http://www.oig.dot.gov/rss.jsp?subject=21 The 10 most recent releases on the U.S. DoT OIG web site related to Highways en-US webmaster@oig.dot.gov (OIG Webmaster) http://www.oig.dot.gov/images/dot.gif http://www.oig.dot.gov/rss.jsp?subject=21 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2578 At the request of U.S. Senator Christopher S. Bond, we will review the performance of the Department of Transportation (Department) and the Denali Commission in using Federalaid highway funds to improve Alaskas surface and maritime transportation infrastructure. Our objectives are to (1) assess the Denali Commissions use of Federalaid highway funds and (2) evaluate the Departments oversight of the Denali Commission and state transportation agencies. Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2578 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2563 The Office of Inspector General will conduct an audit to evaluate the effectiveness of the Federal Highway Administrations National Review Team in conducting national oversight of highway funds and mitigating risks posed by the implementation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2563 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2559 The Office of Inspector General is initiating an audit of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and State DOT oversight of projects administered by Local Public Agencies (LPAs). We will review projects using both American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) and nonARRA Federalaid highway funds. The audit objective is to assess the effectiveness of FHWAs process to improve State oversight of LPA projects. Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2559 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2527 The Office of Inspector General plans to audit the National Highway Traffic Safety Administrations (NHTSA) Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program (CARS). In August 2009, legislation added $2 billion to the original $1 billion program. The legislation requires us to review NHTSAs administration of CARS. Further, at the request of Senator Charles Grassley, we will focus on NHTSAs implementation of the program. The objective of this audit is to assess whether NHTSAs oversight and management controls ensure that CARS transactions (1) meet Federal requirements; (2) use data that are accurate and reliable; and (3) are protected against fraud, waste, and abuse. Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2527 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2496 On June 24, we issued a results of our review related to the solvency of the Highway Trust Fund, conducted at the request of Senator Judd Gregg, Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee. As requested, our objectives were to evaluate: (1) the basis for the Departments projection of the magnitude and timing of a Highway Account cash shortfall; (2) how that projection would vary under different assumptions; and (3) the triggers the Department uses to decide that the risk of insolvency for the Highway Account requires action by the Administration and Congress.We found that the Department used a reasonable methodology to project the magnitude and timing of a cash shortfall. However, some of its assumptions were outdated, as the Department did not use actual yeartodate data to adjust total revenue or outlay estimates. This could yield a margin of error in those projections of up to $1 billion in magnitude and 2 weeks in timing. We also found that the Departments cash balance forecasts vary largely due to factors outside the Departments control. While the accuracy of the Departments projections could be incrementally improved, the range of defensible values for the factors influencing those projections makes it difficult to estimate precisely either the magnitude or timing of the cash shortfall. Finally, we found that the Department relies on cash balance forecasts to trigger formal notification to Congress and the States of a potential insolvency in the Highway Account. While the Department greatly increased the amount of data publicly available regarding the balance of the Highway Account, until recently it has lacked a consistent and easily understood message regarding the timing and magnitude of a cash shortfall. Wed, 24 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2496 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2440 On March 11, 2009, we issued our report on RITAs Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Joint Program Office (JPO). We assessed whether the JPO is effectively managing and overseeing the ITS program by (a) tracking project results and outcomes, (b) managing the ITS budget and overseeing contracts, and (c) providing direction and crossmodal coordination. While ITS initiatives have achieved DOTwide support, we found weaknesses in how the JPO measures project results, executes budget and contract procedures, and manages ITS research projects. Specifically, the JPO has not ensured that its contractors assessments of ITS projects have been useful, timely, or complete. In addition, contractors were producing costly, duplicative work. We also found the JPO was operating without documented budget procedures. As a result, ITS financial reports were not consistently reconciled in 2008, and nearly $20 million in unneeded funds was left on old contracts and agreements. Furthermore, we found the JPO lacked uniform project management standards and project benefitcost analyses; such procedures might have mitigated cost overruns and delays experienced by several ITS initiatives. Finally, we found that the JPO needs to address conflicts of interest, such as allowing the Volpe Center to both oversee and administer the Safe Trip21 project.Our recommendations to JPO focus on: (1) strengthening the ITS assessment program, (2) restructuring support contractor services, (3) documenting budget procedures, (4) coordinating with FHWA to deobligate nearly $20 million in unneeded funds on old contracts and agreements, and (5) strengthening project management by requiring uniform procedures and benefitcost analyses. We also recommend that RITA transfer oversight of the Safe Trip21 project from Volpe to the JPO to avoid conflicts of interest and to comply with DOT Order 2300.8. Wed, 11 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2440 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2359 On September 26, 2008 we issued our report on the results of our review of the Federal Transit Administrations (FTA) Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects involving a Federal funding commitment of $4.55 billion. Our objectives were to assess (1) the status of each project, including costs, funding, schedules, and grantees oversight and (2) any risks that may adversely impact completion of each project. We also evaluated FTAs oversight and the activities of the project management oversight contractors FTA has assigned to each project.FTA and its project grantees face key challenges, including mitigating risks posed by estimated cost increases and schedule delays, ensuring grantees provide timely status information and address project management issues that FTA has identified, assessing ways to improve the use of FTAs oversight tools, and identifying reliable funding sources to cover estimated cost overruns above the Federal cap of $4.55 billion. Due to significant estimated cost increases and schedule completion delays, tough choices lie ahead. Project grantees will likely have to provide their own funding to complete the projects as designed, or propose to significantly reduce the scope of one or more of the projects, potentially diminishing the benefits that the projects will provide to travelers in New York City.We recommended that FTA continue the strong oversight efforts already underway and take the following actions to enhance its oversight: (1) work with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (Port Authority) to expeditiously finalize a single set of realistic, mutually agreedto cost and schedule estimates that reflect all potential risks; (2) finalize action plans with the Port Authority to address project management issues that FTA has identified and carefully track the Port Authoritys progress in carrying out these plans; (3) assess what additional actions could be taken to ensure that grantees address the agreedupon risks identified through FTAs risk management process and that FTAs recovery plans are used to mitigate those risks; (4) request that MTA and the Port Authority submit financial plans that identify sources of local funding to cover likely estimated cost overruns; and (5) ensure that the Lower Manhattan Recovery Office and its project management oversight contractor assigned to the Route 9A North highway project meet with the Federal Highway Administration on a periodic basis to encourage better coordination between all parties. FTA commented that it generally concurred with our recommendations. Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2359 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2275 On March 31, 2008, we issued our report regarding the Central Artery/Tunnel Project May 2007 Finance Plan Update (Plan) submitted by the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (MTA). The purpose of this Plan is to provide senior program and oversight officials with information to track the Projects estimated cost and the financing and cash flows needed to meet Project obligations. Our objective in reviewing the 2007 Plan was to determine whether it complied with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Guidance. The latest Plan forecast a total Project cost of $14.798 billion. As of January 2008, $128 million in Federal funds remained unobligated. Our audit found that the MTAs Plan generally complied with the FHWA Guidance except that it should be adjusted to correct understated insurance costs and reduce the amount of Federal funds available for obligation. Consequentially, the MTA will need to identify $37.7 million in nonFederal resources to complete the Project. In addition, the Plans omission of some of the necessary disclosures and assessments must be corrected to achieve full compliance with FHWA Guidance. Mon, 31 Mar 2008 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2275 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2235 The Office of Inspector General plans to audit the Intelligent Transportation Systems/Joint Program Office (ITS/JPO). Our audit objective is to assess whether the JPO is effectively overseeing the ITS program through its efforts to: (1) provide strategic direction and crossmodal program coordination; (2) manage the ITS research budget; and (3) monitor program status, results, and outcomes. Thu, 07 Feb 2008 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2235 http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2220 The Office of Inspector General is undertaking an audit of the Transportation Technology Innovation and Demonstration Program (TTID). The objectives of this audit are to assess: (1) whether the TTID has met the statutory goals of building a traffic measurement infrastructure, providing commercial revenue generation initiatives, and aggregating and reporting surveillance data; and (2) whether the Federal Highway Administration has met the competitive procurement requirements of Part II of the program, which were intended to expand the number of firms providing surveillance services. Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:00:00 GMT http://www.oig.dot.gov/item.jsp?id=2220