http://www.oig.dot.gov/rss.jsp?agency=11 The 10 most recent releases on the U.S. DoT OIG web site ... PHMSA en-US webmaster@oig.dot.gov (OIG Webmaster) http://www.oig.dot.gov/images/dot.gif http://www.oig.dot.gov/rss.jsp?agency=11 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2534 On September 10, 2009, the Inspector General testified before the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure regarding the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administrations (PHMSA) Special Permits and Approvals Program. The Inspector General highlighted concerns with how PHMSA authorizes transport of hazardous materials under these regulatory exemptions across three areas:(1) PHMSA grants special permits and approvals without assessing applicants prior incidents and enforcement violations or coordinating with other affected Operating Administrations. (2) PHMSAs riskbased oversight criteria do not target holders of special permits and approvals for compliance reviews.(3) PHMSA has not addressed longstanding safety issues raised by the OIG, FAA, and the NTSB. The Inspector General stated that these issues call into question the effectiveness of PHMSAs process for granting special permits and approvals. PHMSA recently developed an action plan to address these and other issues in response to the OIGs July 2009 management advisory and Departmental direction. Thu, 10 Sep 2009 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2534 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2322 The Office of Inspector General plans to audit the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) Special Permits and Approvals Program. It is important that PHMSA work with other Operating Administrations in overseeing special authorizations to ensure hazardous materials are safely packaged and transported. Our audit objectives are to assess the effectiveness of PHMSAs policies and processes for reviewing and coordinating with the affected Operating Administration before authorizing a special permit, an approval, or a special authorization for limited quantity or consumer commodity exceptions. We will also assess PHMSAs and other Operating Administrations oversight and enforcement of approved parties compliance with the terms and conditions of special permits, approvals, and limited quantity or consumer commodity exceptions. Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2322 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2318 On June 25, 2008, the Inspector General testified before the House Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials on actions taken by and needed from the Departments of Transportation (DOT) and Homeland Security (DHS) to enhance pipeline security. Within DOT, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration (PHMSA) oversees pipeline safety, while the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) within DHS oversees securityrelated matters. In 2006, PHMSA and TSA signed a pipeline security annex to establish clear lines of authority and responsibility over pipeline security matters. The annex is part of a Memorandum of Understanding that DOT and DHS signed in 2004 to facilitate transportation security measures. The Inspector General noted that PHMSA and TSA have made considerable progress toward fulfilling the annex provisions but stated that further actions are needed as the current situation is far from an “end state” for enhancing the security of the Nations pipeline system. As required by the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006, the Office of Inspector General recently reviewed PHMSAs and TSAs steps toward implementing the annex. The Inspector Generals testimony focused on actions recommended as a result of that review. Specifically, the Inspector General stated that PHMSA, in collaboration with TSA, must (1) finalize the action plan for implementing the annex provisions and program elements and effectively execute the action plan, (2) amend the annex to clearly delineate the roles and responsibilities of PHMSA and TSA in overseeing and enforcing security regulations for liquid natural gas operators, and (3) maximize resources for assessing pipeline operators security plans and guidance to ensure effective and timely execution of congressional mandates in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007. Wed, 25 Jun 2008 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2318 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2304 As required by the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006, we assessed Department of Transportation (DOT) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) actions taken to implement a pipeline security annex. The annex is part of a Memorandum of Understanding, which DOT and DHS signed in 2004 to facilitate transportation security measures. Within DOT, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration (PHMSA) has responsibility for pipeline security and safety. Within DHS, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is responsible for pipeline security. In 2006, PHMSA and TSA signed the annex to establish clear lines of authority and responsibility over pipeline security matters. We found that the PHMSA and TSA have taken initial steps toward formulating an action plan to implement the provisions of the annex; however, further actions are needed as the current situation is far from an “end state” for enhancing the security of the Nations pipeline system.We recommended that PHMSA collaborate with TSA to complete the following actions: (1) finalize the action plan for implementing the annex provisions and program elements and effectively execute the action plan, (2) amend the annex to clearly delineate the roles and responsibilities of PHMSA and TSA in overseeing and enforcing security regulations for liquid natural gas operators, and (3) maximize the strategy used to assess pipeline operators security plans and guidance to ensure effective and timely execution of congressional mandates in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007. Wed, 21 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2304 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2121 On September 7, we issued our review of congressional earmarks within Department of Transportation programs. In August 2006, Senator Coburn requested that we conduct an independent analysis of congressional earmarks. Consistent with Senator Coburns request, we determined (1) the total number and amount of earmarks within DOT for FY 2006, (2) the inclusion of earmarks in DOTs annual planning and project evaluation processes, and (3) the effects of earmarks on DOTs mission and goals.Overall, we identified 8,056 earmarked projects within the Departments programs that received more than $8.54 billion for FY 2006. Our review of 7,760 earmarked projects valued at $8.05 billion within Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and Federal Aviation Administrationwhich accounted for 99 percent of these earmarked projectsdisclosed that 7,724 of the 7,760 projects either were not subject to the agencies review and selection processes or bypassed the states normal planning and programming processes. There were earmarked projects we reviewed that were evaluated as "highest" priority projects and would have been fully funded regardless of being earmarked. However, many earmarked projects considered by the agencies as low priority are being funded over higher priority, nonearmarked projects; and other earmarks are providing funds for projects that would otherwise be ineligible. We are not making any recommendations in this report as the nature of this review was to conduct and independent analysis of the amount and impact of congressional earmarks for the most recent fiscal year. Fri, 07 Sep 2007 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2121 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2114 On August 29, 2007, we issued our report on incurredcost audits of DOT procurement contracts. The report discusses the Departments initiative to use a new structured approach for obtaining incurredcost audits of procurement contracts. However, we found that Operating Administrations had made little progress in obtaining these audits. Additionally, we found that although the Department has recovered over $4 for every audit dollar spent on these audits, contracting officers have not taken consistent actions in a timely manner to recover overpayments made to contractors. We reported that the Department has the potential to recover between $8 million and $10.3 million more in these overcharges. We recommended that the Department require Operating Administrations to review their fiscal year 2007 audit plans and document revisions, and ensure that audits are obtained and audit reports are resolved in accordance with departmental guidance. The Department generally agreed with our recommendations and also agreed that our estimated savings was reasonable for tracking purposes. Wed, 29 Aug 2007 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2114 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2075 On June 18, a Federal jury in Pocatello, Idaho, convicted Krister Sven Evertson, Wasilla, Alaska, of charges of illegally transporting, storing, and disposing of sodium metal, a hazardous material used to manufacture sodium borohydride, an industrial chemical used to manufacture pharmaceuticals. OIG investigated this case with the EPAs Criminal Investigations Division. Mon, 18 Jun 2007 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2075 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2063 As required by the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006, the Office of Inspector General will review actions PHMSA has taken to implement the security annex to the MOU signed by PHMSA and TSA on August 9, 2006 to establish clear lines of authority and responsibility over pipeline security matters. As required by the act, the review will: (1) provide the implementation status of the program elements outlined in the annex; (2) determine the role, responsibility, and authority of PHMSA regarding pipeline security; (3) assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the process by which PHMSA communicates and coordinates with TSA on matters relating to pipeline security; and (4) address the adequacy of security standards for gas and oil pipelines. Tue, 12 Jun 2007 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2063 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=1950 On December 7, Ahed Alghazouli was sentenced to 30 months in prison, 3 years supervised release, and was ordered to pay a $6,000 fine in U.S. District Court in San Diego, California on a charge of conspiracy to launder money in connection with the sale of illegally imported R12 Freon refrigerant. R12 Freon is used primarily in automobile air conditioning units and is considered by EPA to be a hazardous material because of its ozonedepleting properties. From June 1997 to October 2004, Alghazouli and his brother, Amar Alghazouli, operated United Auto Supply in San Diego, where they sold automotive supplies, including R12 Freon smuggled into the United States from Mexico. Amar Ahed was convicted in March 2006 of similar charges and was sentenced in July to serve 41 months in prison, pay a $7,500 fine, and forfeit property valued at $135,000 in Chandler, Arizona. This case was investigated with the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the EPAs Criminal Investigations Division and the FBI. Thu, 07 Dec 2006 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=1950 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=1890 On September 18, we issued our final report on Integrity Threats to Hazardous Liquid Pipelines. We found that hazardous liquid pipeline operators had repaired all 409 threats we examined, with about 98 percent of the repairs completed within established timeframes. While progress is being made in identifying, repairing, and overseeing integrity threats, several challenges still remain. These include the need to improve the accuracy of operator annual reports submitted to the Office of Pipeline Safety and to ensure the effective use of pipeline inspection technology or smart pigs. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration agreed with both of our recommendations and believes it has already met the intent of these recommendations. Mon, 18 Sep 2006 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=1890