All Reports

We determined:The PRIS backup failure was due to (1)human error and (2)the lack of proper controls which would have detected PRIS was no longer on the master backup schedule which resulted in not having backups performed for PRIS.The PRIS server failure was due to hardware failures and the impact was magnified by human error.The Performance Review & Development data was not adequately secured when regenerated in recovery efforts.TVA management agreed with the findings and has taken or is taking corrective action.

We audited $249million of costs for parts and services for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant paid by TVA to a contractor from January1, 2000, through May31, 2006. We found the contractor overbilled TVA about $960,000 because the contractor had not always included discounts on prices it billed TVA as required by the contract. TVA management is working with the contractor to determine what impact, if any, a previous verbal agreement regarding the contract discount structure may have on the amount owed to TVA. Summary Only

We audited $58.5million of costs billed to TVA by a contractor for staff augmentation support services during FYs 2005 and 2006. We determined TVA was overbilled about $540,000 for labor costs due to duplicate billings, overpayments of labor hours, and use of incorrect wage rates. We also found the contractor had not maintained documentation to support approximately $340,000 of travel expenses billed to TVA.

We were requested by the Vice President, Paradise Fossil Plant (PAF), to assess the procedures and key controls used to track and account for PAF tools. In summary, we found: No policies or procedures exist for tools at PAF.Tools can be ordered without management approval.Controls at the PAF for contractor tool rooms are inadequate to properly track and account for tools.Management agreed with our findings and recommendations and is taking or plans to take corrective action.

The objective of our review was to determine (1) vendor compliance with contract force majeure provisions and (2) the adequacy of coal contract terms and conditions related to force majeure events.

As part of our annual audit plan, we reviewed the processes related to identifying and managing surplus materials to determine if surplus material was identified and managed in accordance with TVA policies and procedures. We identified areas of noncompliance and recommended corrective action to management. Management provided comments on our findings, including corrective action taken.

Our audit of costs billed to TVA by a contractor who provided engineering and technical support found that most of the contract employees had been transferred from staff augmentation contracts where they had been performing the same duties at a substantially lower cost to TVA. In total, we determined TVA's costs increased $689,000 when the staff augmentation contract employees were moved to the "managed task" contract, primarily due to a high overhead markup rate.

We audited $4.5 million of payments TVA made to a contractor from April 2004 through November 2006 for engineering and technical support. In summary, we found TVA was overbilled and/or had overpaid the contractor $30,645, including (1)$28,679 for payroll tax billings that exceeded the contractor's actual costs and (2)$1,966 due to miscellaneous billing and payment errors. The contractor and TVA management agreed with our findings. Summary Only

We audited $2.49 million of costs billed to TVA by a contractor from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2006, for the administration of TVA's vision benefit program. Our audit objective was to determine if the costs billed to TVA were in compliance with the contract terms and conditions. In summary, we found TVA was billed (1)an estimated $69,928 for miscalculated and unsupported claim costs, (2)$4,210 for duplicate claims, and (3)$22,255 for claims that exceeded the contract frequency limitations.

We audited $3.9 million of costs billed by a TVA contractor who provided engineering, materials, and installation support for automating TVA's hydro system. We found TVA was billed $380,000 for costs and associated fees that were either excessive, unsupported, or not in accordance with the contract. The overbillings included excessive labor markups, unsupported labor costs, unallowable or unsupported travel costs, excessive facility rental costs, duplicate billings, overstated retroactive billing adjustments, and fees. Summary Only