An attestation engagement report for the refinery or importer that indicates no discrepancies has no bearing on a violation by the refiner or importer that may be determined by EPA.
With regard to the CPA or CIA who conducted the attestation engagement, any contradiction between an attest engagement report showing no discrepancies by a refiner or importer and a subsequently determined actual violation by that refiner or importer would prompt an inquiry by EPA into the basis for the contradiction. If the violation reasonably should not have triggered a discrepancy notation in the attest report, the matter would be considered closed. If the violation was such that the attestor should have discovered and noted a discrepancy, EPA could raise questions about the quality of the attest engagement, that under certain situations could lead to a action by EPA to debar the attestor. An attestor found to have intentionally submitted a false report to EPA would potentially be subject to the criminal penalties applicable to any party who intentionally submits a false report to the government.(7/1/94)
This question and answer is posted at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/rfg/qa/420r03009.pdf. The original was posted in the Q&A posted on 7/1/94 which can found at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/rfg_qa.htm" See Question ID 3857 for RFG (Taken from the first question on http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/rfg/qa/420r03009.pdf)
What is the affect of a "clean" attestation and/or regulatory audit on subsequent compliance violations identified?
Have more questions? Submit a request