Tennessee Valley Authority: Facts Surrounding Allegations Raised Against
the Chairman and the IG (Letter Report, 09/15/1999, GAO/OSI-99-20).
Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO investigated the Tennessee
Valley Authority's (TVA) Inspector General's (IG) allegation that the
Chairman, TVA, attempted to interfere with the independence of his
office. GAO also investigated the TVA Chairman's allegation that the IG
improperly used his office's credit card.
GAO noted that: (1) with regard to the IG's allegation against the
Chairman, GAO found that it was based on the disagreement between the IG
and the Chairman over the Chairman's authority to both direct a broad
management review of the Office of Inspector General (OIG) and contract
with a nonfederal entity to conduct the review; (2) the Chairman's
actions could be viewed as an attempt to undermine the independence of
the IG; (3) not knowing that a peer review of the OIG had been conducted
only months previously, the Chairman decided to initiate a management
review of the OIG based in part on two anonymous allegations; (4) when
the Chairman discussed the review with the IG, the IG initially agreed
to it; and TVA contracted with a nonfederal entity to conduct the
review; (5) however, when the IG was presented with an OIG legal counsel
opinion and after discussions with other IGs and members of Congress, he
became concerned about the appropriateness of such a review and informed
the Chairman of his reversal of opinion; (6) the Chairman later decided
to use another OIG to conduct the review and believed that the IG would
accept such an arrangement; (7) the Chairman was unaware that this offer
was not communicated to the IG as he had directed; (8) however, before
it was determined that the IG had not been informed about the Chairman's
decision, TVA's Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) initiated a separate
review of the IG's use of his TVA credit card during his 5-year tenure;
(9) as a result of his separate conversations with the Chairman and the
CAO, the IG felt that the Chairman was threatening the OIG's ability to
conduct investigations and wanted to remove him from office; (10) to
counter his belief that the IG would release a 7-day letter to the
press, the Chairman released to the press his recent letter to a member
of Congress; (11) in that letter, the Chairman alleged that the IG had
abuse his use of the TVA credit card; (12) with regard to the Chairman's
allegations concerning the IG's lack of independence, the IG recognized
that his closeness to TVA management and his attendance at TVA social
functions could have led observers to construe that his independence had
been comprised; (13) however, he had investigated allegations involving
all three directors, including an audit of a $30-million, irrevocable
trust created and controlled by the Chairman and funded by TVA; and (14)
this audit resulted in the revocation of the trust and the funds' return
to TVA.
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: OSI-99-20
TITLE: Tennessee Valley Authority: Facts Surrounding Allegations
Raised Against the Chairman and the IG
DATE: 09/15/1999
SUBJECT: Inspectors general
Malfeasance
Investigations by federal agencies
Credit sales
Internal audits
Information leaking
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO report. Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved. Major **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters, **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and **
** single lines. The numbers on the right end of these lines **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the **
** document outline. These numbers do NOT correspond with the **
** page numbers of the printed product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO **
** Document Distribution Center. For further details, please **
** send an e-mail message to: **
** **
** **
** **
** with the message 'info' in the body. **
******************************************************************
Report to the Chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate
September 1999
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Facts Surrounding Allegations Raised Against the Chairman and the
IG
*****************
*****************
GAO/OSI-99-20
GAO/OSI-99-20
Office of Special Investigations
B-283001
September 15, 1999
The Honorable Fred Thompson
Chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs
United States Senate
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), a wholly owned government
corporation, is responsible for developing and conserving the natural
resources of the Tennessee River Valley and supplying power throughout a
seven-state area, presently through 159 distributors, or customers. TVA is
governed by a three-member Board of Directors appointed by the President
and confirmed by the Senate for a 9-year term. Chairman Craven Crowell is
currently the sole member of the Board because Director Johnny H. Hayes
resigned on February 1, 1999, and Director William Kennoy's term expired
on May 18, 1999.
The current Inspector General (IG), George Prosser, began his tenure in
April 1994. As 1 of 33 statutory offices initially established by Congress
under the Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988,/Footnote1/ he was
appointed by TVA's Board of Directors. The act gives the agency head, in
this case the TVA Board, general supervisory authority over the IG but
provides that the agency head cannot interfere with the audit and
investigative functions of the Office of Inspector General (OIG). The 1988
amendments also provide that only federal audit entities, including GAO
and other IGs, may perform a review to determine whether an IG has
internal quality controls and is complying with audit standards
established by the Comptroller General as required by section 4(b)(1)(A)
of the Inspector General Act of 1978./Footnote2/
On May 26, 1999, the TVA IG issued a report (otherwise known as a 7-day
letter) to the TVA Board of Directors and the Congress pursuant to
section 5(d) of the Inspector General Act./Footnote3/ In that report, the
IG alleged that the Board Chairman, the sole Board member, had "harassed
him" and attempted to impede the independence of the OIG. Shortly
thereafter, the Chairman of TVA, on advice of the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) and in accordance with Executive Order No. 12933, referred
two matters to the Integrity Committee of the Executive Council on
Integrity and Efficiency (ECIE)/Footnote4/ relating to questionable credit
card charges by the IG/Footnote5/ and concerns about the management of the
OIG. On June 2, 1999, you requested that we assist the Committee in
investigating the IG's allegation against the Chairman and the Chairman's
allegation regarding the IG's credit card usage.
Results in Brief
----------------
With regard to the IG's allegation against the Chairman, we found that it
was based on the disagreement between the IG and the Chairman over the
Chairman's authority to both direct a broad management review of the OIG
and contract with a nonfederal entity to conduct the review. The
Chairman's actions as discussed below could be viewed as an attempt to
undermine the independence of the IG.
Not knowing that a peer review of the OIG had been conducted only months
previously, the Chairman decided to initiate a management review of the
OIG based in part on two anonymous allegations. These allegations
concerned the lack of performance appraisals and merit increases in the
OIG and an OIG manager's abuse of time and attendance policies. When the
Chairman discussed the review with the IG, the IG initially agreed to it;
and TVA contracted with a nonfederal entity to conduct the review.
However, when the IG was presented with an OIG legal counsel opinion and
after discussions with other IGs and members of Congress, he became
concerned about the appropriateness of such a review and informed the
Chairman of his reversal of opinion. The Chairman later decided to use
another OIG to conduct the review and believed that the IG would accept
such an arrangement. The Chairman was unaware that this offer was not
communicated to the IG as he had directed. However, before it was
determined that the IG had not been informed about the Chairman's
decision, TVA's Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) initiated a separate
review of the IG's use of his TVA credit card during his 5-year tenure
(1994-1999). To our knowledge, the proposed management review of the OIG
has been suspended.
As a result of his separate conversations with the Chairman and the CAO,
the IG felt that the Chairman was threatening the OIG's ability to conduct
investigations and wanted to remove him from office. One reason the IG
provided for feeling threatened was his May 25, 1999, conversation with
the CAO regarding the Chairman's reaction to the May 14, 1999, acquittal
of TVA's former Chief Operating Officer on criminal charges. Thus, the IG
sent the 7-day letter to the Chairman. To counter his belief that the IG
would release the 7-day letter to the press, the Chairman released to the
press his recent letter to a member of Congress. In that letter, the
Chairman alleged that the IG had abused his use of the TVA-issued credit
card. Subsequently, the Chairman referred the following allegations to the
ECIE for its consideration: the previously mentioned OIG mismanagement,
the IG's lack of independence, and the IG's misuse of his TVA credit card.
This referral was based on the two anonymous allegations and a cursory
review of the IG's credit card charges. However, the OIG had reviewed the
management issues that the Chairman referred to the ECIE and had taken
action on them prior to the referral. Details of the initial TVA
allegations along with additional allegations were leaked or released to
the media. Then on August 20, 1999, the Chairman placed the IG on paid
leave pending resolution of the allegations referred to the ECIE.
When the Chairman initiated his attempt for a management review of the
OIG, all three Board positions were occupied. However, he began his most
aggressive actions when his staff completed the analysis of the IG's
credit card usage. By that time, the two other Board members had vacated
their positions. The Chairman's actions included the release of
unsubstantiated allegations to the media and the referral to ECIE.
With regard to the Chairman's allegations concerning the IG's lack of
independence, the IG recognized that his closeness to TVA management and
his attendance at TVA social functions could have led observers to
construe that his independence had been compromised. However, he had
investigated allegations involving all three directors, including an audit
of a $30-million, irrevocable trust created and controlled by the Chairman
and funded by TVA. This audit resulted in the revocation of the trust and
the funds' return to TVA. Further, the audit assisted a criminal
investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on this matter,
which the Department of Justice declined to prosecute. In addition, we
found no evidence of TVA credit card misuse by the IG for the period we
analyzed in depth (Jan. 1998 through mid-May 1999). On the issue of
whether the expenditures were in accord with applicable TVA policy, we
determined that all of the questioned charges--including charges for
hotels, restaurants, golf and liquor--had been incurred as a result of
activities undertaken at Director Hayes' direction and conformed to TVA's
policies.
Allegations That the Chairman Impeded the IG's Independence
-----------------------------------------------------------
Two OIG Personnel Complaints Triggered Broad-Based Management Review
--------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 19, 1998, the Chairman received an anonymous allegation that
the OIG had not given performance appraisals and merit increases to
support staff. After receiving the allegation, the Chairman asked the
General Counsel to determine whether the allegation had merit and whether
the Board could award a contract for an independent review of the OIG. The
General Counsel informed the Chairman that his office had recently
received an anonymous allegation that an OIG branch manager had abused the
OIG's time and attendance policies. He added that the allegation had been
referred to the OIG because it was a management issue. When the Chairman
learned of the second allegation, he requested the General Counsel to
advise the Board how to handle these allegations.
By memorandum dated December 3, 1998, the General Counsel responded,
advising the Chairman that the Board should not refer the anonymous
allegations to the ECIE because they raised management issues rather than
the type of "wrongdoing" set forth in Executive Order No. 12933 that
warranted referral. However, he opined that the Board could seek an
outside review by a contractor to determine whether the OIG was
functioning properly. The General Counsel added that the Board had hired
an outside contractor to review the OIG in 1993/Footnote6/ during William
Hinshaw's tenure as IG.
By memorandum dated December 7, 1998, the Chairman notified the Board
about the two anonymous allegations he had received involving the OIG. The
Chairman advised the Board that he planned to ask the CAO, a previous TVA
IG, to recommend an outside firm to independently evaluate the OIG because
it had been 5 years since the last review. When the other Board members
did not respond to the memorandum, the Chairman concluded that they had
concurred with his belief that a review of the OIG was necessary./Footnote7/
According to the Chairman, two factors led him to believe that a review of
the OIG was warranted: (1) the General Counsel had advised him that the
allegation regarding the OIG's failure to provide performance appraisals
was "troubling" and (2) the OIG had not been reviewed in 5 years. The CAO
and General Counsel told us that the allegations against the OIG had
triggered the Chairman's interest in a review of the OIG. According to the
CAO, other underlying reasons might have existed. For example, the
Chairman had stated that the IG spent too much time socializing with
Directors Hayes and Kennoy.
On December 11, 1998, the Chairman sent his December 7 memorandum to the
IG. However, the OIG had previously reviewed and acted upon the first
anonymous complaint, received from the Office of General Counsel,
concerning the alleged abuse of time and attendance. The OIG's action
included informing all OIG staff of time and attendance policies and
counseling the individual employee named in the allegation. Upon receipt
of the memorandum containing the second allegation concerning performance
appraisals and merit increases for support staff, the OIG reviewed each
OIG employee's file to determine if performance reviews for the previous 4
years were included. This review determined that a few employees did not
have all their service reviews, and the IG worked with the respective
managers to obtain the missing reviews. Further, the OIG updated its human
resources computer system to reflect current performance review information.
After the IG's receipt of the December 7 memorandum, the Chairman and the
IG met to discuss the proposed management review. The Chairman told the IG
that he had tasked the CAO to recommend an outside auditor. The IG advised
the Chairman that it would be inappropriate for PriceWaterhouseCoopers to
conduct the review since the firm audits TVA's financial statement, which
the OIG then reviews. In addition, the IG told the Chairman that the CAO,
as a former TVA IG, should not prepare the list of potential contractors
from which the IG would select. The Chairman agreed with the IG that
PriceWaterhouseCoopers should not conduct the review but disagreed that
the CAO should not take part in identifying potential contractors.
According to the IG, he did not raise any concerns at the meeting about
the review of the OIG because he knew that an outside entity had conducted
the 1993 review of the OIG. He explained, however, that when he met with
the Chairman, he did not know that the OIG's legal counsel had advised the
previous IG that the Board lacked the authority to contract for the 1993
review of the OIG. The IG added that he has always had a good relationship
with all Board members and noted that the Board never interfered with any
audit or investigation he had initiated. He stated that his office had
investigated a number of senior TVA officials, including all three Board
members, and issued reports that were critical of TVA's administration.
For example, he audited a $30-million, irrevocable trust that the Chairman
had created and controlled./Footnote8/ This trust was funded by TVA. The
results of the OIG audit assisted in the FBI's criminal investigation,
which the Department of Justice declined to prosecute; the revoking of the
trust; and the funds' return to TVA.
On March 3, 1999, the CAO notified the IG that he had identified
PriceWaterhouseCoopers and Verner Liipfert, Bernhardt, McPherson & Hand
(Verner Liipfert) as the two potential contractors. Because of his
previous objection to PriceWaterhouseCoopers as the contracting party, the
IG's only option was Verner Liipfert.
IG Raised Concerns About Management Review
------------------------------------------
On March 20, 1999,/Footnote9/ the IG reviewed a copy of a 1993 memorandum
from the OIG legal counsel to the then IG. In the memorandum, the legal
counsel questioned whether the Inspector General Act, as amended, allowed
nonfederal entities to perform reviews of OIGs./Footnote10/ The OIG legal
counsel told us that he provided the memorandum to the IG as soon as he
remembered that he had provided advice concerning the propriety of the
1993 proposed review. On March 22, 1999, the IG met with a TVA Assistant
General Counsel and advised her that he had concerns about the legality of
the review based on the 1993 memorandum.
The next day, March 23, 1999, representatives from Verner Liipfert and its
subcontractor Deloitte & Touche signed a contract with TVA to review the
OIG. The IG had no input into any aspect of the review, including its
scope, and did not know that the contract was being signed. Prior to the
award of the contract, the CAO provided copies of the two anonymous
allegations to the contractor, which it was to consider during the
management review. Under the contract, Verner Liipfert agreed to perform a
broad-based review of the audit, investigation, and inspection activities
of the OIG and to prepare a report of its findings for the Chairman.
Verner Liipfert's responsibilities included, among other things, reviewing
(1) OIG practices and procedures, including manuals, memoranda, and
correspondence; (2) fiscal management procedures, with a selective
analysis of budgets and expenditures; (3) structure and organization,
including the tracking of ongoing projects and follow-up after the
completion of an audit or
investigation; (4) training programs; and (5) management goals,
strategies, and procedures./Footnote11/
After the contract was signed, the Chairman asked the IG to meet with him
and the contractor. At the meeting, the IG informed the Chairman that he
had specific concerns that the review by a nonfederal entity might violate
the Inspector General Act. The IG told us that the Chairman was very upset
and "chewed him out" for questioning the Board's authority to hire a
contractor to perform the review. As a result of the IG's objection, the
contractor told the Chairman and the IG that it would not start the review
until it received notice that the issue concerning the review's legality
had been resolved. Subsequently, the Chairman called the IG to inform him
that the General Counsel would research the matter further.
Negotiations Concerning Contract Were Unsuccessful
--------------------------------------------------
On March 26, 1999, the OIG legal counsel informed the General Counsel that
the IG would accept Verner Liipfert as the entity to perform the review if
the IG, rather than the Board, was the contracting party. The OIG legal
counsel added that a representative of the President's Council on
Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) at OMB had told the IG that this
arrangement was permissible.
On April 30, 1999, the General Counsel sent a memorandum to the Chairman
outlining the options available to the Board for a management review of
the OIG. According to the memorandum, the issue was discussed with
representatives from GAO,/Footnote12/ OMB, Department of Justice, and
Office of Government Ethics. The General Counsel told the Chairman that
the most desirable course would be for the Board to reach an agreement
with the IG as to the review's necessity, the party to perform it, and the
scope of the review. However, the General Counsel recommended that the
contract include specific provisions pertaining to the flow of information
to and from the Board and Verner Liipfert.
The Chairman agreed that the IG should be the contracting party as long as
the Chairman could request the contractor to review specific matters
identified during the review. At the Chairman's request, on May 5, 1999,
the General Counsel provided an outline of his proposed contract
modifications to the IG. In the document, the General Counsel proposed
that the OIG be the contracting party. He also proposed requiring Verner
Liipfert to (1) hold entrance and exit conferences with, and to provide
weekly reports to, the IG and the Chairman; (2) review and fully address
in the final report matters that the IG or the Chairman requested; and (3)
provide copies of the final report to the IG and the Chairman.
The IG reviewed the General Counsel's proposals and obtained advice from
the OIG legal counsel. On May 6, 1999, the OIG legal counsel sent the IG's
counter proposals to the TVA Office of General Counsel. While the IG
agreed that his office should be the contracting party, he wanted to limit
the Board's involvement in the review and/or oversight of the contractor.
Specifically, the IG proposed modifying the contract to state that the IG
would keep the Board apprised of the status of the review and would
provide a copy of the final report to the Board for its dissemination. The
IG told us that although he opposed adding language to the contract
regarding the Chairman's role, he agreed to allow the Chairman to have
unrestricted access to the contractor.
The Chairman, however, did not agree that this later proposal should be
left to an oral understanding, believing instead that the written contract
should require the contractor to review the matters that he identified.
The General Counsel informed the IG of this on the same day that he
received the IG's proposals.
The next day, the IG told the General Counsel that he was withdrawing his
offer that the OIG be the contracting party. He explained that members of
Congress and the IG community had expressed strong objections to
proceeding with any review that the Chairman could direct. The IG
suggested that the General Counsel request an opinion from OMB regarding
the Chairman's authority to oversee the contractor's actions during a
review of the OIG. However, no such request was made./Footnote13/
According to the IG, he concluded that the review was inappropriate in
part because TVA had used an OIG management review to remove William
Hinshaw, the previous IG. Both Mr. Hinshaw and former Director Kennoy told
us that the purpose of the prior OIG review was to remove Mr. Hinshaw as
IG. However, because Mr. Hinshaw subsequently resigned from TVA, the
review was discontinued before the contractor issued a final written
report to the Board.
Chairman Opted to Request Federal Entity's Review of the OIG
------------------------------------------------------------
On May 5 or 6, 1999, after negotiations between the Chairman and the IG
had reached an impasse over whether the Chairman could share oversight of
the review with the IG, the Chairman requested advice from the U.S.
Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee on how to proceed.
According to the Chairman, the U.S. Attorney recommended that TVA identify
three other federal IGs and let the IG select one to conduct the review.
The Chairman accepted this advice, instructed the CAO to prepare the list,
and asked the General Counsel to tell the IG about the new proposal.
On the morning of May 14, before the list was completed, the IG called the
Chairman to advise him that a federal district court jury had acquitted
Joe Dickey, TVA's former Chief Operating Officer, of all criminal
charges./Footnote14/ The Chairman admitted to us that he had harshly
criticized the IG and the OIG during the conversation because of the
acquittal. The Chairman explained that he was upset because the OIG had
spent approximately 2 years investigating Mr. Dickey and he believed that
the acquittal might expose TVA and the IG to a civil lawsuit. During the
conversation, the Chairman told the IG that he should now cooperate with
the management review. The IG did not respond to this comment.
At the time, the Chairman assumed that the IG knew about his decision to
allow an IG to review the TVA OIG. However, the General Counsel had not
told the IG about the Chairman's decision. To our knowledge, the
management review of the OIG has been suspended.
TVA Initiated Review of IG's Credit Card Use
---------------------------------------------
On the afternoon on May 14, 1999, after hearing the conversation between
the Chairman and IG regarding the Dickey case, the CAO directed two senior
members of his staff to obtain copies of all of the IG's TVA credit card
statements from 1994 to 1999 (the entire time the IG had served as IG) and
analyze them. Based on this analysis, one staff member prepared a
memorandum for the CAO on May 27, 1999, questioning the propriety of the
IG's golf, restaurant, and liquor charges since, in the employee's view,
the IG had no obvious business reason to be so heavily involved in such
activities. The staff member who prepared the memorandum admitted he had
conducted only "a very brief preliminary review of charges" on the IG's
credit card statements and recommended that a further detailed review be
performed before any final determination was made.
According to the CAO, he requested the review because he considered the
IG's use of his TVA credit card for golf fees to be inappropriate. In his
view, these actions compromised the IG's independence as the IG was
socializing with distributors and with managers whom he was charged with
monitoring. The CAO further stated that he first learned about the IG's
golf expenses when TVA was preparing a response to a January 13, 1999,
request from the Knoxville News Sentinel for the Board members' 1998
calendar year travel, entertainment, and golf charges. He said that while
the Chairman was reviewing the charges that were made by the Board
members, 12 TVA executives were identified who frequently traveled, played
golf, and socialized with former Director Hayes. Information regarding the
12 employees' 1998 golf credit card charges, that included the IG, was
compiled on March 16, 1999, with no further action taken.
The IG learned about the review of his credit card usage in a meeting with
the CAO on May 25, 1999. Based on the May 14 meeting with the Chairman,
the IG asked the CAO for the meeting to discuss his options regarding his
future at TVA. According to the IG, the CAO suggested that he retire and
take a severance package, because the Chairman would spend every day of
the next 3 years "screwing" with him. As an example of this, the CAO told
the IG that TVA had reviewed his credit card statements and found he had
improperly charged golf expenses. According to the IG, the CAO informed
him that the Chairman had referred his golf charges to the U.S. Attorney
for the Eastern District of Tennessee./Footnote15/ The IG also said that
the CAO mentioned the Chairman's conversation with the U.S. Attorney
regarding the identification of three IGs to conduct the review and the
IG's selection of one to conduct the review. However, the IG did not
interpret this as an offer for him to select an IG to conduct the review.
The CAO described the conversation somewhat differently. According to the
CAO, he told the IG that the Chairman had 3 more years until his term
expired, he knew that the relationship between the Chairman and IG was not
good, and it was not going to improve. The CAO stated that they discussed
two options: the IG could retire or stay and fight the management review.
He added that the IG raised the subject of whether a severance package was
available. The CAO admitted telling the IG that his credit card charges
had been reviewed but denied telling the IG that the matter had been
referred to the U.S. Attorney. The CAO also stated that, for informational
purposes only and not as an offer to the IG, he had told the IG that the
Chairman had spoken with the U.S. Attorney regarding the use of another IG
to conduct the management review.
After his May 25, 1999, meeting with the CAO, the IG called a
congressional member of the Tennessee Valley Authority Congressional
Caucus, to inform him that the Chairman wanted the IG to retire. The IG
and the Chairman told us that another member of Congress had called them
shortly after the IG's conversation with the caucus member. According to
the Chairman, the second member informed him that the IG had asserted at
an IG conference in April that the proposed review of the OIG was an
impediment to the IG's independence. The Chairman also told us that the
second member had advised him that he should not proceed with the review
of the OIG and that he planned to discuss the matter with GAO.
The Chairman told us that he viewed this conversation with a member of
Congress as a threat, so he instructed the General Counsel to prepare a
"defensive" letter responding to the member's call. The letter was sent to
the member on May 26. In the letter, the General Counsel provided
background information concerning TVA's proposed review of the OIG,
starting with a discussion concerning the Chairman's receipt of the
anonymous management complaint. The General Counsel explained that he had
initially advised the Chairman that the Board had the authority to hire an
outside contractor to review the OIG but subsequently suggested that the
Chairman seek a mutually satisfactory agreement with the IG in which the
IG would have contracted for the review. He noted that during this period,
the Chairman had received information from an independent source that the
IG had abused his TVA credit card "to pay for charges at golf courses, the
purchase of liquor and excessive restaurant charges." We determined that
these allegations had not come from an independent source but instead were
the result of a preliminary review of the IG's credit card statements by
the CAO's office.
On the afternoon of May 26, 1999, the IG sent the Chairman a 7-day letter
claiming that the Chairman was interfering with the operations of the OIG
and engaging in harassment. As evidence of this, the IG pointed to the
proposed independent review of the OIG. He also noted his discussion with
the Chairman regarding the Dickey acquittal and opined that the Chairman
essentially had threatened him not to investigate any more cases involving
senior TVA officials. Further, he felt that the Chairman intended to hold
the threat of an outside review over his head if he did so. The IG also
provided details about the May 25 conversation with the CAO, in which the
CAO had told him the Chairman was reviewing his travel expenses.
On June 2, 1999, the Chairman sent you a letter responding to the IG's 7-
day letter. The Chairman asserted that he had acted in a manner that was
sensitive to the status of the IG but did not respond on a point-by-point
basis to the IG's allegations.
TVA and IG Used Media to Publicize Their Opposing Allegations
-------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Chairman, on May 26, 1999, he ordered that the TVA letter
to the Representative be released to the press because he knew that the
IG's 7-day letter would be released to the public within the next 7 days.
After the letter to the Representative was released, a reporter with the
Knoxville News Sentinel interviewed the IG about the allegations
concerning his abuse of the TVA credit card. During the interview, the IG
described the issues he raised in his 7-day letter, including a
description of the May 14 and 25 conversations with the Chairman and CAO,
respectively.
On May 27, 1999, the CAO issued a statement to the media denying the IG's
allegations. In part, the CAO said,
"TVA takes the position there is no justification for the Inspector
General to be spending his time during the work day socializing and
playing golf with managers whose operations he is charged with monitoring
as TVA's independent watchdog. In our view, the Inspector General should
be independent of management and avoid even the appearance of any actions
that might be deemed inappropriate and would result in an OIG
investigation."
On May 28, 1999, the news media received information contained in the May
27 memorandum prepared for the CAO, which analyzed the IG's credit card
charges. This memorandum alleged that the IG had incurred $15,150 in
potentially questionable charges from a casino/hotel, resorts, golf course
fees, liquor purchases, and restaurants. The memorandum failed to disclose
that these particular charges had been incurred over an approximately 5-
year period (1994-1999)./Footnote16/ TVA officials have denied providing
this information to the media.
TVA Referred Issues Involving IG to ECIE
----------------------------------------
After receiving a facsimile copy of the newspaper article entitled
"Prosser: TVA wants me out of there," an OMB official spoke to the TVA
General Counsel about the allegations raised in the article. The OMB
official indicated that the issues between the IG and TVA should not be
fought in the newspapers. She added that if TVA had serious concerns about
the IG's actions, the matter should be referred to the PCIE Integrity
Committee.
As a result of OMB's advice, by letter dated June 1, 1999, the Chairman
referred the matter concerning the IG's questionable credit card charges
to ECIE's Chairman. In the referral, the TVA Chairman requested a review
of the IG's credit card charges including questionable country club,
hotel/casino, golf, liquor, and other charges. The Chairman also provided
information about the two anonymous OIG personnel complaints.
On June 7, 1999, the ECIE Chairman forwarded the matter to the Chairman of
PCIE's Integrity Committee. On June 25, the CAO's office provided
documents to the Integrity Committee regarding the IG's alleged
misconduct. Included was the May 27, 1999, "Preliminary Credit Card
Review" with attached schedules. Based on the unsubstantiated information
provided by the TVA Chairman, the Integrity Committee forwarded the matter
to the Department of Justice. The FBI is currently reviewing the matter.
On August 20, 1999, after being informed that the FBI was investigating
allegations against the IG, the Chairman placed the IG on paid leave.
Press Release and Media Leaks Occurred After Referral to ECIE
-------------------------------------------------------------
On June 2, 1999, TVA released to the press (1) the letter to the Chairman
of the ECIE requesting the investigation of credit card charges by the IG
and (2) the two anonymous complaints raising management issues within the
OIG.
On July 23, 1999, TVA announced in a press release that it had revised its
policy on the employees' use of agency credit cards for business travel
and entertainment. The announcement stated that additional controls would
be placed on TVA's hospitality policy and that the number of TVA credit
cards would be decreased. The announcement added that the Chairman was
requiring the OIG to develop a similar entertainment policy for the OIG
for the Chairman's approval. The Chairman stated in the release that these
changes were prompted by allegations that the IG had more than $10,000 in
charges on his credit card for meals, liquor, golf, and other entertainment.
On August 17, 1999, two documents were leaked to the media. One was a June
24, 1999, memorandum identifying a number of new allegations against the
IG. The other was a July 21, 1999, letter from the Chairman to GAO in
which the Chairman opined that it would appear inappropriate for an
inspector general to spend significant time or resources on customer
relations. TVA denied releasing both documents to the media.
The allegations that the June 24 memorandum contained included, among
others, that the IG had participated in sports betting while at work, was
absent from his office frequently because he was socializing and playing
golf, and had failed to investigate a matter involving a TVA executive
because of their close relationship. We reviewed several of the
allegations in the memorandum and found them generally to be without
merit. For example, we found that the IG had investigated allegations
against all three Board members, including the official alluded to, and
against friends of this official.
Chairman and IG Did Not Receive Crucial Information
---------------------------------------------------
During our investigation, we determined that in two instances the Chairman
and the IG had failed to receive crucial information that might have
impacted on the resolution of the management-review issue. The Chairman
based his decision for a management review in part on the belief that the
OIG had not been reviewed in 5 years. We determined that during this 5-
year period, the OIG had had two peer reviews. The last peer review was
completed on August 21, 1998. It concluded that the TVA OIG had a system
of quality controls that provided with reasonable assurance for the OIG's
conformance with professional standards in the conduct of its audits.
According to the Chairman, he was not aware that a peer review had been
completed in August; and if he had known, it would have affected his
decision to order a management review of the OIG. He added that he most
likely would have postponed the review. The IG told us that he never
thought to inform the Chairman about the peer review.
According to the IG, he was never offered the option of selecting from
three other OIGs to conduct this review. Further, he would not have
objected to such a review because, in his opinion, any IG conducting the
review would have remained independent and would not have allowed the
Chairman to have oversight of the review. However, this information was
not conveyed to the Chairman; and the disagreements between the IG and the
Chairman escalated significantly. After the Chairman criticized the IG
about the Dickey case, TVA initiated an extensive review of the IG's
credit card expenses; and the IG concluded that the Chairman wanted to get
rid of him.
The Chairman alone initiated the process for a management review of the
OIG. When the Chairman received the analysis of the IG's credit card usage
for the IG's entire tenure, he began his most agressive actions against
the IG. This occurred after Directors Hayes and Kennoy had left TVA. The
Chairman's actions against the IG included the release of unsubstantiated
allegations to the media and the referral of unsubstantiated allegations
to the ECIE. These actions could be viewed as an attempt to undermine the
IG's independence.
Chairman's Allegations Concerning IG's Credit Card Expenses
-----------------------------------------------------------
Based on its "brief preliminary review" of the IG's credit card
statements, TVA questioned a total of $15,150 in charges for the years
1994 through 1999. (See table 1.) We reviewed in depth the IG's most
recent charges--$14,197--from January 1, 1998, to May 12, 1999. As to
these, we did not find that the IG had violated any TVA travel policy or
rule. However, as the IG himself recognized, his actions could have
created the appearance that his independence had been compromised. Based
on this analysis, we determined that a further analysis of credit card
charges for the period 1994 through 1997 was not warranted. In addition,
for comparison purposes, we requested TVA to compile credit card expenses
for calendar year 1998 for the three Board members and the senior
executives that report directly to the Board. This comparison indicated
that the IG's credit card expenses were consistent with those of other TVA
executives. See appendix I for this comparison.
IG's Travel Activities Were for Business Purposes or "Customer Relations"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the head of a major office at TVA, the IG often traveled in connection
with his position. For example, he traveled to attend meetings in his
capacity as an ECIE representative on a PCIE committee. In other
instances, he attended TVA Board meetings or met with congressional
members and staff to present OIG reports. These activities clearly do not
raise questions as to the purpose of the travel and were reimbursable as
long as the expenses fell within the guidelines set out in TVA's travel
policies./Footnote17/
The IG also incurred expenses as a result of activities that involved
"customer relations." The IG was a member of TVA's Business Council and,
as did the other Council members, participated in the customer outreach
activities. These activities were done at the specific behest of former
Director Hayes, who was most concerned with TVA's maintaining or
increasing its market share for electric power. Director Hayes also
emphasized that it would be beneficial for the IG to take part in
recreational events, such as golf outings that were ancillary to various
meetings, that TVA planned as part of its program of customer relations.
Moreover, he specifically encouraged the IG to bill the charges to TVA.
The IG had initially paid for his own golf and charged the cost to TVA
only when Director Hayes told him that such charges were consistent with
TVA's policy regarding allowable expenses for hospitality.
The Chairman was aware of the IG's involvement in the customer relations
program and told us that he considered this activity completely
appropriate for the IG as long as his activity had been coordinated with
Director Hayes. Director Kennoy also told us that it was appropriate for
the IG to engage in customer relations.
The IG's involvement in the customer relations program was coordinated
with Director Hayes. The IG never reached out to any distributors but
attended functions only when requested by the Customer Relations and
Marketing Group, which had responsibility for administering the customer
relations program. Essentially, the IG attended various meetings with
distributors at which the IG would discuss the IG Act, his background, and
the role of the OIG at TVA. The IG also assisted certain customers in
dealing with problems that were similar to those encountered by an IG. For
example, the IG assisted one company in setting up an ethics program and
another company in setting up an improved financial control system. He
felt that all of these activities were beneficial to his office.
In performing his customer relations function, the IG sometimes paid the
bill for other TVA employees, Board members, and customers. In some
instances, the IG paid the bill when another TVA official could also have
paid it. In other situations, the IG was the only TVA person present who
could have paid the bill.
As part of its business practices, TVA had hospitality guidelines, which
provided that hospitality was available to official visitors, candidates
for employment, guests, and employees as a part of its business activities
when it was determined to be in TVA's best interest. The guidelines
further provided the following:
"Hospitality services provided for and paid for by TVA may include but are
not limited to:
- Meals.
- Refreshments.
- Banquet or food services.
- Room and equipment rental associated with hospitality.
- Lodging, meal and travel expenses for visitors and guests.
- Entertainment.
- Flowers and decorations for events (as determined by the TVA
organization).
- Recognition awards.
- Gifts.(c)
OIG had written policies indicating that the OIG followed TVA policy
except for some modifications based on the OIG's unique role under laws
and regulations. Nothing in these laws and regulations precluded the IG
from engaging in hospitality functions and incurring the type expenses
provided for in the hospitality policy. Indeed, the OIG policy
specifically indicated that, in accordance with TVA policy, OIG employees
may pay hospitality expenses for non-OIG individuals for a business
purpose, such as to improve relations with individuals that TVA worked
with on a regular basis.
The IG did acknowledge that his close relationship with members of the
Board and his participation in TVA-sponsored social events could have
created the appearance that his independence had been compromised. He
continued, however, that he had participated at the Directors' behest. He
felt that participating in these activities enabled him to maintain a good
working relationship with the Board. He concluded that his participation
did not impede his independence.
Contested Charges for 1998-1999 Were Appropriate
------------------------------------------------
Table 1 details the TVA-questioned expenditures by category and the cost
incurred for each year from 1994 through mid-May 1999.
Table****Helvetica:x11****1: IG's Questioned Charges Based on TVA's
Preliminary Review
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Category of : 1994 : 1995 : 1996 : 1997 : 1998 : 1999^a: Total |
| expenditure : : : : : : : |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Hotel/casino : $0 : $0 : $68 : $68 : $247 : $147 : $530 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Golf resorts : 489 : 480 : 218 : 629 : 2,384 : 180 : $4,380 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Liquor : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 303 : 0 : $303 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Nonlocal : 493 : 254 : 1,793 : 1,548 : 1,669 : 162 : $5,919 |
| restaurant : : : : : : : |
| charges : : : : : : : |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Local : 225 : 621 : 0 : 1,139 : 1,013 : 385 : $3,383 |
| restaurant : : : : : : : |
| charges : : : : : : : |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Other : 0 : 95 : 32 : 328 : 0 : 180 : $635 |
| questionable : : : : : : : |
| charges : : : : : : : |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Total : $1,207: $1,450: $2,111: $3,712: $5,616: $1,054: $15,1 |
| : : : : : : : 50 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
^aWe examined 1999 charges made through May 12.
Source: May 27, 1999, TVA memorandum to the CAO, entitled "Preliminary
Credit Card Review - George Prosser.(c)
We reviewed the charges in each category for 1998 and 1999. Based on the
TVA travel and hospitality policies, we found that none of these charges
violated TVA policies regarding the incurring of expenses for business and
hospitality purposes. Specifically, we found the following as to these
charges.
Hotel/Casino
TVA alleged that the IG had incurred hotel and casino expenses in
Philadelphia, Mississippi, on three occasions in 1998 and 1999, totaling
$394. In 1998, the IG went to Philadelphia twice: in February, for a TVA
Board meeting followed by other business meetings and in October, for an
OIG presentation that he made in Philadelphia and a contiguous city. The
expenses charged for these trips were for lodging. In 1999, the IG went to
Philadelphia for a Joint OIG/TVA presentation made at Mississippi State
University. On this trip, the IG charged the room expenses for himself and
the Chief Financial Officer, who also made a presentation. These expenses
were all appropriate.
Golf Resorts
On seven occasions in 1998 and once in 1999, the IG played golf following
either an official TVA meeting, such as the monthly meeting of the TVA
Board, or an OIG presentation involving customer relations. His expenses
for these golf activities during this period totaled $892 and ranged from
$45 to $276. In several instances, the IG paid the golf fees for TVA
customers, as he did when he incurred the $276 expense. The IG's golf
expenses were consistent with the TVA hospitality policy./Footnote18/
The IG also charged $1,672 at the Power Play Golf Tournament, a major
event sponsored by TVA and its customers to raise scholarship money. This
amount covered the IG's lodging and golf fees. In addition, some of this
amount covered the expenses of another OIG employee who attended in order
to ensure the accountability of the funds raised at the event. This
employee did not have a TVA credit card, and the IG charged all the
employee's expenses. The IG also paid certain expenses for customers. As a
senior official at TVA, the IG's payment of these expenses was consistent
with the TVA's hospitality policy. Indeed, other TVA executives incurred
charges on their TVA credit cards for golf fees and lodging similar to
those of the IG.
Liquor
On one occasion, the IG purchased liquor, which cost about $303, as an
accommodation for Director Hayes who was going to make the purchase so
that alcohol would be available at an official TVA dinner in a "dry"
county. At the time, Director Hayes had a family emergency, which prompted
the IG to make the purchase. Clearly Director Hayes could have purchased
this liquor under the TVA hospitality policy, and we found no policy or
rule that would prohibit the IG from substituting for a Director.
Nonlocal Restaurant Charges
During 1998 and 1999, the IG allegedly charged a total of $1,831 at
restaurants on 15 different occasions. These charges ranged from $35 to
$163, except for one of $500. In every instance, the IG was on official
business including meetings involving audits, with confidential informants
and members of Congress, or attendance at official TVA functions. In
certain instances, the IG paid for meals for others. For example, the
$500 charge occurred in Washington, D.C., when the IG charged the cost of
a meal served at a business meeting he attended with members of the
Congressional Committee having oversight of TVA. All of these expenses
were consistent with TVA travel policy and rules.
Local Restaurant Charges
Some expenses that were not incident to travel were called into issue. For
the period we reviewed, these expenses totaled $1,398 and covered meals
that the IG purchased in the Knoxville area on 17 occasions. The costs of
the meals ranged from $10 to $156, except for one that was $582. In most
instances, the IG conducted a business meeting during lunch and paid for
all participants. For example, he met with the Special Agent in Charge of
the FBI's Knoxville Field Office on at least three occasions in 1998 on
matters of mutual concern and paid for the meals. He also held business
lunches with confidential informants and paid for these. Three charges
during 1998 were related to a meeting that the IG had with representatives
from the OIG of the National Archives and Records Administration. TVA
policy permitted the IG to charge these meals while he was engaged in
official business. Lastly, a $582 charge was for an employee appreciation
luncheon, which was covered under the TVA hospitality policy.
Other Questionable Charges
TVA also raised questions about miscellaneous charges the IG had incurred.
Four of these arose in the 1998 and 1999 time period we reviewed. One was
a charge of $43 the IG had made for a personal item; he had immediately
reimbursed TVA even though he was not asked to do so. A second charge
involved $732 airline tickets that the IG never used. We were informed
that this was due to an administrative error that eventually resulted in
TVA's account being credited for the amount. A third charge consisted of
$118 for flowers for an official TVA event. In this instance, a Director
had asked the IG to order the flowers for customer appreciation. The
fourth charge, for $19, was for publications for the OIG. The purchase of
flowers was covered under the TVA hospitality policy. We determined that
the publications purchase was needed for the work of the OIG.
Scope and Methodology
---------------------
We conducted our investigation from June 9, 1999, through September 7,
1999. We interviewed TVA officials involving both TVA's attempt to retain
a nonfederal entity to conduct a management review of the OIG and the
analysis of the IG's TVA credit card usage. We also interviewed current
and former OIG officials regarding the OIG performance review issue and
the IG's use of the TVA credit card. Further, we contacted individuals
from OMB, FBI, Verner Liipfert, and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the
Eastern District of Tennessee regarding their conversations with TVA
officials. The Department of Justice denied our request to interview the
U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee.
We analyzed records related to both the management review and charges that
the IG made using a TVA credit card. These records included internal
memoranda, notes, contract files, audit reports, and policy manuals
regarding OIG travel and hospitality expenses. We also reviewed quality
standards for IGs. In addition, we reviewed the IG's calendars for 1994
through 1999 and invoices for charges to the TVA credit card for 1996
through 1999. Receipts for 1994 and 1995 were no longer available.
Further, we reviewed a detailed analysis of the IG's travel, by trip, for
calendar year 1998 and the first 5 months of 1999. The IG also provided
written explanations for expenses he had incurred during 1998 and 1999 and
for all charges for golf resorts for the period 1994 through May 1999.
As agreed with your office, unless you release its contents earlier, we
plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days after the date
of this letter. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the
Honorable Craven Crowell, Chairman, Tennessee Valley Authority; George
Prosser, Inspector General, Tennessee Valley Authority; and interested
congressional committees. We will also make copies available to others
upon request. If you have questions concerning this report, please contact
me or Donald Fulwider at (202) 512-6722. John Ryan was a key contributor
to this case.
Sincerely yours,
*****************
*****************
Robert H. Hast
Acting Assistant Comptroller General
for Special Investigations
--------------------------------------
/Footnote1/-^ Pub. L. No. 100-504, 102 Stat. 2515 (1988).
/Footnote2/-^ Pub. L. No. 95-452, 92 Stat. 1101 (1978).
/Footnote3/-^ Section 5(d) requires IGs to report immediately to the head
of their respective establishments whenever they become aware of
particularly serious or flagrant problems, abuses, or deficiencies
regarding the establishment's administration of programs or activities.
Within 7 days of receipt of the report, the head of the establishment is
required to send the report to the appropriate congressional committees
or subcommittees along with a report containing appropriate comments.
(Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App. 3,
****ITCCentury Book:xa4**** 5(d) (1994))
/Footnote4/-^ ECIE consists of statutory IGs appointed by the heads of
designated federal entities. As a result of Executive Order No. 12805,
which was signed in 1992, ECIE became a member of the President's
Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE). PCIE is an interagency
council that is charged with promoting integrity and effectiveness in
federal programs. The PCIE is chaired by the Deputy Director for
Management at the Office of Management and Budget.
/Footnote5/-^ As a member of TVA's senior management, the IG was
authorized to use a TVA Visa Gold Card for hospitality expenses
including, but not limited to, meals, refreshments, and entertainment.
TVA pays for these expenses.
/Footnote6/-^ The Chairman requested, and the Board approved, the 1993
review of the OIG. Dempsey and Associates and TVA were the contracting
parties. Under the contract, the contractor agreed to review the OIG's
resources, procedures, training, and operations. The contract did not
contain any provisions regarding the Board's oversight of the review.
/Footnote7/-^ Former Director Hayes told us that he did not raise any
concerns about the review because the Chairman and the CAO had informed
him that it was a routine management review aimed at helping the OIG run
better. He explained that he did not respond to the memorandum because
he anticipated that the Board would discuss the issue before signing the
contract. Former Director Kennoy did not explain why he had not
responded to the memorandum.
/Footnote8/-^ This audit resulted from a GAO referral to the TVA OIG of an
allegation that the GAO FraudNet had received.
/Footnote9/-^ Also on Mar. 20, 1999, TVA issued a press release announcing
that the Board had ordered a review of the OIG and stating that nothing
in particular had prompted the review. According to the press release,
the review would look at performance efficiency and monitor the IG's
operations. The IG reportedly had no objection to the review.
/Footnote10/-^ 5 U.S.C. App. 3, ****ITCCentury Book:xa4**** 4(b)(2).
/Footnote11/-^ In addition to these tasks, the contractor was required to
determine the extent to which the OIG supported TVA's goal of being
"customer-driven, employee-sensitive, environmentally responsible and
growth-oriented"; examine the existing procedures for measuring
performance and productivity; and examine criteria for allocating
resources and establishing priorities.
/Footnote12/-^ On Mar. 25, 1999, TVA's Office of General Counsel contacted
GAO's Director of Audit Oversight and Liaison, who was responsible for
GAO work on IG matters, to discuss various options available to the
Board for a review of the TVA OIG.
/Footnote13/-^ Although there was no document terminating the Mar. 23,
1999, contract with Verner Liipfert, officials of both TVA and Verner
Liipfert informed us that it had been terminated.
/Footnote14/-^ During an OIG audit of TVA contracts that started in Sept.
1996, issues were raised concerning a contract awarded by Mr. Dickey,
TVA's Chief Operating Officer. These issues were referred to OIG
Investigations in Jan. 1997. Mr. Dickey resigned from TVA on Aug. 14,
1998, and was indicted on Sept. 15, 1998. This indictment was superceded
on Nov. 4, 1998. The trial ended in an acquittal of all charges on May
14, 1999.
/Footnote15/-^ The IG subsequently contacted the U.S. Attorney, who denied
knowing about a referral involving the IG's credit card use. We
attempted to talk with the U.S. Attorney about this matter, but the
Department of Justice declined our request for an interview.
/Footnote16/-^ This disclosure was made in the May 20, 1999, draft of this
memorandum from the senior manager to his supervisor, the CAO.
/Footnote17/-^ TVA travel policy required that TVA pay for travel expenses
incident to business purposes for such things as transportation,
lodging, meals, and other approved expenses in accordance with TVA
guidelines and the Federal Travel Regulations, which are applicable to
most civilian employees of the federal government. In this regard, TVA
reimbursed business travelers for such items as meals, local
transportation, lodging, laundry/dry cleaning, parking, phone expenses,
and other incidentals. The reimbursement for meals, lodging, and
laundry/dry cleaning was limited to 150 percent of the locality rate set
by the General Services Administration (GSA) for civilian employees of
the federal government in a travel status. However, since 1997, in
special and unusual circumstances the maximum reimbursement can be up to
300 percent of the locality rate set by GSA.
/Footnote18/-^In one instance, the IG paid the golf fees for Director
Hayes. Since Director Hayes was clearly authorized to charge TVA for
this expense and the IG was authorized to make such payments when in the
best interest of TVA, we find the IG's action unobjectionable.
1998 CREDIT CARD CHARGES BY TVA BOARD, IG, AND SENIOR EXECUTIVES
================================================================
Table****Helvetica:x11****2: 1998 Domestic Charges by TVA Officials
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Offi : Hote : Mea : Trans : TVA : Othe : Pers : Golf: Liq : Oth : Subt |
| cial : l^b : ls^b: port^c: plane: r : onal : : uor : er^d: otal |
| ^a : : : : : busi : : : : : |
| : : : : : ness : vehi : : : : |
| : : : : : : cle : : : : |
| : : : : : expe : use : : : : |
| : : : : : nse : : : : : |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Chai : $11, : $3, : $15,3 : $56, : $0 : $491 : $0 : $0 : $1, : $88, |
| rman : 309 : 848 : 98 : 294 : : : : : 042 : 382 |
| : : : : : : : : : : |
| Crow : : : : : : : : : : |
| ell : : : : : : : : : : |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dire : 4,341: 1,2 : 7,468 : 52,8 : 0 : 707 : 0 : 0 : 1,6 : $68, |
| ctor : : 71 : : 60 : : : : : 61 : 308 |
| : : : : : : : : : : |
| Kenn : : : : : : : : : : |
| oy : : : : : : : : : : |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dire : 6,134: 1,2 : 8,326 : 27,0 : 0 : 105 : 90 : 0 : 844 : $43, |
| ctor : : 70 : : 42 : : : : : : 811 |
| : : : : : : : : : : |
| Haye : : : : : : : : : : |
| s : : : : : : : : : : |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| IG : 4,453: 2,7 : 5,381 : 0 : 0 : 1,342: 1,1 : 303 : 74 : $15, |
| Pros : : 58 : : : : : 74 : : : 485 |
| ser : : : : : : : : : : |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Chie : 11,6 : 4,4 : 1,089 : 0 : 1,304: 0 : 120 : 0 : 0 : $18, |
| f : 85 : 71 : : : : : : : : 669 |
| Fina : : : : : : : : : : |
| ncia : : : : : : : : : : |
| l : : : : : : : : : : |
| Offi : : : : : : : : : : |
| cer : : : : : : : : : : |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Chie : 3,659: 79 : 447 : 0 : 1,025: 0 : 120 : 0 : 0 : $5,3 |
| f : : : : : : : : : : 30 |
| Oper : : : : : : : : : : |
| atin : : : : : : : : : : |
| g : : : : : : : : : : |
| Offi : : : : : : : : : : |
| cer : : : : : : : : : : |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| CAO : 3,079: 874 : 549 : 0 : 3,994: 0 : 120 : 0 : 0 : $8,6 |
| : : : : : : : : : : 16 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
^aTVA's General Counsel charged no domestic expenses during 1998.
^bThis category does not include direct bills to TVA. It includes only the
amount charged on the VISA Gold Card.
^c"Transport" includes commercial flights, travel service, car rentals,
taxis, gasoline, and parking.
^d"Other" includes conference fees, telephone calls, tips, and facsimiles.
Table****Helvetica:x11****3: 1998 International Charges by TVA Officials
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Official^a : Hotel : Meals : Trans : Other : Other : Subto : Total |
| : ^b : ^b : port^c: : ^d : tal : |
| : : : : busin : : : 1998 |
| : : : : ess : : : charg |
| : : : : expen : : : es |
| : : : : se : : : |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Chairman : $2,284: $484 : $14,6 : $0 : $8 : $17,4 : $105, |
| Crowell : : : 78 : : : 54 : 836 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Director : 585 : 151 : 1,740 : 0 : 12 : 2,488 : $70,7 |
| Kennoy : : : : : : : 96 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Director : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : $43,8 |
| Hayes : : : : : : : 11 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| IG Prosser : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : $15,4 |
| : : : : : : : 85 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Chief : 1,806 : 27 : 0 : 24 : 0 : 1,857 : $20,5 |
| Financial : : : : : : : 26 |
| Officer : : : : : : : |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Chief : 0 : 0 : 0 : 724 : 0 : 724 : $6,054 |
| Operating : : : : : : : |
| Officer : : : : : : : |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| CAO : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : $8,616 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
^aTVAs General Counsel charged no international expenses during 1998.
^bThis category does not include direct bills to TVA. It includes only the
amount charged on the VISA Gold Card.
^c"Transport" includes commercial flights, travel service, car rentals,
taxis, gasoline, and parking.
^d"Other" includes conference fees, telephone calls, tips, and facsimiles.
*** End of document. ***