Federal Reports

This report contains classified information that is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. To obtain further information, please contact the OIG Office of Counsel at OIGCounsel@oig.treas.gov, (202) 927-0650, or by mail at Office of Treasury Inspector General, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC 20220.

The likelihood of fire is lower at hydro plants than at coal plants, but hydro plants are not without fire risk. Hydroelectric stations share many of the same fire hazards as coal plants, such as oil-filled transformers, electrical cables and switchgear, air-cooled generators, and large quantities of combustible hydraulic oil. Hydro plants are typically an underground/underwater windowless structure. In many ways, a hydro plant poses more extreme safety issues and rescue risks, because of limited building access, lack of natural lighting, and embedded structures, all of which increase the potential a fire on a higher level will trap workers on a lower level.During our review, TVA indicated fire protection systems and equipment were generally maintained and in good condition, with some exceptions. Additionally, Hydro Generation was making improvements to condition assessments of fire protection equipment. However, we found the following: (1) risk assessment reports indicated hydro plants could use more fire protection equipment, and additional documentation of inspection, testing, and maintenance were still needed; (2) TVA indicated fire drills were being conducted on a routine basis, but were not being documented as required, fire incidents were not being tracked, and lessons learned were not consistently shared; (3) TVA had not fully implemented the Emergency Response Liaison (ERL) role; and (4) the increased risk from replacing the ERL role had not been considered in TVA's enterprise risk process. We made recommendations to management to address the findings.

This review was initiated to assess recent efforts by the TVA Nuclear Power Group (NPG) to improve outage performance. The objective of the OIG's review was to determine whether the initiatives implemented by the NPG to improve outage performance achieved planned results and current improvement efforts can be improved. We found cost structure development and controls initiatives improved outage performance with respect to cost; however, outage duration and dose continue to miss business plan goals. Additionally, we found outage performance initiatives continually changed and excellence/improvement initiative plans did not include all planned actions. While some initiatives have been completed, others are ongoing and have rolled over to different plans, making it a challenge to tie changes to measurable results.

In response to increasing workplace violence occurring throughout the country and weaknesses identified in a previous OIG evaluation, 2012-14636 - Master Key Program Management - Property and Natural Resources, the OIG initiated a review of TVA firearms and ammunition. The objective of our review was to determine if firearms and ammunition are properly accounted for and safeguarded. Our review found TVA Police and Emergency Management (TVAP&EM) were accounting for and safeguarding firearms and ammunition; however, coal plant-owned shotguns on the 2014 inventory were not included in the annual hands-on inventory list. Unissued firearms are safeguarded in secured storage areas. These firearms, and those issued to TVAP&EM employees, are accounted for through an annual hands-on inventory. During testing, TVAP&EM were able to provide documentation for a sample of firearms that were either destroyed or transferred. While TVAP&EM guidelines require all TVA-issued firearms to be carried while on duty, one employee was unable to initially provide a firearm for physical inventory due to the firearm being in his home. Additionally, while TVAP&EM were able to provide documentation for destroyed and transferred firearms, some improvements could be made to better comply with guidelines for the documentation of transfers. Finally, there were a few instances in the guidelines regarding firearms and ammunition responsibility that did not match actual practice. Summary Only

Due to TVA aging equipment and the risk parts would be unavailable, the OIG scheduled a review of Hydro Generation obsolete equipment. The objective of our review was to determine if Hydro Generation was effectively managing obsolete equipment. During our review, we found Hydro Generation could more effectively manage obsolete equipment. We found there was no documented guidance to specify how obsolete equipment should be managed. In addition, we found obsolete equipment had extended outage durations. We also found some equipment condition assessments (ECA) included an "Availability of Spare Parts" indicator, which measures the availability and willingness of the original equipment manufacturer to support existing, installed equipment with parts and service; however, the indicator was not always included in the equipment condition assessments.

Please see the link below for a video discussing the results of this review.

This review includes lengthy extensions particularly for grants with zero balances and grants with small balances that indicates substantial project progress

Fires in substations can severely impact the supply of power to customers and the utility company's revenue and assets. These fires can also create a fire hazard to utility personnel, emergency personnel, and the general public. There are 14 sites managed by Transmission that have fire protection systems to protect their 500-kilovolt transformers. According to TVA management, fire protection systems have been established where needed; however, the risk that fire protection systems will not function effectively is increased by the condition of systems and systems not meeting national code or TVA requirements. The current systems have antiquated equipment that is being replaced as funding allows. The upgrades do not include modifying the current system's water supply which does not meet National Fire Protection Association code or TVA Standard Process and Procedure requirements. While TVA management indicated TVA is not required to meet national code, not doing so in the case of the water supply could limit the effectiveness of the fire protection system if it were engaged during a fire. According to TVA management, maintenance on fire protection equipment is performed or requested by personnel at the Transmission Service Center; however, maintenance is not always documented. We found there were no requirements to track the fire protection systems or their condition. In addition, the inspections of fire protection equipment that were part of the preventive maintenance program were not conducted consistently. There is an increased risk an issue could go unrecognized if systems are not being consistently inspected and the condition tracked. We made recommendations to management to address the findings.

We found that the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction could improve its administration of its Race to the Top grant by strengthening its system of internal control over contracting and by more closely monitoring the fiscal activity of participating local educational agencies and charter schools to ensure that they complied with all applicable Federal requirements. We found that North Carolina generally reported performance data accurately and completely and that it generally spent Race to the Top funds on allowable activities and in accordance with program requirements and its approved grant application. However, we noted North Carolina made about $1.4 million in payments to a contract without sufficiently documenting that employees obtained all required approvals.

The original report was issued on March 26, 2014, as report number OIG-SBLF-14-005. The report was withdrawn, revised, and reissued on July 9, 2015, as report number OIG-SBLF-14-005R, to reflect changes made on pages 2, 12, 13, 17, and 18. The changes clarify that the Office of Inspector General tested a sample of administrative expenses in this audit. These changes do not affect the findings, conclusions, and recommendations as reported.

This Report was originally issued on March 19, 2014. The report was withdrawn, revised, and reissued as OIG-SBLF-14-004R on July 2, 2015, to reflect changes made on pages 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7. The changes clarified the sample population of loans and investments tested and the amount of administrative costs that were reviewed by the Office of Inspector General as part of the sample. These corrections did not affect the findings, conclusions, and recommendations as reported.