Summary: GAO discussed its continuing review of the Department of Energy's (DOE) efforts to enforce the crude oil pricing regulations established under the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act of 1973. Specifically, GAO discussed the: (1) distribution of overcharge refunds; (2) adequacy of the Economic Regulatory Administration's (ERA) proposed fiscal year 1984 compliance budget; (3) restrictions imposed by global consent orders on the DOE ability to conduct civil audits of major refiners' crude oil pricing practices; and (4) problems identified in ERA negotiating settlements with major refiners. GAO stated that, as a result of settlement agreements with refiners and other oil industry companies, DOE has collected and deposited funds totaling $367 million; however, due to the improper use of consent orders by DOE, payments have been made to institutions not actually injured by the overcharges. Further, overcharged consumers have been denied an opportunity to present claims for payment. GAO sees two possible problems with the adequacy of the ERA budget to effectively carry out its compliance program. First, the proposed staffing and funding levels may not be sufficient to address the latest projected workload. Second, ERA has no contingency plans if its workload increases. Another question related to the adequacy of the ERA budget is the congressionally imposed minimum of 450 ERA employees. GAO concluded that without repeal the budget request is grossly understated because it provides for only 120 employees. ERA has attempted to settle major refiners' alleged violations of the petroleum pricing and allocation regulations by means of global consent orders. Pursuant to these orders, the refiner agrees to take certain actions in return for which ERA releases the refiner from further civil actions in all areas of alleged violations. GAO believes that ERA should perform civil audits of all major refiners where not precluded by a global consent order. In this regard, for all global consent orders currently being negotiated, ERA should ensure that the terms of the orders do not preclude audits of major refiners' activities. Finally, GAO questioned whether the ERA settlement process: (1) considered all relevant audit and compliance documents, (2) used adequate computer resources, and (3) should handle an issue during the negotiation process while the issue is being appealed in the courts.
