Finding 2025-001: Review of Compliance Matrices and Narratives - Special Tests and Provisions Federal Program Name: National Railroad Passenger Corporation Grants Assistance Listing No. 20.315 Federal Award Nos.: 69A36525520030AMTDC 69A36525520040AMTDC 69A36524520000AMTDC 69A36523504100AMTDC 69A36523504110AMTDC FR-AMT-0025-22 FR-AMT-0026-22 FR-AMT-0028-22 FR-AMT-0027-22 Federal Agency: Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration Criteria 1. The code of federal regulations – 2 CFR 200.302 Financial management requires that: (a) Each state must expend and account for the Federal award in accordance with State laws and procedures for expending and accounting for the State’s funds. All recipient and subrecipient financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms of the conditions of the federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by the terms and conditions; and tracking expenditures to establish that funds have been used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 2. The code of federal regulations – 2 CFR 200.303 Internal controls requires that recipients and subrecipients must: (a) Establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient or subrecipient is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). (b) Comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (c) Evaluate and monitor the recipient’s or subrecipient’s compliance with statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of Federal awards. Condition The following exceptions to the criteria were observed during the performance of the audit procedures: 1. For the compliance matrix that is maintained for the annual grants under Assistance Listing No. 20.315, Ernst & Young (EY) identified that for two provisions, the wording contained within the matrix did not match in its entirety to the respective grant agreement. Additionally, EY noted that two provisions that were present in the grant agreements were not included in the matrix. 2. For the compliance matrix that is maintained for Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) grants under Assistance Listing No. 20.315, EY identified that two provisions present in the grant agreements were not included in the matrix. 3. For the compliance matrices maintained for both the annual grants and IIJA grants under Assistance Listing No. 20.315, EY identified a lack of evidence to support management's assessment of certain provisions as not applicable. Cause In reviewing management’s internal controls, the key internal control identified by management is not designed such that consistent, proactive monitoring and/or review occurs to ensure all compliance requirements and any changes to the wording of specific provisions are updated and reviewed within the compliance matrices and narratives. Effect or Potential Effect Amtrak is not in compliance with the 2 CFR 200.302 (a) and 2 CFR 200.303. This may also put Amtrak at greater risk of non-compliance with specific provisions in accordance with the federal awards. Questioned Costs None identified. Context EY reviewed the federal awards in scope and compared them to the compliance matrices and compliance narrative maintained by the company as part of the audit procedures in connection with the testing of the special tests and provisions compliance requirement. Per review of the grant agreements, a total of 159 provisions exist of which EY identified six provisions as missing or inaccurate as described in the condition section above. As such, this finding relates to 3.77% of the total population of provisions. Identification as a Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding of 2024-002. Recommendation EY recommends that Amtrak update the control design with enough precision to ensure that reviews and updates to the compliance matrices are made on a regular cadence to ensure that any updates, amendments or changes are monitored and updated timely. Views of Responsible Officials Amtrak recognizes the need to improve our controls over the updates of the compliance matrices and will review its control processes by the end of FY2026.
Finding 2025-002: Equipment and Real Property Management Federal Program Name: National Railroad Passenger Corporation Grants Assistance Listing No. 20.315 Federal Award Nos.: 69A36524520000AMTDC 69A36524520010AMTDC FR-AMT-0025-22 FR-AMT-0026-22 69A36523504100AMTDC 69A36523504110AMTDC FR-AMT-0019-20 FR-AMT-0020-20 FR-AMT-0003-14-01-02 FR-AMT-0022-21 FR-AMT-0023-21 DTFRDV-07-G-00002 DTFRDV-09-G-00002 FY2000 Appropriation FY1975 Appropriation Federal Agency: Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration Criteria The code of federal regulations – 2 CFR 200.313 Equipment (d) Management Requirements requires that: (2) A physical inventory of the property must be conducted, and the results must be reconciled with the property records at least once every two years. (3) A control system must be in place to ensure safeguards for preventing property loss, damage, or theft. Any loss, damage, or theft of equipment must be investigated. The recipient or subrecipient must notify the Federal agency or pass-through entity of any loss, damage, or theft of equipment that will have an impact on the program. The code of federal regulations 2 CFR 200.303 Internal Controls states the recipient must: (a) Establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient or subrecipient is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by COSO. (d) Take prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified. Condition The following exceptions to the criteria were observed during the performance of the audit procedures: 1. For three of the equipment samples reviewed (approximately $1.1 million net book value), it was observed that the assets within Penn Coach Yard, in Philadelphia PA, lacked adequate safeguards to prevent property loss, damage or theft, as evidenced by the occurrence of two instances of property damage in the current year. EY notes Amtrak performed satisfactory investigations into both instances. 2. During EY's procedures performed for two assets (approximately $7.2 million net book value), EY identified that no inventory had occurred for the assets, even though they had been placed in service over two years prior and would have required an inventory prior to EY's observation. As this came to EY's attention after the inventory was required and during observation procedures, EY investigated further and could not obtain alternative evidence to support that an inventory had occurred within the two-year period. Cause The lack of adequate safeguards at Penn Coach Yard is attributable to a variety of insufficiencies related to security at Penn Coach Yard. The nature of much of Amtrak’s equipment is composed of moving assets on the tracks, operating up and down the corridors, operating around the yards, or moving from location to location in a geographical region to achieve daily operational objectives thus making tracking timely inventories more challenging. Furthermore, Amtrak resources are deployed such that managers and supervisors oversee geographical regions and equipment that are stationed throughout various routes, often connecting through multiple states with many unmanned and less traveled stations. In reviewing management’s internal controls, the key internal controls identified by management are not designed to ensure consistent, timely, and proactive monitoring to verify that inventory observations occur no less than once every two years. While there is an identified internal control stating that “On a monthly basis, these reports will identify all equipment that has not been observed within 2 years and communicate to the Enterprise Asset Management and Disposition Team (EAMDT) and other appropriate parties for action to be taken. EAMDT is responsible for ensuring the observations of equipment are completed. Once the equipment is observed, information is updated in the departmental source system and subsequently updated within the EAMDT reports,” the internal control does not establish a clear action plan or expected timeframe for responsible parties to respond to or remediate identified items. Further, the internal control is designed to identify assets that are already out of compliance, rather than to proactively monitor assets approaching the two‑year threshold. As a result, the internal control design is detective in nature and may not identify the risk of noncompliance until after noncompliance has occurred. Effect or Potential Effect Noncompliance with 2 CFR 200.313 (d) (2) and (3), and potential refund of grant funds used to purchase noncompliant assets. Questioned Costs The questioned costs below represent the total underlying net book value associated with EY's five equipment selections with exceptions. Assistance Listing No. 20.315 69A36524520000AMTDC/69A36524520010AMTDC $ 4,868,340 FR-AMT-0025-22/FR-AMT-0026-22 2,624,469 69A36523504100AMTDC/69A36523504110AMTDC 590,078 FY2000 Appropriation 110,077 FR-AMT-0019-20/FR-AMT-0020-20 98,376 FR-AMT-0003-14-01-02 88,840 DTFRDV-07-G-00002 30,532 FY1975 Appropriation 9,097 FR-AMT-0022-21/FR-AMT-0023-21 5,831 DTFRDV-09-G-00002 (94,917) Total Questioned Costs $ 8,330,723 Context EY performed equipment observations as a part of the testing of the equipment compliance area, randomly selecting 60 equipment units, and performing live observations with Amtrak personnel at the site with the equipment. EY performed inquiries relating to Amtrak’s safeguarding and maintenance procedures along with an inspection of the property records. Identification as a Repeat Finding Condition 2 represents a repeat finding of 2023-001. Condition 1 is not a repeat finding. Recommendation EY recommends Amtrak set up a system with certain criteria for identifying sites at a higher risk for noncompliance with safeguard requirements, and creates an action plan for evaluating, and remediating potential noncompliance. EY recommends that management consider redesigning one of its key controls to help ensure that the monitoring of the observations is occurring on a preventive basis to help identify any exposure to non-compliance before it occurs and clearly identifies any follow-up steps and actions. For example, there should be established a protocol as well as timeline for when required observations are to take place, additionally, as it is known in advance, which items are coming up for inventory, Amtrak could prepare an annual schedule of inventories, that could be revised quarterly. Views of Responsible Officials Amtrak acknowledges the recommendation that Amtrak should have a system with certain criteria for identifying sites at a higher risk for noncompliance with safeguard requirements and create an action plan for evaluating and remediating potential noncompliance. As part of this effort, the EAMDT will work with Corporate Security to review and, as appropriate, align existing governance processes to reduce the likelihood of similar noncompliance. Amtrak agrees with the recommendation to redesign key controls to help ensure that the monitoring of the observations happens on a preventive basis to help identify any exposure to non-compliance before it occurs. Amtrak published an updated Equipment Control Policy and created an eLearning course, as well as implemented several processes, technologies, and reports that help to proactively monitor and identify equipment that is 90 days or less from needing an inventory. This has improved the compliance rate from less than 70% in FY22 to over 97% in FY25. Amtrak understands that this is a repeat finding and will review with the Amtrak departmental owner of equipment that was out of compliance to strengthen the practice and reduce the likelihood of noncompliance.
Finding 2025-003: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Federal Program Name: National Railroad Passenger Corporation Grants Assistance Listing No. 20.315 Federal Award Nos.: 69A36525520030AMTDC 69A36525520040AMTDC 69A36524520000AMTDC 69A36524520010AMTDC FR-AMT-0028-22 FR-AMT-0027-22 Federal Agency: Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration Federal Program Name: Railroad Development Assistance Listing No. 20.314 Federal Award No.: 69A36524400010MEGDC Federal Agency: Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration Federal Program Name: Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program Assistance Listing No. 20.316 Federal Award No.: RRIF_2016_0040 Federal Agency: Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration Federal Program Name: Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Assistance Listing No. 20.326 Federal Award Nos.: 69A36525421260FSPDC 69A36525521430FSPDC 69A36525421100FSPDC Federal Agency: Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration Criteria 1. The code of federal regulations - 2 CFR 200.318 General procurement standards state that: (h) Responsible contractors. The recipient or subrecipient must award contracts only to responsible contractors that possess the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed contract. The recipient or subrecipient must consider contractor integrity, public policy compliance, property classification of employees, past performance record, and financial and technical resources when conducting a procurement transaction. (i) Procurement records. The recipient or subrecipient must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of each procurement transaction. These records must include the rationale for the procurement method, contract type selection, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. 2. Section 10 of the Annual Grant Agreements and Section 500 of the IIJA Supplemental Grant Agreements (Assistance Listing No. 20.315) state: The Recipient will ensure persons or entities that perform any part of the work under this Agreement, including Subrecipients, as defined in 2 C.F.R. § 200.1, or Contractors, as defined in 2 C.F.R. § 200.1, will comply with applicable federal requirements and federal guidance, and the applicable requirements of this Agreement. Recipient agrees that flowing down such requirements does not relieve it of any obligation to comply with the requirements itself. For each of the Recipient’s subawards or contracts to perform all or part of the work under this Agreement: (a) The Recipient must include applicable grant regulations in the subaward or contract and ensure compliance with these provisions, including applicable provisions of 2 C.F.R. § 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, and DOT’s implementing regulations at 2 C.F.R. § 1201. (b) The Recipient must include applicable federal statutory and regulatory requirements in the subaward or contract and ensure compliance with these requirements, including applicable limitations on use of federal funds. 3. Additionally, the code of federal regulations - 2 CFR 200 Appendix II Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards states that: In addition to other provisions required by the Federal agency or non-Federal entity, all contracts made by the non-Federal entity under the Federal award must contain provisions covering the following, as applicable. H) Debarment and Suspension – A contract award must not be made to parties listed on the government wide exclusions in the System for Award Management (SAM), in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. SAM Exclusions contains the names of parties debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded by agencies, as well as parties declared ineligible under statutory or regulatory authority other than Executive Order 12549. 4. The code of federal regulations or 2 CFR 200.320 (c) Procurement Methods states that: (c) Noncompetitive procurement. There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: 2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; Condition The following exceptions to the criteria were observed during the performance of the audit procedures: 1. Required flow-down provisions were not incorporated into the legal agreements related to both of EY's legal expense selections as part of its testing of the procurement, suspension and debarment compliance requirement. 2. Amtrak failed to comply with the key compliance requirement related to suspension and debarment which includes a review of sam.gov to verify the legal firms were not present in the suspension and debarment list prior to the procurement. 3. Amtrak lacked adequate documentation to support the sole source justification of the legal firm related to one of EY's legal expense selections as part of its testing of the procurement, suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Cause Amtrak’s inappropriate interpretation of the annual and IIJA supplemental grant agreements involved the treatment of the procurement of legal counsel as exempt from the 2 CFR procurement, suspension and debarment process requirements. Effect or Potential Effect Noncompliance with Section 10 of the Annual Grant Agreements, Section 500 of the IIJA Supplemental Grant Agreements, 2 CFR 200.318, 2 CFR 200 Appendix II and 2 CFR 200.320. Additionally, Amtrak is at risk of doing business with contractors that are suspended/debarred. Amtrak is also at risk of facing increased costs and increased reliance due to the lack of competitive procurement. Questioned Costs Total questioned costs of $1.3 million were identified. Of this amount, approximately $3,500 relates to two EY selections identified as part of procurement, suspension, and debarment testing involving two legal firms. The remaining questioned costs represent legal expenses associated with the two legal firms that are also included on the SEFA. Assistance Listing No. 20.315 69A36522503710AMTDC $ 150,928 69A365255200340AMTDC 40,449 69A36525520040AMTDC 9,964 Assistance Listing No. 20.315 Total $ 201,341 Assistance Listing No. 20.314 69A36524400010MEGDC 135,247 Assistance Listing No. 20.316 RRIF_2016_0040 84,659 Assistance Listing No. 20.326 69A36525521430FSPDC $ 461,261 69A36525421100FSPDC 254,394 69A36525421260FSPDC 197,655 Assistance Listing No. 20.326 Total $ 913,310 Total Questioned Costs $ 1,334,557 Context EY randomly selected 40 procurement transactions as part of the testing of the procurement, suspension and debarment compliance requirement. EY identified exceptions related to its two legal expenditure selections as noted in the Condition section above. Identification as a Repeat Finding Not a repeat finding. Recommendation EY recommends that Amtrak include legal expenses within their procurement, suspension and debarment policy as outlined within each of the grant agreements. Views of Responsible Officials Amtrak understands the need to comply with procurement requirements for grants and retain documentation of the compliance. Amtrak will change its approach for allocating grant funding and its review of legal contracts to address the issue identified in this finding.