Office                of Inspector Inspector General General
 

Semiannual Report 


to the Congress 


Covering the Period 

October 1, 2011—March 31, 2012
 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20573 

April 27, 2012 

Office of Inspector General

Dear Chairman Lidinsky and 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 October 1, 2011, to March 31, 2012. 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 four audits/evaluations of FMC programs or activities and 

began one audit. We identified four management and performance challenges for inclusion in the 

FMC’s FY 2011 Performance and Accountability Report. These assessments were based on 

information derived from a combination of sources, including OIG audit and inspection work, 

Commission reports, and a general knowledge of the Commission’s programs. We also prepared 

a new Statement of Work in preparation for recompleting our annual financial statement audit 

among independent public accounting firms. 

During this reporting period, the OIG received seven complaints: We responded to three 

of the complaints and forwarded four complaints to the appropriate FMC program areas for 

disposition or 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, OIG staff held 

information sharing sessions with agency staff to identify and clarify the various OIG activities 

that assist in accomplishing the OIG’s mission to prevent and eliminate waste, fraud, abuse and 

mismanagement, and to promote efficiency and effectiveness. OIG staff also visited FMC area 

representatives in South Florida to enhance our understanding of the functions and activities 

performed by FMC area offices and, while there, gave a presentation to several members of the 

Miami business community and local government leaders about the role of federal inspectors 

general. We continued to respond to consumers who were victimized as part of an internet scam 

operation using FMC indicia and worked with the agency’s Office of the General Counsel to 

draft Commission regulations pertaining to IG reporting requirements as required by the DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203). 

As of March 31, 2012, 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 
- 2 -

need to be taken. Fourteen of these recommendations remain open, i.e., unimplemented, between 

16 and 72 months. This represents a 33 percent reduction in open recommendations from the 

prior period, with the largest decrease occurring in the annual information security reviews. The 

oldest recommendation, to implement a paperless bill-paying process, is a “green” alternative to 

the current paper based process that would be more efficient for agency staff and its customers. 

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 ............................................................................................................................ 2

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

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

Audits or Reviews with Fieldwork Ongoing .............................................................................. 7

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

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

SUMMARY OF INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS .......................... 14

TABLE I – Inspector General Issued Reports with Questioned Costs ..................................... 15

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

Better Use ............................................................................................................ 16
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 1 

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) 

for the period October 1, 2011 through March 31, 2012. During this period we issued four 

audits/evaluations of FMC programs or activities and began one audit. We identified four 

management and performance challenges for inclusion in the FMC’s fiscal year (FY) 2011 

Performance and Accountability Report. These assessments were based on information derived 

from a combination of sources, including OIG audit and inspection work, Commission reports, 

and a general knowledge of the Commission’s programs. We also prepared a new Statement of 

Work in preparation for recompleting our annual financial statement audit among independent 

public accounting firms. 

During this reporting period, the OIG received seven complaints. We responded to three 

of the complaints and forwarded four complaints to the appropriate FMC program areas for 

disposition or 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, OIG staff held 

information-sharing sessions with agency staff to identify and clarify the various OIG activities 

that assist in accomplishing the OIG’s mission to prevent and eliminate waste, fraud, abuse and 

mismanagement, and to promote efficiency and effectiveness. OIG staff also visited FMC area 

representatives in South Florida to enhance our understanding of the functions and activities 

performed by FMC area representatives and, while there, gave a presentation to several members 

of the Miami business community and local government leaders about the role of federal 

inspectors general. We continued to respond to consumers who were victimized as part of an 

internet scam operation using FMC indicia and worked with the agency’s Office of the General 

Counsel to draft Commission regulations pertaining to IG reporting requirements as required by 

the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203). 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 2 

BACKGROUND

The FMC is an independent agency responsible for the regulation of oceanborne 

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. 

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

the Senate, each serving five-year terms. For FY 2012, the Commission was appropriated $24.1 

million and is authorized 132 full-time equivalent positions. 

Although the majority of FMC personnel is located in Washington, D.C., the 

Commission 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 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 $727,322. 

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. 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 3 

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 

commissioners, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House and FMC’s appropriating 

and authorizing committees. This dual reporting requirement helps to ensure the independence 

of the OIG. 

AUDITS/EVALUATIONS

During this semiannual period, the OIG issued two audits of the FMC’s financial 

operations and two program evaluations pertaining to information technology security and select 

Bureau of Enforcement compliance activities. We also began an evaluation of the transportation 

subsidy program. Details on these audits and evaluations are provided below. 

Issued Audits and Reviews

Audit Report Number Subject of Audit

A12-01 Audit of FMC’s FY 2011 Financial Statements 

A12-01A Management Letter to the FY 2011 Financial 

Statements 

A12-02 Evaluation of FMC Implementation of the Federal 

Information Security Management Act for 

FY 2011 

OR12-01 Review of the Compliance Audit Program in the 

Bureau of Enforcement 

Summary of Audits and Reviews Issued During the Current Period

In A12-01, Audit of the Federal Maritime Commission’s Financial Statements for the 

Fiscal Years Ended September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, the objective was to opine on 

whether the agency’s financial statements follow Generally Accepted Accounting Principles 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 4 

(GAAS) and present fairly the financial position of the agency. The statements audited were the 

Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2011 and 2010, and the related Statements of Net Cost, 

Statements of Changes in Net Position, Statements of Budgetary Resources and Statements of 

Custodial Activity, for the years then ended. This was the eighth consecutive year that the FMC 

prepared financial statements for audit. As in the seven prior years, the agency received an 

unqualified opinion, the highest opinion given by independent auditors. 

The independent auditor opined that the Federal Maritime Commission’s financial 

statements were fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with GAAS; there were 

no material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting (including safeguarding 

assets), and there was no reportable noncompliance with laws and regulations tested. 

The FY 2012 audited statements provide insight into the mission and operations of the 

agency. The FMC has a single source of funds, “Salaries and Expenses,” funded by an annual 

appropriation that is available for commitments and obligations incurred during the fiscal year in 

which the authority was granted. Congress approved FY 2011 appropriations in the amount of 

$24,086,730. Almost 75 percent of the annual appropriation goes to fund salaries and benefits; 

most of the remaining appropriated funds is used on rent, government and commercial contracts, 

furniture, printing and equipment maintenance. Less than one percent is spent on travel 

expenses. The FMC collects remittances for user fees and penalties but is not authorized to 

offset any of its budget authority by utilizing these funds. The collections, deposited directly into 

the Treasury General Fund, totaled $2.43 million in FY 2011, double the collections in the prior 

year. 

The OIG review of internal control over financial reporting did not find any matters 

involving the internal control over its operations that were considered material weakness in the 

systems and processes we tested. On the other hand, the OIG identified vulnerabilities in agency 

financial and procurement practices that warranted some corrective actions. These findings are 

presented in A12-01A, Management Letter to the FY 2011 Financial Statements. This year’s 

management letter contains the status of seven prior-year findings and three current-year 

findings. 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 5 

In A12-02, Evaluation of FMC Implementation of the Federal Information Security 

Management Act for FY 2011, the objective was to evaluate the FMC’s security posture by 

assessing compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) and 

related information security policies, procedures, standards and guidelines. The scope of this task 

included the FMC Network and applications housing service contracts, tariff location filings and 

FMC license applications. The OIG also assessed management actions to implement the OIG 

recommendations and documented the status of prior recommendations. The FY 2011 report 

contains 12 subject matter findings and 20 recommendations for corrective actions. 

One particularly noteworthy finding involves the agency’s IT contingency planning 

process. Beginning in FY 2006, the OIG issued security evaluation findings critical of the 

agency’s Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) and its disaster recovery planning, including the 

need for plans to address power outages and hardware failures. In November 2007, the OIG 

reported that the FMC’s emergency procedures documentation did not address IT recovery in 

sufficient detail and omitted the FMC network entirely. We warned that the FMC was likely to 

experience delays in recovering IT operations after an emergency. In our 2009 evaluation, we 

again noted that the FMC lacked an adequate contingency planning program, to include policies, 

procedures, testing and documentation, and in FY 2010 warned management of likely delays 

when recovering from a system failure due to incomplete and untested contingency planning. 

In June 2011, the agency experienced a massive power outage that affected critical 

business operations because the agency could not rely on its COOP site and its disaster recovery 

plan to take over for the temporarily non-functioning FMC servers. Commission staff was 

without email, phones and internet access for over 48 hours. Further, critical online business 

applications were down. Importantly, no FMC applications were accessible at the COOP site. 

Only one server – Form FMC-1 – was in place, but it was not connected. No other servers were 

in place. 

At the same time, the agency spent approximately $24,000 per year over three years to 

maintain the COOP site in the event of an emergency, even though, unbeknownst to senior 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 6 

management, it was not functional. When management discovered the situation shortly after the 

power outage, it cut funding at the site until such time as a disaster recovery plan could be 

prepared and implemented. 

Following the outage, the agency initiated discussions with another federal agency 

regarding the FMC’s disaster recovery plan as a first step in establishing a comprehensive 

agency-wide COOP plan and, ultimately, addressing its data replication needs. 

In OR12-01, Review of the Compliance Audit Program in the Bureau of 

Enforcement, we evaluated controls in place to ensure the accuracy of responses from industry 

on questionnaires used by the Bureau of Enforcement (BOE) in the audit process, reviewed 

program performance measures and workflow tracking mechanisms and documented program 

accomplishments. Finally, we assessed BOE’s follow-up processes to validate corrective action. 

The compliance audit program enables agency staff to assess Ocean Transportation 

Intermediary compliance with Commission regulations. The program generally works well, 

meets program objectives, and produces results: 96 percent of the audits in the OIG’s sample 

found at least one noncompliance issue. Many had multiple findings. 

On the other hand, we observed areas where some improvement is possible. The office 

has not fully transitioned to an automated tracking system. It relies on a manual log to produce 

quarterly and annual quantitative-based reports. BOE does not capture qualitative information, 

such as a summation of the compliance issues found in the audits it performs. For example, 63 

percent of the audits reviewed by the OIG found tariff compliance issues. Sharing this 

information with agency decision makers and with other licensees via our website would enable 

the Commission to broaden its outreach, address recurring issues and educate licensees. 

BOE, working with the Bureau of Certification and Licensing, should ensure that all 

licensees are aware of the compliance audit program. While the regulations state that the licensee 

must turn over information at the FMC’s request, no specific reference is made to the compliance 

audit. OTIs essentially learn of the program when they are selected for audit. We recommended 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 7 

that the agency add language in its transmittal letter sent to new licensees to specifically put them 

on notice that they are subject to audit. Knowing that they may be audited would likely enhance 

OTI compliance throughout their operations. 

Audits or Reviews with Fieldwork Ongoing

The OIG began one program review near the end of the reporting period. In A12-XX, 

Audit of the FMC’s Implementation of the Transit Subsidy Program, the objective is to 

determine whether controls are in place to ensure that (i) Department of Transportation (DOT) 

invoices accurately reflect the amount of subsidy being distributed to agency staff; (ii) the 

agency-paid transit subsidy is being properly reflected on the agency’s books and records and 

that monthly adjustments are properly accounted for; (iii) employees are following program 

guidelines when calculating their monthly subsidy request and receive only the amount of 

subsidy authorized under the program; and (iv) only eligible authorized agency staff are 

receiving a subsidy. 

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 seven complaints. We responded to four of the complaints and forwarded three 

complaints to the appropriate FMC program areas for disposition. The OIG opened no new 

investigations and referred no matters to prosecutorial authorities during this period. 

Additionally, the OIG continues to work with the agency’s Office of the General Counsel 

concerning an ongoing internet scam that attempts to defraud the public by, among other things, 

using the agency’s official insignia to add legitimacy to correspondence with the targeted public. 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 8 

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. 

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 Office of Inspectors General. 

The CIGIE is comprised of all inspectors general that are Presidentially-appointed / Senate 

confirmed and those that are appointed by agency heads (designated federal entities). The OIG 

remains active in CIGIE operations. For example, the IG is a member of both the Legislation and 

Integrity Committees. 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 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 9 

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 IG also 

continued to participate in quarterly meetings with other Designated Federal Entity OIGs to 

discuss issues, outcomes and solutions endemic to smaller IG offices. 

The Assistant Inspector General participates 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 common interest to FAEC members. The Counsel to the Inspector General 

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. 

During this semiannual period, the OIG did not review legislation impacting the FMC; 

however, we did review and comment on IG community-related legislation and other proposals 

with a direct impact on office of inspectors general operations. We also revised Commission 

regulations pertaining to OIG reporting responsibilities under the recently-enacted Dodd-Frank 

Amendments. 

Additionally, the OIG counsel prepared a one-hour information session available to all 

FMC employees on the role and function of the OIG. The presentation touched on the various 

OIG activities that assist in accomplishing the OIG’s mission to eliminate and prevent waste, 

fraud, abuse and mismanagement, and to promote efficiency and effectiveness. Specifically, 

counsel discussed the different types of audits and how they are conducted and addressed OIG 

investigations, the respective employee rights and the duty to cooperate in investigations and 

audits. Finally, counsel provided employees with a variety of methods by which they could 

exercise their duty to report misconduct and advised them of the available protections for 

reporting illegal activities and misconduct. 

During the reporting period, in accordance with the Inspector General Reform Act, 

FMC/OIG also provided legal services, on a reimbursable basis, to the Architect of the Capitol 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 10 

OIG pursuant to a memorandum of understanding. The OIG also participated in assisting two 

sister OIGs in providing audit report quality control. 

Peer Review Activities

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

performed 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. 

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, Public Law 

111-203, requires federal offices of inspectors 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 March 2010 peer review opinion is available on the OIG’s webpage at 

www.fmc.gov/bureaus_offices/office_of_inspector_general.aspx. 

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. 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 11 

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, 14 of these recommendations remain open 

past one year. This represents a 33 percent reduction in open recommendations, with the largest 

decrease occurring in the annual information security reviews: 

 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 12 

Short Title

Report 

Issue 

Date

Open 

Rec’s

Elapsed Months

(as of 3/31/12)

1. FY 2010 Management Letter 11/10/10 3 16 

2. Helpdesk Satisfaction Survey 8/6/10 4 19 

3. User Fee Calculations 5/27/10 1 22 

4. T&A – Capping Report 5/14/10 2 22 

5. FISMA Evaluation for 2009 1/28/10 1 26 

6. Bureau Timekeeping Practices 6/30/09 1 33 

7. Agency Checkout Process 1/12/09 1 38 

8. Accuracy of Enforcement Database 3/31/06 1 72 

The oldest recommendation (72 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 accounts or by credit/debit cards. The FMC still processes the 

majority of its transactions with customers, including regulated entities, by bank check. In its 

most recent open recommendation update, management advised the OIG that it is “making 

progress” and has planned to meet with agency contractors to discuss technical requirements. 

However, according to management, the “availability of contractor resource hours remains a 

concern.” The OIG will review the status of this recommendation during the next financial audit 

cycle to assess the delays in implementing this labor saving green alternative to current 

processing procedures. 

The second oldest recommendation involves revising existing employee check-out forms 

to itemize all agency IT systems individuals must be removed from prior to departing the agency. 

This would help to ensure access to sensitive agency data is safeguarded. The current form 

identifies “Information Technology” and focuses on physical IT assets, to include computer, 

monitor and phone card, and Information Security Officer for a security clearance. Management 

intends to make substantive revisions to the check-out form to include a comprehensive list of 

the “universe of systems and benefits to which employees have access outside of FMC systems.” 

This addition has added years to the implementation of a relatively straight-forward solution to 

targeted problem. Management informed the OIG that the form will be completed by September 

30, 2012. 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 13 

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 to 

oig@fmc.gov or to https://www2.fmc.gov/oigcomplaints/ (if the complainant wishes to remain 

anonymous). 

 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 14 

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 None 

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

refused 

None 

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

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

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

dollar value of questioned costs 

15 

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

dollar value of recommendations that funds be put 

to better use 

16 

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 

 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 15 

TABLE I

INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED REPORTS WITH QUESTIONED COSTS

 Dollar Value

Number

Questioned 

Cost

Unsupported 

Costs

A. For which no management decision has been 

made by the commencement of the reporting 

period 

0 0 0 

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 

during the reporting period 

0 0 0 

(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 

made by the end of the reporting period 

0 0 0 

E. Reports for which no management decision 

was made within six months of issuance 

0 0 0 

 
October 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012 Page 16 

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 1 $72,000 

(i) dollar value of recommendations that were 

agreed to by management 1 $72,000 

(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 
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