Reports & Testimonies

  • GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed.

    GAO’s recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented. You can explore open recommendations by searching or browsing.

    GAO's priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. These recommendations are labeled as such. You can find priority recommendations by searching or browsing our open recommendations below, or through our mobile app.

  • Browse Open Recommendations

    Explore priority recommendations by subject terms or browse by federal agency

    Search Open Recommendations

    Search for a specific priority recommendation by word or phrase



  • Governing on the go?

    Our Priorities for Policy Makers app makes it easier for leaders to search our recommendations on the go.

    See the November 10th Press Release


  • Have a Question about a Recommendation?

    • For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
    • For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
  • « Back to Results List Sort by   

    Results:

    Subject Term: "Facility maintenance"

    18 publications with a total of 36 open recommendations including 4 priority recommendations
    Director: Zina Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should develop a comprehensive plan for shipyard capital investment that establishes (1) the desired goal for the shipyards' condition and capabilities; (2) an estimate of the full costs to implement the plan, addressing all relevant requirements, external risk factors, and associated planning costs; and (3) metrics for assessing progress toward meeting the goal that include measuring the effectiveness of capital investments. (Recommendation 1)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should conduct regular management reviews that include all relevant stakeholders to oversee implementation of the plan, review metrics, assess the progress made toward the goal, and make adjustments, as necessary, to ensure that the goal is attained. (Recommendation 2)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should provide regular reporting to key decision makers and Congress on the progress the shipyards are making to meet the goal of the comprehensive plan, along with any challenges that hinder that progress, such as cost. This may include reporting on progress to reduce their facilities restoration and modernization backlogs, improve the condition and configuration of the shipyards, and recapitalize capital equipment. (Recommendation 3)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Melissa Emrey-Arras
    Phone: (617) 788-0534

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure accountability for BIE school facility funds, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs to develop a comprehensive long-term capital asset plan to inform its allocation of school facility funds. Such a plan should include a prioritized list of school repair and maintenance projects with the greatest need for funding.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. In August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that its Office of Facilities, Property, and Safety Management is undergoing a reorganization to establish a work group focused on asset management and will continue to work with the Office of Management and Budget to develop a capital asset management plan. Indian Affairs has reported a target date of June 30, 2018 for implementing this recommendation. We will continue to monitor Indian Affairs' efforts to implement this recommendation and await documentation on the actions it is taking to develop a capital asset plan.
    Recommendation: To ensure accountability for BIE school facility funds, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs to provide more details in Indian Affairs' annual congressional budget justifications on specific needs at BIE schools, including information on proposed capital expenditures, and updates on previous school construction projects.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. In August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that its Office of Facilities, Property, and Safety Management will work with Indian Affairs' budget office and BIE to incorporate more details in its fiscal year 2019 budget justification on the specific needs at BIE schools and proposed and updated capital expenditures. Indian Affairs reported a target date of September 30, 2018, for implementing this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure accountability for BIE school facility funds, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs to develop and implement guidance for its project managers and contracting officers regarding effective use of accountability measures.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. In August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that it had taken a range of actions, including establishing new oversight mechanisms, hiring staff with expertise in construction contracting, and administering training for contracting staff, among other actions to enhance the use of accountability measures in contracting. Indian Affairs reported a target date of February 28, 2018 for implementing this recommendation. It did not report taking any actions to develop guidance for its project managers and contracting officers on the effective use of accountability measures, which our recommendation specifies. We will continue to monitor Indian Affairs' efforts to implement this recommendation and await documentation that these actions are completed.
    Recommendation: To ensure accountability for BIE school facility funds, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs to clarify Indian Affairs' design handbook requirements to explain when and how school designs can deviate from specific requirements--such as heating and cooling systems with complex features--when the life cycle cost analysis demonstrates the requirements are not cost-effective or practical given such factors as the technical capacity of school facility staff.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: Interior did not agree with this recommendation because it said its draft design handbook-once finalized-would address the process for requesting design deviations but was not intended to include every situation where deviations could be requested. We reviewed a version of the agency's draft handbook in May 2017 and found it did not adequately address our recommendation because it did not explain how Indian Affairs would allow for deviations, including how deviations could be based on life cycle cost analysis. In August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that its revised handbook will clearly explain the process for requesting deviations from specific requirements for designing schools. We will review its updated guidance when the agency provides us a finalized version.
    Recommendation: To ensure accountability for BIE school facility funds, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs to improve oversight and technical assistance to tribal organizations to enhance tribal capacity to manage major construction projects.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. In August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that its Division of Facilities Management and Construction will develop a project tracking and monitoring process for all projects above a certain monetary threshold. Additionally, Indian Affairs reported that this office will work with BIA and BIE officials to identify common challenges that tribes face in managing projects and provide appropriate technical assistance. Indian Affairs reported a target date of June 30, 2018 for implementing this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure accountability for BIE school facility funds, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs to develop and implement guidance for maintaining complete contract and grant files for all BIE school construction projects.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. In August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that it will take several actions to address the recommendation, including developing guidance for maintaining complete grant files on tribally-managed school construction projects. Additionally, it reported that a new Interior policy requires that all new contract files from January 1, 2017, forward be maintained electronically, which will enhance Indian Affairs' ability to maintain contract files. Indian Affairs reported a target date of March 31, 2019 for implementing this recommendation.
    Director: Anne-Marie Fennell
    Phone: (202) 512-3841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that the elements of the agency's process for making asset maintenance decisions are achieving desired outcomes, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of the Park Service to evaluate the Capital Investment Strategy and its results to determine if it is achieving its intended outcomes or if changes need to be made.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its March 22, 2017 update, the Department of the Interior stated that they concur with this recommendation and will assign responsibility for developing and implementing corrective actions to the new Director of NPS upon his or her confirmation.
    Director: Zina Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD's biennial core reporting procedures align with the reporting requirements in Section 2464 and each reporting agency provides accurate and complete information, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to update DOD's guidance--in particular DOD Instruction 4151.20--to require future Biennial Core Reports to include instructions to the reporting agencies on how to (1) report additional depot workload performed that has not been identified as a core requirement, (2) accurately capture inter-service workload, (3) calculate shortfalls, and (4) estimate the cost of planned workload.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To increase the transparency of future Biennial Core Reports, Congress should consider amending 10 USC 2464 to require DOD to include information such as (1) workload shortfalls at lower-level categories; (2) executed workload in similar categories that could be used to mitigate shortfalls; (3) progress on implementing mitigation plans; (4) data reported at the first-level category of the work breakdown structure, except for when shortfalls are identified; (5) explanations for first-level categories (i.e., Special Interest Items and Other) of the work breakdown structure; and (6) whether the core requirements reported in the previous Biennial Core Report have been executed.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Brian J. Lepore
    Phone: (202) 512-4523

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To aid DOD in conducting future AOA processes that fully follow best practices, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and the Environment to develop guidance requiring the use of AOA best practices, including those practices we have identified, and in this guidance, the Assistant Secretary should define the types of military construction decisions for which these AOA best practices should be required.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its written comments, DOD did not concur with our recommendation. Specifically, DOD disputes that our 22 best practices for a reliable Analysis of Alternatives (AOA) process apply to basing or military construction decision-making processes and therefore does not believe that the department should incorporate these best practices into its military construction decision-making process. We continue to believe that our AOA best practices can be applied to a wide range of activities in which an alternative must be selected from a set of possible options, as well as to a broad range of capability areas, projects, and programs including DOD's military construction decision-making processes. As of June 22, 2017, DOD had not taken any action to implement this recommendation.
    Director: Brian J. Lepore
    Phone: (202) 512-4523

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the Office of the Secretary of Defense's (OSD) oversight of the services' progress in implementing the standardized process for assessing facility conditions and recording facility condition ratings based on that process, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment should revise its guidance to clarify how--either in DOD's Real Property Assets Database or by some other mechanism--the services are to indicate when a facility condition rating recorded in DOD's Real Property Assets Database is based on the standardized process.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment revise its guidance to clarify how--either in DOD's Real Property Assets Database or by some other mechanism--the services are to indicate when a facility condition rating recorded in DOD's Real Property Assets Database is based on the standardized process. As of October 2016, DOD has not completed any actions to implement this recommendation.
    Director: David J. Wise
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve risk assessments for repair and alteration projects, the Administrator of GSA should develop and implement a plan to periodically analyze information GSA already collects, for example, based on a representative sample of repair and alterations projects, in order to: (1) identify the specific impacts unforeseen conditions have had on project costs, schedules, and scope of work; (2) analyze the causes of these conditions for those projects that experienced unforeseen site conditions; and (3) identify actions that will be taken to address the potential causes of unforeseen site conditions.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: GSA said it is working to study potential unforeseen site conditions on repair and alteration projects. Based on the identification of new categories of unforeseen site conditions, GSA will implement plans to prevent and mitigate such unforeseen site conditions on future projects. Specifically, GSA will conduct a study of change orders. GSA will then analyze conditions and identify possible categories of unforeseen site conditions. GSA will include assessment of causes and impact on schedule and budget, and also assess potential causes of unforeseen site conditions. Finally, GSA will develop plans to address potential causes and mitigate risks of unforeseen site conditions. We will continue to follow-up with GSA to confirm that it follows through with these actions.
    Director: Melissa Emrey-Arras
    Phone: (617) 788-0534

    4 open recommendations
    including 2 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: To support the collection of complete and accurate safety and health information on the condition of BIE school facilities nationally, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs to ensure that all BIE schools are annually inspected for safety and health, as required by its policy, and that inspection information is complete and accurate. This could include: (1) Analyzing the key challenges to ensuring that all BIE schools are inspected, as well as implementing a plan to mitigate those challenges. (2) In the interim, prioritizing inspections at schools where facility conditions may pose a greater risk to students--such as schools with dormitories or those that have not been recently inspected.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: In September 2016, Indian Affairs reported that it had completed annual safety inspections at all BIE school locations for the first time in at least 15 years. In late August 2017, officials reported that Indian Affairs was on course to complete all inspections in 2017 but did not provide documentation on its progress. Further, Indian Affairs stated that it understands the need to ensure that completing school inspections does not detract from inspection quality. However, as of August 2017 we had not received documentation that the agency had taken steps to ensure that its safety personnel collect inspection information that is complete and accurate. We believe the steps Indian Affairs has taken to prioritize the completion of safety inspections at all BIE schools are important ones. However, we believe it is also important that the agency take specific steps to ensure that the inspection information it collects is complete and accurate. Without complete and accurate information, BIE schools may not have the information they need on potential safety hazards, which may endanger students and staff. We will continue to monitor Indian Affairs' efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To support the collection of complete and accurate safety and health information on the condition of BIE school facilities nationally, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs to revise its inspection guidance and tools to ensure that they are comprehensive and up-to-date; require that regional safety inspectors use them to ensure all vital areas are covered, such as school fire protection; and monitor safety inspectors' use of procedures and tools across regions to ensure they are consistently adopted.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: In May 2017, Indian Affairs implemented new comprehensive guidelines for safety and health inspections and testing and maintaining fire prevention systems. The guidelines, which we reviewed, detail specific inspection procedures which all relevant safety personnel are required to follow. Indian Affairs provided training in May and June of 2017 to relevant staff on using the guidelines. According to the guidelines, Indian Affairs' safety office is required to monitor safety staff compliance with the new inspection procedures. We believe these are important steps to ensuring that regional inspectors have clear procedures in place for conducting BIE school inspections. However, Indian Affairs has not provided us with documentation, such as a plan, for how its safety office will monitor inspections to ensure procedures are consistently followed by inspectors across regions. For example, such monitoring could help ensure that all inspectors conduct a close out meeting with relevant school staff at the conclusion of an on-site safety inspection. We believe such monitoring is important to ensure that the practices of its safety inspectors consistently align with its procedures and result in inspection information that is complete and accurate. We will continue to monitor Indian Affairs' efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that all BIE schools are positioned to address safety and health problems with their facilities and provide student environments that are free from hazards, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs to develop a plan to build schools' capacity to promptly address safety and health problems with facilities. Such a plan could prioritize assistance to schools to improve the expertise of facility staff to maintain and repair school buildings.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. As of late August 2017, Indian Affairs had not provided us any documentation that it had taken steps to implement our recommendation. We will continue to monitor Indian Affairs' efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that all BIE schools are positioned to address safety and health problems with their facilities and provide student environments that are free from hazards, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs to consistently monitor whether schools have established required safety committees.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2017, Indian Affairs officials told us that they are developing a system that would enable them to monitor whether schools have established required safety committees. They also noted that Indian Affairs' new inspection procedures require that inspectors check to see if schools have established safety committees. Finally, the BIE Director reported that he would send a memorandum to all BIE schools reminding them about Indian Affairs' requirement to establish safety committees. We will review and evaluate Indian Affairs' actions when the agency has provided us with supporting documentation.
    Director: David Wise
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Administrator of the General Services Administration should develop a legislative proposal to enhance accountability for government-wide implementation of the Act. GSA should consider including the following in its proposal: (1) establishing authorities for a single agency to monitor and enforce implementation of the Act; (2) establishing agency responsibilities for reporting progress on implementation of the Act; (3) establishing agency responsibilities for assessing employee skill levels related to the Act and identifying training that allows employees to develop and retain skills required by the Act; and (4) establishing an interagency group to further government-wide collaboration on implementation of the Act.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In response to our recommendation, GSA agreed to work with other agencies to evaluate whether additional legislative changes would improve the speed and efficiency of implementation. In October 2017, GSA informed us they intend to submit a legislative proposal to Congress as part of the FY 2019 budget process. We will continue to monitor GSA actions.
    Director: Cary Russell
    Phone: (202) 512-5431

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better determine the costs needed to sustain the equipment to support a Marine Air Ground Task Force capability, the Commandant of the Marine Corps should direct the Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics to incorporate the four characteristics of reliable cost estimates in the Marine Corps' forthcoming prepositioning programs budget development policy, and specifically to ensure that estimates are accurate and well-documented, require all relevant departments and subordinate commands to provide documentation of cost-estimating details that include both source data and calculations.

    Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
    Status: Open

    Comments: Based on our review of DOD's database on DOD's actions addressing GAO recommendations and follow up with DOD officials, as of September 1, 2017, DOD has not yet addressed this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To better determine the costs needed to sustain the equipment to support a Marine Air Ground Task Force capability, the Commandant of the Marine Corps should direct the Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics to incorporate the four characteristics of reliable cost estimates in the Marine Corps' forthcoming prepositioning programs budget development policy, and specifically to ensure that estimates are credible, implement management requirements to establish and conduct formal cross-checks of major cost elements among the relevant departments and subordinate commands to determine whether they are replicable.

    Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
    Status: Open

    Comments: Based on our review of DOD's database on DOD's actions addressing GAO recommendations and follow up with DOD officials, as of September 1, 2017, DOD has not yet addressed this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To better determine the costs needed to sustain the equipment to support a Marine Air Ground Task Force capability, the Commandant of the Marine Corps should direct the Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics to incorporate the four characteristics of reliable cost estimates in the Marine Corps' forthcoming prepositioning programs budget development policy, and specifically to ensure that estimates are comprehensive, implement a standardized structure for collecting all the necessary details used to develop and support cost estimates from all relevant departments and subordinate commands.

    Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
    Status: Open

    Comments: Based on our review of DOD's database on DOD's actions addressing GAO recommendations and follow up with DOD officials, as of September 1, 2017, DOD has not yet addressed this recommendation.
    Recommendation: As part of its quality assurance program for ensuring that the Marine Corps has accurate and reliable information on inventory data for stored assets used to support combatant commanders' requirements, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, in consultation with the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organization, should take steps to update the Technical Manual on Logistics Support for the Marine Corps Prepositioning Program - Norway and the Local Bilateral Agreement, to incorporate guidance and instructions on conducting a quality assurance review that assesses the accuracy and reliability of the Norwegian Equipment Information Management System.

    Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
    Status: Open

    Comments: Based on our review of DOD's database on DOD's actions addressing GAO recommendations and follow up with DOD officials, as of September 1, 2017, DOD has not yet addressed this recommendation.
    Director: Courts, Michael J
    Phone: (202) 512-8980

    2 open recommendations
    including 2 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: To strengthen the applicability and effectiveness of the Department of State's physical security standards, the Secretary of State should work through DS or, in his capacity as chair, through the OSPB to clarify existing flexibilities in the FAH to ensure that security and life-safety updates to the OSPB standards and Physical Security Handbook are updated through an expedited review process.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of September 2017, State had drafted a revision to the Overseas Security Policy Board (OSPB) Working Group Guidelines in the Foreign Affairs Handbook (FAH) to clarify existing flexibilities for and to formalize an expedited process for making security and life-safety updates to the OSPB standards and Physical Security Handbook, and according to State, the revisions are under review.
    Recommendation: To strengthen the effectiveness of the Department of State's risk management policies, the Secretary of State should develop a risk management policy and procedures for ensuring the physical security of diplomatic facilities, including roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders and a routine feedback process that continually incorporates new information.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: In December 2016, we learned that State had convened a working group to develop a comprehensive risk management policy. According to State, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security is coordinating this working group. As of September 2017, State expects to publish the new risk management policy by December 31, 2018.
    Director: Wise, David J
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide increased transparency about the funding amounts agencies are spending to maintain their assets and manage their backlogs, the Director of OMB should require the OMB Deputy Director for Management, as chair of the FRPC, in collaboration and consultation with FRPC member agencies, to collect information--through FRPP or other mechanisms--on funding agencies annually spent to address existing deferred maintenance and repair deficiencies and report summary level information in the FRPC's fiscal year report.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of December 2015, OMB had worked with the FRPC to develop a method to collect annual recurring maintenance and repair data in the FRPP. This effort includes (1) developing separate definitions for "operations" and "maintenance" costs, which are currently reported in the FRPP as a combined cost number, and (2) defining a methodology that agencies can use to consistently collect and report annual deferred maintenance and repair expenditures. OMB expects these actions to be completed by the fiscal year 2018 FRPP reporting cycle. As of March 28, 2017, OMB had not provided GAO with any additional updates regarding the status of this recommendation..
    Director: Wise, David J
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better ensure the quality of both the more detailed data that agencies collect on their structures and the summary information submitted in the FRPP, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should, in collaboration with FRPC, develop guidance to improve agencies' internal controls to produce consistent, accurate, and reliable data on their structures.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm the actions that OMB has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Kohn, Linda T
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help address the uncertainty NIH faces, related to the potential impact of increasing indirect costs on its funding of future research, the Director of NIH should assess the impact of growth in indirect costs on its research mission, including, as necessary, planning for how to deal with potential future increases in indirect costs that could limit the amount of funding available for total research, including the direct costs of research projects.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: National Institutes of Health
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 7, 2015, NIH provided some information indicating that it had taken action to address our recommendation by tracking the size of indirect costs as a proportion of NIH's overall budget as part of the agency's annual budget planning process and risk assessment program. However, we determined that the actions did not fully address the recommendation because they focus on the agency's overall budget and do not assess the potential ongoing impact of indirect costs for universities on its mission. As of August 2017, NIH officials have not informed us of any additional actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
    Director: Mctigue, James R Jr
    Phone: (202) 512-7968

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: Further, to provide greater assurance that the military departments will meet reporting milestones for future projects, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics--in coordination with the Director of the Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight-- should revise corrosion-related guidance to clearly define a role for the military departments' Corrosion Control and Prevention Executives to assist the Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight in holding their departments' project management offices accountable for submitting infrastructure-related reports in accordance with the DOD Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: On July 24, 2013, DOD reported that it non-concurred with our recommendation. DOD reported that the Military Department Corrosion Control and Prevention Executives are given the freedom to manage their programs in the most efficient and effective manner for their respective departments. Additionally, DOD reported that the Corrosion Control and Prevention Executives know the reporting requirements and are working closely with the Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office and the project managers to ensure reports are submitted in accordance with the DoD Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan. Therefore, DOD reported that further guidance is not necessary as the requirements are already clearly stated in the DoD Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan. Our audit work showed that DOD's strategic plan and guidance do not define a role for the Corrosion Executives in assisting the Corrosion Office in the project reporting process. Our recommendation was intended to fortify the role of Corrosion Executives in ensuring that project management offices within the Corrosion Executives' respective military departments submit project reports as required in the strategic plan. We continue to believe that the Corrosion Executives could provide the additional management oversight necessary to strengthen corrosion project reporting. In May 2016, the Senate Armed Services Committee informed us that it have included language in its National Defense Authorization Act Bill for fiscal year 2017. Specifically, the language reads: SEC. 312. REVISION OF GUIDANCE RELATED TO CORROSION CONTROL AND PREVENTION EXECUTIVES. Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in coordination with the Director of Corrosion Policy and Oversight, shall revise corrosion-related guidance to clearly define the role of the corrosion control and prevention executives of the military departments in assisting the Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight in holding the appropriate project management office in each military department accountable for submitting the report required under section 903(b)(5) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417; 10 U.S.C. 2228 note) with an expanded emphasis on infrastructure, as required in the long-term strategy of the Department of Defense under section 2228(d) of title 10, United States Code. As of October 2016, legislation was not passed.
    Director: Mctigue Jr, James R
    Phone: (202) 512-7968

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the ability of the Army and local communities to manage future base closures, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to issue, consistent with DOD guidance, guidance on specific levels of maintenance to be followed in the event of a base closure based on the probable reuse of the facilities.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In DOD's comments on our report, it stated that it concurred with our recommendation and that the Army agrees to publish property maintenance guidance prior to closing installations in the event of future base closures. In June 2016, DOD stated that the Department is prohibited by Congressional/statutory language to plan for or implement future BRAC execution.
    Recommendation: To improve the ability of DOD and the local communities to respond to future growth actions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force to consider developing a procedure for collecting service members' physical addresses while stationed at an installation, annually updating this information, and sharing aggregate information with community representatives relevant for local planning decisions, such as additional population per zip code, consistent with privacy and force protection concerns.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation and stated that it agrees that information pertaining to the physical location of installation personnel helps affected communities plan for housing, schools, transportation and other off-post requirements in support of installations. It further stated that existing policy requires the military departments to provide planning information, including base personnel, to states and communities to support the establishment or expansion of a military base. In the event of future basing decisions affecting local communities, DOD stated that it will work with the military departments to assess and determine the best means to obtain, aggregate, and distribute this information to help ensure adequate planning information is made available. In June 2016, DOD stated that the Department is prohibited by Congressional/statutory language to plan for or implement future BRAC execution.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Army and the Air Force to consider creating or designating a civilian position at the installation level to be the focal point and provide continuity for community interaction for future growth installations and to consider expanding this position to all installations. This position may be a collateral duty.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially agreed with this recommendation. It stated that it agrees with the need for a designated position at the installation level to work with the community and will ensure this requirement is being met through current practices and in accordance with each military department's personnel system. In many of the growth impacted communities, installation officials serve as ex-officio members of the community's growth management organization and relevant installation staff, including those engaged with public works, housing, education, and land use planning, and coordinate as needed with their civilian community counterparts. In July 2015, DOD stated that in the event the Department of Defense proceeds with future realignments that could result in a reduced footprint, there are provisions for Base Transition Coordinators (BTCs) to be designated as a liaison with the affected community. In the event these future realignments result in an expanded footprint or personnel growth, the Department would consider this recommendation at that time. In June 2016, DOD stated that the Department is prohibited by Congressional/statutory language to plan for or implement future BRAC execution.
    Director: Merritt, Zina Dache
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that Congress has visibility over the status of DOD's core depot-level maintenance and repair capability, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Maintenance, Policy, and Programs) to include in the Biennial Core Report to Congress detailed explanations for why services do not have the workload to meet core maintenance requirements for each shortfall identified in the report.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2016, recent GAO work on this issue shows that DOD has not fully implemented this recommendation. In DOD's 2016 Biennial Core Report, DOD did not provide detailed explanations for all of the services shortfalls identified in its report. We are waiting until DOD's 2018 Biennial Core Report to further update the status of this recommendation.
    Director: Aloise, Eugene E
    Phone: (202)512-6870

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To strengthen NNSA's oversight practices and current and future facility modernization efforts, and to improve the transparency and usefulness of cost analyses prepared for future NNSA nuclear facilities modernization projects, the Secretary of Energy should direct the Administrator of NNSA to ensure that life cycle cost analyses include a thorough and balanced evaluation of short- and long-term construction and financing alternatives. Such analyses should consider the full useful life of the facility rather than the 20-year requirement for GSA leases or any predetermined length of time that might produce results that favor one option over another.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: NNSA provided evidence that it requires life cycle cost analyses for projects greater than $20 million. However, this is not fully responsive to GAO's recommendation. For example, the recommendation stated that each life cycle cost analysis performed includes short- and long-term construction and financing alternatives and that these analyses should consider the full life of the facility rather than the 20-year requirements for GSA leases or any predetermined length of time. NNSA's actions do not address this aspect of the life cycle cost analysis. Our work found that facility's life cycle cost analysis only covered 20 years and it failed to reflect cost savings over a longer useful life (possibly over 50 years) that could have been realized if the facility were purchased instead of leased. Nothing in the draft Order addresses how the life cycle cost period to be analyzed should be established (e.g., 20 years or 50 plus years). Our review of NNSA's additional responses have not provided sufficient evidence to close the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To strengthen NNSA's oversight practices and current and future facility modernization efforts, and because of the importance of mitigating the risks of outsourcing nuclear weapons components and other information that if exported, might allow potential adversaries to develop or advance their nuclear capabilities, the Secretary of Energy should direct the Administrator of NNSA to take immediate action to assess the effectiveness of NNSA's oversight of KCP's current export control and nonproliferation practices and, if appropriate, initiate corrective actions to strengthen that oversight.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: While NNSA/contractor actions are commendable and appear to be beneficial, such as adding performance-based incentives, training 950 employees, and including new contract clauses in its supplier purchase orders, these actions do not fully satisfy the recommendation. GAO's recommendation was specifically directed at the effectiveness of NNSA's oversight of the KCP contractor's export control and nonproliferation practices and to initiate corrective actions to strengthen that NNSA oversight. While the Kansas City Site Office's addition of a performance based incentive seems to be a good improvement, NNSA has not demonstrated its own oversight effectiveness. Our review of NNSA's response provided in March 2014 was not persuasive. In addition, GAO-16-710 found that as of May 2016, the Secretary of Energy had not used the enhanced procurement authority to ensure supply chain integrity, and the Department of Energy (DOE) had not developed processes for using the authority, as it had not fully assessed the circumstances under which the authority might be useful.