Office                of Inspector Inspector General General
 

Semiannual Report 


to the Congress 


Covering the Period 

April 1, 2010—September 30, 2010
 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION 

 

 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION 

Washington, DC 20573 

October 29, 2010 

Office of Inspector General 

Dear Commissioners: 

The attached report is submitted in accordance with Section 5 of the Inspector General 

Act of 1978, as amended. It summarizes the activities of the Office of Inspector General (OIG) 

for the period April 1, 2010, to September 30, 2010. The Act requires that you transmit the 

report to the appropriate Congressional committees within 30 days of receipt. Your transmittal 

should also include any comments you consider appropriate and other statistical tables and 

reports required by law. 

During this period we issued three audits/evaluations of Federal Maritime Commission 

(FMC) programs or activities, and began three program evaluations and one audit. Also during 

this period, the OIG received 35 complaints: we responded to five complaints and forwarded 21 

complaints to the appropriate FMC program area for disposition. Nine complaints were 

forwarded to other agency OIGs or programs with jurisdiction over the subject matter of the 

complaint. The OIG opened no new investigations and referred no matters to prosecutorial 

authorities during this period. 

In addition to these audit and investigative activities and outcomes, the OIG responded to 

two congressional requests for information pertaining to OIG operations. We issued a fraud alert 

on the office’s webpage after a preliminary investigation revealed that scam artists were using 

indicia of an official nature, such as FMC letterhead, to perpetrate a scam. We also assisted 

another federal OIG to hire an attorney, responded to a request for comments to the Office of 

Special Counsel pertaining to Whistleblower retaliation, worked with agency program staff to 

review internal controls over office procedures for processing license fee checks and commented 

on Commission Orders on Privacy Act implementation. 

Although management and the OIG have reached agreement on implementation plans for 

all open recommendations, we are concerned that two recommendations remain unimplemented 

for 54 and 47 months. Management should do more to close these recommendations. I appreciate 

management’s support and I look forward to working with you in our ongoing efforts to promote 

economy and efficiency in agency programs. 

Respectfully submitted, 

/Adam R. Trzeciak/ 

Inspector General 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Transmittal Letter
 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1
 

BACKGROUND 

TABLE II – Inspector General Issued Reports with Recommendations that Funds be Put to 

............................................................................................................................ 1
 

AUDITS/EVALUATIONS............................................................................................................. 3
 

Summary of Audits and Reviews Issued During the Current Period ......................................... 3
 

Audits or Evaluations with Fieldwork Ongoing ......................................................................... 6
 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................... 7
 

OTHER OIG ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................................ 8
 

SUMMARY OF INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS .......................... 13
 

TABLE I – Inspector General Issued Reports with Questioned Costs ..................................... 14
 

Better Use.................................................................................................................................. 15
 
 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This Semiannual Report to the Congress summarizes the activities and accomplishments 

of the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC or Commission), Office of Inspector General (OIG 

or Office), for the period April 1, 2010 through September 30, 2010. During this period we 

issued three audits/evaluations of FMC programs or activities, and began three program 

evaluations and one audit. 

Also during this reporting period, the OIG received 35 complaints: we responded to five 

complaints and forwarded 21 complaints to the appropriate FMC program area for disposition. 

Nine complaints were forwarded to other agency OIGs or programs with jurisdiction over the 

subject matter of the complaint. The OIG opened no new investigations and referred no matters 

to prosecutorial authorities during this period. 

In addition to these audit and investigative activities and outcomes, the OIG responded to 

two congressional requests for information pertaining to OIG operations, issued a fraud alert on 

the office’s webpage after a preliminary investigation revealed that scam artists were using 

down-loaded FMC letterhead to perpetrate a scam; assisted another federal OIG to hire an 

attorney, responded to a request for comments to the Office of Special Counsel pertaining to 

Whistleblower retaliation, worked with agency program staff to review internal controls over 

office procedures for processing license fee checks, and commented on a Commission Order on 

Privacy Act implementation. 

BACKGROUND 

The FMC is an independent agency responsible for the regulation of ocean-borne 

transportation in the foreign commerce of the United States. The principal statutes or statutory 

provisions administered by the Commission are the Shipping Act of 1984, as amended by the 

Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998; the Foreign Shipping Practices Act of 1988; and Section 

19 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920. 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 1 
 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

The FMC is headed by five Commissioners nominated by the President and confirmed by 

the Senate, each serving five-year terms. For Fiscal Year (FY) 2010, the Commission was 

appropriated $24.1 million to fund 129 full-time equivalent positions. 

Although the majority of the Commission’s personnel are located in Washington, D.C., it 

also maintains a presence in Los Angeles, Seattle, New York, New Orleans, Houston and South 

Florida, through area representatives who serve the major ports and transportation centers within 

their respective geographic areas. In addition, one at-large area representative operates from 

Washington, D.C. 

The FMC/OIG was established in 1989 as required by the Inspector General Act of 1978, 

as amended (5 U.S.C. app.). The OIG is an independent audit and investigative unit headed by 

an Inspector General (IG) who reports directly to the Commissioners of the FMC. To aid the 

FMC in accomplishing its mission, the OIG was provided three full-time staff and a budget of 

$762,270 for FY 2010. 

The OIG is responsible for conducting audits and investigations relating to the programs 

and operations of the FMC. Audits are conducted for the purpose of finding and preventing 

fraud, waste and abuse, and promoting economy, efficiency and effectiveness within the agency. 

OIG investigations seek out facts related to allegations of wrongdoing on the part of FMC 

employees and individuals, or entities having contracts with, or obtaining benefits from, the 

agency. The Inspector General Act provides that the OIG shall have access to all agency records 

and may subpoena records from entities outside of the agency in connection with an audit or 

investigation. 

The IG is required by law to prepare a report summarizing OIG audits and investigations 

during the immediately preceding six-month period. The report is sent to the FMC Chairman 

and Commissioners, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House and FMC’s 

appropriating and authorizing committees. This dual reporting requirement facilitates and helps 

to ensure the independence of the Office. 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 2 
 

 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

AUDITS/EVALUATIONS 

During this semiannual period, the OIG issued three program evaluations pertaining to (i) 

best practices for time and attendance (T&A) implementation, (ii) the accuracy of calculations 

used by the agency to establish user fees for various services and (iii) user satisfaction with the 

agency’s Helpdesk services. We also began the annual financial statement audit, the annual 

evaluation of information security, a review of Privacy Act implementation and a program 

evaluation of the Office of Consumer Affairs and Dispute Resolution Services. 

Issued Audits and Reviews 

Audit Report Number Subject of Audit 

OR10-02 Best Practices for Time and Attendance 

Implementation 

OR10-03 Review of FMC’s User Fee Calculations 

OR10-04 User Satisfaction Survey of the Office of 

Information Technology Helpdesk 

Summary of Audits and Reviews Issued During the Current Period 

In OR10-02, Best Practices for Time and Attendance Implementation, the objective 

was to consolidate best practices observed in six FMC bureaus / offices. During previous audits, 

we noted similarities and differences among the bureaus / offices. Some T&A practices seemed 

to us to work better (i.e., stronger controls, higher compliance rates) than others. Based on these 

audits, we identified “best practices” to help the agency to comply with T&A requirements and 

to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of agency payroll practices. 

While we found both similarities and differences among the practices used in FMC 

bureaus and offices to administer payroll, the most noticeable, and arguably the most inefficient 

process, was the lack of uniform processes to monitor employee time and attendance among the 

bureaus / offices. With that in mind, the OIG developed a list of 12 best practices to assist the 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 3 
 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

agency to standardize its T&A practices. FMC managers provided the OIG with an action plan 

to address the vulnerabilities we identified in each of the bureaus and offices audited. 

In OR10-03, Review of FMC’s User Fee Calculations, the OIG analyzed the 

methodology used by the agency to set user fees for activities that convey special benefits to 

recipients beyond those accruing to the general public. Guidance for establishing such fees is 

contained in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-25, User Charges. The 

Circular requires user charges to be sufficient to recover the government’s full cost. Full cost 

includes all direct and indirect costs to any part of the federal government of providing a good or 

service. These costs include, but are not limited to, an appropriate share of: (i) direct and indirect 

personnel costs, including salaries and fringe benefits, such as medical insurance and retirement; 

and (ii) physical overhead, consulting and other indirect costs including material and supply 

costs, utilities, insurance, travel and rents or imputed rents on land, buildings or equipment. 

The OIG determined that the agency followed a process that incorrectly calculated its 

user fees for various mission-related services, resulting in user fees that understated the agency’s 

costs to provide these services. The OIG recommended that the agency either (i) establish user 

charges that reflect the full cost of the activity provided, as directed in Generally Accepted 

Accounting Principles and Cost Accounting Standards, or (ii) with the approval of the OMB, set 

fees below the full cost if the agency determines that recouping full costs would be a financial 

burden on the industry or the public. 

In its response to the audit, management agreed to re-evaluate existing user fees and 

initiate a process to determine the full cost of services for which the agency assesses user fees, in 

accordance with the OMB requirements and applicable federal financial accounting standards. 

Once those costs are determined, management will prepare a proposed rule for Commission 

approval, with the goal of issuing a final rule by December 31, 2010. 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 4 
 

 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

In OR10-04, User Satisfaction Survey of the Office of Information Technology 

Helpdesk, the objectives were to determine whether (i) controls are in place to ensure that all 

assistance requests made by customers (e.g., agency staff) are documented, assigned and 

corrected in a timely manner; (ii) customers are notified of progress made to address their 

requests; and (iii) customer requests are timely cleared. To address the objectives, the OIG sent 

a data collection instrument to agency staff, interviewed Office of Information Technology (OIT) 

personnel and reviewed service call tracking summary reports. 

The Helpdesk received favorable marks from staff responding to the OIG questionnaire. 

Almost 70 percent (37 of 53 respondents) said that they were extremely satisfied or very satisfied 

with the “overall experience.” Eighty-one (81) percent indicated that their last service request 

was resolved to their satisfaction. Respondents also provided helpful suggestions to enhance 

Helpdesk performance. The most frequent suggestions centered on the need for follow up by 

Helpdesk staff to ensure problems are corrected and keeping staff “in the loop” when repairs or 

“fixes” are spread over several hours or days. 

While the results generally speak well of the service the Helpdesk provides, OIG 

observations and analysis suggest that there is still room for improvement. The Helpdesk has no 

policies and procedures for technicians to use, for example, when assigning priority levels to 

calls for assistance. (The priority assigned often determines the response time.) Consequently, 

the priority assigned to a service call is based on the technician’s own assessment as opposed to 

objective criteria. We found several instances where identical problems (e.g., “printer down” or 

“unable to log on to pc”) were assigned different priority levels, depending on the technician 

taking the call. 

We had several concerns with the tracking system used to assign technicians and monitor 

outcomes. Most notably, we identified blocks of time where no calls were logged in and specific 

requests that were missing from the log. Without complete information on the number of service 

requests, the nature of the request, and the time required to respond to the request, the OIT 

director has an incomplete picture of Helpdesk performance. 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 5 
 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

Finally, the OIG noted that the tracking software used by the Helpdesk has unused 

features that could enhance OIT oversight of Helpdesk operations. We believe that staff should 

be trained in Helpdesk operations and the tracking software currently in use. By using more 

available features, customers could, for example, enter their service requests into the tracking 

system and track the status of their service requests, call escalation would occur automatically 

based on a predetermined time interval and trend analysis reports could be produced showing the 

kinds of problems staff experienced to determine whether systemic problems exist. 

The OIT director told the OIG that he made policy changes in January 2010 to enhance 

service operations. While the impact of these changes will no doubt take time to materialize, the 

OIG made seven recommendations to enhance service efficiency and effectiveness in a shorter 

timeframe. 

Audits or Evaluations with Fieldwork Ongoing 

The OIG began three program evaluations and one audit during the reporting period. 

In A11-01, Independent Evaluation Report of FMC’s Implementation of FISMA for 

FY 2010, the objectives are to (1) evaluate the agency’s information system & security program 

and assess compliance with FISMA and related information security policies, procedures, 

standards and guidelines, (2) perform a vulnerability scan from an address outside FMC to 

identify vulnerabilities associated with hardware and software installed facing the Internet (open 

ports, missing patches, default or missing passwords, etc.), (3) evaluate responses to prior 

recommendations, and (4) review agency activities associated with its responsibilities under the 

Privacy Act. 

In OR11-01, Program Evaluation of the Office of Consumer Affairs and Dispute 

Resolution Services, the review objectives are to (i) document CADRS’ mediation activities, 

including training, staff development and certifications; (ii) identify users of mediation services 

and how CADRS promotes its mediation services to consumers and the shipping industry; (iii) 

evaluate how CADRS tracks complaints and reports outcomes for its consumer affairs mission; 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 6 
 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

and (iv) assess the relationship between CADRS’ dual consumer affairs and alternative dispute 

resolution missions. The evaluation was initially planned to begin in March 2010. However, per 

management’s request, the OIG delayed fieldwork until July 2010. 

The objective of the OIG’s annual financial statement audit (A11-02) is to opine on 

whether the FMC’s FY 2010 financial statements follow Generally Accepted Accounting 

Principles and present fairly the financial position of the agency. The OIG will also review 

internal control over financial reporting and agency compliance with laws and regulations. The 

statements to be audited are the Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2010 and 2009, and the 

related Statements of Net Cost, Statements of Changes in Net Position, Statements of Budgetary 

Resources, Statements of Financing and Statements of Custodial Activity. This will be the 

seventh consecutive year that the FMC prepared financial statements for audit. 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES 

The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, provides that the IG may receive and 

investigate complaints or information concerning possible allegations of fraud, waste and abuse 

occurring within FMC programs and operations. Matters of possible wrongdoing are referred to 

the OIG in the form of allegations or complaints from a variety of sources, including FMC 

employees, other government agencies and the general public. During this reporting period, the 

OIG received 35 complaints. We responded to five of the complaints and forwarded 21 

complaints to the appropriate FMC program area for disposition. Nine complaints were 

forwarded to other agency OIGs or programs with jurisdiction over the subject matter of the 

complaint. 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 7 
 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

OTHER OIG ACTIVITIES 

Review of Legislation 

As required by the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, the Office of Inspector 

General routinely reviews proposed legislation and regulations. The purpose of these reviews is 

to assess whether the proposed legislation or regulation (1) impacts the economy and efficiency 

of FMC programs and operations, and (2) contains adequate internal controls to prevent and 

detect fraud and abuse. During this period, the OIG reviewed various proposals to provide 

inspectors general with testimonial subpoena authority, to provide ombuds services to 

whistleblowers under the Whistleblower Protection Enforcement Act of 2009, and to improve 

public access to federal information, pursuant to the Transparency in Government Act. 

The OIG also reviewed the agency’s regulations, which were amended to reflect the 

agency’s January 31, 2010 reorganization, and suggested revisions to reflect the appropriate 

reporting relationship between the inspector general and the agency. 

Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency Activities 

The Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) was established 

by law as an independent entity by the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-409) to: 

•	 address integrity, economy and effectiveness issues that transcend individual government 

agencies; and 

•	 increase the professionalism and effectiveness of personnel by developing policies, 

standards, and approaches to aid in the establishment of a well-trained and highly skilled 

workforce in the Offices of the Inspectors General. 

The CIGIE is comprised of all inspectors general whose offices are established under 

section 2 or section 8G of the Inspector General Act of 1978, i.e., those that are Presidentiallyappointed / Senate confirmed and those that are appointed by agency heads (designated federal 

entities), respectively. The IG is a member of CIGIE’s Legislation and Integrity Committees. 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010	 Page 8 
 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

The Legislation Committee is a centralized point-of-contact and liaison for CIGIE to ensure 

regular and ongoing communication with Congressional committees, committee staff and the 

Government Accountability Office regarding issues of common interest, and provides input to, 

and receives feedback from, the Congress on legislation affecting the IG community as a whole. 

The Integrity Committee is charged with receiving, reviewing, and referring for investigation, where 

appropriate, allegations of administrative (non-criminal) misconduct against inspectors general and 

designated senior staff members of the OIG. The Committee's membership consists of the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation's representative to the CIGIE, who serves as its Chairperson; the Special 

Counsel of the Office of Special Counsel, the Director of the Office of Government Ethics; and four 

federal inspectors general. 

The Assistant Inspector General continues to participate in Federal Audit Executive 

Council (FAEC) activities. The FAEC is comprised of senior audit staff from agency OIGs that 

discuss and coordinate issues affecting the federal audit community - with special emphasis on 

audit policy and operations of interest to FAEC members. The OIG’s Counsel participates in the 

Council of Counsels to the Inspector General (CCIG) activities. The CCIG consists of senior 

counsel from agency OIGs who discuss various legal issues that affect the OIG community. 

The OIG also participated in a CIGIE project to study OIG hotlines. The goal of the 

study was to provide a basis for an internal CIGIE dialogue regarding hotline and complaint 

intake, offer recommendations and suggested actions for OIG Hotlines and provide suggestions 

for the IG Academy Hotline Operator Training Course. The effort resulted in a draft report for 

best practices, which was adopted by CIGIE to advance to the next phase of OIG hotline review. 

Additionally, the OIG learned of a scheme that used the name of the FMC to perpetuate a 

scam on consumers. Fraudulent e-mails and correspondence, designed to look like the FMC’s 

authentic Web page, informed unsuspecting consumers that they had won a lottery or 

sweepstakes. However, the “winners” needed to wire money or send a check for an amount 

between $1,000 USD and $10,000 USD before the winnings could be conveyed to settle 

accounts with the FMC. To protect potential victims from falling prey to this deception, OIG 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 9 
 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

prepared a scam alert to warn about the fraudulent scheme. The scam alert was posted on both 

the FMC and OIG websites. Based in part on the alert, the OIG received numerous inquiries 

from potential victims about the authenticity of the scam pitch. In many instances, we were able 

to thwart the scammer’s intent and advised consumers not to fall prey. 

Also, during the reporting period, pursuant to the Reform Act, OIG renewed an 

Memorandum of Understanding with the Architect of the Capitol OIG to provide legal services 

on a reimbursable basis. 

Peer Review Activities 

Federal Offices of Inspector General are required by the IG Act to have a peer review 

performed on their organization once every three years. These reviews are to be performed only 

by federal auditors. A committee of the CIGIE schedules the review to ensure that resources are 

available to perform them and that OIGs do not conduct reciprocal reviews. 

The objectives of a peer review are to determine, for the audit function, whether an 

effective quality control system has been established in the office and if policies, procedures and 

applicable government auditing standards are being followed. 

On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 

Public Law 111-203, was signed into law. Section 989(C) of the Act requires federal offices of 

inspector general to include in their semiannual reports to Congress, an appendix containing the 

results of any peer review conducted by another OIG during the reporting period, or if no peer 

review was conducted within that reporting period, a statement identifying the date of the last 

peer review conducted by another OIG. The most recent peer review of the FMC OIG was 

issued on March 12, 2010, outside of this reporting period. There are no unimplemented 

recommendations from this or any previous peer review. The peer review opinion is available 

on the OIG’s webpage at www.fmc.gov/bureaus_offices/office_of_inspector_general.aspx. 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 10 
 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

Significant Management Decisions 

If the IG disagrees with any significant management decision, Section 5(a)(12) of the 

Inspector General Act requires that such disagreement be reported in the semiannual report. 

Further, Section 5(a)(11) of the Act requires that any decision by management to change its 

response to a significant resolved audit finding must also be disclosed in the semiannual report. 

For this reporting period, there were no significant management decisions made on which 

the IG disagreed, and management did not revise an earlier decision on an OIG audit 

recommendation. 

Access to Information 

The IG is to be provided with ready access to all agency records, information or 

assistance when conducting an investigation or audit. Section 6(b)(2) of the IG Act requires the 

IG to report to the agency head, without delay, if the IG believes that access to required 

information, records or assistance has been unreasonably refused, or otherwise has not been 

provided. A summary of each report submitted to the agency head in compliance with Section 

6(b)(2) must be provided in the semiannual report in accordance with Section 5(a)(5) of the Act. 

During the reporting period, the OIG did not encounter any difficulties in obtaining 

assistance or access to agency records. Consequently, no report was issued by the IG to the 

agency head in accordance with Section 6(b)(2) of the IG Act. 

Audit Resolution 

As of the end of this reporting period, all OIG audit recommendations for reports issued 

in prior periods have been resolved. That is, management and the OIG have reached agreement 

on what actions need to be taken. As noted below, six of these recommendations remain open 

past one year. 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

Report Open Elapsed Months 

Short Title Issue Date Rec.(s) (as of 9/30/10) 

1. Bureau T&A Practices 6/30/09 4 15 

2. Privacy & Data Protection 9/22/08 5, 7 24 

3. FISMA Evaluation for 2008 9/22/08 9 24 

4. FISMA Evaluation for 2006 10/2/06 4 47 

5. Accuracy of Enforcement Databases 3/31/06 3 54 

The oldest recommendation (54 months) involves “Pay.Gov,” a payment system 

available to all federal agencies that enables agency customers to make secure electronic 

payments to the agency directly from their bank account or by credit/debit card. The FMC still 

processes the majority of its transactions with customers, including regulated entities, by bank 

check. In its most recent recommendation update, management told the OIG that it will 

implement Pay.Gov when it implements other information technology modernization projects. 

Management estimates that this will occur by March 2011. 

Contacting the Office of Inspector General 

Employees and the public are encouraged to contact the OIG regarding any incidents of 

possible waste, fraud or abuse occurring within FMC programs and operations. The OIG 

telephone number is (202) 523-5863. To report suspected wrongdoing, employees or the public 

may call the OIG Hotline on (202) 523-5865. A confidential or anonymous message can be left 

24 hours a day. Complaints or allegations of fraud, waste or abuse can also be emailed directly 

to the Inspector General at oig@fmc.gov or to https://www2.fmc.gov/oigcomplaints/ (if the 

complainant wishes to remain anonymous). 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 12 
 

 

 

 

 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

SUMMARY OF INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
 

IG Act 

Reference Reporting Requirement Page(s) 

Section 4(a)(2) Review of legislation and regulations 8 

Section 5(a)(1) Significant problems, abuses and deficiencies None 

Section 5(a)(3) Prior significant recommendations on which 

corrective actions have not been made 

11 

Section 5(a)(4) Matters referred to prosecutive authorities 7 

Section 5(a)(5) Summary of instances where information was 

refused 

11 

Section 5(a)(6) List of audit reports by subject matter 3 

Section 5(a)(7) Summary of each particularly significant report 3 

Section 5(a)(8) Statistical tables showing number of reports and 

dollar value of questioned costs 

14 

Section 5(a)(9) Statistical tables showing number of reports and 

dollar value of recommendations that funds be put 

to better use 

15 

Section 5(a)(10) Summary of each audit issued before this reporting 

period for which no management decision was 

made by the end of the reporting period 

None 

Section 5(a)(11) Significant revised management decisions None 

Section 5(a)(12) Significant management decisions with which the 

inspector general disagrees 

None 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 13 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

TABLE I
 

INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED REPORTS WITH QUESTIONED COSTS
 

Dollar Value 

Questioned Unsupported 

Number Cost Costs 

A. For which no management decision has been 

made by the commencement of the reporting 0 0 0 

period 

B. Which were issued during the reporting period 0 0 0 

Subtotal (A + B) 0 0 0 

C. For which a management decision was made 0 0 0 

during the reporting period 

(i) dollar value of disallowed costs 0 0 0 

(ii) dollar value of costs not disallowed 0 0 0 

D. For which no management decision has been 0 0 0 

made by the end of the reporting period 

E. Reports for which no management decision 0 0 0 

was made within six months of issuance 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 14 
 

 

Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress 

TABLE II
 

INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED REPORTS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS 

THAT FUNDS BE PUT TO BETTER USE
 

Number Dollar Value 

A. For which no management decision has been made 

by the commencement of the reporting period 

0 0 

B. Which were issued during the reporting period 0 0 

Subtotal (A +B) 0 0 

C. For which a management decision was made during 

the reporting period 0 0 

(i) dollar value of recommendations that were 

agreed to by management 0 0 

(ii) dollar value of recommendations that were 

not agreed to by management 

0 0 

D. For which no management decision has been made 

by the end of the reporting period 

0 0 

E. Reports for which no management decision was 

made within six months of issuance 

0 0 

April 1, 2010 - September 30, 2010 Page 15 
HOTLINE COMPLAINTS
 

The success of the OIG mission to prevent fraud, waste and abuse 

depends on the cooperation of FMC employees and the public. 

A COMPLAINT CAN BE REPORTED BY CALLING OUR 24-HR DIRECT LINE 

(202) 523-5865 

E-MAIL ADDRESS: 

https://www2.fmc.gov/oigcomplaints/ 

TO PLACE A COMPLAINT IN WRITING PLEASE MAIL TO: 

Federal Maritime Commission 

Office of Inspector General 

Room 1054 

800 North Capitol Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20573 

To Be Opened By the IG Only 

THE INFORMATION YOU PROVIDE IS CONFIDENTIAL AND YOU CAN BE ANONYMOUS 

HOWEVER, CALLERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO ASSIST THE INSPECTOR GENERAL BY
 

SUPPLYING INFORMATION AS TO HOW THEY MAY BE CONTACTED FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION