Summary
Summary
|
Report Number: |
|
|
Report Title: |
Department of Environmental Protection - Petroleum Preapproval Program Expenditures and Site Management Processes - Operational Audit |
|
Report Period: |
07/2003-02/2005 and Selected Actions through 06/2005 |
|
Release Date: |
11/16/2005 |
This audit of the Department of Environmental Protection (Department) focused on Petroleum Preapproval Program (Program) expenditures and site management processes during the period July 2003 through February 2005, and selected actions taken through June 2005. As summarized below, improvements are needed in cleanup site file documentation, site management, payment processing, environmental laboratory certifications, and financial reporting.
Finding No. 1: Key Program documents were not always included in scanned cleanup site files used for site management by the Department and other interested parties.
Finding No. 2: For one cleanup site with costs in excess of $5 million, documentation was not available explaining the Department’s decision to use State resources to fully fund the cleanup and not seek any cost recovery from the responsible party.
Finding No. 3: Required annual Site Manager visits were not always performed or documented. As a result, the Department cannot be assured that Site Managers have taken advantage of the benefits to be derived from such visits and complied with Department procedures and guidance.
Finding No. 4: Training records were not always available or complete and did not, in some instances, demonstrate that Site Managers received required health and safety training.
Finding No. 5: Program work orders, change orders, and invoices were not always processed in compliance with Department procedures and guidance.
Finding No. 6: One cleanup site file did not contain documentation evidencing Department reasons for paying $11,000 for services provided by a subcontractor when the subcontractor did not achieve the goals established in the approved cost proposal.
Finding No. 7: Some cleanup site contractors utilized environmental laboratories that were not certified by the State at the time of certain measurements, which could result in reliance on inaccurate test results.
Finding No. 8: The Department’s method for recording retainage withheld on work performed by cleanup site contractors resulted in overstatements of Program expenditures and liabilities and an understatement of encumbrances recorded in the State’s accounting system. As of May 2005, each of the three accounts were misstated by $6.4 million.
The Secretary's response is included in its entirety at the end of this report as Appendix D.