Federal Reports

Two executives at a textile company, based in Milford, Delaware, pleaded guilty to federal program bribery charges in U.S. District Court in February.Donald Crothers, the company’s vice president for marketing and contract administration, and John Gonzales, the company’s executive vice president and chief financial officer, pleaded guilty for their roles in a bribery scheme to secure Amtrak contracts for seat cushions. The executives bribed former Amtrak employee, Timothy Miller, then a Lead Contract Administrator, to steer four fleet maintenance contracts to their company in exchange for approximately $20,000 in bribes, trips, and other items of value. Crothers pleaded guilty on February 4, 2019, and Gonzales’ guilty plea came the following day.A cross-agency team of special agents from Amtrak OIG, the FBI, and the U.S. Department of Transportation OIG conducted the investigation that resulted in the charges.

An Amtrak Passenger Conductor, two Assistant Passenger Conductors, and an Usher/Gateman were disciplined for policy violations on February 5, 2019. The employees allowed and/or assisted non-ticketed passengers to receive unauthorized free travel aboard company trains on several occasions, generally at the request of other Amtrak employees. The employees received suspensions ranging from four to five days each.

We audited the costs claimed by the State of Arkansas, Game and Fish Commission, under grants awarded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) through the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program. The audit included claims totaling approximately $67 million on 57 grants that were open during the State fiscal years that ended June 30, 2016, and June 30, 2017. The audit also covered the Commission’s compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and FWS guidelines, including those related to collecting and using hunting and fishing license revenue and reporting program income.We found that the Commission complied, in general, with applicable grant accounting and regulatory requirements. We questioned costs totaling $102,720 ($77,040 Federal Share), however, because the Commission overcharged the grants for costs incurred and was missing or had inadequate documentation to support the costs incurred.Both the FWS and the Commission concurred with all six recommendations and will work together to implement corrective actions.

We audited the costs claimed by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department under grants awarded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) through the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program. The audit included claims totaling approximately $50.2 million on five grants that were open during the State fiscal years that ended June 30, 2016, and June 30, 2017. The audit also covered the Department’s compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and FWS guidelines, including those related to the collection and use of hunting and fishing license revenues and the reporting of program income.We found that the Department complied with applicable grant accounting and regulatory requirements. We did not identify any reportable conditions. We also followed up on all recommendations from our 2013 audit (Report No. R-GR-FWS-0010-2013) and found that the U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget considered one recommendation, related to real property reconciliation, resolved but not implemented. We did not require a response to this audit report.

Quarterly Summary Memorandum for the Lead Inspector General, Department of Defense

As of May 2018, the Postal Service had 145 active and 35 inactive tanks in its underground storage tanks (UST) program. Active USTs contain fuel (gasoline and diesel) to power generators and its fleet of vehicles. USTs are designated as inactive when the tank is no longer economically viable to keep in place and operating, it is not sufficiently used to keep operating, or it is no longer needed. Our objective was to assess the Postal Service’s effectiveness in managing its UST program.

The OIG investigated allegations that two propane delivery contractors, one of which was American Indian-owned, conspired to improperly obtain U.S. Government contracts that are restricted to Indian economic enterprises under the provisions of the Buy Indian Act. Specifically, we investigated to determine if the Indian-owned company subcontracted 100 percent of contract performance to the non-Indian-owned company.We found that the Indian-owned company was awarded approximately 17 contracts, with a combined value of about $350,000, under the Buy Indian Act. We also found that though the Indian-owned company received approximately 51 percent of the net profit, it had little or no involvement with the actual performance of the propane supply contract: the non-Indian contractor provided all the fuel and made all the physical deliveries, thus violating the Buy Indian Act.