OFFICE OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER

Transcription

1 STATE OF NEW YORK OFFICE OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER 270 BROADWAY NEW YORK, NEW YORK H. CARL McCALL STATE COMPTROLLER ROSEMARY SCANLON ASSISTANT DEPUTY COMPTROLLER FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK February 16, 1995 Ms. Donna Lynne Director Mayor's Office of Operations City of New York 100 Church Street - 20th floor New York, New York Re: Follow-Up Review of Audit Report on Intra-City Compliance Procedures Regarding Summonsable Offenses (A-20-91), Follow-Up Report No. A-1-95 Dear Director Lynne: Pursuant to the State Comptroller's audit authority as set forth in the State Constitution, the State Finance Law, and the General Municipal Law, we have reviewed the actions taken by relevant City agencies, as of November 9, 1994, to implement the recommendations included in our prior audit, Report A-20-91, issued August 4, The prior audit concerned the Notices of Violation (Violations) issued by one City agency to another regarding hazardous conditions existing on the premises of the receiving agency, and the monitoring by the issuing and receiving agencies to assure removal of the hazard. The primary objective of this follow-up review was to examine the extent to which the 25 recommendations made in our 1992 audit were implemented. The relevant City agencies had concurred with most of the recommendations at the time of the audit. A second objective was to assess current City efforts to comply with the Administrative Code's provisions regarding the safety of City facilities for workers and visitors. The City's Office of Management and Budget Audit Coordination and Review unit (OMB), had recently completed an assessment of City agency compliance with our report recommendations. The OMB Status Report indicated that 24 recommendations had been implemented or were in the process of being implemented and one recommendation was categorized as "alternative action not yet implemented."

2 -2- Our review, using the follow-up standards described below for assessing the extent of corrective action taken, if any, found that 18 were implemented, 5 were partially implemented and 2 were not implemented: Implemented - auditee agreed with the recommendation and we verified that action had been taken to adopt the recommendation or an alternative approach that achieves the same objective. Partially Implemented - auditee agreed with the recommendation and we observed that action was in process that would implement the recommendation or the recommendation's objective. Not Implemented - auditee disagreed with recommendation or, if it had agreed, there was no evidence of implementation action being taken. To conduct this follow-up review, we secured available Violation data from the Mayor's Office of Operations (Operations) and other City sources. In addition, State Comptroller auditors conducting other audits at City agency sites verified the accuracy of some of the OMB findings and the Violation data. Background The New York City Departments of Fire, Buildings, and Environmental Protection inspect properties to assure compliance with laws and regulations designed to protect the public and property from fire, defective structures, and toxic air and materials. When such conditions are detected by an inspection, a Violation is issued to the person or business entity in control of the source of the unlawful and dangerous condition. The Violation is entered as a lien against the party in one or more official records until the Violation is removed and/or a fine is paid. Clearing the lien is the incentive for the party to remove the Violation. However, no lien is issued with Violations on City-owned or controlled properties and workplaces. Our prior audit highlighted numerous outstanding Violations at properties controlled by almost all City Mayoral agencies as well as by covered organizations such as the Board of Education and the Health and Hospitals Corporation. The audit evidenced an absence of compliance and corrective action in many instances. A 1982 Agreement promulgated by Operations with City agencies provided for disposition of the Violation with appropriate and timely action. Our 1992 report concluded that unnecessary dangers and risks to the well-being and property of the public, employees and the City existed because of lengthy delays and/or inaction by many of the receiving agencies regarding the Violations issued to them. At that time, some of the City agencies alleged no knowledge of the 1982 Agreement or the agencies' responsibilities for correcting Violations. We made 25 recommendations to clarify the relationship and responsibilities of the various City entities to assure a safe workplace for City employees and the public.

3 -3- Summary Conclusions We commend Operations on its intensive effort to encourage agencies to expeditiously clear Violations and correct hazardous conditions. We agree with its emphasis on encouraging agencies to take action to prevent recurrence of conditions that may result in personal injuries and/or property damage. The procedure currently being followed is that Fire and Buildings generate monthly reports for Operations showing, by agency, the number of Violations issued, removed/corrected, and outstanding. Despite Operation's efforts, the combined total of Buildings and Fire Violations outstanding at Mayoral agencies and covered organizations at September/October 1994 was 11,162, more than double the 5,492 Violations of all types at March 1991 disclosed by our prior audit. The monthly reports include the Violation status for Board of Education, Health and Hospitals Corporation and Housing Authority facilities. Operations receives quarterly reports on the status of outstanding Violations from the eight mayoral agencies that receive the majority of Fire and Buildings Violations. When necessary, Operations meets with an agency to assist and encourage corrective actions to remove Violations and prevent recurrences. For example, Operations has arranged for the award of a Citywide requirements contract for recharging fire extinguishers, which allows each agency to issue purchase orders without the delay of getting quotations or bids. The City may be able to manage the monitoring of Violations more efficiently. The Environmental Control Board (ECB), a unit of the New York City Department of Environmental Protection, adjudicates Violations. It maintains a computer data base, the Bureau of Air Resources Automated Management Information System (BARAMIS), on which each of the issuing agencies, including Buildings and Fire, enters Violations resulting from their inspections. We suggest that ECB use BARAMIS to generate a periodic consolidated schedule of Violations including all City agency/locations. It would be more efficient and effective than continuing the current practice where each issuing agency prepares a multitude of reports on agency Violations. (See discussion related to Recommendation No.25) Follow-Up Observations, By Recommendation 1. The Mayor's Office of Operations should provide clear direction to all City agencies by either reissuing the 1982 Agreement or promulgating new procedures, and then ensure that the agencies comply. Agency Action - "Correction of Outstanding City Agency Violations" was the subject of an August 1994 Memorandum from the Director of Operations to Agency heads. Referring to our prior audit, the memo stated that, notwithstanding the fact that many

4 -4- agencies reduced their backlog of Violations and established procedures to prevent future Violations, "Nevertheless, the number of outstanding violations remains high." The Memorandum instructed each agency to appoint a Violations Coordinator and encouraged the agencies "to ensure timely follow up and correction of all outstanding City agency violations." We were furnished with the current, updated "Interagency Violation Coordinator" list. 2. The Bureau of Air Resources should establish and implement procedures to ensure that agencies correct cited conditions. Status - Partially Implemented Agency Action - The Bureau of Air, Noise, and Hazardous Materials (which is the successor to the Bureau of Air Resources) advised OMB that it is meeting with the Environmental Control Board and Operations to improve environmental monitoring activities. No procedures had been established at the time of our follow-up. At our exit conference the Bureau provided us with the details of a newly instituted process to ensure agency compliance with environmental laws and rules. We reviewed this material which appears to achieve the Bureau's compliance monitoring responsibility. 3. The Environmental Control Board should review its data base and remove all fines that have been erroneously imposed against City agencies. Agency Action - ECB and Operations assured OMB that fines issued against City agencies are routinely removed from BARAMIS. ECB furnished us the September 1994 schedule of "Write-Offs for Publicly Owned Property" showing year-to-date write-offs of $96,100 for Fire, $45,290 for Buildings and $35,255 for Air Resources. The September Write-Offs schedule included fines for Violations issued in March According to ECB, the issuing agencies enter Violations into BARAMIS and are suppose to write-off the fines for publicly owned property before making an entry. As evidenced by the September write-off schedule we cited, the identification of the publicly owned property violation sometimes occurs after the entry and then ECB performs the write-off. ECB informed us that "few violations are still outstanding against City entities. These remaining cases are in the process of being written off."

5 4. The Fire Department should issue correction approval letters to respondents who certify compliance adequately, and disapproval letters to respondents whose corrective measures do not remedy cited conditions. -5- Agency Action - OMB was advised that Fire's Bureau of Fire Prevention sends each agency the appropriate section of the "Monthly Report of Outstanding Notices of Violation Issued by the Fire Department Which Have Been Removed From the Outstanding Report" as an alternative to the correction approval letter, and a "Certificate of Correction Disapproval Letter" for corrective measures that have not been accepted. 5. The Fire Department should instruct agencies to inform it of outstanding Violations incorrectly attributed to them on Fire's compliance request letters, so that the Violations can be immediately rerouted to the correct respondent. Agency Action - Operations met with the agencies to instruct them on what to do with Violations incorrectly sent to them. Fire agreed that wrong attribution of Violations is no longer a problem. 6. The Fire Department should include the addresses of cited Violations, in addition to the Violation number, in its compliance request letters. Agency Action - The Fire Department currently produces three different monthly reports which detail, by agency, every Violation that remains outstanding, has been removed from the outstanding report, or has been issued since the last report. The address where the Violation exists and its Violation number, as well as other identifying data, are included on these reports. 7. The Department of Buildings should notify agencies when it approves their compliance documentation. Agency Action - The Department of Buildings' Administrative Enforcement Unit informed OMB that it attaches a "Certificate of Correction Approval Letter" to the monthly list of Violations it sends each agency, thus notifying agencies that their documentation has been accepted.

6 8. The Human Resources Administration should prepare written procedures for monitoring Violations. Status - Not Implemented -6- Agency Action - The Human Resources Administration (HRA) informed OMB that it is currently in the process of formalizing procedures for monitoring Violations. We were unable to verify this. 9. The Human Resources Administration should properly certify compliance with issuing agencies. Agency Action - HRA informed OMB that it is now certifying compliance by signing and returning the "Certificate of Correction." 10. The Police Department should follow up on repair requests made to its Building Maintenance Section. Agency Action - The Police Department informed OMB that all Violations received are recorded in both a log book and a computerized data base. Repair requests are then forwarded to the Building Maintenance Section for the actual repair. OMB observed the log book and the computer system and reported both appeared current. 11. The Police Department should establish a system to ensure that each of its facilities tracks the disposition of Violations issued to it, and monitor those facilities to make sure cited conditions are corrected. Agency Action - The Police Department is now centrally tracking the disposition of Violations. 12. The Economic Development Corporation and the Department of General Services should follow up with the tenants of leased properties formerly under the jurisdiction of the Department of Business Services to make certain that cited conditions are corrected. Status - Partially Implemented

7 -7- Agency Action - The Economic Development Corporation (EDC) informed OMB that all outstanding Violations forwarded to it at the time of the audit were accounted for. Business Services reported that it is reviewing the Fire Department's Monthly Summary Report of Outstanding Violations and notifying the Fire Department of the Violations that do not belong to it. Some effort has been made to resolve these outstanding Violations but more effort is still needed. 13. The Health and Hospitals Corporation should require facilities to send all Violations to central HHC to be entered into the log. Agency Action - HHC is decentralizing some of its operations but has designated a Central Office Coordinator for all facilities. Also, HHC has designated three individuals to monitor and report on Violations by type (Buildings, Fire, and Environmental Protection). 14. The Fire Department should ensure that its 1987 agreement with the Health and Hospitals Corporation, regarding sending duplicates of Violations to Central Office, is adhered to. Agency Action - The Fire Department assured OMB that duplicate copies of an agency's Violations are sent to the agency's coordinator. 15. The Fire Department should send appropriate Certificate of Correction Approval Letters to the Health and Hospitals Corporation. Agency Action - The Fire Department informed OMB that it sends each Mayoral agency and covered organization the appropriate section of the Monthly Report of Outstanding Notices of Violations Issued by the Fire Department Which Have Been Removed From The Outstanding Report. This alternative action satisfies the intent of the recommendation. 16. The Board of Education should prepare written procedures for monitoring Violations. Agency Action - The Board prepared a written description of its Violations Abatement Process.

8 17. The Board of Education should follow up on repair requests made to its Division of School Facilities. Status - Partially Implemented -8- Agency Action - The Board informed OMB that a new repair request follow-up plan was implemented in October However, the plan may not have reduced the number of outstanding Violations. Our recently completed audit at the Board's Division of School Facilities found that there were 4,285 outstanding Violations at April 1994, some outstanding as long as 484 days. Some of these Violations had been issued for such serious infractions as discharged fire extinguishers, blocked exits, missing exit signs, and inadequate emergency lighting. Furthermore, we observed that no mechanism was established to monitor actions taken or planned to correct outstanding Violations. Also, the Board's record of outstanding Violations did not reconcile with the records of the issuing agencies. The Board's Chief Executive for School facilities responded that several initiatives are underway to address violations, the most significant of which is sending quarterly printouts of outstanding violations to custodians to update and report back on their completion status. 18. The Department of Health should prepare written procedures for monitoring Violations. Agency Action - Health prepared and issued written procedures in September 1991 as a result of our prior audit. 19. All receiving agencies cited in this report should reconcile their records of outstanding Violations with those of the issuing agencies. Inform the issuing agencies of Violations that have been corrected and of Violations that have been sent to the wrong respondent so that they can be rerouted. Outstanding Violations should be corrected. Status - Partially Implemented Agency Action - HRA, Police, EDC, the Health and Hospitals Corporation (HHC), the Board of Education and the Department of Health informed OMB that they are monitoring and reconciling their outstanding Violations. HRA and Police reported that they are sending the quarterly status report, Interagency Building and Fire Violations Status Report, to Operations. However, EDC, HHC, the Board and Health reported that Operations does not require them to submit a quarterly status report. In addition,

9 -9- there is still a large number of outstanding Violations. OMB reviewed the Fire Department's Monthly Report of Outstanding Notices of Violation and found that the Board of Education had 1,529 Violations outstanding from 1987 to March OMB also reviewed Buildings' City-Owned Compliance Results report as of February 28, 1994, and found that the Department of Housing Preservation and Development had 470 outstanding Violations, with 160 reported as "Hazardous." 20. The Mayor's Office of Operations should formalize the City's policy regarding interagency fines. In addition, it should weigh the benefits of allowing fines to be imposed on City agencies as a way to ensure correction of Violations. Status - Not Implemented Agency Action - Operations informed OMB that although there is no policy prohibiting interagency fines, it would be administratively burdensome and expensive to implement and would not generate new revenue for the City. Operations believes that more oversight and training on compliance procedures, better tracking of Violations, and direct assistance to agencies should expedite corrective action. [Operations informed us that "after careful consideration, the City of New York has decided not to impose monetary penalties for noncompliance with City agency violations.... This recommendation will not be implemented." Also, a representative of the City's Department of Law at the exit conference related that the City of Chicago was unsuccessful in employing a monetary penalty approach in an attempt to secure compliance with health and safety regulations.] 21. The Mayor's Office of Operations should identify the receiving agencies and request that each such agency designate a contact person (or persons) and advise Operations accordingly. Agency Action - As indicated in the August 1994 Memorandum from the Director of the Mayor's Office of Operations, a list of Agency Coordinators was compiled and procedures were established to maintain a comprehensive up-to-date Coordinator contact list. OMB believes that the lack of a good communication system between the issuing and receiving agencies and the Environmental Control Board has caused extensive delays in resolving Violations. We received a copy of the current Coordinator list dated January 1995.

10 The Mayor's Office of Operations should forward the list of agency contacts to the Department of Buildings and the Fire Department. Agency Action - Operations has forwarded a list of agency Coordinators to Buildings and Fire and has indicated that it would be updated quarterly. However, the last update of the list was April Although we asked Operations for a more recent list, we have not yet received it. 23. The Mayor's Office of Operations should ensure that all contact persons are apprised of their responsibilities. Agency Action - Operations advised OMB that all contact persons are invited to attend meetings to discuss the City's occupational safety and health issues, including Violations and agency responsibilities pertaining to Violations. At our request, Operations gave us the agendas for its meetings (with the Police, Homeless, Correction, Environmental Protection and General Services Departments) which concentrated on the Violations issue. Operations also provided us the proposed instructions to agencies for implementing the Director's Memorandum regarding Violations, including the need to prevent recurrence of conditions that are currently being corrected. 24. The Mayor's Office of Operations should develop uniform code or name for each agency to be used on Violations. Agency Action - Operations informed OMB that since our prior audit the agency codes used by FISA (the Financial Information Services Agency) have been accepted for use on BARAMIS, the ECB's Violation data base, on which both Fire and Buildings input the Violation data and the agency code after the Violation has been served.

11 The Mayor's Office of Operations should program BARAMIS to enable a search by agency name, and explore the feasibility of granting receiving agencies access to view BARAMIS information. Status - Partially Implemented Agency Action - The Mayor's Office of Operations now states that Recommendation 25 should have been addressed to the Environmental Control Board which maintains BARAMIS, rather than to Operations which acts only in an advisory capacity to ECB. (Operations initially indicated that it had no control over BARAMIS but that ECB was amenable to changing BARAMIS, if possible.) In reply to our request, during the follow-up review, for a consolidated listing of all types of Violations outstanding against each Mayoral agency and covered organization, ECB said that BARAMIS was not programmed to generate this information. We later learned that the data base now identifies each Violation on a City premise by the agency's FISA code. Since BARAMIS is the central repository of all types of Violations issued by City agencies, there are significant operational and financial and advantages that justify adopting our request. New Recommendation - The Office of Operations should consider directing ECB to develop and implement a BARAMIS program that generates a consolidated Violation report for each City entity, showing all outstanding violations for each entity site. We are grateful for the assistance and cooperation of the staffs of the Office of Operations and the Office of Management and Budget, as well as the employees of the Mayoral agencies and covered organizations visited during this follow-up review. We would appreciate your response, indicating any action planned or taken to address the unresolved matters discussed in this report. Sincerely, Rosemary Scanlon Assistant Deputy Comptroller