The Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) improperly paid an employee over $100,000 in paid administrative leave during fiscal years 2021 and 2022. During the same time period, DEEP also failed to accurately log the start and end times of Environmental Conservation officers’ shifts in at least 70 instances, and did not maintain accurate vehicle mileage laws during fiscal years 2021 and 2022.
These findings come from a recently released audit from the Auditors of Public Accounts covering DEEP, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), the Office of Consumer Counsel (OCC), and the Connecticut Siting Council (CS) for fiscal years 2021 and 2022.
It found that the agency placed an employee facing pending criminal charges on leave for more than the 30 days allowed by state agency regulations while the matter was adjudicated. During that time, the employee received $114,983. Of that amount, $109,239 was paid improperly because it went beyond the allowable 30-day period.
In another instance, DEEP placed an employee on administrative leave for 11 days without supporting documentation.
DEEP told auditors that the leave of the employee facing criminal charges occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic when court proceedings were slow.
“This led to the employee remaining on leave for an extended period as management felt it inappropriate and possibly unsafe to allow the employee to return to work pending charges. Ultimately, the charges were nulled, and the employee returned to work.” DEEP told auditors.
In the second case, DEEP said the employee resigned and was placed on paid administrative leave by management and the Office of Labor Relations (OLR) for their final two weeks after they made derogatory comments.
“In the future, the agency will seek extension from the appropriate regulatory authorities should we encounter other extraordinary circumstances such as these.” DEEP told auditors.
The finding that DEEP was not following paid leave requirements is a repeat from a previous audit report covering fiscal years 2018, 2019, and 2020.
The audit also found instances of inaccurate time reporting among the agency’s Environmental Conservation officers.
Auditors reviewed time card reports from 13 Environmental Officers across 32 pay periods and compared the information to their vehicle GPS data. It identified 70 cases from nine officers where the start or end time of the dispatch log differed from the vehicle start/stop time by at least 30 minutes. In 33 cases from five officers, the start/stop time difference was more than an hour. In 11 cases from three officers, GPS identified the vehicle stopped at their home during their shift for over an hour.
DEEP said they don’t believe this finding reflects any instances of officers being paid for time they were not working. They said neither GPS nor the dispatch log are the primary tools used to record employee hours. “Timekeeping is handled through scheduling and reporting time in the Core-CT Time and Labor Module. Staff enter their time into Core-CT Self Service, and it is reviewed and approved by their supervisors on a bi-weekly basis. Managerial review is also conducted on a regular basis. This system is the official time management system of the agency.” DEEP told auditors.
In another repeat finding, auditors reviewed the agency’s control over its fleet vehicle maintenance and found it does not centrally track forms employees use to request completed and requested work.
The audit reviewed 293 vehicle mileage reports from April 2022 and found 105 instances where vehicles were used five or fewer times, including 23 instances where a vehicle was not used. Auditors reported this makes it appear some of the DEEP’s fleet vehicles are being underused. As of April 2022, the agency had 502 vehicles, 347 of which it owned and 155 of which it leased from the Department of Administrative Services (DAS).
According to auditors, the lack of a fleet management system means the agency is not “efficiently and effectively managing vehicle utilization and costs.”
DEEP told auditors it agrees with the finding and is working towards a better management system. They said they have begun conversations with DAS about “the procurement of more vehicles through DAS and leases back to DEEP as opposed to agency owned.”
“The initial impacts of COVID had a distinct impact on lack of utilization of many vehicles in DEEP’s fleet. As many staff have migrated towards a hybrid work environment, the need for DEEP to reassess its baseline for vehicle needs is even more apparent.” the agency told auditors.
Other findings affecting DEEP in the audit report relate to improper hiring of seasonal employees at state parks and other locations, a lack of an adequate process to report unauthorized or irregular handling of state funds to the Auditors of Public Accounts and the State Comptroller, and a lack of a central database to track complaints and the status of complaints once received.
Was this article helpful?
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
I think it is difficult for most people to extrapolate the many layers of possible meaning from data and points in an APA Audit. This article is concerned with a 60 Page Audit and 24 Findings. 21 of those 24 finds are being “Repeated” which means DEEP has only resolved 3 of the APA’s Audit Findings and Recommendations since the release of their prior audit in March of 2022.
I think the DEEP employee paid 108k to sit at home and play Grand Theft Auto on Playstation for half a year while under Criminal Investigation makes a great news headline but it’s really not all that interesting unless you do the math and start looking up salaries. How long was the person out for again? 108k? Because the prior audit findings, released in March of 2022 for fiscal years ended June 30, 2018 thru 2020, found eight DEEP employees were on paid administrative leave from 31 to 168 days. In fact, that finding goes on to say that as of July 23, 2021, one employee remained on leave since March 2, 2020. That’s a year and a half. The point is, so what?
Is it of no concern that DEEP performed no evaluations on any of 5 managerial employees selected during the audit period? Not a single review?
Is it of no concern that DEEP would not (or could not) provide the contracts for purchase orders totaling $624,663, $24,469,075, and $769,206? DEEP’s response was that “many of the staff responsible for those contracts departed State service and their documentation is only available in a dormant email account.” Documentation for a 24 million purchase order is trapped in a dormant email? That’s not surprising to anyone? Or that aside from not providing the Auditors with $769k DAmato Construction non-competitive contract, DEEP also could not provide the required ethics affidavits and certification necessary for statutory execution and payment of that contract. That’s not surprising?
Every single finding is packed full of meaning and The Auditors of Public Accounts are absolutely brilliant. Put that report on display at the MoMA. It’s a masterpiece.
Be good and thanks for listening.
Bryant Abbott
When will you address what illegally occurred to me. All information can be found on me legal GoFundMe page, JJ Fox, Manchester, CT.
Time to address illegal abuse of autistic people by corrupt Connecticut state workers.