
tasks if the U.S. Virgin Islands does not or cannot complete them. Upon
completion of the financial management corrective actions, follow the Office
of the Chief Financial Officer's Resource Management Directive System
2520-03 to determine whether any of the current unspent funds of
approximately $37 million under the U.S. Virgin Islands' assistance
agreements could be put to better use.
9/30/18
9/30/19
3/31/20
3/31/21
$37,000
Internal Controls Needed to
Control Costs of Emergency and
Rapid Response Services
Contracts, as Exemplified in
Region 6
14-P-0109. February 4.2014
Region
6
3. Direct contracting officers to require that the contractor adjust all its
billings to reflect the application of the correct rate to team subcontract
Other Direct Costs.
9/30/24


49

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
Category 2—Water Issues
EPA Must Improve Oversight of
Notice to the Public on Drinking
Water Risks to Better Protect
Human Health
19-P-0318. September 25.2018
OW
3. Define for primacy agencies and public water systems acceptable
methods and conditions under which the electronic delivery of Tiers 2 and 3
notices meet the Safe Drinking Water Act's direct delivery requirement.
9/30/20


4. Update the EPA's drinking water program review protocols to include
steps for reviewing Tier 3 notices and for citing primacy agencies that do
not retain complete public notice documentation.
12/31/20



5. Update and revise the 2010 Revised State Implementation Guidance for
the Public Notification Rule to include:
a.	Public notice delivery methods that are consistent with regulations.
b.	Information on modern methods for delivery of public notice.
6/30/20


6. Update and revise the 2010 Public Notification Handbooks to include:
a.	Public notice delivery methods that are consistent with regulations.
b.	Information on modern methods for delivery of public notice.
c.	Public notice requirements for the latest drinking water regulations.
d.	Procedures for public water systems to achieve compliance after
violating a public notice regulation.
e.	Up-to-date references to compliance assistance tools.
f.	Additional resources for providing public notice in languages other than
English.
9/30/20


ow
OECA
7. Conduct a national review of the adequacy of primacy agency
implementation, compliance monitoring, reporting, and enforcement of the
Safe Drinking Water Act's public notice
requirements.
12/31/20


OECA
OW
9. Implement a strategy and internal controls to improve the consistency of
public notice violation data available in the EPA's new national drinking
water database, including the review and
update of open public notice violations prior to migrating the data to the new
database
9/30/20


EPA Region 6 Quickly Assessed
Water Infrastructure after
Hurricane Harvey but Can
Improve Emergency Outreach to
Disadvantaged Communities
19-P-0236, Julv 16, 2019
Region
6
1. Include environmental justice outreach in planning and pre-landfall
preparation exercises by gathering data to determine the population, unique
needs, and challenges of vulnerable communities.
9/30/20


2. Revise the Region 6 pre-landfall hurricane plan to incorporate steps
based on the results of outreach conducted during the planning and pre-
landfall preparation exercises.
3/31/21


EPA Region 5 Needs to Act on
Transfer Request and Petition
Regarding Ohio's Concentrated
Animal Feeding Operation
Permit Program
19-N-0154, Mav 15, 2019
Region
5
2. Issue a decision regarding the citizen petition to withdraw Ohio's National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program with respect to
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations and related permitting authority.
3/31/20
12/31/20

Management Weaknesses
Delayed Response to Flint
Water Crisis
18-P-0221. Julv 19. 2018
OW
1. Establish controls to annually verify that states are monitoring
compliance with all Lead and Copper Rule requirements, including
accurately identifying tier 1 sampling sites and maintaining continuous
corrosion control treatment.
9/30/19


2. Include in the revised Lead and Copper Rule the most protective
protocols for monitoring and corrosion control.
2/28/19
9/1/19

9. Improve oversight by establishing a clear and credible escalation policy
for EPA intervention in states. The policy should provide steps the EPA will
take when states do not act.
7/31/19


50

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
EPA Needs to Provide
Leadership and Better Guidance
to Improve Fish Advisory Risk
Communications
17-P-0174. April 12.2017
OW
1. Provide updated guidance to states and tribes on clear and effective risk
communication methods for fish advisories, especially for high-risk groups.
This guidance could recommend posting fish advisory information at
locations where fish are caught and using up-to-date communication
methods that include social media, webinars, emails, newsletters, etc.
3/31/20


2. Working with states and tribes, develop and disseminate best practices
they can use to evaluate the effectiveness of fish advisories in providing
risk information to subpopulations, such as subsistence fishers, tribes, and
other high fish-consuming groups.
3/30/20


EPA Needs to Further Improve
How It Manages Its Oil Pollution
Prevention Program
12-P-0253, February 6.2012
OLEM
1. Improve oversight of facilities regulated by the EPA's oil pollution
prevention program by:
d. Producing a biennial public assessment of the quality and consistency of
Spill Prevention, Control, Countermeasure Plans and Facility Response
Plans based on inspected facilities.
U
6/30/20

EPA Should Revise Outdated or
Inconsistent EPA-State Clean
Water Memoranda of Agreement
10-P-0224. September 14.2010
OW
2-2. Develop a systematic approach to identify which states have outdated
or inconsistent memorandums of agreements; renegotiate and update
those Memorandums of Agreements using the Memorandum of
Agreements template; and secure the active involvement and final,
documented concurrence of headquarters to ensure national consistency.
9/28/18
9/30/20


Category 3—Environmental Contamination and Cleanup
EPA Unable to Assess the
Impact of Hundreds of
Unregulated Pollutants in Land-
Applied Biosolids on Human
Health and the Environment
19-P-0002. November 15.2018
OW
3. Complete development of the probabilistic risk assessment tool and
screening tool for biosolids land application scenarios.
12/31/21


4. Develop and implement a plan to obtain the additional data needed to
complete risk assessments and finalize safety determinations on the 352
identified pollutants in biosolids and promulgate regulations as needed.
12/31/22


6. Publish guidance on the methods for the biosolids pathogen alternatives
3 and 4.
12/31/20


7. Issue guidance on what new technologies are allowable options or
alternatives for biosolids pathogen reduction.
U
5/31/19
5/30/20

8. Issue updated and consistent guidance on biosolids fecal coliform
sampling practices.
12/31/20


9. Change the website response to the question "Are biosolids safe?" to
include that the EPA cannot make a determination on
the safety of biosolids because there are unregulated pollutants found in
the biosolids that still need to have risk assessments
completed. This change should stay in place until the EPA can assess the
risk of all unregulated pollutants found in biosolids.
U
9/30/19
5/30/20

10. Modify the EPA's website responding to public questions on the safety
of biosolids to: (a) identify unregulated pollutants found in biosolids, (b)
disclose biosolids data gaps, and (c) include descriptions of areas where
more research is needed. Make similar revisions in other EPA-published
documents that include a response to the question "Are biosolids safe?"
These changes should stay in place until the EPA can assess the risk of all
unregulated pollutants found in biosolids.
9/30/19
4/30/20
5/30/20

11. Determine whether the impact on the safety and protection of human
health justifies a requirement to include a general disclaimer message on
the biosolids labels and information sheets regarding unregulated pollutants
and a referral to the website for additional information. Publish the rationale
for the determination on the EPA biosolids website.
9/30/19


12. Conduct regular biosolids training and conference calls or meetings for
regional and state staff and wastewater treatment operators to improve
consistency in rule interpretation and aid in knowledge transfer.
12/31/19


51

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)


13. In addition to EPA technical biosolids trainings or conferences, include
on the biosolids website general questions and answers the regions and
states have dealt with regarding biosolids to improve EPA knowledge
transfer to regional and state biosolids program managers as well as
wastewater treatment plant operators.
9/30/19
5/30/20

EPA Needs to Finish
Prioritization and Resource
Allocation Methodologies for
Abandoned Uranium Mine Sites
on or Near Navajo Lands
18-P-0233.Auaust22.2018
Regions
6 and 9
1. Complete the necessary removal site evaluations and engineering
evaluations/cost analyses.
12/31/20


2. Fully develop and implement prioritization and resource allocation
methodologies for the Tronox abandoned uranium mine sites on or near
Navajo Nation lands.
12/31/21


Improvements Needed in EPA
Training and Oversight for Risk
Management Program
Inspections
13-P-0178. March 21. 2013
OLEM
7. Coordinate with the assistant administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance to revise inspection guidance to recommend
minimum inspection scope for the various types of facilities covered under
the program and provide detailed examples of minimum reporting.
7/31/14
2/28/19
6/30/22

8. Coordinate with the assistant administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance to develop and implement an inspection monitoring
and oversight program to better manage and assess the quality of program
inspections, reports, supervisory oversight, and compliance with inspection
guidance.
9/30/14
2/28/20
2/30/23

Making Better Use of
Stringfellow Superfund Special
Accounts
08-P-0196. Julv 9. 2008
Region
9
2. Reclassify or transfer to the Trust Fund, as appropriate, $27.8 million
(plus any earned interest less oversight costs) of the Stringfellow special
accounts in annual reviews, and at other milestones including the end of
fiscal year 2010, when the record of decision is signed and the final
settlement is achieved.
12/31/12
9/21/23
$27,800
Category 4—Toxics, Chemical Safety, and Pesticides
EPA Not Effectively
Implementing the Lead-Based
Paint Renovation, Repair and
Painting Rule
19-P-0302, September 9,2019
OECA
1. Identify the regulated universe of Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair
and Painting Rule firms in support of regional targeting strategies, in
coordination with the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.
U
12/31/21

2. Establish Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
enforcement objectives, goals, and measurable outcomes.
U
7/1/21

3. Establish management oversight controls to verify that Lead-Based Paint
Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule Program guidance and expectations
are being met; this may also involve specific reporting requirements for
regions and authorized states and tribes.
U
5/1/20

4. Establish or identify an effective forum to document and share best
practices and innovations related to the Lead-Based Paint Renovation,
Repair and Painting Rule Program.
U
5/1/20

OCSPP
5. Establish specific guidelines for resources and funding allocated to the
Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule Program that will
further the goals of the Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead
Exposures and Associated Health Impacts.
12/31/20


6. Establish the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
Program's objectives, goals, and measurable outcomes, such as measures
to demonstrate the effectiveness of program contributions toward
decreasing elevated blood lead levels.
12/31/20


52

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
EPA Needs to Determine
Strategies and Level of Support
for Overseeing State Managed
Pollinator Protection Plans
19-P-0275.Auaust15.2019
OCSPP
2. Using survey data, determine how the EPA will assist states with
implementing their Managed Pollinator Protection Plans.
6/30/20


3. Using survey data, fully communicate to states what Managed Pollinator
Protection Plan implementation assistance is available from the EPA and
how this assistance will be provided.
6/30/20


4. Determine whether and how the EPA will help states address additional
areas of concern—such as chronic pesticide risks and other limitations
identified by stakeholders—through their Managed Pollinator Protection
Plan implementation efforts.
6/30/20


5. Determine how the EPA can use the Managed Pollinator Protection Plan
survey results to advance its National Program Manager Guidance goals
and its regulatory mission.
6/30/21


Measures and Management
Controls Needed to Improve
EPA's Pesticide Emergency
Exemption Process
18-P-0281, September 25.2018
OCSPP
1. Develop and implement applicable outcome-based performance
measures to demonstrate the human health and environmental effects of
the EPA's emergency exemption decisions.
6/30/20


5. Develop concise emergency exemption application guidance that
specifies the minimum requirements of an application submission and is
available on the Office of Pesticide Programs Section 18 website.
9/30/20


6. Provide clear guidance to state lead agencies on how and when they can
use efficacy data from other state lead agencies to satisfy the emergency
exemption application criteria.
9/30/20


7. Expand the data presented in the Office of Pesticide Programs Section
18 database by considering additional data points, such as application
acreage requested, actual acreage applied, and registration status of each
exempted pesticide.
6/30/20


EPA Can Better Manage State
Pesticide Cooperative
Agreements to More Effectively
Use Funds and Reduce Risk of
Pesticide Misuse
18-P-0079. February 13.2018
OECA
1. Develop and implement additional Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act guidance to assist project officers in evaluating whether
funding is reasonable given projected work plan tasks.
11/30/19
5/29/20

EPA Can Better Reduce Risks
From Illegal Pesticides by
Effectively Identifying Imports for
Inspection and Sampling
17-P-0412. September 28.2017
OECA
1. Establish national compliance monitoring goals based on assessment
and consideration of available regional resources.
9/30/19
3/27/20

2. Implement internal controls to monitor and communicate progress on
regional goals.
9/30/19
3/27/20

EPA Needs to Manage Pesticide
Funds More Efficiently
17-P-0395. September 18.2017
OCSPP
2. Develop and implement a plan to reduce excess Pesticides
Reregistration and Expedited Processing Fund and Pesticide Registration
Fund balances within the established target range.
12/31/21


Additional Measures Can Be
Taken to Prevent Deaths and
Serious Injuries From
Residential Fumigations,
17-P-0053. December 12.2016
OCSPP
3B: Within two years of the Final Report, by November 30,2018, OCSPP
will validate an implement new device clearance guidance.
11/30/18
3/31/20

53

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
Category 5—Air Quality
EPA's 2017 Glider Vehicle
Testing Complied with Standard
Practices
19-P-0252. Julv 31. 2019
OAR
1. In consultation with the general counsel, the designated Agency ethics
official, and the assistant administrator for Research and Development,
revise EPA Delegation of Authority 7-170 to enable practical
implementation for the acceptance of donated property consistent with
Section 104 of the Clean Air Act and address pertinent ethics
considerations.
9/30/20



2. In consultation with the general counsel and the designated agency
ethics official, evaluate and document whether the Office of Transportation
and Air Quality needs to develop further guidance or policies to implement
the Delegation of Authority for the acceptance of donated property under
Section 104 of the Clean Air Act and, if determined necessary, develop
further guidance or policies as appropriate.
9/30/20


More Effective EPA Oversight Is
Needed for Particulate Matter
Emissions Compliance Testing
19-P-0251. Julv 30. 2019
OECA
1. Develop and implement a plan for improving the consistency of stack test
reviews across EPA regions and delegated agencies.
3/31/22


OAR
2. Assess the training needs of EPA regions and state, local, and tribal
agencies concerning stack test plans and report reviews and EPA test
methods and develop and publish a plan to address any training shortfalls.
3/31/22



3. Develop stack test report checklists for EPA Method 5 and other
frequently used EPA methods to assist state, local, and tribal agencies in
their review of stack test plans and reports.
6/30/21


Region
10
5. Develop a communication plan to make all state and local agencies
within Region 10 aware of EPA requirements and guidance for conducting
stack testing oversight.
5/31/22


6. Develop and implement controls to assess delegated agencies' stack
testing oversight activities.
3/31/22


EPA Effectively Screens Air
Emissions Data from Continuous
Monitoring Systems but Could
Enhance Verification of System
Performance
19-P-0207. June 27.2019
OAR
1. Develop and implement electronic checks in the EPA's Emissions
Collection and Monitoring Plan System or through an alternative
mechanism to retroactively evaluate emissions and quality assurance data
in instances where monitoring plan changes are submitted after the
emissions and quality assurance data have already been accepted by the
EPA.
3/31/25


54

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
EPA Demonstrates Effective
Controls for Its On-Road Heavy-
Duty Vehicle Compliance
Program; Further Improvements
Could Be Made
19-P-0168. June 3. 2019
OAR
1. Define performance measures to assess the performance of the EPA's
on-road heavy-duty vehicle and engine compliance program.
9/30/22


2. Conduct and document a risk assessment for the on-road heavy-duty
vehicle and engine compliance program that prioritizes risk and links
specific control activities to specific risks. Update the risk assessment on a
scheduled and periodic basis.
6/30/21


3. Address the following risks as part of the on-road heavy-duty vehicle and
engine compliance program risk assessment, in addition to other risks that
the EPA identifies:
a.	Non-criteria pollutants not being measured.
b.	Level of heavy-duty sector testing throughout the compliance life cycle.
c.	Marketplace ambiguity over regulatory treatment of rebuilt versus
remanufactured engines.
d.	Different compliance challenges for heavy-duty compression-ignition and
spark-ignition engines.
e.	Lack of laboratory test cell and in-house testing capacity for heavy-duty
spark-ignition engines.
9/30/21


4. Evaluate the following issues, which may require regulatory or
programmatic action, as part of (1) the on-road heavy-duty vehicle and
engine emission control program risk assessment and (2) the EPA's annual
regulatory agenda development process:
a.	Regulatory definition of on-road heavy-duty engine useful life may not
reflect actual useful life.
b.	Not-to-Exceed standard may not reflect real-world operating conditions,
especially for certain applications.
c.	In-use testing requirements for heavy-duty spark-ignition engines may be
needed.
d.	A particle number standard may more accurately control particulate
matter emissions that impact human health.
9/30/22


6. Conduct and document an evaluation of opportunities to reassess the
manufacturer in-use testing program, including the use of targeted,
nonstandard testing in areas of concern.
9/30/20


8. Develop and implement procedures for communicating potential
compliance issues to the EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance.
a. Establish clear criteria for when compliance issues should be referred to
the EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.
9/30/20


Collecting Additional
Performance Data from States
Would Help EPA Better Assess
the Effectiveness of Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance
Programs
18-P-0283, September 25.2018
OAR
3. Revise the vehicle inspection and maintenance rule to remove the cross
reference to Title 40 § 51.353(b)(1) of the Code of Federal Regulations and
provide defined evaluation methodology guidance to enable states to
quantify emission reductions.
6/30/19
12/31/19

5. Develop and implement guidance on the calculation of individual test
statistics in state reports to provide consistency in state reports across
regions.
6/30/19
12/31/19

7. Issue guidance to address any trends or common problems identified by
the outreach conducted to states with deficiencies in program
implementation.
3/31/20


55

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
EPA Can Strengthen Its Process
for Revising Air Quality
Dispersion Models that Predict
Impact of Pollutant Emissions
18-P-0241, September 5,2018
OAR
2. Develop a quality assurance project plan or equivalent documents
describing the results of systematic planning before developing a new air
quality dispersion model or undertaking any significant revisions in the
future to existing preferred air quality dispersion models, which are codified
in Appendix A to Appendix W of 40 C.F.R. Part 51.
3/31/20
9/30/20



3. Revise the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards' Quality
Management Plan to state whether the Agency is developing quality
assurance project plans or equivalent documents to meet EPA Quality
System requirements for developing or revising preferred air quality
dispersion models.
3/31/20
9/30/20

EPA Did Not Identify
Volkswagen Emissions
Cheating; Enhanced Controls
Now Provide Reasonable
Assurance of Fraud Detection
18-P-0181.Mav29.2018
OAR
1. Define performance measures to assess the performance of the EPA's
light-duty vehicle compliance program.
3/31/21


24. Improved Data and EPA
Oversight Are Needed to Assure
Compliance With the Standards
for Benzene Content in Gasoline
17-P-0249. June 8. 2017
OAR
1. Improve controls over the reporting system to assure facility-submitted
data are of the quality needed to assess compliance with the regulations.
These controls should provide reasonable assurance that the following
occurs:
a.	Volumes and average benzene concentrations in facilities annual
benzene reports match those calculated based on their batch reports.
b.	Benzene concentrations in facility batch reports and annual benzene
reports contain two decimal places.
c.	Production dates match the compliance year in facility reports.
d.	Facilities use only valid product codes in their reports.
e.	Only valid company and facility identification numbers are used.
f.	Maximum average benzene concentrations for the second compliance
period and beyond match the corresponding annual average benzene
concentrations.
g.	Import companies aggregate their facilities and submit just one annual
benzene report.
h.	All required reports are submitted.
U
6/30/20



3. Revise the benzene regulations to require that attest engagements verify
annual average benzene concentrations and volumes with batch reports, to
ensure that credits needed or generated are correct.
U
9/30/20



6. Ensure the integrity of benzene credit trading by developing and
implementing a process to verify that annual average benzene
concentration and total volume values that facilities input into the trading
database are supported by batch reports.
6/30/20




9. Revise the annual benzene report so that facilities must report the
number of benzene deficits or credits at the end of the current reporting
year.
9/30/20


EPA Has Not Met Certain
Statutory Requirements to
Identify Environmental Impacts
OAR
2. Complete the anti-backsliding study on the air quality impacts of the
Renewable Fuel Standard as required by the Energy Independence and
Security Act.
9/30/24


of Renewable Fuel Standard
16-P-0275.Auaust18.2016

3. Determine whether additional action is needed to mitigate any adverse
air quality impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard as required by the
Energy Independence and Security Act.
9/30/24


56

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
Air Quality Objectives for the
Baton Rouge Ozone
Nonattainment Area Not Met
Under EPA Agreement
2A-96694301 Awarded to the
Railroad Research Foundation
13-R-0297. June 20.2013
Region
6
1. Recover federal funds of $2,904,578 unless the foundation provides a
verifiable and enforceable remedy to reduce diesel emissions in the Baton
Rouge ozone nonattainment area, as required by the cooperative
agreement.
9/30/20

$2,905
Category 6—Research and Lai
boratories
Regional Research Programs
Address Agency Needs but
Could Benefit from Enhanced
Project Tracking
19-P-0123. Aoril 18. 2019
ORD
1. Complete data entry of all Regional Sustainability and Environmental
Sciences projects into the Regional Science Program Tracker.
10/1/20


2. Verify and update information for Regional Applied Research Effort
projects in the Regional Science Program Tracker.
10/1/20


3. Update the Regional Science Program Tracker to improve Regional
Applied Research Effort/Regional Sustainability and Environmental
Sciences project tracking by including:
a.	A timeline with significant dates/milestones and events.
b.	Significant products/outputs that stem from a project, including interim
products/outputs to show project progress prior to completion/final report.
c.	A feature to prompt staff to add impacts and/or evidence of use of project
results in decision-making.
10/1/20


4. Update the Regional Applied Research Effort Program Annual Process
Guidelines to require that Regional Science Liaisons use the Regional
Science Program Tracker and increase awareness of the system among
regional staff as a one-stop source of information on regional research
projects.
10/1/20


EPA Needs a Comprehensive
Vision and Strategy for Citizen
Science that Aligns with Its
Strategic Objectives on Public
Participation
18-P-0240, September 5,2018
DA
1. Establish a strategic vision and objectives for managing the use of citizen
science that identifies:
a.	Linkage to the Agency's strategic goals,
b.	Roles and responsibilities for implementation, and
c.	Resources to maintain and build upon existing Agency expertise.
12/31/20


2. Through appropriate EPA offices, direct completion of an assessment to
identify the data management requirements for using citizen science data
and an action plan for addressing those requirements, including those on
sharing and using data, data format/standards, and data testing/validation.
12/31/20


ORD
3. Finalize, in coordination with the Office of Environmental Information and
Region 1, the Draft Quality Assurance Handbook for Citizen Science, and
communicate to Agency staff and citizen science groups the availability and
content of this handbook.
12/31/20


4. Build capacity for managing the use of citizen science, and expand
awareness of citizen science resources, by:
a.	Finalizing the checklist on administrative and legal factors for Agency
staff to consider when developing citizen science projects, as well as
identifying and developing any procedures needed to ensure compliance
with steps in the checklist;
b.	Conducting training and/or marketing on the EPA's citizen science
intranet site for program and regional staff in developing projects; and
c.	Finalizing and distributing materials highlighting project successes and
how the EPA has used results of its investment in citizen science.
12/31/20


Total
$69,622
57

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress	October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
CSB Reports with Unimplemented Recommendations
Report title, number, and date
Office
Unimplemented recommendation
Planned
completion
date
Revised
completion
date
Potential
monetary
benefits
(in $000s)
Category 1—Management and
Operations
CSB Still Needs to Improve Its
'Incident Response' and 'Identity
and Access Management
Information Security Functions
19-P-0147.Mav9.2019
CSB
1. Implement use of Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12, regarding
Personal Identity Verification card technology for physical and logical
access, as required. If unable to implement this card technology, obtain a
waiver from the Office of Management and Budget not to operate as
required by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
10/28/19
3/31/20

36. CSB Needs to Continue to
Improve Agency Governance
and Operations
16-P-0179, Mav 23, 2016
CSB
6. Include the General Services Administration in any future office leasing
plans and revisit office needs for a potential adjustment or supplement to
the Washington, D.C., and Denver office leases to reduce space within the
General Services Administration benchmarks.
10/20/22

$349
Total
$349
58

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Appendix 4—Closed Investigations
For Reporting Period Ended March 31,2020
Section 5(a)(19) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, requires a report on each investigation involving a
senior government employee where allegations of misconduct were substantiated. Section 5(a)(22) of the Inspector
General Act requires a detailed description of the particular circumstances of any investigation conducted by the OIG
involving a senior government employee that is closed and was not disclosed to the public. Details on each investigation
conducted by the OIG involving both senior and non-senior employees closed during the semiannual reporting period
ending March 31, 2020, are provided below. We also include a separate listing of investigations conducted by the OIG and
closed during the semiannual reporting period involving non-employees such as grant recipients, contractors, and former
EPA employees.
Investigations Involving Senior Employees
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2018-ADM-0079
An EPA political appointee and an EPA Senior Executive Service employee allegedly improperly influenced the
hiring process to give prohibited preferential treatment to an applicant for an EPA position. The investigation
was inconclusive.
CASE NUMBER: OI-HQ-2020-ADM-0Q28
An EPA GS-15 employee allegedly submitted a resume to the EPA that falsely claimed receipt of a degree. The
investigation found that the resume said the employee attended—but did not specifically claim that the
employee received a degree from—an educational institution. It was further determined that the employee's
GS-15 position does not require a degree. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DE-2017-CAC-0028
An EPA GS-15 employee allegedly gave special treatment to a former GS-13 subordinate employee by allowing
the subordinate employee to telework on a recurring weekly basis in violation of the office's telework policy. The
allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2019-ADM-0084
A CSB GS-15 employee allegedly accepted unauthorized gifts from a subordinate employee in violation of
federal government ethics standards. The investigation found that the gifts received by the GS-15 did not rise to
a level that violated the applicable ethics standards. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2019-ADM-0101
A CSB GS-15 employee allegedly approved Agency-funded payments to cover a subordinate employee's
residential cable and internet service in violation of the CSB's internal policies. After the investigation was
initiated, the CSB discontinued said payments, and the GS-15 employee resigned.
Investigations Involving Non-Senior Employees
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2018-ADM-0034
An EPA GS-13 employee allegedly provided a false statement when completing Standard Form 86,
Questionnaire for National Security Positions, by failing to disclose an arrest and subsequent guilty plea for
driving under the influence. It was determined that the employee had misinterpreted the questionnaire. The
allegation was not supported. The Agency reassigned the employee to other duties so that the employee would
not operate a government- or privately owned vehicle while on Agency business, pending the employee's
successful completion of court-ordered probation.
59

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
CASE NUMBER: QI-AT-2017-ADM-0126
An EPA GS-13 employee allegedly violated federal government ethics standards by socializing with government
contractors at a private birthday dinner, as well as allegedly helped the employee's child's school obtain an
EPA-funded grant. The investigation determined that the employee had socialized with government contractors,
had used government property in relation to the aforementioned grant, and represented an outside organization
back to the EPA. The investigative results were referred to EPA management, and the employee was
suspended for 12 days.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2018-ADM-0099
An EPA GS-13 employee allegedly verbally abused and stalked a private citizen online. The private citizen
reported the matter to the local police department. The investigation found no evidence that any contacts were
conducted during official government hours or used official government resources. The allegation was not
supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-NE-2019-ADM-0025
An EPA GS-14 employee allegedly engaged in time and attendance fraud by conducting personal travel on
days claimed as teleworking, reported episodic telework as regular hours, and was unreachable during official
telework hours. The investigation regarding the employee's personal travel was inconclusive. The remaining
allegations were referred to the employee's management to address as deemed appropriate.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2018-ADM-0018
An EPA GS-13 employee allegedly fraudulently signed a change of beneficiary form for another employee's
retirement account in an attempt to be named as the beneficiary. The results of the investigation found that the
GS-13 employee never submitted a change of beneficiary form on behalf of the other employee. The allegation
was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2017-ADM-0149
An EPA GS-13 employee allegedly engaged in time and attendance fraud. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-SA-2018-ADM-0111
An EPA GS-12 employee allegedly provided false education information during the EPA hiring process and the
subsequent security clearance investigation. A requirement of the employee's job included having a level of
education in a specific field of study. The investigation disclosed that the employee had never attended the
schools listed on the employee's job application, resume, and security investigation (SF-82) paperwork. The
employee retired after receiving a letter of proposed removal. The employee was debarred from working on any
federal contracts and assistance agreements for three years.
CASE NUMBER: QI-NE-2018-ADM-0134
An EPA GS-7 employee allegedly submitted fraudulent transit reimbursement paperwork by claiming to use one
mode of transportation while actually taking a less expensive one. Due to a lack of records, the OIG
investigation could not confirm whether the employee's reimbursement claims were inaccurate. The
investigation was inconclusive.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2018-CFD-0036
An EPA GS-11 employee allegedly purposely provided a false statement when completing the SF-86,
Questionnaire for National Security Positions, by not disclosing a prior arrest. The investigation found that the
employee had misinterpreted the questions. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-PH-2018-ADM-0133
An EPA GS-13 employee allegedly conducted personal business activities while on official government duty.
The investigation disclosed that the employee conducted personal business activities during hours claimed as
teleworking. The employee resigned after receiving a notice of proposed removal.
CASE NUMBER: OI-PH-2019-OTH-Q112
An unknown subject allegedly created an unauthorized pay allotment from an EPA employee's biweekly
paycheck. During the investigation, the employee realized that the allotment was an authorized amount for a life
insurance program. The allegation was not supported.
60

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2018-ADM-0077
An EPA GS-12 employee allegedly claimed to be an EPA federal agent and made threatening statements to
students at a college in Oklahoma. Those allegations were not supported. However, the investigation uncovered
additional allegations, including that the EPA employee allowed a non-EPA employee to perform work on behalf
of the employee and submitted inaccurate scientific reports and false time and attendance records. These
additional allegations were supported. The EPA employee resigned during the investigation. A notation about
the adverse finding was permanently added in the former employee's personnel file.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2016-CFR-0068
An unknown EPA employee allegedly disclosed an EPA contract bidder's proprietary information to another
bidder. The investigation was inconclusive.
CASE NUMBER: QI-CH-2019-ADM-0045
An EPA GS-14 employee allegedly used an EPA-issued laptop and other government equipment to do non-
EPA-related work and did not submit timesheets that accurately reflected work times. The allegations were
supported. The investigation further found that the employee was teleworking from nonapproved alternate work
locations. The employee retired from federal service during the investigation.
CASE NUMBER: QI-CH-2016-CFR-0057
An EPA GS-13 employee was convicted of obstructing a child pornography investigation and sentenced to 38
months in prison. During this reporting period, the employee was debarred from working on federal contracts
and assistance agreements for a period often years.
CASE NUMBER: OI-PH-2020-ADM-0Q24
An unknown subject allegedly stole an EPA employee's EPA-issued laptop. The OIG investigators attempted to
locate the computer, but it was not recovered and no subject was identified. Identifying information about the
laptop, such as the serial number, was entered into the National Crimes and Information Center. The
investigation was inconclusive.
CASE NUMBER: OI-AT-2020-ADM-0Q43
An EPA GS-13 employee allegedly falsely claimed to be conducting visits to Superfund sites during work hours.
The investigation was inconclusive.
CASE NUMBER: QI-CH-2019-ADM-0071
An EPA OIG GS-13 Special Agent was arrested and charged while off-duty for allegedly driving under the
influence. During the course of the OIG's investigation, the employee also allegedly made inconsistent
statements to investigators. Both allegations were supported. The employee resigned after receiving a notice of
proposed removal.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2019-ADM-0051
A GS-13 EPA OIG employee allegedly claimed hours for working in the office when the employee was not there.
The allegation was supported, and the employee was suspended for ten days.
CASE NUMBER: OI-NE-2019-ADM-010Q
Numerous EPA employees were allegedly involved in falsifying records regarding radioactive materials that
were removed from a Superfund site and delivered to a disposal facility. Although the OIG investigation was
inconclusive as to whether the employees falsified records, it did find that the disposal facility may have
improperly received contaminated material. The OIG referred the matter to the EPA's Criminal Investigation
Division. The OIG investigation was inconclusive.
CASE NUMBER: OI-AT-2020-AFD-0Q11
EPA employees allegedly prevented a nonprofit grantee from receiving reimbursement of expenses relating to
an EPA Superfund site. The allegation was not supported.
61

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
CASE NUMBER: QI-CH-2018-CCR-0095
An EPA GS-13 employee allegedly removed the hard drive from the employee's EPA-issued computer and
replaced it with a personal hard drive without authorization. The investigation found that the employee replaced
the original hard drive in the EPA-issued computer and connected to the EPA network on multiple occasions.
The employee was suspended for 14 days.
Investigations Involving Non-Employees
CASE NUMBER: QI-CH-2017-CAC-0087
A computer store owner allegedly fraudulently received thousands of computers and related equipment from
various federal agencies, including the EPA, which he then sold through his business or on eBay. The allegation
was supported. The investigation found that the owner received the computer equipment through the U.S.
Government Services Administration's Computers for Learning Program, which is designed to transfer unused
government computers and equipment to schools and educational nonprofit organizations. The owner had
received over $22 million in computers and related equipment from the federal government since 2007,
including over $158,000 from the EPA. The owner was indicted on four counts of mail fraud, one count each of
wire fraud and theft of government property, and interstate transportation of stolen property. The owner died,
and the investigation was subsequently closed.
CASE NUMBER: OI-AR-2Q11-CFR-1142
A company allegedly violated the provisions of the EPA's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program by
falsely claiming it used a socially and economically disadvantaged company on a contract partially funded by the
EPA. The allegation was supported. The investigation resulted in a civil settlement agreement in which the
company agreed to pay $3,800 to the United States.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2018-ADM-0044
A subcontractor for a U.S. government travel system allegedly inappropriately used EPA travel information to
collect unauthorized commission fees from the General Services Administration. Since the EPA was not directly
charged or impacted by the collection of the commission fees, the matter was referred to the GSA OIG.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2018-AFD-0074
An EPA grant recipient allegedly improperly withdrew $91,000 in grant funds prior to the costs being incurred by
the grantee. The investigation determined that the premature withdrawal of funds was caused by a
miscommunication between a former EPA project officer and the grant recipient. The EPA implemented
corrective actions, and the grant recipient returned the unexpended funds.
CASE NUMBER: QI-NE-2018-THT-0097
A private citizen allegedly made threats against an EPA employee through the mail and in voicemails. The
allegation was supported. The investigation also disclosed that the private citizen inundated several other EPA
personnel with harassing, nuisance emails, and voicemails. The Agency barred the private citizen from
accessing the impacted EPA locations.
CASE NUMBER: OI-AT-2020-ADM-0Q23
An EPA subcontractor allegedly used undocumented workers for activities involving an EPA contract. The
investigation determined that no EPA funds were used to pay those workers, and the prime contractor took
steps to ensure that all subcontractors complied with the U.S. Customs and Immigration Service requirements
related to verifying a worker's identity and employment eligibility.
CASE NUMBER: QI-SE-2015-CFR-0013
An individual allegedly misapplied EPA grant funds for personal purposes. The allegation was supported. As a
result of this investigation, the individual pleaded guilty to one count of misapplication from an organization
receiving federal funds, as well as to one count of making and subscribing a false tax return. The investigation
was worked jointly with the Internal Revenue Service. The individual was sentenced to 18 months in prison,
followed by two years of supervised release.
62

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
CASE NUMBER: QI-SE-2019-LFD-0102
An operator of a public water system allegedly provided falsified water samples to a laboratory funded by an
EPA public water system grant. The operator admitted to OIG investigators having submitted falsified water
samples to the laboratory. The matter was declined by the EPA's Suspension and Debarment Division.
CASE NUMBER: OI-SE-2019-AFD-00Q9
Two elected officials at a state nonregulatory agency that received EPA grant funds allegedly were removed
from their positions because they neglected to provide timely and accurate records, delayed approving
timesheets and signing checks, and failed to attend a public hearing to consider future county funding. The
investigation was inconclusive as to whether these allegations involved EPA money. The allegations were
referred to the EPA's Suspension and Debarment Division, which declined to pursue the matter.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2019-AFD-0106
Unidentified officials at the Department of Planning and Natural Resources for the U.S. Virgin Islands allegedly
received kickbacks and other considerations from a local financier to mitigate paying fines for engaging in illegal
construction of environmentally regulated lands on two privately owned islands. The allegations were not
supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2017-CFR-0018
A laboratory with an EPA contract allegedly manipulated data to make the results appear acceptable and to
meet specific contractual requirements. The allegations were supported. The EPA terminated the contract, and
the company and its owner were debarred for three years.
CASE NUMBER: OI-AT-2020-ADM-0Q19
Unknown individuals at the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Tennesse Department of Environment and
Conservation allegedly knowingly used improper computer models to estimate air pollution and deposition in the
Lower Watts Bar Reservoir. The allegations were not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2015-CFR-0131
An EPA Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds recipient allegedly used Minority/
Disadvantaged Business Enterprises merely as pass-throughs, not to perform any commercially useful functions
on EPA-funded projects. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-AT-2019-ADM-0069
The OIG was alerted via the hotline about a whistleblower action that was filed in federal court against members
of a Board of Directors for a city water system. The action alleged violations of the False Claims Act, improper
contract awarding, and various other violations of state law. The U.S. Department of Justice and the OIG
declined to intervene in the lawsuit.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2019-ADM-0052
A subject allegedly stole an EPA employee's EPA-issued laptop while the employee was commuting from work
on public transportation. The allegation was supported. The OIG investigators recovered the laptop from the
subject, who claimed to have found the laptop on a Washington, D.C., Metro train. Prosecution of the subject
was subsequently declined by the U.S. Department of Justice.
CASE NUMBER: QI-NE-2012-CFR-0031
Several prime contractors allegedly falsely represented that a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise had
performed a commercially useful function on EPA-funded contracts when, in reality, the prime contractors
performed that function. The investigation resulted in civil false claims settlements totaling $605,000.
CASE NUMBER: OI-HQ-2020-CCR-0Q27
The EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation received an email that appeared to be
spam. The OIG investigates reports of spam to determine whether the spam has affected the EPA network. The
investigation revealed that there were no identified threats or vulnerabilities to the EPA network. Additionally, it
was determined that the email was not malicious. The allegation was not supported.
63

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
CASE NUMBER: OI-HQ-2020-CCR-0Q15
An EPA employee was the victim of an email scam that used the employee's official EPA email account. The
investigation revealed no threats or vulnerabilities to the EPA network and did not find that the employee was
targeted because of employment with the EPA. The appropriate agencies were notified of the incident.
CASE NUMBER: QI-SE-2019-THT-0076
An individual allegedly left two threatening voicemails with an EPA Operations Office in Region 10. The OIG
investigated the allegation. Due to the escalation in behavior exhibited by the individual, a bar notice was issued
for the individual in EPA Region 10.
CASE NUMBER: OI-AT-2020-PFD-00Q3
A company allegedly misused the EPA logo. The investigation determined that this appeared to involve a
trademark violation, and it was not readily apparent that the EPA logo was being used to commit false
statements. The investigation was inconclusive.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2019-ADM-0053
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers allegedly used EPA funds to pay for labor not related to the EPA's
Superfund projects and overcharged the EPA. The USACE OIG previously had investigated the allegation and
found that the USACE could improve how it charges the EPA. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DE-2019-THT-0022
The husband of an EPA employee allegedly threatened to kill the employee. The OIG determined that this threat
did not occur when the employee was acting in an official capacity and referred the matter to local law
enforcement.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2014-CAC-0016
An EPA laboratory contractor who received over $7 million in EPA funds during an eight-year period allegedly
provided numerous false data analysis reports. The allegation was supported. The EPA cancelled all grants with
the contractor, and the contractor shut down that business. The EPA's Suspension and Debarment Division
declined to take action in this matter.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DE-2019-AFD-0037
A tribal employee allegedly committed grant fraud by creating a fake contract to misappropriate $50,000 in EPA
funds to provide to the employee's significant other. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: OI-HQ-2019-QTH-0020
An unknown person allegedly wrote racially insensitive messages on various dry erase boards throughout EPA
headquarters. The investigation identified an EPA contractor's employee as responsible for the writings. The
individual was dismissed from working at the EPA.
CASE NUMBER: QI-AR-2014-CAC-0052
A company allegedly did not subcontract work to a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, as contractually
required. OIG investigators conducted numerous interviews and reviewed records related to the contracted
work. The investigation determined that the allegation was supported, but the U.S. Department of Justice
declined to prosecute the matter.
CASE NUMBER: QI-LE-2019-ADM-0047
An eBay seller allegedly was selling stolen EPA 2017 Emergency Response Challenge Coins on eBay. The
investigation revealed that the coins were misdelivered, rather than stolen. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2019-ADM-0105
A civil complaint alleging the misappropriation of funds was filed against an individual involved in the
administration of an EPA Superfund site. An investigation was opened to determine whether the civil complaint
implicated the potential misuse of EPA funds. The investigation found that the EPA's financial interest in the
Superfund site was limited to receiving funds for the sale of land and for any cost incurred related to the cleanup
of the site. The allegation was not supported.
64

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
CASE NUMBER: 2007-CS-0033
A contractor was allegedly involved in a kickback and bid rigging scheme involving two Superfund sites in New
Jersey. The allegation was supported. The investigation resulted in the conviction often individuals and three
companies on charges including major fraud, tax fraud, bid rigging, money laundering, and obstruction of justice.
Criminal fines and restitution of more than $6 million were imposed. The contractor also paid the U.S.
government $2,727,200 plus interest under a civil settlement. The aforementioned results were reported in prior
semiannual periods. The investigation was officially closed during this semiannual period.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2017-CFR-0037
A contractor on a Drinking Water State Revolving Fund project allegedly arranged to provide water tanks that
did not meet the American Industrial Steel standards. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DA-2019-CFD-0075
A contractor on two Drinking Water State Revolving Fund projects allegedly did not pay project employees the
prevailing wage and benefit rates in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act. The OIG investigators identified
misclassifications that affected proper payments. The contractor subsequently paid the employees the
appropriate amount.
CASE NUMBER: OI-DA-2019-CFD-008Q
A contractor on a Drinking Water State Revolving Fund project was allegedly not paying subcontractors
appropriately. The investigation revealed that the contractor had paid the subcontractors all amounts due at the
time. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-DE-2010-CFR-0337
A contractor allegedly manufactured wastewater treatment blowers outside of the United States, violating the
Buy American clause of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The allegation was supported. The
individual was sentenced to 12 months of jail and ordered to pay restitution totaling $180,392. The
aforementioned results were reported in prior semiannual periods. The investigation was officially closed during
this semiannual period.
CASE NUMBER: QI-SE-2019-AFD-0089
A tribe in Alaska allegedly misused EPA grant funds by using Conex boxes and a utility vehicle purchased with
EPA funds for personal purposes. The investigation was inconclusive.
CASE NUMBER: OI-AT-2020-CFD-0Q12
Construction contractors allegedly defrauded a city government during a water infrastructure project. An
investigation was opened to determine whether the contractors' alleged fraudulent activities involved a Drinking
Water State Revolving Fund project. The investigation determined that the contractors had not participated in
the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund activities. The allegations were not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-CH-2017-AFD-0147
An executive director of a Michigan Conservation District allegedly committed grant fraud. The investigation
disclosed that the individual siphoned EPA grant funds to the individual's personal accounts and spent them at
the local casino. The individual was convicted of grant fraud, sentenced to 37 months in prison, and ordered to
pay $573,159.00 in restitution. Additionally, the individual was debarred from government contracts and
assistance agreements for a period often years. The aforementioned results were reported in prior semiannual
periods. The investigation was officially closed during this semiannual period.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2019-CDF-0104
A company self-disclosed to the OIG that it determined 323 hours totaling $14,725.94 were mischarged to an
EPA contract. The OIG investigation revealed that the company's contractual agreement was with the General
Services Administration under the GSA's Alliant Contract. The EPA contracted with the GSA to provide services
to the EPA. As such, the company sent a partial payment in the amount of $10,523.32 to the GSA, and a credit
for the rest of the amount owed. The GSA fully refunded the funds to the EPA.
65

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
CASE NUMBER: OI-SE-2018-QTH-0076
An EPA contractor allegedly stole an EPA laptop and sold it to a pawn shop. The allegation was supported. The
contractor pleaded guilty to second degree theft and was sentenced to 364 days in jail. The sentence was
suspended under the condition that the contractor paid $1,233 in restitution, $200 in court costs, and $500 as a
crime victim compensation penalty assessment.
CASE NUMBER: OI-CH-2020-AFD-0Q51
It was alleged that employees with a state environmental agency accepted bribes related to an entity's filing for
a wetlands permit under the Federal Clean Water Act. The allegation was not supported.
CASE NUMBER: QI-AT-2019-AFD-0079
It was alleged that an EPA grantee was misusing EPA grant funds. The investigation determined that the
grantee failed to provide proper supporting documentation for expenditures from EPA grant funds due to
accounting errors and implemented new policies to address the identified weaknesses.
CASE NUMBER: QI-HQ-2017-CAC-0098
An EPA information technology contractor responsible for working on EPA-owned laptops allegedly stole and
sold over 30 of them. The allegation was supported. The contractor accepted a plea agreement and received a
suspended sentence, paid restitution in the amount of $15,100, and was put on probation for five years.
CASE NUMBER: OI-AT-2020-CFD-0Q54
An employee of an Indian tribe allegedly stole approximately $500,000 to $1,500,000 from the tribe over four
years, some of which were allegedly monies from EPA grants. The OIG determined that the allegation already
had been investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the employee admitted to stealing over $500,000
of nonfederal monies from the tribe and subsequently was prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice.
66

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Appendix 5—Peer Reviews Conducted
For Reporting Period Ended March 31,2020
Section 5(a)(14) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, requires an appendix containing the results of any peer
review conducted of the EPA OIG by another OIG during the reporting period or, if no such peer review was conducted, a
statement identifying the date of the last peer review conducted of the EPA OIG by another OIG. Section 5(a)(15) of the
Inspector General Act requires a list of any outstanding recommendations from any peer review conducted of the EPA OIG
by another OIG that have not been fully implemented. Section 5(a)(16) of the Inspector General Act requires a list of all peer
reviews conducted by the EPA OIG of another OIG during the reporting period, including a list of any recommendations from
any previous peer review that remain outstanding.
The EPA OIG did not conduct any peer reviews of other OIGs during the semiannual reporting period. The following are the
most recent peer reviews conducted by another OIG of the EPA OIG. There are no outstanding recommendations from
these peer reviews.
Audits
The U.S. Department of Defense OIG completed an external peer review of the EPA OIG audit
organization covering the fiscal year ended September 30, 2017, and issued its report on June 18,
2018. The review was conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards
and the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency's Guide for Conducting Peer
Reviews of the Audit Organizations of Federal Offices of Inspector General. The peer review report
stated that the system of quality control for the EPA OIG audit organization in effect for the year ended
September 30, 2017, was suitably designed and complied with to provide the EPA OIG with reasonable
assurance that audits are performed and reported in conformity with applicable professional standards
in all material respects. The EPA OIG received an external peer review rating of pass.
Investigations
The U.S. General Services Administration OIG completed the most recently mandated Council of the
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency quality assurance review of the EPA OIG Office of
Investigations and issued its report on June 11, 2018. The U.S. General Services Administration OIG
identified no deficiencies and found internal safeguards and management procedures compliant with
quality standards.
67

-------
Semiannual Report to Congress
October 1, 2019—March 31, 2020
Appendix 6—OIG Mailing Addresses and Telephone Numbers
Headquarters
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW (2410T)
Washington, D.C. 20460
(202) 566-0847
Atlanta
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
Audit/Evaluation: (404) 562-9830
Investigations: (404) 562-9857
Boston
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
5 Post Office Square (Mail Code: 15-1)
Boston, MA 02109-3912
Audit/Evaluation: (617) 918-1475
Investigations: (617) 918-1466
Chicago
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
77 West Jackson Boulevard
13th Floor (IA-13J)
Chicago, IL 60604
Audit/Evaluation: (312) 353-2486
Investigations: (312) 886-7167
Cincinnati
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268-7001
Audit/Evaluation: (513) 487-2363
Investigations: (312) 886-7167
Offices
Dallas
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General - 4th Floor
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, TX 75270
Audit/Evaluation: (214) 665-6621
Investigations: (214) 665-2249
Denver
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
1595 Wynkoop Street, 4th Floor
Denver, CO 80202
Audit/Evaluation: (303) 312-6969
Investigations: (303) 312-6868
Kansas City
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
11201 Renner Boulevard
Lenexa, KS 66219
Audit/Evaluation: (913) 551-7878
Investigations: (913) 551-7420
New York
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
290 Broadway, Suite 1520
New York, NY 10007
Audit/Evaluation: (212) 637-3049
Investigations: (212) 637-3040
Philadelphia
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
1650 Arch Street, 3rd Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
Audit/Evaluation: (215) 814-2326
Investigations: (215) 814-2470
Research Triangle Park
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
Mail Drop N283-01
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Audit/Evaluation: (919) 541-1030
Investigations: (919) 541-3668
San Francisco
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
75 Hawthorne Street (IGA-1-2)
8th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Audit/Evaluation: (415) 947-4527
Investigations: (415) 947-4507
Seattle
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
Mail Code 17-H13
1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155
Seattle, WA 98101-3140
Audit/Evaluation: (206) 553-6906
Investigations: (206) 553-1273
68

-------