Skip to Highlights
Highlights

Agencies that violate the Antideficiency Act must report the violation to the President and Congress and transmit a copy of the report to the Comptroller General at the same time. 31 U.S.C. §§ 1351, 1517(b). The report must contain all relevant facts and a statement of actions taken.

Since fiscal year 2005, GAO, in its role as repository for the Antideficiency Act reports that agencies submit, has produced and publicly released an annual compilation of summaries of the reports. We base the summaries on unaudited information extracted from the agency reports. Each summary includes a brief description of the violation and of remedial actions agencies report that they have taken. We also include copies of the agencies' transmittal letters.

Agencies reported 13 violations in fiscal year 2020. While GAO has not opined on the violations reported or the remedial actions taken, we do note that many of the reported violations resulted from similar agency actions. For example, 5 of the reported violations resulted from agencies overobligating or overexpending their apportionments, and 3 of the reported violations occurred because agencies obligated or expended appropriated funds on activities specifically prohibited by law.

This file has been updated to include agency transmittal letters submitted to GAO in fiscal year 2020.

View Decision

B-332675

May 17, 2021

The Honorable Kamala Harris
President of the Senate

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the House of Representatives

Subject:  Fiscal Year 2020 Antideficiency Act Reports Compilation

Agencies that violate the Antideficiency Act must report the violation to the President and Congress and transmit a copy of the report to the Comptroller General at the same time.  31 U.S.C. §§ 1351, 1517(b).  The report must contain all relevant facts and a statement of actions taken. 

Since fiscal year 2005, GAO, in its role as repository for the Antideficiency Act reports that agencies submit, has produced and publicly released an annual compilation of summaries of the reports.  We base the summaries on unaudited information extracted from the agency reports.  Each summary includes a brief description of the violation, as reported by the agency, and of remedial actions agencies report that they have taken.  We also include copies of the agencies’ transmittal letters.  We post the summaries and the agency transmittal letters on our public website.  In some cases, the agencies also sent us additional materials to accompany their transmittal letters.  We will make these additional materials available to Members and their staffs upon request.

Please find enclosed the compilation of summaries of the 13 Antideficiency Act violation reports and agency transmittal letters submitted to GAO in fiscal year 2020.  The United States Department of Agriculture reported 7 violations, the Department of Energy reported 2 violations; while the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Environmental Protection Agency each reported 1 violation.

While GAO has not opined on the violations reported or the remedial actions taken, we do note that many of the reported violations resulted from similar agency actions.  For example, 5 of the reported violations resulted from agencies overobligating or overexpending their apportionments, and 3 of the reported violations occurred because agencies obligated or expended appropriated funds on activities specifically prohibited by law.  While GAO has not had occasion to review the specific facts giving rise to these reported violations, we want to highlight that an agency will violate the Antideficiency Act if it overobligates or overexpends its apportionment or obligates or expends appropriated funds on activities that are expressly prohibited by law.

In addition to the 13 reports received by GAO in fiscal year 2020, we also directly reported four violations that agencies failed to report to Congress.[1]

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Shirley A. Jones, Managing Associate General Counsel, at (202) 512-8156, or Charlotte E. McKiver, Assistant General Counsel for Appropriations Law, at (202) 512-5992.
Thomas H. Armstrong
Thomas H. Armstrong
General Counsel

Enclosure

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-01

 

Agency No.:  DCMA, 18-01

Date Reported to GAO: October 9, 2019

Agency: Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Years (FYs) 2013-2016

Account(s): Operation and Maintenance (O&M); Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation (RDT&E)

Amount Reported: $26,380,023

 
 

Description:  DCMA reported that it violated the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it obligated and disbursed funds from the incorrect appropriation to develop information technology (IT) software to replace existing systems. 

DCMA used appropriations from O&M accounts to fund multiple contracts for development of an IT system it identified as the Integrated Workload Management System (IWMS).  According to DCMA, these contracts should have been funded using appropriations from DCMA’s RDT&E account because development of IWMS involved significant development, integration, and testing. 

Remedial Action Taken:  To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, DCMA reported that it implemented multiple corrective actions, including an intensive validation process so future IT requirements will be developed and resourced through a formal program identified as the “Future Years Defense Program.”  DCMA also reported that it established a full Acquisition Review Board to review all acquisition actions that were not previously covered by a Service Acquisition Review Board, which only reviewed service acquisitions.  Additionally, DCMA reported that it was implementing and developing processes to identify violations more quickly.  DCMA reported that it identified the Director of IT and Comptroller as being responsible for the ADA violation.  The DCMA Director issued a letter of admonishment to the Comptroller.  The Director of IT is no longer a U.S. government employee and so discipline was not pursued.  The DCMA report did not reach a conclusion that the ADA violations were willfully or knowingly committed. 

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-02

 

Agency No.: None Reported

Date Reported to GAO: October 24,  2019

Agency: Department of Agriculture (Agriculture)

Date(s) of Violation(s): 1999 through Fiscal Year (FY) 2017

Account(s): National Finance CenterWorking Capital Fund

Amount Reported: Unknown

 
 

Description:  Agriculture reported a violation of the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it provided certain web hosting services to the New Orleans Chapter of the Association of Government Accountants (AGA), a nonfederal entity, at no cost to the AGA. 

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer, National Finance Center (NFC) provides payroll processing, human resource systems, insurance services, and data center hosting services to Agriculture and other federal agencies.  Agriculture explains in its report that NFC operates as an approved working capital fund activity and Agriculture states that NFC is authorized to charge agencies for the services it provides.  In 1999 NFC began providing web hosting services to the AGA.  These services were discontinued in July 2017 after Agriculture identified concerns that NFC’s hosting support of AGA’s web pages could potentially be a violation of the ADA.  In April of 2018, Agriculture’s Office of the General Counsel determined that NFC violated the ADA by providing the web hosting services to the AGA without available appropriations. 

Remedial Action Taken:  To prevent a recurrence of these types of violations, Agriculture reported that it implemented a policy to address the development and maintenance of web pages hosted by NFC.  However, Agriculture provided few details on the new policy, and did not explain how the policy would address NFC’s provision of services to nonfederal entities.  The reported policy mandates, among other things, that any modification to the web services request process be reviewed and approved by an appropriate authorizing official for requests for new web pages, as well as requests for changes to existing web pages.  Agriculture reported that it identified a former Chief Financial Officer as being responsible for the ADA violation and that the individual is no longer with the agency.  Agriculture did not report whether any disciplinary action was taken against any employee, but did report that it determined that the ADA violations were not willfully or knowingly committed.

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-03

 

Agency No.: None Reported

Date Reported to GAO: October 25, 2019

Agency: Department of Agriculture (Agriculture)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Year (FY) 2019

Account(s): Pima Agriculture Cotton Trust Fund

Amount Reported: $59,572.01

 
 

Description:  Agriculture reported a violation of the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it recorded a payment that exceeded the FY 2019 apportionment that was available for the Pima Agriculture Cotton Trust Fund (Trust) program.

The Trust program was established by Section 12314 of the Agricultural Act of 2014, Public Law 115-334, to reduce the economic injury to domestic manufacturers resulting from tariffs on cotton fabric that are higher than tariffs on certain apparel articles made of cotton fabric.  According to Agriculture, the Commodity Credit Corporation is authorized to transfer funds to the Trust each year until fiscal year 2023.  Agriculture submitted this ADA report because the Trust lacked the necessary funds to cover an Inter/Intra‑Agency Agreement administrative fee that was incurred in FY 2019.

Remedial Action Taken:  To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, Agriculture reported that it has established additional controls including recertification prior to final signoff and exploring the utilization of commitment accounting, although Agriculture did not explain what commitment accounting is.  Agriculture identified the Commodity Credit Corporation Program Section, Programs Budget Branch, Budget Division, Farm Production and Conservation Business Center, along with its Foreign Agricultural Service Budget Office as being responsible for the violation.  Agriculture did not report whether any disciplinary action was taken against any employee, but did report that it determined that the ADA violations were not willfully or knowingly committed.

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-04

 

Agency No.:None Reported

Date Reported to GAO: October 25, 2019

Agency: Department of Agriculture (Agriculture)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Year (FY) 2018

Account(s): Non-Insured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) Frost Freeze

Amount Reported: $887.57

 
 

Description:  Agriculture reported a violation of the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it recorded obligations for payments exceeding the FY 2018 apportionment for its NAP Frost Freeze Program. 

According to Agriculture, the NAP Frost Freeze Program, authorized by the 2014 Farm Bill, allowed the Farm Service Agency to retroactively provide assistance at additional coverage levels under the 2012 NAP to producers of eligible uninsurable fruit crops grown on a tree or bush when low yields occurred due to a natural disaster.  Agriculture discovered that it exceeded its authority to issue payments under the NAP Frost Freeze program by $887 when it improperly made payments in excess of its apportionment. 

Remedial Action Taken: To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, Agriculture reported that it will ensure that appropriate controls are in place to prevent payments for programs that are no longer in existence.  Agriculture identified its Emergencies and Compliance Division, Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs, Farm Service Agency as being responsible for the violation.  Agriculture did not report whether any disciplinary action was taken against any employee, but did report that it determined that the ADA violations were not willfully or knowingly committed.  In its report, Agriculture did not identify what efforts it made, if any, to recover improper payments. 

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-05

 

Agency No.: None Reported 

Date Reported to GAO: October 28, 2019

Agency: Department of Energy (Energy)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Year (FY) 2018

Account(s): Advanced Research Projects Agency

Amount Reported: $5,801,831.76

 
 

Description:  Energy reported that it violated the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it incurred obligations without a valid apportionment in place. 

Energy reported that an attorney in its Office of General Counsel advised Energy’s Chief Financial Officer that a written apportionment was not necessary following the enactment of the second continuing resolution (CR) for FY 2018 because the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin 17-02 automatically apportioned funds provided by the CR.  However, according to Energy, OMB Bulletin 17-02 did not automatically apportion funds where either the Senate or House of Representatives had reported a bill with zero funding for a specific program. Based on the attorney’s guidance, Energy incurred obligations without a valid apportionment in place.

Remedial Action Taken:  To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, Energy reported that management in its Office of General Counsel has reminded attorneys who provide appropriations guidance to carefully review all OMB bulletins and similar documents before providing similar legal advice in the future.  Additionally, Energy noted that OMB Circular Number A-11 has been updated for consistency with OMB Bulletin No. 17-02.  Energy identified an attorney in its Office of General Counsel as being responsible for the ADA violation.  The Assistant General Counsel for General Law met with the attorney and determined that discipline was not necessary.  Energy determined that the ADA violation was not willfully or knowingly committed.

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-06

 

Agency No.: None reported

Date Reported to GAO: November 21, 2019

Agency: Department of Agriculture (Agriculture)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Year (FY) 2018

Account(s): Farm Service AgencySalaries and Expense

Amount Reported: $300,000

 
 

Description:  Agriculture reported that it violated the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it obligated funds for an information technology (IT) project prior to receipt of written approval by the Chief Information Officer (CIO), which was required by a general provision in the appropriations act. 

General Provision 706 of the 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Public Law 115‑141, required Agriculture to first obtain written approval from the Chief Information Officer before funds may be obligated for any IT project, contract, or agreement valued over $25,000.  In March of 2018, Agriculture obligated $300,000 for the development and automation of the Commodity Credit Corporation Budget Model for FY 2018 before that project was approved by Agriculture’s CIO in violation of the general provision. 

Remedial Action Taken:  To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, Agriculture reported that it has stressed to all management personnel that they must comply with policies and procedures to ensure that the appropriate authorizations and approvals are obtained prior to the procurement of goods and services.  Agriculture identified a Programs Branch Chief and Budget Officer for the Farm Service Agency, along with its Office of Budget and Finance, as being responsible for the violation.  Agriculture did not report whether any disciplinary action was taken against any employee, but did report that it determined that the ADA violations were not willfully or knowingly committed.

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-07

 

Agency No.: None Reported

Date Reported to GAO: December 3, 2019

Agency: Department of Agriculture (Agriculture)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Year (FY) 2017

Account(s): Agriculture Risk Coverage

Amount Reported: $1,543,445,051.34

 
 

Description:  Agriculture reported that it violated the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it recorded an obligation for FY 2017 in excess of its apportionment.  Agriculture reported another violation in this account for FY 2018.  See GAO-ADA-20-10. 

Agriculture reported that the Farm Service Agency improperly estimated the funds needed for the County Agriculture Risk Coverage Program, and an insufficient amount was apportioned to cover the fiscal year 2017 obligation for the program.  As a result, the violation occurred when the program incurred obligations in excess of its apportionment. 

Remedial Action Taken: To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, Agriculture reported that new procedures have been put into place to ensure that appropriate authorizations and approvals are obtained prior to requesting funding.  Agriculture also reported that future shortfalls will be addressed by a change in the way that future estimates are calculated.  Additionally, Agriculture reported that it now conducts a monthly call with all stakeholders in the program to discuss upcoming payment runs and to determine if there is enough funding available.  Agriculture identified the Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs, Production, Emergencies, and Compliance Division as being responsible for the ADA violation.  Agriculture determined that the ADA violations were not willfully or knowingly committed and reported that no administrative discipline was imposed on any employee involved. 

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-08

 

Agency No.: None Reported

Date Reported to GAO: December 20, 2019 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Year (FY) 2014

Account(s): United States Secret Service (USSS)Salaries and Expenses

Amount Reported: None Reported

 
 

Description: DHS reported violations of the Antideficiency Act (ADA) that occurred when it accepted voluntary services during the 2014 United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). 

DHS reported that the USSS received voluntary services in 2014 during the UNGA from volunteer members of the Homeland Security Mobile Trauma Unit (MTU).  According to DHS, no gratuitous service agreement was in place between the USSS and the MTU, when the voluntary services were provided. 

Remedial Action Taken:  To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, DHS reported that it educated staff on voluntary services and use of gratuitous service agreements, and implemented ADA training for employees.  DHS identified the former Deputy Director of USSS and the special agent in charge of the New York field office as being responsible for the ADA violation.  The employees responsible for the ADA violation are both retired from federal service and no disciplinary action was pursued.  DHS determined that the ADA violations were not willfully or knowingly committed. 

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-09

 

Agency No.: None Reported

Date Reported to GAO: January 10, 2020

Agency: Department of Agriculture (Agriculture)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Years (FYs) 2010-2011

Account(s): Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers Program

Amount Reported: $19,689,763.19

 
 

Description:  Agriculture reported that its Office of Advocacy and Outreach (OAO) violated the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it recorded obligations under its Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers Program in excess of amounts that were available in FYs 2010 and 2011. 

According to Agriculture, section 14004(a)(3) of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, Public Law 110-246, provided 1-year funds for each of FYs 2010 through 2012 to carry out Agriculture’s Office of Advocacy and Outreach’s Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers Program.  Agriculture reported that it obligated and expended these funds in excess of the amounts available for FYs 2010 and 2011.  Agriculture reported that the errors occurred because the obligations for the grants were recorded in Agriculture’s payment system before the grants were finalized. 

Remedial Action Taken:To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, Agriculture reported that it has developed, tested, and implemented stronger internal controls.  Agriculture also reported that standard operating procedures were developed to reinforce the grant management business process, and that mandatory grant management training is now required for relevant personnel.  Agriculture identified a former Assistant Secretary for Administration of OAO and its Financial Management Division as being responsible for the violation.  Agriculture did not report whether any disciplinary action was taken against any employee, but did report that it determined that the ADA violations were not willfully or knowingly committed.

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-10

 

Agency No.: None Reported

Date Reported to GAO: January 27, 2020

Agency: Department of Agriculture (Agriculture)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Year (FY) 2018

Account(s): Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC)

Amount Reported: $1,797,297

 
 

Description:  Agriculture reported that it violated the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it recorded an obligation for FY 2018 in excess of its apportionment.  Agriculture reported another violation in this account for FY 2017.  See GAO-ADA-20-07. 

According to Agriculture, the ARC program provides revenue loss coverage at the county or farm level.  Agriculture had crop year 2017 enrollments approved in FY 2018 that exceeded the amounts available for this purpose.  Agriculture reported that program officials did not check funds availability at the time of the approval and instead checked at the time of payment.  When the payment run occurred, Agriculture discovered that there were not enough funds for all crop year 2017 contracts approved in FY 2018. 

Remedial Action Taken:To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, Agriculture reported that new procedures have been put into place to ensure that appropriate authorizations and approvals are obtained prior to requesting funding.  Additionally, Agriculture reported that it now conducts a monthly call with all stakeholders in the program to discuss upcoming payment runs and to determine if there is enough funding available.  Agriculture identified the Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs, Production, Emergencies, and Compliance Division, Farm Service Agency, as being responsible for the ADA violation.  Agriculture determined that the ADA violations were not willfully or knowingly committed and did not report whether administrative discipline was imposed on any employees involved. 

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-11

 

Agency No.: None Reported 

Date Reported to GAO: February 24, 2020

Agency: Department of Energy (Energy)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Years (FYs) 2011-2012, and 2017

Account(s): Operation and Maintenance

Amount Reported: $17,349

 
 

Description:  Energy reported that it violated the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it incurred obligations to pay for an outside employee training program that violated certain restrictions on the use of appropriated funds. 

Energy’s appropriations acts for FYs 2011, 2012, and 2017, placed restrictions on the use of appropriated funds for training.  Specifically, such appropriations acts prohibited the use of funds for any employee training that did not meet identified needs for knowledge, skills, and abilities bearing directly on the performance of official duties.  Energy reported that it violated the ADA when it incurred obligations to pay for an employee training program in FYs 2011, 2012, and 2017 that violated these restrictions.  Energy noted that the training course violated these restrictions because it was focused on personal growth rather than professional development.

Remedial Action Taken:  To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, Energy reported that it updated its training policies to explicitly note the training restrictions contained in its appropriations acts.  Energy identified its Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA) as being responsible for the ADA violation.  Energy did not report whether any disciplinary action was taken against any employee, but did report that it found no evidence that the ADA violations were willfully or knowingly committed.  Energy also reported that the SWPA employee responsible for approving the training resigned in December of 2017. 

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-12

 

Agency No.:  None Reported

Date Reported to GAO: March 13, 2020

Agency: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 and 2018

Account(s): Deposit Insurance Fund

Amount Reported: None Reported

 
 

Description:GAO, following a routine audit of FDIC’s financial statement, determined that FDIC violated the purpose statute in 31 U.S.C. § 1301(a) and the Antideficiency Act (ADA) when it incurred obligations from the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) during a lapse in appropriations between December 22, 2018, and January 25, 2019.  B-330693, Oct. 8, 2019.  GAO concluded that FDIC’s general authority to incur obligations against the DIF was not available to FDIC OIG during the lapse in appropriations because FDIC OIG is funded through a separate and distinct appropriation. Consequently, FDIC OIG violated the purpose statute when it relied on FDIC’s general authority and incurred obligations against the DIF to continue operating during the lapse in appropriations.  GAO also concluded that because FDIC OIG did not have an appropriation, it violated the Antideficiency Act.  This conclusion was consistent with FDIC OIG’s prior, historical practice of conducting an orderly shutdown during a lapse in appropriations.

FDIC’s report expressed disagreement with GAO’s determination.  It asserted that FDIC did not violate the Purpose Act or the ADA because FDIC believes it has broad authority to use the DIF to fund various operations. 

Remedial Action Taken:  FDIC asserts that it did not violate the purpose statute or ADA by incurring obligations from the DIF during the lapse in appropriations, contrary to GAO’s findings.

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

Antideficiency Act Reports – Fiscal Year 2020

GAO No.: GAO-ADA-20-13

 

Agency No.: None Reported 

Date Reported to GAO: August 29, 2019

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Date(s) of Violation(s): Fiscal Years (FYs) 2011-2016

Account(s): Environmental Programs and Management; Hazardous Substance Superfund

Amount Reported: None Reported

 
 

Description: EPA reported violations of the Antideficiency Act (ADA) that occurred when it accepted voluntary services from various individuals. 

EPA reported that it improperly received voluntary services from various individuals at different points between 2011 and 2016.  EPA identified two instances where it concluded that it had accepted such voluntary services.  In the first instance, EPA accepted the unpaid services of post‑graduate fellows, some of whom did not satisfy the definition of “student” in 5 U.S.C. § 3111, which contains requirements for the acceptance of volunteer services.  In the second instance, EPA accepted voluntary services from peer reviewers who had not signed written compensation waivers prior to performing the uncompensated services. 

Remedial Action Taken:  To prevent a recurrence of this type of violation, EPA reported that it now reminds agency managers of legal requirements associated with uncompensated services in its annual operating guidance.  EPA also reported that it issued a memorandum reiterating legal requirements for accepting services without pay, issued a new policy on non-student volunteers, and is providing training for agency managers and staff.  EPA indicated that because of the systemic nature of concern, the ADA violations could not be attributed to any single employee.  EPA also reported that it found no evidence that the ADA violations were willfully or knowingly committed.

Source:  Unaudited information GAO extracted from agency Antideficiency Act reports.

 

[1] B-330776, Apr. 22, 2020; B-331094, Jun. 25, 2020; B-331093, Jun. 30, 2020; B‑331132, Aug. 6, 2020.   

Downloads

GAO Contacts