More Resources

Inspection of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Professional Research or Teaching Leave

On October 19, 1998, you asked that the Office of Inspector General (OIG) undertake a review of the Department of Energy’s aircraft activities. You also requested that I report back to you within 90 days. We have gathered information concerning the number of aircraft, the level of utilization, and the cost of the Department’s aircraft operations. We have also briefly summarized four issues that, in our judgment, may require management attention. Prior to your request, the OIG had initiated a separate audit of aircraft and air service management programs at the Albuquerque Operations Office, which accounts for the largest percentage of the Department’s total expenditures on aircraft activities. Based on this audit, we concluded that Albuquerque could reduce the overall cost of its aircraft activities. We also found that the Operations Office could discontinue air service between Albuquerque and Amarillo, Texas, if it relied on currently available commercial air services. We issued the draft report to the Albuquerque Operations Office on December 4, 1998. Although taking exception to some of the tentative audit conclusions, Albuquerque agreed to take aggressive actions to reduce the cost of aviation services and to cancel the shuttle service between Albuquerque and Amarillo. Discussions are proceeding to resolve any substantive differences between this office and Albuquerque.

Audit follow-up is an integral part of good management. According to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-50, corrective action taken by Departmental officials on audit findings and recommendations is essential to improving the effectiveness and efficiency of Government operations. Over the past several years, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) has issued reports addressing a variety of Departmental challenges. Management is responsible for taking prompt and effective corrective action on those issues where Departmental concurrence has been obtained. The objective of this audit was to determine if the Department has made progress in correcting weaknesses previously disclosed through audit.h

The U.S. Department of Energy's Audit Follow-up Process

EPA discusses its responsibilities pursuant to Section 309 of the Clean Air Act to review EISs

Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain (July 1999)

The Clean Air Act, a law to prevent pollution of a single environmental medium, contains an unusual provision. That provision is Section 309, which authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review certain proposed actions of other federal agencies in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and to make those reviews public. If the proposing agency (the "lead" agency) does not make sufficient revisions and the project remains environmentally unsatisfactory. EPA may refer the matter to the President's Council on Environmental Quality for mediation