Investigative Reports

Summary of FindingsWe found that the EPA lacked robust oversight mechanisms—such as compliance monitoring of EPA-approved labs, of third-party certifiers, and of wood heater manufacturers—to ensure that the Wood Heater Program facilitates compliance with the Clean Air Act. As a result, wood heaters that do not meet Clean Air Act standards may end up in the marketplace, increasing risks to public health and the environment. We also identified concerns regarding impartiality, conflicts of interest, and enforcement of program violations, especially in cases where the EPA is allowing known noncompliance to go unaddressed.

An Amtrak lead service attendant based in Miami, Florida, entered into a forbearance and workout agreement on May 22, 2024, with the Small Business Administration (SBA) and agreed to a payment schedule to satisfy his settlement and restitution amounts. The employee agreed to pay a total of $124,631 including fines, fees, and interest. The employee applied for and received an SBA‐backed Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) for economic losses resulting from the pandemic related to self‐employment or businesses he allegedly owned. Our investigation found that the employee submitted an application to the SBA that included false statements and information to qualify for the EIDL loan. As a result, the employee received an EIDL loan in the amount of $120,000 to which he was not entitled.

An Amtrak train attendant based in Miami, Florida, signed a civil settlement agreement on May 13, 2024, with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Florida. The employee was ordered to pay $10,000 in restitution and a $5,000 penalty. Our investigation found that the employee submitted a false claim for an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) Advance of $10,000. We interviewed the employee and he admitted to receiving the EIDL Advance for a non-existent catering business. As a result, the employee received an EIDL loan advance in the amount of $10,000 to which he was not entitled.

Ricarda Burrell, a former Customer Service Representative, pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, to one count of mail fraud and one count of theft of public money involving CARES Act Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) fraud. Burrell received the PUA while she was employed at Amtrak. The total fraud amount was $9,739. Sentencing has been scheduled for September 3, 2024.

In September 2023, VA announced it had erroneously awarded millions of dollars in critical skill incentive (CSI) payments to senior executives at its central office. VA cancelled the payments, notified Congress, and requested the Office of Inspector General (OIG) review the matter.CSIs are a new recruitment and retention tool authorized by the PACT Act, which significantly expanded access to VA health care and benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances. CSIs are meant for an employee who “possesses a high-demand skill or skill that is at a shortage,” to help VA meet a projected increase in staffing requirements. In total, VA awarded $10.8 million in CSIs to 182 senior executives (ranging from nearly $39,000 to over $100,000 each) in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) at VA’s central office.The OIG found the award of CSIs to nearly all VHA and VBA central office executives lacked adequate justification and was inconsistent with the PACT Act and VA policy. This was due, in part, to breakdowns in leadership and controls at multiple levels of VA, including• insufficient transparency from VHA regarding the scope and costs of its CSI plans for VACO senior executives; • excessive deference by VA’s Human Resources and Administration/Operations, Security, and Preparedness leaders to under secretaries and other senior leaders, despite concerns that they or their staff had about the incentives;• missed opportunities by the Office of General Counsel to detect legal issues with the CSIs before payment; and• failure to leverage VA’s existing governance processes to ensure proper risk management of the new CSI authority.VA concurred with the OIG’s two findings and eight recommendations and provided acceptable action plans and completion timelines. The OIG will monitor VA’s progress until sufficient documentation has been received to close the recommendations as implemented.

An Amtrak Foreman based in Providence, Rhode Island, was terminated on May 7, 2024, after an administrative hearing for repeatedly going to his residence during his shift without permission to do so and without taking the appropriate leave. Instead, the foreman did so without swiping out on a time keeping machine, which resulted in his receipt of over $2,300 in pay for hours he did not work. The former employee is ineligible for rehire.

This document provides an update to our plan for oversight of the EPA’s implementation of the IIJA.We have divided this Year 3 oversight plan into three time-based sections that describe planned and ongoing IIJA-related audit and evaluation projects for FY 2024 and beyond. The first section includes planned and ongoing projects for Year 3 of our IIJA oversight, the second section details planned projects for Years 4–5, and a third section summarizes our planned approaches for oversight work expected in Year 6 and beyond. Each of the planned and ongoing projects summarized in this plan relates to the EPA’s IIJA implementation work; however, some projects identified in this oversight plan will receive partial support from annual appropriations.

Endo Health Solutions Inc. (EHSI) was ordered May 2, 2024, to pay $1.086 billion in criminal fines and an additional $450 million in criminal forfeiture—the second-largest set of criminal financial penalties ever levied against a pharmaceutical company—for violations of the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), according to the U.S. Department of Justice.EHSI pleaded guilty April 18, 2024, to one misdemeanor count of introducing misbranded drugs into interstate commerce. In its plea, EHSI admitted that from April 2012 through May 2013, some of its sales representatives marketed Opana ER with INTAC (Opana ER) to prescribers by touting the drug’s purported abuse deterrence, tamper resistance, and/or crush resistance despite a lack of clinical data supporting those claims. In addition, approved labeling for Opana ER did not provide adequate information for healthcare providers to safely prescribe Opana ER for use as an opioid that is abuse deterrent. According to the plea agreement, EHSI was responsible for the misbranding of Opana ER by marketing the drug with a label that failed to include adequate directions for its claimed abuse deterrence, in violation of the FDCA. EHSI withdrew Opana ER from the market in 2017. The investigation, supported by our office, found that some Amtrak employees and dependents were prescribed the misbranded drug.