Federal Reports

The audit objectives were to determine whether program funds were managed in accordance with the ARC and Federal grant requirements.

This report presents the results of our audit of U.S. Postal Service’s financial controls and safeguarding assets at selected retail units.

The Postal Service operates approximately 31,000 retail units that provide services to customers nationwide. Retail unit employees are required to adhere to policies and procedures regarding financial reporting and the safeguarding of assets. All retail units must report their financial activity to Accounting Services daily, and retail unit management is responsible for the security of accountable items. Controls over these processes are essential for ensuring financial information is reliable and assets are protected. During a prior audit, we identified potential security matters and financial control issues at selected retail locations. As a result, we visited 10 additional retail units to determine compliance with policies and procedures and whether issues were remediated.

What We Did

Our objective was to determine compliance with policies and procedures regarding financial controls and safeguarding assets at selected Postal Service retail units. Specifically, we interviewed Postal Service management and retail associates, observed the safeguarding of assets, reviewed Postal Service (PS) Form 1412 supporting documentation, and inventoried arrow keys present at the retail units.

Why We Did This Report

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General initiated this project to describe the lessons we have identified from select EPA OIG and U.S. Government Accountability Office, or GAO, oversight reports to help inform the EPA’s future efforts to prepare for and respond to natural disasters.

Summary of Findings

We reviewed 26 EPA OIG and GAO reports that include findings related to the EPA’s prior disaster response actions. From those, we identified seven programmatic themes: (1)interagency and external stakeholder cooperation, (2) risk communication to the public,(3)data collection and characterization of risks, (4) policy development, (5) resource limitation, (6)contract management, and (7) resilience of contaminated sites and infrastructure. These themes had lessons that may allow the EPA to be better prepared for and respond to a natural disaster in the future. These reports made 79 recommendations to the EPA. Although we did not evaluate the timeliness or quality of the EPA’s corrective actions to these recommendations, it is imperative that the EPA implement recommendations that could provide a more efficient and effective response to future natural disasters.

Improved Documentation and Guidance Can Help Strengthen Corporation Finance’s Disclosure Review Program, Report No. 586

The OIG found that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) effectively uses operating experience (OpE) information to inspect Emergency Diesel Generators (EDGs) at operating nuclear power plants. However, the agency could strengthen the Reactor OpE Program by updating guidance and assessing the program, and ensuring the EDG Technical Review Group (TRG) members know their roles and responsibilities.
Currently, the guidance provided in Office Instruction LIC-401, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) Reactor Operating Experience, and NRR’s Operating Experience Staff Handbook is outdated. In addition, the NRC does not have an assessment process for the Reactor OpE Program. Assessing the Reactor OpE Program periodically could help staff and management determine whether the program meets its objectives and staff are using relevant guidance to process OpE information. Moreover, the NRC lacks policies and procedures for the EDG TRGs, which may lead to inconsistent practices, reduced productivity, and missed opportunities to disposition EDG-related OpE information.
The OIG makes seven recommendations to strengthen the Reactor Operating Experience Program implementation process.

The Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office (LPO) provides debt financing in the form of loans and loan guarantees to support innovative clean energy, advanced transportation, and tribal energy projects in the United States. To help carry out its mission, the LPO utilizes contractors and third-party advisors to assist with loan application processing, which increases the risk for conflicts of interest.

Given the LPO’s reliance on contractors and third-party advisors, we initiated this audit to determine whether the LPO had an
effective framework in place for managing conflicts of interest for contractors providing support and advisory services to its Office.

We found that the LPO did not have an effective framework in place for managing conflicts of interest for contractors providing support to the LPO. Specifically, the LPO was not aware of all the relationships that could cause conflicts of interest. We also found that the LPO did not ensure adequate management of conflict of interest disclosures and waiver requests, and did not ensure its prime contractor fully implemented key aspects of its strategy for managing potential conflicts of interest.

These issues occurred because the LPO did not have controls in place to identify and manage conflicts of interest. Specifically, the LPO had not developed and implemented a formal, centralized tracking system or policies and procedures for managing conflicts of interest. Additionally, the LPO relied upon third-party advisors and other contractors to self-identify conflicts of interest and did not ensure adequate oversight of its prime contractor.

To address the issues identified in this report, we have made two recommendations that, if fully implemented, should help ensure that decisions about awarding and managing loans and loan guarantees are in the Government’s and the public’s best interest.