Federal Reports

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.

This reporting period was marked by TVA leading the nation in the resurgence of nuclear power. TVA’s commitment to nuclear power was demonstrated by (1) the restart of the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) Unit 1 in North Alabama in May; (2) Board approval in August for completion of a second nuclear reactor at the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN) in East Tennessee; and (3) Board authorization in September to submit an application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a combined construction and operating license for two new nuclear units at TVA’s Bellefonte site in Hollywood, Alabama. The anticipated flurry of applications by private sector utilities with the NRC to build new nuclear plants is indicative of the belief within the utility industry that nuclear power is America’s best option to meet growing power demands. TVA’s successful restart of BFN Unit 1 on time and within budget has sparked renewed optimism that nuclear power is a viable, clean, and efficient source of energy. President George W. Bush recognized the significance of TVA’s role in this area by his attendance at a special ceremony at BFN on June 21, 2007. The TVA Board recently approved a $9.7 billion budget that includes $317 million to start work at WBN. The total projected cost to complete the project is $2.49 billion over the next five years. The Board also approved $423 million for additional natural gas generation. In addition to this new construction, the Board approved $22 million for the first phase of a renewed emphasis on energy efficiency and reduction in peak power demand. With this historic investment comes concomitant risks. The OIG’s role is to limit some of those risks by the oversight we provide. The OIG dedicated both investigators and auditors to BFN during the construction there, and we have similarly posted OIG personnel at WBN. The OIG staff is trained to anticipate areas in the construction process that are particularly vulnerable to fraud, our investigators and auditors develop confidential sources at the site, and we provide a confidential hotline, “Empowerline,” so people can report concerns anonymously 24/7. As with any major building project, we found fraud, waste, and abuse at BFN. We provided TVA management with details on each of our findings and “lessons learned” to avoid losses and to improve contracting and other processes at WBN. We generally were pleased with management’s response to the issues we raised, and we noted significant improvements. Of course, the work of the OIG extends beyond the oversight of TVA’s nuclear program. This report contains an expansive scope of audits, inspections, and investigations that have resulted in a stronger TVA. For example, the OIG recommended that TVA create a Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer position. The need for a more robust and comprehensive ethics program following the best practices of the industry was embraced both by the TVA Board Audit and Ethics Committee and TVA’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Tom Kilgore. This new more centralized approach to invigorating an already ethical culture will increase accountability and awareness of TVA employees’ ethical responsibilities. Peyton Hairston was named as TVA’s first Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer; he will report to the CEO and the Audit and Ethics Committee. We applaud TVA’s renewed commitment to excellence in this area. Finally, the work highlighted in this report demonstrates broad oversight coverage of TVA by the many dedicated employees of the OIG. Once again, their work has resulted in a healthier and more efficient TVA.

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.

This Semiannual Report to Congress summarizes the activities of our office for the 6-month period

EAC OIG issued this memorandum to alert the EAC Executive Director to additional actions needed to bring EAC into compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) and Office of Management and Budget guidelines.

We initiated an inspection to determine whether the objectives of TVA Nuclear Medical Services (TVAN Medical) program were being met and assess compliance with applicable regulations. Our review included only the services being performed by TVAN Medical. In summary, we found no stated objectives, policies, or procedures relating specifically to TVAN Medical. In addition, varying services are being performed at the TVAN Medical site offices, and supervision of nurse practitioners may not be adequately ensured. Management generally agreed with our findings and recommendations and has taken or plans to take corrective action.

At the request of the Vice President, Paradise Fossil Plant (PAF), we conducted limited review to determine if ordered goods were received and properly recorded in PassPort at PAF. Our review included receipts at PAF from September 7, 2007, through September12, 2007. In summary, our review of selected receipts at PAF found the goods ordered for PAF were generally received, as ordered, and properly recorded in PassPort.

We performed a review to verify all production servers, databases, and the mainframe were being backed up. Our review found (1)all but 20 production distributed servers, (2)all production databases, and (3)the mainframe were being backed up at the time of our testing. Information Services provided explanations and/or actions taken for the 20 servers not being backed up. We also determined 13 backup policies (rules within the software used to backup servers) were obsolete or inactive and 9 servers did not have their exclude lists documented. Based on other observations noted during the audit, we believe an overall process design review could facilitate a better integrated and more efficient backup and restore process. TVA Management agreed with our findings and is taking action to address the recommendations.

We audited $3.8million of costs billed to TVA by a contractor for providing reclearing and maintenance for transmission line right-of-way areas. In summary, we found the contractor could not provide support for an estimated $33,521 in labor costs. The contractor agreed with our finding and explained that on several occasions employees had been paid in cash. TVA management plans to recover the unsupported costs.

As part of our annual audit plan, we audited $11.3million in costs billed to TVA by a contractor, to design and install hydrated lime injection systems at various TVA fossil plants. Our audit objective was to determine if the costs the contractor billed to TVA were in compliance with the provisions of the contract. In summary, we determined the contractor billed TVA an estimated $310,818 for costs that were unsupported or not in accordance with the contract provisions. TVA management stated that discussions with the contractor are currently underway to reach a final resolution of all the audit issues and to address each of the recommendations.

Our review of TVA's compliance with FISMA of 2002 determined that among improvements made during fiscal year 2007, TVA completed revisions to align the security program with NIST FIPS 199 standards and implemented measures to ensure personnel complete security training. While TVA continues to make progress in implementing information technology controls required by FISMA, we noted additional controls are needed to improve (1)oversight and evaluation of contractor systems, (2)the Privacy Program, and (3)consideration of e-authentication risks at TVA.

We conducted a review to assess the procedures in place at TVA to ensure that new hires meet physical job requirements. In summary, we found TVA has a policy in place that requires all new hires to have a medical screening before starting work. However, the TVA Medical Examiners Guide and Health and Safety Practice 1, Occupational Health, do not specify (1)who is responsible for providing examiners with job descriptions to be used in their examination and (2)that examiners are required to utilize the job description information in conducting their physical job requirement evaluation. Management agreed with our findings and recommendations and has initiated or plans to initiate appropriate corrective action.

We conducted a review of TVA and contractor employment procedures to determine if TVA policies and procedures ensure the hiring of non-citizens complies with legal requirements. In summary, it appears that TVA has appropriate policies and procedures in place to ensure that (1)its hiring process is in compliance with applicable legal requirements and (2)contractors are responsible for ensuring that principals/employees under contract to TVA meet Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS) requirements. However, we selected 34employees to verify TVA compliance with the INS requirements and found required information could not be provided for 9 employees due to the loss of electronic files. The Personnel Records Imaging System (PRIS) backup and server failures were addressed in OIG Audit No.2007-039T-01. However, we recommended management determine what actions are necessary since required information was lost due to system failures. Management agreed with our findings and has initiated or plans to initiate corrective action.

We performed an inspection to assess the reasonableness of travel reimbursements where employees were (1)in travel status for an extended period of time and/or (2)received significant reimbursements. The scope of the inspection included all reimbursements made to employees during FYs 1999-2006. We found many TVA employees who received significant travel reimbursements and traveled to the same location for extended periods in multiple years. We identified the top 100 travelers for each year reviewed based on the number of days spent in travel status in a single location during FYs 1999-2006 and requested justifications from management for the extensive travel. In summary, we found for the 8 years of travel reimbursements reviewed, there were 434 TVA employees identified as a top 100 traveler in a single year for the years reviewed. During this period, the 434 individuals received reimbursements totaling over $9.6million. While the organizations provided explanations, no documentation was provided to support that consideration was given to changing any official duty stations. The lack of specific justification for extended travel for several individuals over several years to one location raises questions about whether there may be untapped cost saving opportunities. Management generally agreed with our findings and recommendations and is taking or plans to take corrective action.

We conducted a review to determine whether the trust funds administered by River Operations and the Office of Environment and Research were administered in accordance with terms of the agreements and applicable laws and regulations. Our scope included all trust funds with balances or activity from October 2005-January 2007. In summary, we found:No policies or procedures applicable to the creation or administration of trust funds existed; andThe majority of the trust funds were basically inactive; trust funds were established with appropriated funds; and the trust funds received limited oversight.Management generally agreed with our findings and recommendations and is taking or plans to take corrective action.

EAC OIG, through the independent public accounting firm of Clifton Gunderson LLP, audited $38.1 million in funds received by the Kentucky State Board of Elections under the Help America Vote Act. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether the state Board of Elections (1) used payments authorized by Sections 101, 102, and 251 of HAVA in accordance with HAVA and applicable requirements; (2) Accurately and properly accounted for property purchased with HAVA payments and for program income; and (3) met HAVA requirements for Section 251 funds for an election fund, for a matching contribution, and for maintenance of a base level of state outlays.

TVA's successful effort to restart Unit 1 at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) provides an opportunity to transfer knowledge to future generation projects to (1) improve project oversight, (2) improve project efficiency and effectiveness, (3) generate cost savings opportunities, and/or (4) reduce TVA's risk of fraud, waste, and abuse. OIG reviews of the BFN Unit 1 Restart project and TVA management's evaluations of the restart activities identified opportunities for improvement in future generation projects. Specifically: The OIG conducted reviews throughout the course of the project focusing on (1) payment of overheads and direct expenses, (2) craft time labor reporting, (3) equipment and tools controls, (4) inventory management and accounting, (5) the restart incentive program, and (6) contract compliance.TVA management identified areas they felt were "hard spots" during the project and developed key project control activities to avoid these issues in the future. Some "hard spots" identified related to (1) staffing and training, (2) self-assessments, (3) development of a comprehensive plan, (4) turnover, and (5) material and equipment availability.

We reviewed control activities and the scale certification process applicable to TVA coal shipments at Calvert City Terminal (CCT). We found the terminal had controls and processes in place for the receiving, blending, weighing, and loading of the coal it handles for TVA. The terminal also appeared to have adhered to the scale certification requirements prescribed by the TVA contract. However, we:Identified one barge shipment where terminal documentation showed the barge being sent to the TVA Colbert Fossil Plant (COF). According to TVA Fuel Supply (FS) personnel, the barge sank in August 2006, en route to COF. As of August10, 2007, FS had not recovered the loss.Found discrepancies with some barge and train shipments that apparently resulted from keying errors on the part of TVA and CCT personnel. This included six train shipments recorded in FuelWorx as received at the wrong terminal. Management generally agreed with our findings and recommendations and is taking or plans to take corrective action.

We reviewed 42 loans initiated through Economic Development's (ED) four loan programs (Economic Development Loan Fund, Minority Business Development Loan Fund, Business Incubator Loan Fund, and Special Opportunity Counties Loan Fund) and found:Management had not fully implemented procedures governing the loan administrative process after closing, as agreed upon in response to Audit2004-011F.Noncompliance with ED loan guidelines in 13 of 42 loan files reviewed.Uncollectible ED loans were not written off in a timely manner as required by generally accepted accounting principles.Explanations provided by ED management for 10 of the 13 loan files where noncompliance was noted indicated the Loan Approval Committee made exceptions and approved loan applications even though they were not in compliance with program guidelines. Of these ten loans, five were identified as being in default status indicating that departure from guidelines could have potentially contributed to the loan defaults. Our review noted no other specific trends in the loan files that appeared to contribute to loan defaults. At ED's request, we reviewed ED's draft Loan Manual and identified improvement opportunities. Management generally agreed with our findings and recommendations and is taking or plans to take corrective action.

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.

We conducted a review of 52 TVA non-compete contracts to determine whether non-competed contracts are issued and administered in compliance with TVA policies and procedures, including assessing the justification for the non-competed contract award. We found: Two contracts could not initially be located for review and seven did not have Form17388 and/or the appropriate notification/approval required by TVA policies and procedures. Form17388 is required with the appropriate signatures and justification for the contract. Three of the contracts reviewed did not appear to have an appropriate justification as outlined in Section9(b) of the TVA Act and INSTRUCTION1, Business Practice9, Implementing Procedures. Multiple contracts not governed by BP9 are classified under a justification in PassPort that does not apply to the contract. Management generally agreed with our findings and recommendations and is taking or plans to take corrective action.

We determined: TVA's Privacy Summary Report to the OIG needed improvement in three areas.TVA's privacy policies and procedures were generally consistent with federal requirements; however, we noted (1) five areas where we believe further guidance is needed, and (2) TVA is in the process of updating its privacy policies and procedures.While TVA has made progress in implementing privacy program components, a focused effort is needed to strengthen the program by: (1) completing implementation of planned privacy assessments of all systems identified with Information in Identifiable Form (IIF), and (2) ensuring privacy activities are better integrated between TVA groups who have privacy responsibilities.TVA needs to improve its privacy practices through (1) reviews and updates of Systems of Records notices and (2) implementation of best practices on systems with IIF.At the completion of our fieldwork on March8, 2007, our review found there were no significant IIF compromises reported to the OIG for the two-year period ending December6, 2006, and no instances of criminal or civil liability relating to loss of personal information were reported by the General Counsel's office. However, an issue came to our attention subsequent to our review indicating IIF was available on temporary share drives to anyone with a TVA network account. TVA management generally agreed with our recommendations and has taken or is taking corrective action.

We determined:The PRIS backup failure was due to (1)human error and (2)the lack of proper controls which would have detected PRIS was no longer on the master backup schedule which resulted in not having backups performed for PRIS.The PRIS server failure was due to hardware failures and the impact was magnified by human error.The Performance Review & Development data was not adequately secured when regenerated in recovery efforts.TVA management agreed with the findings and has taken or is taking corrective action.

We audited $249million of costs for parts and services for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant paid by TVA to a contractor from January1, 2000, through May31, 2006. We found the contractor overbilled TVA about $960,000 because the contractor had not always included discounts on prices it billed TVA as required by the contract. TVA management is working with the contractor to determine what impact, if any, a previous verbal agreement regarding the contract discount structure may have on the amount owed to TVA. Summary Only

We audited $58.5million of costs billed to TVA by a contractor for staff augmentation support services during FYs 2005 and 2006. We determined TVA was overbilled about $540,000 for labor costs due to duplicate billings, overpayments of labor hours, and use of incorrect wage rates. We also found the contractor had not maintained documentation to support approximately $340,000 of travel expenses billed to TVA. The contractor and TVA management agreed with our findings, and TVA management is planning to (1)recover the overbilled amount and (2)implement a requirement for the contractor to maintain documentation of travel expenses that are billed to TVA. Summary Only

EAC OIG conducted this audit to determine whether (1) travel was performed in accordance with the Federal Travel Regulation, (2) travel cards were properly controlled and used for only official purposes, and (3) travelers paid their travel card bills in a timely manner.

We were requested by the Vice President, Paradise Fossil Plant (PAF), to assess the procedures and key controls used to track and account for PAF tools. In summary, we found: No policies or procedures exist for tools at PAF.Tools can be ordered without management approval.Controls at the PAF for contractor tool rooms are inadequate to properly track and account for tools.Management agreed with our findings and recommendations and is taking or plans to take corrective action.

The objective of our review was to determine (1) vendor compliance with contract force majeure provisions and (2) the adequacy of coal contract terms and conditions related to force majeure events. In summary, we found: No documented instances in which (1) a vendor did not provide formal notification of a force majeure event and (2) the force majeure justification was not in accordance with the force majeure contract language.Standard contract language exists for the development of a contract force majeure clause; however, the force majeure clause is often modified either in initial contract negotiations or subsequent contract supplements. This variation could result in increased cost to TVA. Most of the force majeure events were not verified. In addition, we also found (1) no policies and/or procedures specifically governing how to manage force majeure events, (2) no central repository for documenting force majeure events declared and the impact resulting from these force majeure events, and (3) limited and/or inconsistent documentation pertaining to force majeure events and Fuel Supply actions. Management agreed with our findings and recommendations and is taking or plans to take corrective action.

As part of our annual audit plan, we reviewed the processes related to identifying and managing surplus materials to determine if surplus material was identified and managed in accordance with TVA policies and procedures. We identified areas of noncompliance and recommended corrective action to management. Management provided comments on our findings, including corrective action taken.

Our audit of costs billed to TVA by a contractor who provided engineering and technical support found that most of the contract employees had been transferred from staff augmentation contracts where they had been performing the same duties at a substantially lower cost to TVA. In total, we determined TVA's costs increased $689,000 when the staff augmentation contract employees were moved to the "managed task" contract, primarily due to a high overhead markup rate. By moving the contract employees to the "managed task" contract, it appeared TVA was attempting to avoid reporting this headcount as staff augmentation. Since it appeared doubtful TVA had received $689,000 worth of management oversight from the contractor, it is our opinion that TVA wasted $689,000 when it moved staff augmentation contract employees to the "managed task" contract. Summary Only

We audited $4.5 million of payments TVA made to a contractor from April 2004 through November 2006 for engineering and technical support. In summary, we found TVA was overbilled and/or had overpaid the contractor $30,645, including (1)$28,679 for payroll tax billings that exceeded the contractor's actual costs and (2)$1,966 due to miscellaneous billing and payment errors. The contractor and TVA management agreed with our findings. Summary Only

We audited $2.49 million of costs billed to TVA by a contractor from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2006, for the administration of TVA's vision benefit program. Our audit objective was to determine if the costs billed to TVA were in compliance with the contract terms and conditions. In summary, we found TVA was billed (1)an estimated $69,928 for miscalculated and unsupported claim costs, (2)$4,210 for duplicate claims, and (3)$22,255 for claims that exceeded the contract frequency limitations. Additionally, TVA was billed an estimated $56,748 in ineligible claim costs that occurred because eligibility information was not timely updated. Summary Only

We audited $3.9 million of costs billed by a TVA contractor who provided engineering, materials, and installation support for automating TVA's hydro system. We found TVA was billed $380,000 for costs and associated fees that were either excessive, unsupported, or not in accordance with the contract. The overbillings included excessive labor markups, unsupported labor costs, unallowable or unsupported travel costs, excessive facility rental costs, duplicate billings, overstated retroactive billing adjustments, and fees. Summary Only

We completed agreed-upon procedures to assist the Center for Resource Solutions (CRS) in determining TVA's compliance with the annual reporting requirements of CRS' Green Pricing Accreditation Program for the year ended December 31, 2006. The required information on TVA's renewable energy initiative, "Green Power Switch," was provided to CRS.

We evaluated the design, implementation, and effectiveness of TVA's Ethics and Compliance Program and found:TVA's current ethics program was limited to the Office of Government Ethics' standards and requirements. The Designated Agency Ethics Officer (DAEO), currently within the General Counsel's office, is responsible for making sure the appropriate employees are trained in these standards. Currently, about 20 percent of TVA employees are required to participate in annual ethics training. The audit team found that leading practice provides ethics training to all employees and addresses how ethical behavior affects and supports a company's overall mission. It has been shown that such training provides an ethical foundation for employees which, in turn, provides the basis for a company's compliance program.TVA's compliance program is comprised of "silos." Each business unit, such as TVA's nuclear and fossil power organizations, has experts in nuclear and environmental regulations who assist individual nuclear and fossil plants in complying with specific regulations. However, leading practice trends toward a more centralized corporate compliance management approach. This centralized approach provides for coordination of each business unit's compliance program and allows for better communication of issues across the organizations. Based on these findings, we recommended to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) that TVA establish a Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer (CECO) position and move the responsibility for TVA's Ethics Program from the General Counsels' office to the CECO, who would be responsible for directing the ethics program and coordinating compliance programs across TVA. We recommended the CECO report to TVA's CEO and Board of Directors. The CEO agreed with our recommendation to establish and fill the CECO position at TVA and indicated implementation details would be addressed after the appointment.

We determined: Personally identifiable information (PII) and other sensitive information were not properly secured thus exposing the information to anyone with a TVA network ID;Temporary shares were being used to store non-business related information;TVA does not have a policy or guidance for management of temporary shares to address the proper use of the share (i.e., types of information that can be stored and the unsecured nature of the share), responsibilities of the users, and maintenance (i.e., maximum time frame for retention of files on the share); TVA Standard Programs and Processes (SPP) 12.9, Computer Security and Privacy Incident Response, which includes procedures for notifying TVA employees and their dependents, contractors, and retirees and their dependents when PII has potentially been compromised, has yet to be implemented; and Two business practice drafts (1) TVA Information Security Policy, which describes classification and protection of information, and (2) Acceptable Use of Information Resources (Rules of Behavior), which explicitly prohibits storage of non-TVA information on TVA servers, have yet to be implemented. TVA management agreed with the findings and has taken or is taking corrective action.

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

EAC OIG audited $49.7 million in funds received by the Maryland State Board of Elections under the Help America Vote Act. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether Maryland 1) expended HAVA payments in accordance with the Act and related administrative requirements and 2) complied with the HAVA requirements for replacing punch card or lever voting machines, for establishing an election fund, for appropriating a 5 percent match for requirements payments, and for maintaining state expenditures for elections at a level not less than expended in fiscal year 2000. Specifically, we audited expenditures from May1, 2003 through December 31, 2005, and reviewed controls to assess their adequacy over the expenditure of HAVA funds. We also evaluated compliance with certain HAVA requirements for the following activities: accumulating financial information reported to EAC on the Financial Status Reports (standard forms number 269); accounting for property; purchasing goods and services; accounting for salaries; charging indirect costs; and spending by counties. We also determined whether Maryland had complied with the requirements in HAVA applicable to Section 251 requirements payments for: establishing and maintaining the election fund; sustaining the State's level of expenditures for elections; and appropriating funds equal to five percent of the amount necessary for carrying out activities financed with Section 251 requirements payments.

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

We audited $23.2 million of costs billed by a TVA contractor for providing construction and modification services for TVA's generating plant switchyards, substations, electrical transmission system, and power control communication facilities. We found the costs billed by the contractor were fairly stated except for a minor overbilling of craft labor costs that occurred as a result of a clerical error. Summary Only

The attached report presents the results of the subject review that was performed at my request by the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Office of Inspector General of Appalachian Regional Commission’s (ARC) Systems Security Program

The United States Capitol Police's (USCP) Office of Financial Management (OFM) prior to the establishment of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), solely to assist OFM with respect to the property inventory records of the USCP as of September 30, 2006. USCP management is responsible for the agency's property inventory records. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standard established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, and Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of the USCP OFM. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described in Schedule A, either for the purpose for which this report has been requested, or for any other purpose.

Full-time annual employees are eligible to participate in TVA's Tuition Reimbursement Program (TRP). The use of the program has grown significantly since fiscal year (FY) 2003. Payments to employees increased from about $339,000 in FY 2003 to over $985,000 in FY2006. The objective of our review was to assess compliance with TRP policies and procedures. In summary, we identified opportunities for improvement in TRP program controls. Specifically, we noted:Instances of non-compliance with Business Practice18, "Tuition Reimbursement," related to (1) required documentation for program approvals, (2) evidence of satisfactory completion, (3) approval for cost increases, (4) reimbursements for non-allowable expenses, and (5) the requirement to drop inactive participants.Opportunities to improve controls over the program including (1) requiring all participants to sign service agreements, (2) follow-up on satisfactory course completion when tuition reimbursement is approved prior to completion of coursework, (3) ensuring maximum reimbursements are not exceeded, and (4) clarifying acceptable coursework and active participation. Management generally agreed with our recommendations, and we concur with TVA management's planned actions.

EAC OIG through the independent public accounting firm of Clifton Gunderson LLP, audited $71.9 million in funds received by the Commonwealth of Virginia State Board of Elections under the Help America Vote Act. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether the Commonwealth of Virginia: 1) used payments authorized by Sections 101, 102 and 251 of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in accordance with HAVA and applicable requirements; 2) Accurately and properly accounted for property purchased with HAVA payments and for program income; 3) met HAVA requirements for Section 251 funds for an election fund, for a matching contribution, and for maintenance of a basic level of state outlays.

Gold Cards are issued to TVA Board members, officers, and other designated employees for travel, entertainment, hospitality, and incidental miscellaneous expenses and these charges are directly billed to TVA. Our review included Gold Card purchases made from October 1, 2004, to August 28, 2006. Of the 272 cardholders with charges during this period, 10 accounted for about 34 percent of all charges. In summary, we found:VISA Gold Executive Expense Cards (Gold Card) are generally being used in accordance with TVA policies and procedures.Policies addressing Gold Card use could be improved.Gold Card expenditures were for various purposes, including travel, meals, hospitality/gifts, economic development, and employee meetings. We noted instances where documented justifications (i.e., purpose, risk to TVA, and benefit to TVA) did not appear adequate to show the potential benefits warranted the expenditures. Management generally agreed with our findings and indicated that modifications would be made to policies and forms to strengthen controls governing Gold Card usage.

EAC OIG, through the independent public accounting firm of Clifton Gunderson LLP, audited $67 million in funds received by the State of Indiana Election Division under the Help America Vote Act. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether the State of Indiana: 1) Used payments authorized by Sections 101, 102, and 251 of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in accordance with HAVA and applicable requirements; 2) Accurately and properly accounted for property purchased with HAVA payments and for program income; 3) Met HAVA requirements for Section 251 funds for an election fund, for a matching contribution, and for maintenance of a base level of state outlays.

EAC OIG audited $137.8 million in funds received by the Ohio Secretary of State under the Help America Vote Act. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether the Office (1) expended HAVA payments in accordance with the Act and related administrative requirements and (2) complied with the HAVA requirements for replacing punch card or lever voting machines, for establishing an election fund, for obtaining a 5 percent match of the funds for activities financed with Section 251 requirements payments from the State, and for maintaining State expenditures for elections at a level not less than expended in fiscal year 2000.

We audited $37.4 million of costs billed by a TVA contractor for providing specialty fire protection systems and determined the contractor had billed TVA an estimated $408,100 of excessive or unsupported costs. Specifically, the contractor billed TVA (1)an estimated $257,400 of extra labor costs because it paid certain local craft employees wage and benefit rates that exceeded rates included in TVA's labor agreements, (2)$87,700 of labor adjustments that were either not in accordance with the contract or were duplicates of adjustments that had already been made, and (3)$63,000 of miscellaneous overpaid and unsupported labor and travel costs. We recommended TVA (1)revise its contract to include specific criteria for paying wage and benefit rates that exceed rates included in TVA's labor agreements, (2)determine if any of the previously billed costs should be recovered, and (3)recover or avoid paying the remaining overbilled costs. Summary Only

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

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