Federal Reports

Working in industrial environments is inherently dangerous and steps must be taken to ensure the safety of personnel performing work on energized equipment. The Tennessee Valley Authority’s clearance procedures establish standardized clearance requirements to ensure equipment is isolated from its energy source and rendered nonoperative before performing work on machines or equipment where the unexpected energizing, start up, or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury or property damage. Due to the importance of the clearance procedure in preventing injury and/or property damage while equipment is being serviced, we performed an evaluation of the nuclear clearance process. We determined the clearance procedure was being performed for work requiring clearances to safely control hazardous energy and training was completed as required. However, we determined (1) some clearances were not issued in accordance with all procedural requirements, and (2) audits performed were not in compliance with the clearance procedure. We also identified an opportunity for improvement related to the alignment of clearance procedures.

We audited the Springfield Housing Authority’s Public Housing Operating Fund and Capital Fund programs because the Authority ranked fifth highest on our risk assessment of Massachusetts public housing agencies and is the third largest in the State. In addition, we had not audited the Authority in more than 10 years. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority complied with procurement and contract administration requirements for its Public Housing Operating Fund and Capital Fund programs. Authority officials did not always comply with Federal procurement requirements and their own procurement policy. Specifically, they did not always adequately perform and document procurement, and contract terms were not always consistent with other procurement documents. In addition, Authority officials did not always comply with contract administration requirements. Specifically, they did not always ensure that (1) contract amounts were not exceeded, (2) change orders were approved in a timely manner, and (3) completion documents were submitted as required. These conditions occurred because Authority officials did not always follow their procurement policies and were not always aware of Federal procurement requirements due to a lack of training. Further, the Authority had inadequate controls to ensure that it adequately documented the history of the procurements and did not exceed contract amounts. As a result, the Authority incurred $37,941 in ineligible costs, $916,132 in unsupported costs, and $408,968 in unspent funds that may need to be reallocated.We recommend that the Director of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Boston Office of Public Housing require Authority officials to (1) repay from non-Federal funds the $37,941 in ineligible costs, (2) support that $916,132 spent on contracts was fair and reasonable or repay the funds, (3) support that $408,968 in funds not yet spent on contracts was fair and reasonable or reallocate the funds, (4) establish and implement adequate record-keeping procedures to comply with Federal procurement requirements, and (5) establish and implement adequate controls so the Authority does not exceed the contract amount without appropriate contract amendments and approvals.