Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Office of Property and Fleet Management to consistently monitor property provided to non-federal recipients within 1 year of receipt, and to ensure property is being used for its intended purpose 1 year after initial monitoring. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, USDA's 180-day letter has not been received.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Office of Asset Management to resume monitoring the Economic Development Property program, including property provided to non-federal recipients. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, DOE indicated in its 180-day letter that the agency concurred with the recommendation, and will update their annual personal property reporting requirements. DOE anticipates having this recommendation implemented by September 30, 2020. GAO will continue to monitor DOE's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should direct the Employment and Training Administration to take steps, such as reconciling data between Job Corps centers and the Job Corps National Office, to ensure that the entities responsible for overseeing and monitoring the Job Corps Program have accurate data on the excess property provided to non-federal recipients. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Labor: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: As of February 2020, DOL indicated in its 180-day letter that they concurred with the recommendation, and have taken steps to improve the monitoring and oversight of Job Corps Property. This includes modifying the GSAXcess approval process by elevating review of all GSAXcess requests made by Job Corps Centers to DOL's Employment Training Administration's (ETA) national office. ETA is also working with DOL's Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management (OASAM) to develop a process for GSAXcess review that includes identifying approval levels for each category of property, identifying categories of property requiring additional review and approvals, and coordinating and streamlining access request procedures. These changes will be reflected in DOL's Office of Job Corps standard operating procedures (SOP), which is expected to be issued at the end of fiscal year 2020. DOL expects to provide training to Job Corps staff and Job Corps Centers in support of the SOP that will be provided annually. GAO will continue to monitor DOL's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Office of Property and Fleet Management to establish clear processes to oversee property programs, including excess property provided to non-federal recipients across the agency. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, USDA's 180-day letter has not been received.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Office of Asset Management to update its regulations and guidance on programs that provide property to non-federal recipients to ensure regulations are current and establish a process to regularly communicate information about non-federal recipient programs to DOE program offices. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, DOE indicated in its 180-day letter that the agency concurred with the recommendation, and will update internal policies, and provide personal property information on DOE's internal informational website known as Powerpedia. DOE anticipates implementing this recommendation by September 30, 2020. GAO will continue to monitor DOE's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The GSA Administrator should direct the Office of Government-wide Policy to revise the Personal Property Reporting Tool by updating the authorities agencies can select. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: As of February 2020, GSA indicated in its 180-day letter that it concurred with the recommendation, and has taken steps to revise the Personal Property Reporting Tool (tool). GSA has added relevant authorities to the tool as recently as July 2019, and will continue to contact agencies to ensure relevant authorities are included in the tool. GSA is also evaluating technical updates to the tool to ensure that reporting agencies select an appropriate authority when reporting personal property. GSA plans to complete these actions by July 31, 2020, and inform agencies of these changes in their guidance by the end of fiscal year 2020. GAO will continue to monitor GSA's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: The GSA Administrator should direct the Office of Government-wide Policy to document in what circumstances excess property loaned to non-federal recipients should be reported and what property GSA is reporting on behalf of agencies, for example, by updating GSA guidance. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: As of February 2020, GSA indicated in its 180-day letter that it concurred with the recommendation. GSA will better communicate with agencies to better understand the confusion of reporting on loaned excess property, as reporting requirements are in statute, regulations, and guidance. GSA also plans to review and update by July 31, 2020, relevant regulations and guidance in this area including Federal Management Regulation Bulletin B-27, "Annual Executive Agency Reports on Excess and Exchange/Sale Personal Property." GAO will continue to monitor GSA's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The EPA Administrator should direct EPA officials responsible for appointing advisory committee members to follow a key step in its appointment process—developing and including draft membership grids in appointment packets with staff rationales for proposed membership—for all committees. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2019, EPA restated its reasons for disagreeing with this recommendation. (EPA's rationale for disagreeing was originally stated in a June 2019 letter included in an appendix in our report.) We will provide updated information regarding this recommendation when it becomes available.

Recommendation: EPA's Designated Agency Ethics Official should direct EPA's Ethics Office, as part of its periodic review of EPA's ethics program, to evaluate—for example, through audits or spot-checks—the quality of financial disclosure reviews for special government employees appointed to EPA advisory committees. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2019, EPA notified GAO that it expects to launch an electronic financial disclosure reporting system for special government employees in January 2021. Once financial disclosure forms for these individuals are available electronically, EPA's Ethics Office will be better positioned to audit or review the forms, according to EPA officials. In addition, the electronic filing system should minimize errors (e.g. failing to record the date that the form was received) made by filers and reviewers, according to EPA officials.

Recommendation: The Director of CFPB should implement a systematic process for prioritizing risks to consumers and considering how to use the bureau's available policy tools—such as rulemaking, supervision, enforcement, and consumer education—to address these risks. Such a process could incorporate principles from the prior One Bureau process, such as an assessment of the extent of potential harm to consumers in financial markets, to prioritize the most significant risks. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019, CFPB staff told us that the CFPB Director approved a proposal to implement a short-term policy prioritization exercise. According to a memorandum describing this exercise, CFPB anticipates that it will involve CFPB's Strategy Office engaging members of cross-bureau working groups to review and update priorities related to addressing risks to consumers. According to CFPB staff, the working groups will need up to a few months to complete this work, and the results should be available in the second quarter of 2020. To fully address this recommendation, CFPB needs to make further progress in implementing this planned prioritization exercise, including by demonstrating steps taken to prioritize risks to consumers and considering how to use CFPB's various policy tools to address these risks.

Recommendation: The Chief of the Forest Service should determine whether new regulations governing timber export and substitution are appropriate. If the agency determines new regulations are appropriate, it should issue them in accordance with the 1997 act, in consultation with BLM. Otherwise, the agency should seek legislative relief from the act's requirement. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open

Comments: In its May 15, 2020 correspondence, the Forest Service stated that it is putting together a Corrective Action Plan for addressing the recommendation. It expects leadership review of the plan to be completed in June 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of the BLM should determine whether new regulations governing timber export and substitution are appropriate. If the agency determines new regulations are appropriate, it should issue them in accordance with the 1997 act, in consultation with the Forest Service. Otherwise, the agency should seek legislative relief from the act's requirement. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open

Comments: In its April 9, 2020 correspondence, BLM stated that a proposed rule continues to be reviewed by Departmental officials. BLM identified December 31, 2020 as a new target date for completing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chief of the Forest Service should review agency policies for continued relevance and effectiveness in addressing the risk of illegal timber export and substitution, and based on that review--and in accordance with applicable regulations--should issue new policies as necessary. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open

Comments: In its May 15, 2020 correspondence, the Forest Service stated that it is putting together a Corrective Action Plan for addressing the recommendation. It expects leadership review of the plan to be completed in June 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of the BLM should review agency policies for continued relevance and effectiveness in addressing the risk of illegal timber export and substitution, and based on that review--and in accordance with applicable regulations--should issue new policies as necessary. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open

Comments: In its April 9, 2020 correspondence, BLM stated that any action to address this recommendation is contingent upon the completion of Recommendation #2. Once BLM's response to that recommendation is completed, the agency will address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should ensure the consistent application of the requirement for respondent time costs, including clarifying instructions for when and how to include fringe benefits. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: In April 2019, we requested information from OMB on the agency's implementation of our recommendation but as of May 2019 have not received any status updates. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should review the policies, procedures, and related control activities to ensure that the agency's Paperwork Reduction Act review process is operating effectively. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: In April 2019, we requested information from OMB on the agency's implementation of our recommendation but as of May 2019 have not received any status updates. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should review the policies, procedures, and related control activities to ensure that the agency's Paperwork Reduction Act review process is operating effectively. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, USDA provided an update on efforts to review its Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) policies and procedures. To ensure that its PRA process is operating effectively, USDA reviewed and updated its internal guidance on preparing information collection request supporting statements, including sections regarding the calculation of respondent burden hour and cost estimates. This updated guidance encourages consultation with potential respondents to help develop these burden estimates. A new PRA consultation checklist directs agency officials to seek input from individuals outside of USDA regarding the agency's burden estimates for an information collection request, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used in the estimate calculations. The updated guidance specifies that fringe benefits, such as paid leave, insurance, and retirement contributions, should be included in the wage rates used for respondent burden cost estimates. It also clarifies when roundtrip travel time and costs should be included in burden estimates. According to USDA officials, the agency meets with PRA Coordinators to ensure compliance with the updated guidance. These are positive steps toward improving USDA's burden calculation process. However, USDA has not yet provided evidence of a review or revision of its information collection request review process. A review or revision of this process could help USDA better identify errors in burden estimate calculations prior to the final information collection request being sent to OMB and released to the public.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should review the policies, procedures, and related control activities to ensure that the agency's Paperwork Reduction Act review process is operating effectively. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2018, HHS provided a statement of actions it had taken to address this recommendation. HHS stated that it had added reporting tools to its Common Data Element Repository (CDER) Library that could help improve tracking of information related to HHS's Information Collection Requests. HHS also stated that it had launched daily emails to Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) staff to inform them of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Notices of Action related to Information Collection Requests. Additionally, HHS released an information collection burden calculator tool in the CDER Library to give PRA staff the ability to create burden tables for consistent use across multiple platforms for a single Information Collection Request. According to HHS officials, this tool incorporates both wages and employee benefits in the burden calculations. As of August 2019, HHS's burden calculator tool has been included as a resource on PRA.Digital.gov, a new OMB website that serves as a PRA knowledge base for federal staff. While these are important steps, we are awaiting additional details on how these changes have affected HHS's PRA review process. We will continue to monitor HHS's progress toward addressing our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should leverage existing consultation with stakeholders and the public to explicitly seek input on the estimated burden imposed by information collections. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2018, HHS stated that it continues to leverage consultation mechanisms for input on the burdens imposed by information collections. According to the agency, it plans to increase the use of the eRulemaking program's Federal Docket Management System for all information collections, including non-rule Information Collection Requests. HHS also stated it plans to contact stakeholders to discuss potential information collections and receive burden estimates. As of August 9, 2019, we have not received an update about HHS's actions or plans. We will continue to monitor HHS's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should review the policies, procedures, and related control activities to ensure that the agency's Paperwork Reduction Act review process is operating effectively. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In its September 2018 recommendation implementation update, Department of Transportation (DOT) stated that the department began an internal review of the Paperwork Reduction Act program operations, policy, and guidance. Officials reported that they anticipate issuing an updated policy by September 30, 2019. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should leverage existing consultation with stakeholders and the public to explicitly seek input on the estimated burden imposed by information collections. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In its September 2018 recommendation implementation update, Department of Transportation (DOT) stated that the department began an internal review of the Paperwork Reduction Act program operations, policy, and guidance. Officials reported that they anticipate issuing an updated policy by September 30, 2019. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: Congress may wish to consider amending the Paperwork Reduction Act to more explicitly require federal agencies to consult with potential respondents on each information collection beyond the publication of Federal Register notices using efficient and effective consultation methods. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2019, no relevant legislation has been enacted. We will continue to monitor legislation to see if it addresses our matter for congressional consideration.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should include enough information in Federal Register notices to allow the public to reasonably calculate or determine the number of respondents, the frequency of response, and the average burden time per response for each information collection activity. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In its September 2018 recommendation implementation update, Department of Transportation (DOT) stated that the departmental Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Officer has reviewed the Notice templates and checklist with DOT component PRA Officers during monthly PRA meetings and has applied additional scrutiny in the review process. DOT officials stated that the department began an internal review of the Paperwork Reduction Act program operations, policy, and guidance that will include additional aids to support Notice development. Officials reported that they anticipate issuing an updated policy by September 30, 2019. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should leverage existing consultation with stakeholders and the public to explicitly seek input on the estimated burden imposed by information collections. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: According to IRS, agency officials met with representatives of external stakeholder organizations on the Information Reporting Program Advisory Committee (IRPAC) to seek input on the burden experience of their participants and the communities they represent. As a result of these discussions, the IRPAC has added the burden experience as defined by the PRA as a monthly agenda topic for the 2019 session. As of September 2019, IRS officials reported that the IRPAC has not yet met in 2019. Once we receive documentation confirming this action, we will update the status of the recommendation accordingly.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should include enough information in Federal Register notices to allow the public to reasonably calculate or determine the number of respondents, the frequency of response, and the average burden time per response for each information collection activity. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2018, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) reported that it continues to standardize the review process by developing a checklist that ensures all required elements are included in the Federal Register notice. Agency officials stated that the agency will complete the development and delivery of training for employees with responsibility for PRA compliance in fiscal year 2019. We will continue to monitor IRS's progress toward completing these actions.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should ensure that CMS has complete data on terminations of enrollee coverage for nonpayment of premiums by requiring issuers to report these data. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should provide a transparent process for issuers and CMS to systematically reconcile discrepancies in their data on terminations of enrollee coverage for nonpayment of premiums. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
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 Education should direct the Chief Operating Officer of FSA to establish and document a procedure for the destruction of records contained in electronic systems in accordance with approved disposition schedules. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2019, FSA stated they have addressed the recommendation, but it is still undergoing an internal review. Once we receive documentation, we will determine if it addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Chief Operating Officer of FSA to ensure staff receive records management training annually. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2019, FSA stated they have addressed the recommendation, but it is still undergoing an internal review. Once we receive documentation, we will determine if it addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Chief Operating Officer of FSA to conduct the triennial assessment of the FSA records management program. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2019, FSA stated they have addressed the recommendation, but it is still undergoing an internal review. Once we receive documentation, we will determine if it addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Chief Operating Officer of FSA to ensure that privacy impact assessments address all required elements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2019, FSA stated they have addressed the recommendation, but it is still undergoing an internal review. Once we receive documentation, we will determine if it addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Chief Operating Officer of FSA to ensure that information security-related policies and procedures are reviewed at least annually, in accordance with FSA policy; updated as needed; and approved by security officials. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2019, FSA stated they have addressed the recommendation, but it is still undergoing an internal review. Once we receive documentation, we will determine if it addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should update its regulation to include protections of personal information as an element of a school's ability to demonstrate its administrative capability. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2019, FSA stated they have addressed the recommendation, but it is still undergoing an internal review. Once we receive documentation, we will determine if it addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the FCC should establish quantifiable goals and related measures--performance indicators, targets, and timeframes--for its enforcement program and annually publish the results to demonstrate the performance of this program and improve transparency regarding FCC's enforcement priorities. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open

Comments: In 2018, FCC included quantifiable goals and related measures for its enforcement program in FCC's Fiscal Year 2019 Performance Plan, which is included in FCC's Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Estimate to Congress. FCC plans to publish the results in its Fiscal Year 2019 Performance Report. FCC expects to release this report in March 2020.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the FCC should establish, and make publically available, a communications strategy outlining the agency's enforcement program for external stakeholders, to improve engagement with the telecommunications community on the purposes, objectives, and processes the Enforcement Bureau employs to achieve its mission. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2019, FCC has yet to take action on this recommendation.

Recommendation: As Congress considers reauthorizing NFIP, it should consider comprehensive reform to improve the program's solvency and enhance the nation's resilience to flood risk, which could include actions in six areas: (1) addressing the current debt, (2) removing existing legislative barriers to FEMA's revising premium rates to reflect the full risk of loss, (3) addressing affordability, (4) increasing consumer participation, (5) removing barriers to private-sector involvement, and (6) protecting NFIP flood resilience efforts. In implementing these reforms, Congress should consider the sequence of the actions and their interaction with each other.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, Congress has not passed comprehensive reform of NFIP, but Congress is considering various reforms as it works to reauthorize the program. We will review the status of this item if and when such legislation passes.

Recommendation: To help state credit union supervisors and privately insured credit unions better interpret Regulation I and inform consumers when an institution is not federally insured, CFPB should issue guidance to clarify whether drive-through windows require disclosures.

Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open

Comments: CFPB agreed with this recommendation. As of January 2020, CFPB said it had explored options for addressing the recommendation and determined it would require notice-and-comment rulemaking. CFPB said that because the agency had other, higher regulatory priorities, it did not currently have plans to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help state credit union supervisors and privately insured credit unions better interpret Regulation I and inform consumers when an institution is not federally insured, CFPB should issue guidance to describe what constitutes clear and conspicuous disclosure, including minimum signage dimensions and font size for disclosures.

Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open

Comments: CFPB agreed with this recommendation. As of January 2020, CFPB said it had explored options that would most effectively and efficiently provide guidance regarding Regulation I and said that notice-and-comment rulemaking would be necessary to address GAO's recommendation with regard to "clear and conspicuous" disclosures. CFPB said that because the agency had other, higher regulatory priorities, it did not currently have plans to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help state credit union supervisors and privately insured credit unions better interpret Regulation I and inform consumers when an institution is not federally insured, CFPB should issue guidance to explain and provide examples of which communications are advertising.

Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open

Comments: CFPB agreed with this recommendation. As of January 2020, CFPB said it had explored options that would most effectively and efficiently provide guidance regarding Regulation I and said that notice-and-comment rulemaking would be necessary to address GAO's recommendation. CFPB said that because the agency had other, higher regulatory priorities, it did not currently have plans to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance its ability to fulfill its role as the facilitator of cross-sector collaboration and best-practices sharing, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Assistant Secretary of Infrastructure Protection, Office of Infrastructure Protection, to explore with key critical infrastructure partners, whether and what opportunities exist to harmonize federally-administered screening and credentialing access control efforts across critical infrastructure sectors.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: As of 2/12/2020, awaiting additional evidence/clarification from DHS.

Recommendation: To improve the transparency and accountability over the compensation paid to WYO companies and set appropriate compensation rates, the FEMA administrator should take into account WYO company characteristics that may impact companies' expenses and profits when developing the new compensation methodology and rates.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open

Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. FEMA issued a Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporate actual flood expense data into the WYO payment methodology.

Recommendation: To assist IRA owners in addressing challenges associated with investing their retirement savings in unconventional assets, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should provide guidance to IRA owners and custodians on how to determine and document fair market value (FMV) for certain categories of hard-to-value unconventional assets. For example, IRS could consider updating Form 5498 instructions to custodians on how to document FMV for hard-to-value assets (e.g., last-known FMV based on independent appraisal, acquisition price) and provide guidance directed at account owners that provides examples of how to ascertain FMV for different types of unconventional assets.

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS agreed that guidance should be provided to IRA owners and custodians. In 2018, IRS stated that it had discussed this issue with Counsel and Treasury, and it was agreed that fair market value would be a part of the IRA guidance project under the 2017 Priority Guidance Plan. IRS officials said that these new regulations would address FMV for certain categories of hard-to-value unconventional assets. IRS further noted that it would be premature to modify instructions and guidance to custodians on how to determine and document FMV for hard-to- value assets until the new regulations are issued. In their October 2019 update of planned guidance projects, Treasury's Office of Tax Policy and IRS still listed planned IRA regulations. GAO will not close this recommendation as implemented until the new valuation guidance is issued.

Recommendation: To achieve a better understanding of the effect of certain Personal care services (PCS) services on beneficiaries and a more consistent administration of policies and procedures across PCS programs, the Acting Administrator of CMS should collect and analyze states' required information on the impact of the Participant-Directed Option and Community First Choice programs on the health and welfare of beneficiaries as well as the state quality measures for the Participant-Directed Option and Community First Choice programs.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) concurred with GAO's recommendation. On December 30, 2016, the agency issued guidance on the Community First Choice program to assist states in submitting information to CMS on the health and welfare of beneficiaries. In March 2019, CMS officials stated that the agency is currently developing the process for states to report this information to CMS. Agency officials also stated they are exploring the value of collecting this information for the Participant-Directed Option program given the limited number of states currently operating under this authority. In February 2020, CMS officials stated that the agency continues to develop policy related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To continue the agency's efforts to improve state and local emergency preparedness for rail accidents involving hazardous materials, the Secretary of Transportation should, after the rulemaking is finalized, develop a process for regularly collecting information from state emergency response commissions on the distribution of the railroad-provided hazardous-materials-shipping information to local planning entities.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: DOT published the Oil Spill Response Plans and Information Sharing for High-Hazard Flammable Trains final rule in February 2019. As of September 2020, PHMSA indicated that it wanted to close out the recommendation by adding 2 questions to the Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness grant application asking SERCs whether they receive information on High-Hazard Flammable Train operations and whether they are disseminating this information to local planning entities. OMB is currently reviewing the additional information request. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to address the recommendation.

Recommendation: As NIH-DFAS begins formalizing its internal guidance, the Director of NIH-DFAS should establish a mechanism for tracking key milestones in the indirect cost rate-setting process, such as when indirect cost rate proposals are due.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: National Institutes of Health: Office of Management: Office of Acquisition and Logistics Management: Office of Acquisition Management and Policy: Division of Financial Advisory Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendations. In response, HHS stated that National Institute of Health's Division of Financial Advisory Services (DFAS) will establish a mechanism for tracking key milestones in the indirect cost rate-setting process. NIH-DFAS has initiatives underway that include moving from paper to electronic submissions of indirect cost proposals and developing a replacement to its Commercial Rate Agreement Distribution Services website. DFAS is looking into the feasibility of incorporating key milestones into these two major initiatives. NIH-DFAS is currently working with a contractor to develop a web based system that will establish a tracking system to account for when indirect cost proposal are due from organizations. The original initiative to enable the electronic submission of indirect cost proposals was modified to incorporate this new requirement. NIH-DFAS anticipates the planned date for implementation of this system to be October 1, 2017. As of February 4, 2020, this recommendation is still open because DFAS does not have the "proposal due date" and "extension due date" data fields activated in eFLow. DFAS is looking into adding those enhancements and hope to have these updates implemented by June 30, 2020. On July 8th, 2020, NIH-DFAS notified us that they plan to update us with the status of this recommendation by October 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help lessen confusion among the public and policy makers regarding federal data on sexual violence, the Director of OMB should establish a federal interagency forum on sexual violence statistics. The forum should consider the broad range of differences across the data collection efforts to assess which differences enhance or hinder the overall understanding of sexual violence in the United States.

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

Comments: At the time of our report, OMB neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation but stated that it did not believe convening a forum was the most strategic use of resources because agencies were not far enough along with their data collection efforts. We disagree with OMB's assertion because 7 of the 10 data collection efforts have been in place for more than 10 years, and several have been in place for multiple decades. As of December 2019, OMB has not provided information on any new efforts to establish a federal interagency forum on sexual violence statistics.

Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of BLM's efforts to track and deter unauthorized grazing, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of BLM to amend the regulations on unauthorized grazing use--43 C.F.R. Subpart 4150 (2005)--to establish a procedure for the informal resolution of violations at the local level, or follow the existing regulations by sending a notice of unauthorized use for each potential violation as provided by 43 C.F.R. 4150.2(a) (2005).

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, BLM is reviewing comments from the Department of the Interior's Office of the Solicitor on the revised grazing handbook. In addition, BLM will need to develop and roll-out a communication strategy and plan. Therefore, the recommendations will not be fully implemented until December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of BLM's efforts to track and deter unauthorized grazing, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of BLM to record all incidents of unauthorized grazing, including those resolved informally.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, BLM is reviewing comments from the Department of the Interior's Office of the Solicitor on the revised grazing handbook. In addition, BLM will need to develop and roll-out a communication strategy and plan. Therefore, the recommendations will not be fully implemented until December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of BLM's efforts to track and deter unauthorized grazing, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of BLM to revise the agency's Unauthorized Grazing Use Handbook to make it consistent with 43 C.F.R. pt. 4100 (2005).

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, BLM is reviewing comments from the Department of the Interior's Office of the Solicitor on the revised grazing handbook. In addition, BLM will need to develop and roll-out a communication strategy and plan. Therefore, the recommendations will not be fully implemented until December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of the Forest Service's efforts to track and deter unauthorized grazing, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Chief of the Forest Service to adopt an unauthorized grazing penalty structure that is based, similar to BLM's, on the current commercial value of forage.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, Washington Office staff are finalizing directive revisions affecting the change in the excess and unauthorized use fee structure and preparing them for tribal consultation. It is anticipated that the 120-day tribal consultation period will begin concurrent with the publication in the Federal Register of a 60-day notice and comment period for the revised directives. It is expected that the revisions would be ready to be implemented prior to the beginning of the 2021 grazing fee year that begins March 1, 2021.

Recommendation: To help improve reporting of emissions data on the OGOR, the Secretary of the Interior should direct BLM to provide additional guidance on how to estimate natural gas emissions from federal oil and gas leases.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In November 2018, BLM's "Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation; Rescission or Revision of Certain Requirements" rule (43 C.F.R. 3179.301) took effect, revising the 2016 rule. According to BLM in July 2020, the revision satisfies the intent of the recommendation because the rule specifies the acceptable means of estimation or measurement of vented or flared gas. The rule says the operator may estimate or measure vented gas in accordance with applicable state or tribal regulatory agency rules or regulations, estimate using the gas to oil ratio (GOR) test (which, during GAO's review, some BLM officials said was not accurate), or to "measure" the volume of the flared gas. We do not believe the revised rule provides sufficient additional specificity on how natural gas emissions should be estimated by operators.

Recommendation: To help improve reporting of emissions data on the OGOR, the Secretary of the Interior should direct ONRR to provide additional guidance on how to differentiate between combusted and noncombusted lease use volumes reported on the OGOR, which could assist Interior in measuring its progress toward greenhouse gas reduction goals.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, ONRR reported that it developed and implemented two disposition codes--one for the royalty-bearing flaring of gas and another for the royalty-bearing venting of gas volumes. ONRR did not develop additional disposition codes because, according to BLM, other disposition codes would not be required due to BLM's 2018 revision of the methane rule. However, we do not believe the measurement provisions in the revised methane rule contain any specific provisions requiring reporting for combusted and non-combusted lease use gas. Gas could be used on lease in pneumatic valves, which is released into the atmosphere as methane; or combusted to power up generators, where it's released as carbon dioxide. Knowing whether the emissions are in the form of methane or carbon dioxide is critical to helping Interior accurately estimate greenhouse gas emissions.

Recommendation: Because some quantities of radioactive materials are potentially dangerous to human health if not properly handled, NRC should take action to better track and secure these materials and verify the legitimacy of the licenses for those who seek to possess them. Specifically, the NRC should take the steps needed to include category 3 sources in the National Source Tracking System and add agreement state category 3 licenses to the Web-based Licensing System as quickly as reasonably possible.

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In October 2016, NRC issued a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) "Proposed Staff Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Accountability," (SRM-COMJMB-16-0001) and directed NRC staff to take specific actions to evaluate whether it is necessary to revise NRC regulations or processes governing source protection and accountability for category 3 sources. Among other things, this re-evaluation was expected to consider GAO's recommendations. In August 2017, NRC staff completed its analysis and provided recommendations to the NRC Commissioners. (Most of this analysis is available on NRC's website.) In its analysis, the NRC staff recommended not including category 3 sources in the National Source Tracking System. They also recommended not adding agreement state category 3 licenses to the Web-based Licensing System. As of January 2020, the NRC Commissioners have yet to take action on the staff analysis.

Recommendation: Because some quantities of radioactive materials are potentially dangerous to human health if not properly handled, NRC should take action to better track and secure these materials and verify the legitimacy of the licenses for those who seek to possess them. Specifically, the NRC should at least until such time that category 3 licenses can be verified using the License Verification System, require that transferors of category 3 quantities of radioactive materials confirm the validity of a would-be purchaser's radioactive materials license with the appropriate regulatory authority before transferring any category 3 quantities of licensed materials.

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In October 2016, NRC issued a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) "Proposed Staff Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Accountability," (SRM-COMJMB-16-0001) and directed NRC staff to take specific actions to evaluate whether it is necessary to revise NRC regulations or processes governing source protection and accountability for category 3 sources. Among other things, this re-evaluation was expected to consider GAO's recommendations. In August 2017, NRC staff completed its analysis and provided recommendations to the NRC Commissioners. (Most of this analysis is available on NRC's website.) In its analysis, the NRC staff recommended not requiring transferors of category 3 quantities of radiological material to confirm the validity of licenses prior to transferring any category 3 quantities of these materials. As of January 2020, the NRC Commissioners have yet to take action on the staff analysis.

Recommendation: Because some quantities of radioactive materials are potentially dangerous to human health if not properly handled, NRC should take action to better track and secure these materials and verify the legitimacy of the licenses for those who seek to possess them. Specifically, the NRC should, as part of the ongoing efforts of NRC working groups meeting to develop enhancements to the prelicensing requirements for category 3 licenses, consider requiring that an on-site security review be conducted for all unknown applicants of category 3 licenses to verify that each applicant is prepared to implement the required security measures before taking possession of licensed radioactive materials.

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, NRC issued a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) "Proposed Staff Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Accountability," (SRM-COMJMB-16-0001) and directed NRC staff to take specific actions to evaluate whether it is necessary to revise NRC regulations or processes governing source protection and accountability for category 3 sources. Among other things, this re-evaluation will consider GAO's recommendations. In August 2017, NRC staff completed its analysis and provided recommendations to the NRC Commissioners. (Most of this analysis is available on NRC's website.) In its analysis, the NRC staff recommended requiring all safety and security equipment to be in place before granting a license to a previously unknown entity. This requirement would apply to all unknown entities applying for a radioactive material license regardless of the quantity of licensed material requested. If NRC took this action, it would fully address this recommendation. As of January 2020, the NRC Commissioners have yet to take action on the staff analysis.

Recommendation: To help ensure that practitioners who may be ineligible do not possess a controlled substance registration and that practitioners who pose an increased risk of illicit diversion are identified, the Acting Administrator of DEA should take additional actions to strengthen verification controls. Specifically, the Acting Administrator of DEA should develop policies and procedures to validate SSNs and apply the policies and procedures to all new and existing SSNs in the CSA2; such an approach could involve collaborating with SSA to assess the feasibility of checking registrants' SSNs against the Enumeration Verification System.

Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2018, DEA told us that it assessed the feasibility of directly collaborating with SSA to check registrants' SSNs against any SSA systems, including the Enumeration Verification System (EVS), and is unable to implement a data verification process to validate SSNs against EVS without legislative authority. Specifically, DEA said that access to SSA's systems would require passage of new legislation to authorize DEA to fully participate in a data exchange agreement with SSA, which DEA said was also confirmed by Senate staff. In June 2020, DEA provided documentation of SSA's response to DEA's request to access EVS which stated that SSA was unable to enter into a data exchange under the conditions DEA initially proposed. However, it also stated that SSA would explore granting DEA access if DEA requested number-holder's consent. Therefore, we continue to believe there is a possible path forward in using SSA's service. Additionally, DEA told us that it would use information from the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) to validate SSNs. However, as of August 2020, DEA has not provided any documentation to support how or if this has been implemented. Further, as noted in our report, FSMB is limited to information for medical doctors, osteopathic doctors and some physician assistants, which make up only a portion of DEA's registrants. As we noted in our report, validating SSNs will help establish registrants' identities which will better ensure DEA has the information necessary to implement its existing controls and to identify other registrations held by each individual, including past adverse actions taken against previous registrations. As such, we continue to believe that DEA should take steps to validate the information it receives. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress in this area.

Recommendation: To help ensure that practitioners who may be ineligible do not possess a controlled substance registration and that practitioners who pose an increased risk of illicit diversion are identified, the Acting Administrator of DEA should take additional actions to strengthen verification controls. Specifically, the Acting Administrator of DEA should identify and implement a cost-effective approach to monitor state licensure and disciplinary actions taken against its registrants; such an approach could include using data sources that contain this information, such as the National Practitioner Data Bank or the Federation of State Medical Boards.

Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2018, DEA provided a copy of its purchase order award to the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB); however, as of August 2020, DEA has not provided documentation to demonstrate how use of FSMB will be implemented. Also, in April 2018, DEA said it was exploring how to establish a cost-effective system to obtain National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) information and will reevaluate the need to obtain NPDB information after DEA has had the opportunity to process the FSMB information. In June 2020, DEA stated it will not be taking additional action on obtaining NPDB. We will continue to monitor DEA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve USDA's ability to better understand the economic impacts of unintended mixing of GE and other crops, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) to work with all relevant USDA stakeholders, including APHIS and the Organic Working Group, to determine what additional information should be sought in future organic surveys, such as the costs of reshipping and re-storing shipments rejected because of unintended GE presence, as well as the costs associated with finding new buyers for such shipments.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In its August 2016 Statement of Action on our report, USDA did not provide any new information on actions it has taken, if any, to implement this recommendation. For example, there was no indication whether stakeholders internal to the department had continued to meet to discuss the 2014 Organic Survey results and how to move forward with future survey questions to obtain additional data, such as data needed to better understand the economic impacts of unintended mixing with GE crops. As of September 2020, USDA did not have an update regarding the implementation of this recommendation. We will continue to follow up on USDA's efforts.

Recommendation: To improve USDA's ability to better understand the economic impacts of unintended mixing of GE and other crops, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of NASS to include producers, growing identity-preserved crops, in addition to organic producers in USDA's survey efforts.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In its August 2016 Statement of Action on our report, USDA did not provide any new information on actions it has taken, if any, to implement this recommendation. We continue to believe that USDA should survey producers growing identity-preserved crops regarding their potential economic losses from unintended GE presence, as is being done for organic producers. As we previously reported, U.S. acreage planted to identity-preserved crops is significantly greater than that planted to organic crops; yet, little is known about the economic costs to identity-preserved farmers of unintended mixing. As of September 2020, USDA did not have an update regarding the implementation of this recommendation. We will continue to follow up on USDA's efforts.

Recommendation: To ensure that FHFA has adequate authority to ensure the safety and soundness of the enterprises and to clarify its supervisory role, Congress should consider granting FHFA explicit authority to examine third parties that do business with and play a critical role in the operations of the enterprises.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has not taken action on this matter.

Recommendation: To promote consistency in the distribution of supplemental payments among states and with CMS policy, the Administrator of CMS should issue written guidance clarifying its policy that requires a link between the distribution of supplemental payments and the provision of Medicaid-covered services.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: CMS issued a proposed rule in November 2019 that may address this issue. According to the agency, the rule will promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen the fiscal integrity of Medicaid. Specifically, the agency said the rule would require states to report to CMS a comprehensive description of the methodology used to calculate the amount and distribution of supplemental payments and the provider metrics used to calculate payment amounts, such as Medicaid utilization or costs. We will assess the extent to which the final rule addresses our recommendation when it is issued.

Recommendation: To promote consistency in the distribution of supplemental payments among states and with CMS policy, the Administrator of CMS should issue written guidance clarifying its policy that payments should not be made contingent on the availability of local funding.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: CMS issued a proposed rule in November 2019 that may address this issue. According to the agency, the rule will promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen the fiscal integrity of Medicaid. Specifically, the proposed rule clarifies the agency policy that Medicaid payments may not be contingent on the availability of local funding, according to agency officials. We will assess the extent to which the final rule addresses our recommendation when it is issued.

Recommendation: In order to ensure complete, analyzable records regarding research grant award decisions are available for management and analysis, the Secretary of Energy should direct DOE's grant-making agencies to implement additional data collection efforts, which should include: (1) Retaining complete records of pre-proposal, proposal, and award data, including a record of proposal disposition, in linked electronic files to facilitate aggregate, statistical analysis of the grant-making process, including the calculation of success rates. (2) Collecting demographic, education, and career information from applicants, on a voluntary basis, that is not available to proposal reviewers but is used for analysis of success rates.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE generally agreed with this recommendation. DOE's Office of Science began collecting investigator demographics during the second quarter of fiscal year 2015 and already retained complete records that enabled the calculation of success rates. According to DOE officials, since September 2017, the other three grant-making components included in our audit have been taking various actions to implement the recommendation. These three components, the Office of Nuclear Energy (NE), the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), and the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), all complete steps to ensure that they retain complete grant life cycle information for each individual award, including complete records of pre-proposal, proposal, and award data in linked electronic files, thus fulfilling the first part of our recommendation. In 2019, EERE coordinated the development of a Federal Register Notice (FRN) regarding data collection jointly with NE and ARPA-E. The FRN drafted by EERE was finalized and published on February 11, 2020 (Vol. 85, Issue 28, Pages 7759-7760 [FR DOC# 2020-02674]). Under the proposed information collection request, an interface will be implemented in DOE grant application systems to allow external users to voluntarily provide a minimal amount of demographic information to comply with this recommendation, pursuant to review by the Office of Management and Budget. On June 30th, DOE officials shared with GAO the draft FRN for the 30-day notice and request for public comment prior to implementation.

Recommendation: To comply with Title IX enforcement requirements, the Secretary of the Department of Defense, which funds STEM research at universities, should direct the Director of the Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity to ensure that Title IX compliance reviews of DOD's grantees are periodically conducted.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation and noted it is in the process of revising current DOD guidance which will address its Title IX enforcement requirements. In September 2017, a DOD official stated that the agency is in the process of formulating instructions related to both Title IX and Title VI that they believe will address the recommendation regarding Title IX enforcement. In a memorandum issued in December 2017, a DOD official described the agency's corrective action plan (CAP), including drafting an updated rule for the Code of Federal Regulations and the development and issuance of internal DOD policy documents regarding Title IX enforcement requirements. Both of these activities were expected to be completed by June 2019. DOD reported in March 2020 that it is continuing to revise current DOD guidance to address its Title IX enforcement requirements. The Director of DOD's Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (ODEI) stated in a letter to GAO that the revised Titile IX policy is in the early stages of DOD's policy process. ODEI expressed its commitment to developing the revised policy and ensuring Title IX compliance reviews are conducted as per the revised policy and GAO's recommendation. In September of 2020, DoD sent an update indicating that they will issue a policy memorandum, specifically outlining the requirement for DoD Components who provide financial assistance to educational programs or activities conduct periodic compliance reviews. This is expected to be complete by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To help ensure that FDA has relevant and timely information to support management decisions, including the critical information necessary to ensure the safety and effectiveness of drugs compounded for animals, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Commissioner of the FDA to develop policy or guidance for agency staff that specifies circumstances under which FDA will or will not enforce compounding regulations for animals and clearly define key terms.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In November 2019, FDA released for public comment its new Draft Guidance for Industry #256 - Compounding Animal Drugs from Bulk Drug Substances. The draft guidance describes FDA's policy regarding the compounding of animal drugs from bulk drug substances including the conditions under which FDA does not intend to take enforcement action for violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act's requirements for approval, adequate directions for use, and current Good Manufacturing Practices. We will review the updated guidance when it is finalized and determine if it addresses this recommendation. In August 2020, FDA indicated that, in response to numerous requests from external stakeholders, the comment period on the draft guidance has been extended to October 2020. Once the comments have been reviewed, FDA anticipates finalizing the guidance by the end of calendar year 2021.

Recommendation: To help ensure that FDA has relevant and timely information to support management decisions, including the critical information necessary to ensure the safety and effectiveness of drugs compounded for animals, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Commissioner of the FDA to consistently document the bases for FDA's decisions about how or whether it followed up on warning letters, adverse event reports, and complaints about drug compounding for animals.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2019, FDA reported to GAO that when the Draft Guidance for Industry #256 was issued that calendar year, FDA intended to develop a risk-based compliance program to address compounding of animal drugs from bulk drug substances. As part of that compliance program, FDA reported that it intended to consistently document the basis for its decisions about what actions are taken, for example, warning letters, adverse event reports, and complaints. In August 2020, FDA reported that a working group has been formed to develop a risk-based compliance strategy, which will include a process for documenting the basis for FDA's decisions about how or whether it followed up on warning letters, adverse event reports, and complaints about drug compounding for animals. FDA anticipates implementing this strategy simultaneously with the finalization of Guidance for Industry #256, which is anticipated to occur at the end of calendar year 2021. We will follow-up with FDA regarding these actions and determine if the actions address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To help inform decision makers on the SAMP's progress as well as the decision regarding the extension of the SAMP's term, the Secretary of Defense should direct the SAMP to define timelines and measures to assess its progress in completing its major tasks.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation, stating that the department will submit its Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act report on military programs and controls regarding professionalism to Congress on September 1, 2015, thereby satisfying the requirements of this recommendation. DOD confirmed its position with regard to this recommendation on October 19, 2015. As of September 16, 2020, DOD has not responded to further inquiries regarding any actions it has taken to implement this recommendation. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To increase assurance that commanders are conducting command climate assessments in accordance with statutory requirements and departmental guidance, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Air Force, the Army, and the Navy, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to modify existing guidance or develop new guidance to comply with requirements set forth in the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act and internal DOD guidance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, stating that existing Army practice is consistent with the intent of departmental guidance for command climate survey utilization. DOD confirmed its position with regard to this recommendation on October 19, 2015. As of September 16, 2020, DOD has not responded to further inquiries regarding any actions it has taken to implement this recommendation. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To better inform the department's approach to senior officers' professional development, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Navy, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to assess the need for and feasibility of implementing 360-degree assessments for all general and flag officers.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, stating that it concurs with the recommendation to assess the need for and feasibility of implementing 360-degree assessments, or 360-degree-like feedback assessments, where they are not already being performed, but that it believes that it should only do so for general and flag officers at the three star ranks and below. DOD confirmed its position with regard to this recommendation on October 19, 2015. At that time, DOD also stated that it believes in a holistic approach to developing and assessing professionalism, noting, as an example, the Joint Staff's use of staff assistance visits and Senior Leader "roundtables" to complement the use of 360-degree assessments. In April 2018, DOD stated that each military department and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had implemented a 360-degree assessment requirement for all general and flag officers. As of September 16, 2020, DOD has not responded to inquiries regarding documentation in support of these actions. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to assess its progress in addressing ethics and professionalism issues, the Secretary of Defense should direct the SAMP, through the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, or SAMP's successor organization(s), to identify information sources and develop intermediate goals and performance metrics. At minimum, these performance metrics should be clear, quantifiable, and objective, and they should include a baseline assessment of current performance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred, with comment, with this recommendation, noting that the office of the Senior Advisor for Military Professionalism is a temporary office established by Secretary Hagel for a two year term ending no later than March of 2016. DOD confirmed its position with regard to this recommendation on October 19, 2015. In April 2018, DOD identified activities it had undertaken in the spirit and intent of the recommendation. As of September 16, 2020, DOD has not responded to inquiries for documentation in support of these actions and the related development of intermediate goals and performance metrics. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve its oversight of network adequacy in MA, the Administrator of CMS should augment MA network adequacy criteria to address provider availability.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation, and noted in a February 2018 update that CMS requires MAOs to identify provider availability in certain circumstances, such as in granting exceptions to the agency's network adequacy criteria. CMS also stated that it would consider augmenting MA network adequacy criteria to address provider availability in future years. However, CMS's 2018 MA network adequacy guidance stated that the agency does not currently consider provider availability when reviewing an organization's network adequacy, and this guidance was not updated in 2019. As a result, as of September 2019, agency officials have not implemented this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve its oversight of network adequacy in MA, the Administrator of CMS should verify provider information submitted by MAOs to ensure validity of the Health Services Delivery data.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation, and noted in a February 2018 update that the agency has standardized existing protocols to ensure the validity of the Health Services Delivery data submitted by MAOs with regards to exceptions requests and partial county justifications. However, CMS's 2018 MA network adequacy guidance stated that MAOs remain responsible for conducting validation of Health Services Delivery data. Unless CMS verifies provider information submitted by MAOs, the agency cannot be confident that MAOs are meeting network adequacy criteria. As of September 2019, agency officials have not implemented this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve its oversight of network adequacy in MA, the Administrator of CMS should set minimum requirements for MAO letters notifying enrollees of provider terminations and require MAOs to submit sample letters to CMS for review.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation. In a September 2017 update, the agency stated that it had met the spirit of our recommendation by adding its best practice suggestions of what should be included in the written termination notice to the Medicare Managed Care Manual. However, as we noted in our report, those practices are not required, nor are the letters regularly reviewed. As of September 2019, agency officials have not yet implemented this recommendation.

Recommendation: To encourage plan sponsors to continue efforts to improve plan participation and overall retirement savings through the use of Qualified Default Investment Alternatives, the Secretary of Labor should direct the Assistant Secretary for the Employee Benefits Security Administration to assess the challenges that plan sponsors and stakeholders reported, including the extent to which these challenges can be addressed, and implement corrective actions through clarifying guidance or regulations, as appropriate.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: In 2015, DOL noted that the agency would assess the challenges that plan sponsors and stakeholders had reported to GAO, decide in FY 2016 whether a broader public comment process (such as a Request for Information) or a research project would aid that assessment, and determine whether other actions, such as issuing clarifying guidance or regulations, would be beneficial to its stakeholders. In 2016, DOL confirmed that the agency continues to plan to take the above action. As of July 2017, DOL had not added a public comment process to EBSA's 2017 regulatory agenda, and had no specific timeline for any next action. In an April 2018 update, DOL responded that it had convened the 2018 ERISA Advisory Council (EAC) to study lifetime income solutions in the context of QDIAs with a focus on decumulation issues and rollovers. Among other recommendations, the EAC recommended to DOL that it clarify that sponsors may default participants into different options based on participant demographics because plan populations may not be sufficiently similar for a single default to be universally appropriate. However, DOL noted that it has not added a public comment process on QDIA issues to EBSA's regulatory agenda, and had no specific timeline for any next action.

Recommendation: To ensure consistent implementation of the Buy Indian Act procurement authority across the agencies and to enhance oversight of implementation of the Act at regional offices, the Secretaries of the Interior and Health and Human Services should direct the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health Service respectively, to clarify and codify their policies related to the priority for use of the Buy Indian Act, including whether the Buy Indian Act should be used before other set-aside programs.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. The Indian Health Service (IHS) informed GAO that in order to clarify and codify the policies related to priority for use of the Buy Indian Act, formal rulemaking was required. IHS published the intent to promulgate the regulation in the Fall 2019 and Spring 2020 Unified Agendas. According to IHS officials, the timeline for completion of the new regulation is December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To ensure consistent implementation of the Buy Indian Act procurement authority across the agencies and to enhance oversight of implementation of the Act at regional offices, the Secretaries of the Interior and Health and Human Services should direct the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health Service respectively, to collect data on regional offices' implementation of key requirements, such as challenges to self-certification.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. The Indian Health Service (IHS) informed GAO that in order to clarify and codify policies related to priority for use of the Buy Indian Act, formal rulemaking was required. IHS published the intent to promulgate the regulation in the Fall 2019 and Spring 2020 Unified Agendas. Further, the officials stated that once the new Buy Indian regulation is promulgated, IHS plans to identify a plan to collect data on area office implementation of key policy requirements, including monitoring authentication of contractor credentials. According to IHS officials, due to limitations within the Federal Procurement Data System- Next Generation IHS is unable to collect the necessary data until the rule is promulgated.

Recommendation: To ensure that the Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Service (DCPAS) and DOD components are determining LQA eligibility consistently with DOD's LQA Instruction, the DSSR, and OPM compensation claim decisions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to require the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy or DCPAS, as delegated, to monitor reviews of LQA eligibility determinations conducted by DOD components.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this action, and as of December 2019, had taken steps to improve oversight of LQA determinations by DOD components; however, it had not issued guidance that requires the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy or DCPAS to monitor reviews of LQA eligibility determinations by DOD components. At the direction of DCPAS, DOD components completed reviews and submitted reports of overseas allowances paid to a sampling of overseas employees for calendar years 2015, 2016, and 2017. According to DCPAS officials, in DOD's 2017 review of overseas allowances, one employee was identified as having erroneously received LQA. This number is lower than the three employees identified during the 2016 review and lower than the 11 employees identified in the 2015 review. Additionally, in September 2019, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy issued a memorandum requesting DOD components to complete a review of overseas allowances and differentials, including LQA, paid to overseas employees during calendar year 2018. In January 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued a memorandum that clarified LQA eligibility requirements as applied and interpreted in recent Office of Personnel Management compensation claim decisions and the Department of State Standardized Regulations. The memorandum also required components to screen relevant records and determine if there are any employees who are no longer eligible to receive LQA based on the compensation claim decisions and Department of State Standardized Regulations. Finally, according to DCPAS officials, in December 2019, DOD was revising DOD's LQA instruction to incorporate the new LQA guidance from the January 2018 memorandum. However, it is unclear whether the revised instruction once issued will require the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary or DCPAS to monitor the reviews conducted by DOD components to identify any potentially inconsistent eligibility determinations and ensure corrective action is taken, as was the intent of GAO's recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and transparency of its review process, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs or the Director of the Office of the Indian Energy and Economic Development, as appropriate, to develop a documented process to track its review and response times.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. The agency has taken initial steps by developing system enhancements to document the submittal date of energy-related documents. According to BIA officials, there is not yet a process for tracking and reporting on timeframes. To fully implement this recommendation, BIA needs to develop plans and procedures for management to gather information on agency response times for monitoring and assessment.

Recommendation: To ensure the tribal energy development capacity (TEDC) grant program is effective in moving tribes closer to developing the capacity needed to pursue TERAs, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs or the Director of the Office of the Indian Energy and Economic Development, as appropriate, to develop a documented process for evaluating the effectiveness of TEDC grants.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development's Division of Energy and Mineral Development sent surveys to tribal stakeholders on the effectiveness of TEDC grants. However, as of January 2020, Indian Affairs does not have a documented process for evaluating the effectiveness of TEDC grants.

Recommendation: If Congress wishes to evaluate the effectiveness of the ITC and the PTC as incentives for the development of renewable utility-scale electricity generation projects as it considers proposals to extend the ITC or reauthorize the PTC, it should consider directing the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to provide Congress with project-level data currently collected from taxpayers who claim the ITC in lieu of the PTC--such as the number of projects for which they are claiming the credit, the technology of the projects taking the credit, and the total generating capacity added--and make such data available for analysis. Additionally, take steps to collect and report the same data from all taxpayers claiming the ITC.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: Congress has not taken action on this matter as of June 11, 2020.

Recommendation: If Congress wishes to evaluate the effectiveness of the ITC and the PTC as incentives for the development of renewable utility-scale electricity generation projects as it considers proposals to extend the ITC or reauthorize the PTC, it should consider directing the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to take steps to collect project-level data from taxpayers claiming the PTC--such as the number of projects for which they are claiming the credit, the technology of the projects taking the credit, and the total generating capacity--and make these data available for analysis.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: Congress has not taken action on this matter as of June 11, 2020.

Recommendation: To enhance State's efforts to protect SWT participants from abuse and the SWT program from misuse, the Secretary of State should direct the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs to establish a mechanism to ensure that sponsors provide complete and consistent lists of fees that participants must pay.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: In response to our recommendation that the State Department (State) establish a mechanism to ensure that sponsor provide complete and consistent lists of fees that exchange visitors on the Summer Work Travel program must pay, State acknowledged it collected such fee information in 2016. As July 18, 2018, we are awaiting State's review and analysis of this information to ensure the price lists are consistent and comprehensive, as well as published guidance it is sending to sponsors on how fee and cost information must be listed on their websites so that there will be consistency among sponsors. State indicated its fee study will take place in 2019 to cover the period of 2018. As of August 2020, State indicated that it planned to complete the fee study following final Summer Work Travel rule, pending OMB approval.

Recommendation: To enhance State's efforts to protect SWT participants from abuse and the SWT program from misuse, the Secretary of State should direct the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs to establish a mechanism to ensure that information about these participant fees is made publicly available.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: In response to our recommendation that the State Department (State) establish a mechanism to ensure that information about Summer Work Travel participant fees is made publicly available, State noted that it had published a notice for proposed rulemaking on January 12, 2017. When finalized, this would require each sponsor to include in its recruiting material, and post on its main Web site (e.g., with a visible link to such a page on the sponsors homepage), examples of the typical monthly budgets of exchange visitors placed in various regions of the United States to illustrate wages (based on the required weekly minimum of 32-hours of work at a typical host placement) balanced against itemized fees and estimated costs. Until State finalizes this rule, they cannot enforce this requirement. State anticipated releasing the final rule in the middle of 2019, pending OMB approval. As of August 2020 State has not issued a final rule; and OMB approval is still pending.

Recommendation: To enhance State's efforts to protect SWT participants from abuse and the SWT program from misuse, the Secretary of State should direct the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs to establish detailed criteria that will allow State to assess the sufficiency and appropriateness of opportunities for cultural activities outside the workplace that sponsors provide to SWT participants.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: In response to our recommendation that the State Department (State) establish detailed criteria that will allow it to assess the sufficiency and appropriateness of opportunities for cultural activities outside the workplace that sponsors provide to Summer Work Travel participants, State published a notice for proposed rulemaking on January 12, 2017. When finalized, this would require sponsors and their host entities to create cultural opportunities at least once per month. The proposed rule also notes that State will issue guidance outlining best practices for cross-cultural programming. As of August 2020 this is not finalized.

Recommendation: To ensure that federal regulators have better information about lump sum windows and to better ensure that participants have ready access to key information they need to make a decision when presented with a lump sum offer, the Department of Labor should require plan sponsors to notify DOL at the time they implement a lump sum window offer, including the number and category of participants being extended the offer (e.g., separated vested; retiree) as well as examples of the materials provided to them.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Labor (DOL) agreed that this type of information may be helpful in determining the extent to which lump sum window offers are made, as well as the types of disclosures the participants receive. However, as of July 2017, DOL reported that it has not identified authority under ERISA for it to impose such a requirement on plan sponsors either before or shortly after the plan offers the lump sum window. The agency states that ERISA expressly provides specific reporting and disclosure requirements. These include various filings, such as annual financial reports, reports upon plan termination, and reports upon making certain transfers of pension plan assets to health benefit accounts. The agency believes ERISA does not require plans to notify them regarding the benefit distribution options they offer or changes in those options, and does not read the broad rulemaking authority in ERISA in Section 505 (general regulations) and Section 110 (pension reporting and disclosure) as authorizing EBSA to establish the notice filing requirement GAO recommended. The agency also commented that ERISA expressly requires that most pension plans file a Form 5500 annual report with the statute specifying the required contents of this annual report in some detail and requiring "such other financial and actuarial information as the Secretary may find necessary or appropriate." Although the agency noted it could, by regulation, require reporting on lump sum window offers on the Form 5500, there would be a substantial time lag because ERISA by statute establishes the reporting cycle for the Form 5500 -- the report is not due until 210 days (7 months) after the plan year closes (e.g., for calendar year plans, July 31st of the following year). The agency recognizes that this might not be responsive to the recommendation, which appears to envision a notification system that is relatively contemporaneous with the lump sum window being offered to participants and beneficiaries. In 2018, DOL noted that it allocated its regulatory resources to other priority projects and, as of June 2020, reported that this status remains unchanged.

Recommendation: To ensure that federal regulators have better information about lump sum windows and to better ensure that participants have ready access to key information they need to make a decision when presented with a lump sum offer, the Department of Labor should coordinate with the Internal Revenue Service and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) to clarify the guidance regarding the information sponsors should provide to participants when extending lump sum window offers and place the guidance on the agency's website. Guidance should include clear and understandable presentations of information, such as the relative value of the lump sum, the role and level of protections provided by PBGC, and the positive and negative ramifications of accepting the lump sum. Such guidance could also include promising practices for information materials from plan sponsors which are particularly effective in facilitating informed participant decision-making.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Labor agreed with this recommendation, noting it is important to coordinate with the Treasury Department/IRS and PBGC to clarify the guidance regarding the information sponsors and other plan fiduciaries should provide to participants and beneficiaries when extending lump sum window offers. In 2016, the agency noted that the manner of publishing that guidance would be part of that coordination process. They may consider some formal public request for input (such as publishing a Request for Information in the Federal Register) and focus group or other field testing work. In addition, the agency noted that the 2015 ERISA Advisory Council announced that one of its projects this year concerns how to give participants effective notices and disclosures concerning lump sum window offers, including possible development of model participant notices. The 2015 Council developed recommendations and model notices on lump sum window offers in "pension risk transfer transactions," and suggested that DOL make the Model Notices available on its web site to plan sponsors and participant advocates and that plan sponsors use the Model Notices when engaging in risk transfer transactions. Similar to other model communications developed by the 2015 Council, the agency believes the model notice could be further enhanced if subjected to broader public input from, for example, plan sponsors, participant advocates, communications experts, and academics. Subject to the limits on its authority in this area and resource constraints. They are considering efforts to obtain public input on the Council's recommendations and model notice. They also intend to contact the Treasury Department/IRS and PBGC to discuss the Council's recommendations. In 2017, EBSA reported that it does not have a specific timeline for any next action but would alert GAO if a decision is made to add such a project to EBSA's agenda. In 2018, DOL noted that it allocated its regulatory resources to other priority projects and, as of June 2020, reported no additional changes.

Recommendation: To provide participants with useful information and to provide for lump sums that are based on up-to-date assumptions, Treasury should review its regulations governing the information contained in relative value statements to ensure these statements provide a meaningful comparison of all benefit options, especially in instances where the loss of certain additional plan benefits may not be disclosed.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: Treasury generally agreed with this recommendation but did not provide specific comments on plans to address it. As of August 2019, Treasury has not addressed this recommendation.

Recommendation: To provide participants with useful information and to provide for lump sums that are based on up-to-date assumptions, Treasury should review the applicability and appropriateness of allowing sponsors to select a "lookback" interest rate for use in calculating lump sums associated with a lump sum window that can serve to advantage the interests of the sponsor.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: Treasury generally agreed with this recommendation but did not provide specific comments on plans to address it. As of August 2019, Treasury has not addressed this recommendation.

Recommendation: To provide participants with useful information and to provide for lump sums that are based on up-to-date assumptions, Treasury should establish a process and a timeline for periodically updating the mortality tables used to determine minimum required lump sums-- including a means for monitoring when experts' views may indicate that mortality tables may have become outdated, and for taking expedited action if warranted.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: Treasury generally agreed with this recommendation but did not provide specific comments on plans to address it. As of August 2019, Treasury has not addressed this recommendation.

Recommendation: To better ensure that FBI whistleblowers have access to recourse under DOJ's regulations should the individuals experience retaliation, and to minimize the possibility of discouraging future potential whistleblowers, the Attorney General should clarify in all current relevant DOJ guidance and communications, including FBI guidance and communications, to whom FBI employees may make protected disclosures and, further, explicitly state that employees will not have access to recourse if they experience retaliation for reporting alleged wrongdoing to someone not designated in DOJ's regulations.

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In response to our report, in December 2016, Congress passed and the President signed the FBI Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-302, which, among other things, provides a means for FBI employees to obtain corrective action for retaliation for disclosures of wrongdoing made to supervisors and others in the employees' chain of command. Following this, the FBI worked closely with the Department of Justice's Office of Inspector General (DOJ-OIG) to develop a training that clearly identifies to whom FBI employees may make protected disclosures. In addition, the FBI issued an aligned policy directive and two fact sheets detailing whistleblower rights. In October 2018, a DOJ official reported to us that the department was in the process of updating its regulations and, in February 2020, DOJ officials confirmed that the updated regulation was in the departmental clearance process but they could not provide an estimate for when it would be finalized. As a result, as of February 2020, DOJ's regulations have not been updated and are inconsistent with the current statute and FBI's guidance and training; as such, the problem of unclear or conflicting guidance to FBI employees still needs to be addressed. To address this recommendation, DOJ would need to update its regulations and ensure that all relevant guidance is clear and consistent across the department.

Recommendation: To help ensure contracting officers carry out the requirements of Section 802, the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and Administrator of USAID should revise the processes and guidance governing management reviews of procurements to ensure that such reviews assess whether contracting officers are complying with the provisions of Section 802.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with GAO's recommendation. Following a May 2015 Federal Acquisition Regulation update to reflect the requirements of Section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the Office of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy drafted supplementary information for an update of the agency's Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI) that was considered and rejected by Defense Acquisition Regulation Council. In July 2019, the Office of Defense Pricing and Contracting reported that new PGI guidance would be drafted that will require management reviews to consider compliance with Section 802 requirements included in the Federal Acquisition Regulation. As of August 2020, we have been unable to determine the status of this guidance.

Recommendation: Depending on the outcome of the litigation, the Secretary of Labor should take steps to ensure the agency will be positioned to conduct a meaningful retrospective review consistent with the Executive Order at an appropriate time. These steps should be taken in consultation with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and could include, for example, identifying metrics that could be used to evaluate the rule, and implementing a plan to gather and analyze the necessary data.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) agreed with this recommendation and reported that it is working to develop data collection plans and explore a potential evaluation that is focused on the Home Care Rule. As part of this effort, WHD noted that it will continue to work with HHS and other federal partners. In FY16, WHD reported that such an evaluation of how stakeholders and affected industries have responded to the rule would be beneficial. However, litigation has delayed implementation and enforcement of the rule significantly, and WHD believes an evaluation at this stage would be premature and would be unlikely to fully and accurately capture stakeholders' responses to the rule and the resulting impacts. Delaying the evaluation would allow WHD to monitor the results of its own investigations and the effects of ongoing compliance assistance, both of which would be extremely difficult to measure at this early stage. In 2017, WHD reported that it will continue to monitor early implementation to determine the appropriate start for any evaluation and lay the groundwork for future assessment, including a plan for how to identify data that would inform such as an assessment. In 2018, WHD reported that it is too early in the implementation phase of the rule to conduct an evaluation of the rule's impact. The Department and WHD continue to engage with HHS to understand stakeholders' responses to the rule. WHD also continues to lay the groundwork for any future assessment by working to identify data sources that would inform such as an assessment.

Recommendation: To achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness, Congress should consider transferring the oversight of the markings of toy and imitation firearms in 15 U.S.C. 5001 from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (within the Department of Commerce) to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: This matter is an action identified in GAO's annual Duplication and Cost Savings reports. No legislative action identified. The Gun Look-Alike Case Act, H.R. 3224, which was introduced on July 27, 2015, in the 114th Congress, would transfer the authority to regulate the markings of toy, look-alike, and imitation firearms in section 5001 of title 15 of the U.S. Code from NIST to CPSC, as GAO suggested in November 2014. This bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade of the Committee on Energy and Commerce in the United States House of Representatives, and did not pass out of committee. This bill was not reintroduced in the 115th Congress and, as of March 2020, has not been reintroduced by the 116th Congress. Continued regulation of the marking of toy and imitation firearms by NIST rather than CPSC does not leverage each agency's expertise and therefore may not be the most efficient use of scarce federal resources.

Recommendation: To improve existing coordination of oversight for consumer product safety, Congress should consider establishing a formal comprehensive oversight mechanism for consumer product safety agencies to address crosscutting issues as well as inefficiencies related to fragmentation and overlap such as communication and coordination challenges and jurisdictional questions between agencies. Different types of formal mechanisms could include, for example, creating a memorandum of understanding to formalize relationships and agreements or establishing a task force or interagency work group. As a starting point, Congress may wish to obtain agency input on options for establishing more formal coordination.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: This matter is an action identified in GAO's annual Duplication and Cost Savings reports. As of March 2020, no legislation was identified that would establish a collaborative mechanism to facilitate communication across the relevant agencies and to help enable them to collectively address crosscutting issues, as GAO suggested in November 2014. Some of the agencies with direct regulatory oversight responsibilities for consumer product safety reported that they continue to collaborate to address specific consumer product safety topics. However, without a formal comprehensive oversight mechanism, the agencies risk missing opportunities to better leverage resources and address challenges, including those related to fragmentation and overlap.

Recommendation: To improve transparency in the rulemaking process, provide agencies and the public with information on why regulations are considered to be significant regulatory actions, and promote consistency in the designation of rules as significant regulatory actions, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should work with agencies to clearly communicate the reasons for designating a regulation as a significant regulatory action. Specifically, OMB should encourage agencies to clearly state in the preamble of final significant regulations the section of Executive Order 12866's definition of a significant regulatory action that applies to the regulation.

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

Comments: In a May 14, 2015 letter to the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Director of OMB stated that nothing in the Executive Order 12866 prevents agencies from identifying the particular relevant definition of significance in rules, and that some rules do contain this information. The letter also stated that OMB believes it is appropriate to leave agencies flexibility in how they comply with Executive Order 12866, since such specific procedures for including such information is not a requirement of the Executive Order itself. However, in written comments submitted to GAO in March 2020, OMB stated that there are numerous examples from the past few years of agencies clearly identifying in the preambles of significant regulations the applicable section(s) of EO 12866's significance definition. OMB further stated that it encourages agencies to continue and expand this practice, especially where doing so has been found to improve agency planning for the regulatory process or to otherwise enhance decision-making. When we can further confirm that OMB has taken steps to encourage agencies to include this information in rules, we will provide an update.

Recommendation: To strengthen federal oversight of facilities with ammonium nitrate, the Secretary of Labor and the Administrator of EPA should direct OSHA and EPA, respectively, to consider revising their related regulations to cover ammonium nitrate and jointly develop a plan to require high risk facilities with ammonium nitrate to assess the risks and implement safeguards to prevent accidents involving this chemical.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: On December 9, 2013, OSHA issued a Request for Information seeking, among other things, comments on potential revisions to its Process Safety Management standard and its Explosives and Blasting Agents Standard. The Request for Information specifically invited comments on safe work practices for storing, handling, and managing ammonium nitrate and on regulatory requirements to improve its approach to preventing the hazards associated with ammonium nitrate. As of July 2017, OSHA reports it has completed a Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Review Act panel to gather feedback from small businesses on updating its Process Safety Management (PSM) regulation. During the panel, the agency discussed the option of adding ammonium nitrate to the list of chemicals covered by PSM and collected comments. As of June 2018, the PSM rulemaking is on the regulatory agenda under Long Term Action. According to OSHA officials, the agency will continue to collect comments on the option of adding ammonium nitrate to the list of highly hazardous chemicals covered by the PSM regulations as dictated by the rulemaking process. We will close this recommendation when OSHA decides what action to take as a result of the rulemaking process.

Recommendation: To strengthen federal oversight of facilities with ammonium nitrate, the Secretary of Labor and the Administrator of EPA should direct OSHA and EPA, respectively, to consider revising their related regulations to cover ammonium nitrate and jointly develop a plan to require high risk facilities with ammonium nitrate to assess the risks and implement safeguards to prevent accidents involving this chemical.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2017, EPA issued a final rule to modify its Risk Management Program (RMP) regulations. The agency decided not to propose any revisions to the list of regulated substances and therefore, did not address ammonium nitrate in the revised regulations.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should direct the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health to consider updating regulations for the storage of ammonium nitrate taking into consideration, as appropriate, other related standards and current practices.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: OSHA previously (December 3, 2014) issued guidance to Regional Administrators to assist OSHA officials in enforcing the ammonium nitrate storage requirements in the Explosives and Blasting Agents Standard. In addition, on December 9, 2013, OSHA issued a Request for Information (RFI) seeking, among other things, comments on potential revisions to the Explosives and Blasting Agents Standard, which includes ammonium nitrate storage requirements. According to OSHA officials, the agency discussed the option of adding ammonium nitrate to the list of chemicals covered by the Process Safety Management (PSM) regulations and collected comments. As of June 2018, the PSM rulemaking is on the regulatory agenda under Long-Term Action. We will close this recommendation when the agency decides what action to take as a result of the rulemaking process.

Recommendation: If Congress agrees that significant paid preparer errors exist, it should consider legislation granting IRS the authority to regulate paid tax preparers.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: Multiple bills have been introduced in the Congress that would authorize the Department of Treasury to regulate paid tax preparers, as GAO recommended in April 2014. The most recent bills include: H.R. 3157, H.R. 3330, S. 1192, and Section 5 of S. 1138. As of August 2020, no action has been taken on any of these bills. In addition, multiple other bills were introduced in both the House and Senate between 2014 and 2018 to regulate paid tax preparers. GAO testified on October 1, 2015 on improper payments and the tax gap before Senate Finance and on December 10, 2015 on GAO recommendations before the Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, US Senate. Both hearings increased attention to GAO's matter to Congress that tax preparers be regulated. Paid preparer regulation may increase the accuracy of tax returns and potentially reduce the tax gap.

Recommendation: To improve the CSA program, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FMCSA Administrator to revise the SMS methodology to better account for limitations in drawing comparisons of safety performance information across carriers; in doing so, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FMCSA Administrator to conduct a formal analysis that specifically identifies: (1) limitations in the data used to calculate SMS scores including variability in the carrier population and the quality and quantity of data available for carrier safety performance assessments, and (2) limitations in the resulting SMS scores including their precision, confidence, and reliability for the purposes for which they are used.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: FMCSA did not agree with our recommendation, disputing the methodology and conclusions in our report. However, we continue to believe that addressing Safety Measurement System (SMS) methodology limitations has merit and could help the agency better target FMCSA's resources to the carriers that pose the highest risk of crashing. For example, we found FMCSA requires a minimum level of information for a carrier to receive an SMS score; however, this requirement is not strong enough to produce sufficiently reliable scores. As a result, FMCSA identified many carriers as high risk that were not later involved in a crash, potentially causing FMCSA to miss opportunities to intervene with higher risk carriers. To fully implement this recommendation, FMCSA should revise SMS methodology to account for data limitations that limit comparisons so that the FMCSA is better positioned to identify and mitigate carriers that pose the greatest safety risks. FMCSA has recently developed and tested a new methodological approach that could potentially account for the limitations we identified. While FMCSA has not yet committed to deploying the new methodology, they hope to do so some time in 2020.

Recommendation: To improve the CSA program, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FMCSA Administrator to ensure that any determination of a carrier's fitness to operate properly accounts for limitations we have identified regarding safety performance information.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) agreed with the basic principles that GAO addressed in this area, but disagreed with GAO's characterization of FMCSA's proposed Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) rule. In January 2016, FMCSA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed a revised methodology for issuance of a safety fitness determination for motor carriers. Specifically, the new methodology would have determined when a motor carrier is not fit to operate commercial motor vehicles in or affecting interstate commerce based on the carrier's on-road safety data; an investigation; or a combination of both. However, in July 2018, in part due to a review of SMS by the National Academies of Science congressionally mandated evaluation of SMS, FMCSA announced that the enhancements previously proposed will not be completed.

Recommendation: As DOL continues to review regulatory barriers to lifetime income options for 401(k) plan participants it should consider other countries' approaches to plans offering annuities, such as their reliance on existing solvency requirements and insurance industry standards to provide assurances rather than place responsibility on plan sponsors to make an assessment of an annuity provider's financial stability. As DOL considers the approaches of other countries and continues to work with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, which facilitates interactions between insurance companies and state insurance regulators, DOL may wish to consult with the Federal Insurance Office, which coordinates federal efforts on prudential aspects of international insurance matters.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL worked with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) in 2013 and 2014 to consider possible options for easing plan sponsor concerns about the requirement to assess the financial solvency of annuity providers. DOL reported they will continue to work with NAIC, as well as the National Organization of Life & Health Insurance Guaranty Associations and Treasury's Federal Insurance Office as they consider potential regulatory approaches in this area. DOL also worked with the Federal Insurance Office in developing guidance on the selection and monitoring of annuity providers under the current annuity selection safe harbor regulation. In October 2017, Treasury recommended DOL work with Treasury to develop proposals on how establish or certify one or more expert, independent fiduciary entities to assess the long-term financial strength of annuity providers. Plan sponsors could use these assessments as a safe harbor in selecting annuity providers for their plan. As of 2017, DOL continued to cite its other regulatory and guidance priorities as taking precedence. In April 2018, DOL reported that in the development and clearance of the Spring 2018 regulatory agenda, the agency decided to continue to classify this project as a long-term action. We commend DOL's efforts on a more workable safe harbor, but continue to encourage DOL to review alternative approaches taken by other countries, such as their reliance on existing solvency requirements and insurance standards, which can ease the burden on plan sponsors.

Recommendation: To improve CTP's ability to operate efficiently, achieve effective results, and plan appropriately, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Commissioner of FDA to monitor FDA's performance relative to those time frames, such as evaluating whether staff are performing reviews of these submissions efficiently and effectively.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: FDA has established and monitored performance measures that include time frames for reviewing and acting on regular SE submissions, Exemption from SE requests, and Modified Risk Tobacco Product applications for fiscal years 2015 through 2018. However, we are leaving this recommendation open until FDA begins monitoring its performance relative to timeframes for provisional SE submissions, which the agency plans to do at the end of fiscal year 2019.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of the Bureau of Land Management to take steps, including making changes to AFMSS, and in any new system that replaces AFMSS, to improve the ability of staff to identify wells that are a high priority for environmental inspection and to incorporate information on the inspection history of wells into the environmental inspection prioritization process.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: BLM concurred with the recommendation and has initiated action to update its application for permit to drill (APD) permit processing system. This new system will be known as AFMSS II and, when fully implemented, may address GAO's recommendations. Currently, BLM's actions are insufficient to close this recommendation because they have not completed the updates to AFMISS. Specifically, BLM has not completed its update of AFMSS II to cover environmental inspections. We will continue to follow up with BLM as the agency continues to take action to improve its well tracking system. BLM said it intends to update AFMSS II to cover environmental issues and projects that the remaining AFMSS II related tasks ensuring the system's full deployment will be completed by March 2020. In October 2019, we requested an update on BLM's timeframes.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of the Bureau of Land Management to take steps to ensure that environmental violations or problems and enforcement actions are documented in a consistent manner.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2018, BLM informed us that the agency has taken several corrective actions to address the implementation of the recommendation, which will be accomplished related to the redesign of its Automated Fluid Minerals Support System (AFMSS). However, the agency reported that this system will not be completed until March 2020. In October 2019, we requested an update on BLM's timeframes.

Recommendation: To help improve its ability to oversee M&O contractor costs, including indirect costs, for its laboratories and make more effective use of DOE and contractor resources, the Secretary of Energy should take--or, as appropriate, direct the Administrator of NNSA to incorporate more specific benchmarking requirements into future laboratory contracts--similar to the benchmarking requirements used by DOE to assess and manage pension and post-retirement benefit costs--including which costs should be benchmarked, how frequently benchmarking should occur, and what process should be used to ensure corrective actions are taken, as needed.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2017, the Director of NNSA Office of Policy issued guidance to NNSA Laboratory Field Office Managers to update contracts to include a new clause requiring laboratory contractors to submit a strategic plan every year in accordance with guidance. Part of the annual plan requires contractors to discuss the costs of doing business and cost-increase factors at the sites, including overhead dollars. The annual strategic plan is due to the NNSA Office of Policy by August 15 each year. The annual strategic plans included information on indirect costs and cost drivers, but did not include benchmarking. We again requested information on the benchmarking requirements, if any, in July 2020.

Recommendation: To better position EPA to collect chemical toxicity and exposure-related data and ensure chemical safety under existing TSCA authority, while balancing its workload, and to better position EPA to ensure chemical safety under existing TSCA authority, the Administrator of EPA should direct the appropriate offices to develop strategies for addressing challenges that impede the agency's ability to meet its goal of ensuring chemical safety. At a minimum, the strategies should address challenges associated with: (1) obtaining toxicity and exposure data needed to conduct ongoing and future TSCA Work Plan risk assessments, (2) gaining access to toxicity and exposure data provided to the European Chemicals Agency, (3) working with processors and processor associations to obtain exposure-related data, (4) banning or limiting the use of chemicals under section 6 of TSCA and planned actions for overcoming these challenges--including a description of other actions the agency plans to pursue in lieu of banning or limiting the use of chemicals, and (5) identifying the resources needed to conduct risk assessments and implement risk management decisions in order to meet its goal of ensuring chemical safety.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of March 2020, several sections of this recommendation have been superseded by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century of 2016. However, questions remain about whether the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, which oversees implementation of this legislation, has identified the resources necessary to conduct risk assessments and implement risk management decisions.

Recommendation: To reduce the varying interpretations of LRRA, which have led to uncertainty and disagreements among RRGs and state insurance regulators, and at the same time continue to facilitate the formation and efficient operation of RRGs, Congress may wish to consider clarifying certain LRRA provisions. For example, clarifying whether (1) RRG registration requirements beyond those currently specified in LRRA are permitted in nondomiciliary states and (2) fees in addition to premium and other taxes could be charged to RRGs by nondomiciliary states in which they operate. Congress may also wish to consider providing a more specific definition of the types of insurance coverage permitted under LRRA.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2020, Congress had not taken actions to clarify the provisions we had noted within the Liability Risk Retention Act as causing some uncertainty among risk retention groups and state insurance regulators.

Recommendation: To help ensure that FDA's overseas offices are able to fully meet their mission of helping to ensure the safety of imported products, the Commissioner of FDA should ensure, as it completes its strategic planning process for the overseas offices, that it develops a set of performance goals and measures that can be used to demonstrate overseas office contributions to long-term outcomes related to the regulation of imported products and that overseas office activities are coordinated with the centers and Office of Regulatory Affairs (ORA).

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In June and July 2018 FDA reported on its recent efforts to assess the effectiveness of the foreign offices' contributions to drug-safety related outcomes. Among other things, the agency developed new performance measures for these offices along with a monitoring and evaluation plan and conducted an assessment of the foreign offices to help set their objectives and ensure the right balance of personnel, skillsets, and resources. However, FDA still had to develop intermediate outcomes to link with final outcomes. In August 2020, the agency indicated that because of a reorganization and strategic planning effort for its Office of Global Policy and Strategy, it was still revising and updating its measures and its approach to evaluating impact in 2020 to align with a five-year strategic plan completed in March 2020. The agency indicated that the recommendation should remain open, and GAO will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To better ensure FDA's oversight of the safety of GRAS substances, the Commissioner of FDA should develop a strategy to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest in companies' GRAS determinations, including taking steps such as issuing guidance for companies on conflict of interest and requiring information in GRAS notices regarding expert panelists' independence.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: On November 16, 2017, FDA published a notification of availability for the draft guidance "Best Practices for Convening a GRAS Panel: Guidance for Industry," with a request for comments on the draft guidance by May 15, 2018. FDA indicated that the draft guidance represents FDA's current thinking on strategies to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest in companies' GRAS determinations, including assessing potential GRAS panel members for conflicts of interest. As of July 2020, FDA had not yet finalized the guidance, so we are leaving the recommendation open.

Recommendation: Because EPA alone cannot address the complexities of the nation's challenges in addressing environmental health risks for children, Congress may wish to consider re-establishing a government-wide task force on children's environmental health risks, similar to the one previously established by Executive Order 13045 and co-chaired by the Administrator of EPA and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Congress may wish to consider charging it with identifying the principal environmental health threats to children and developing national strategies for addressing them. Congress may also wish to consider establishing in law the Executive Order's requirement for periodic reports about federal research findings and research needs regarding children's environmental health.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, we have not identified actions by the Congress to establish in law requirements such as those in Executive Order 13045.

Recommendation: To address the current information gap in Regulation SHO for prime brokerage arrangements and mitigate the impact of any unintended consequences caused by SEC rules, as well as ensure consistent implementation of SEC rules by the industry, the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission should finalize, in an expedited manner upon finalization of the temporary rule, the revised 1994 Prime Broker Letter.

Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 4, 2019, the revised Prime Broker letter has not been finalized. Staff from the Reg SHO team in SEC's Trading and Markets division stated that they have regularly and continuously asked the industry for comments on the Prime Broker Letter without receiving any real progress. Their most recent request for comments was emailed to industry counsel on May 22, 2019. Industry counsel acknowledged the request but have yet to provide comments.

Recommendation: To enhance the transparency of CMS oversight and clarify and communicate the types of allowable state financing arrangements, the Administrator of CMS should provide each state CMS reviews under its initiative with specific and written explanations regarding agency determinations on the allowability of various arrangements for financing the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments and make these determinations available to all states and interested parties.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: CMS has taken steps to provide states with specific and written explanations regarding agency determinations on whether various arrangements for financing the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments are allowable and making those determinations available to states and interested parties. In November 2019, CMS issued a proposed rule that the agency said would promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen fiscal integrity of the Medicaid program. The proposed rule would establish new policies and codify existing policies related to the sources of funds that states use to finance the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments. For example, the rule is intended to provide CMS and states with better information and guidance to identify existing and emerging state financing issues, provide more clarity on allowable financing arrangements and promote state accountability. GAO will continue to monitor the status of the proposed rule, as well as review a final rule, if one is issued, to determine the extent to which it addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator, EPA, should take a number of steps to further protect the American public from elevated lead levels in drinking water. Specifically, to improve EPA's ability to oversee implementation of the lead rule and assess compliance and enforcement activities, EPA should ensure that data on water systems' test results, corrective action milestones, and violations are current, accurate, and complete.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020 there has been no change on the status of this recommendation. In June 2019, EPA reported to GAO that its tools for improving data about water systems compliance are not complete, though some states and laboratories have been exploring and testing incremental versions of them. EPA reported in a previous update that the agency had been working with states through face-to-face trainings and webinars on the reporting of milestone data. GAO will continue to monitor these efforts and reevaluate whether water systems' test results, corrective action milestones and violations are current, accurate and complete subsequent to the completion of the Compliance Monitoring Data Portal and the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) Prime, described briefly below. However, until these new tools are complete, the status of this recommendation remains open. According to EPA, as of June 2018, SDWIS Prime has been available for exploring and testing, following incremental interim releases, since early 2018. In addition, EPA stated that SDWIS Prime will continue to be available for exploring and testing until the first production release anticipated for mid-2020.The agency has also focused on promoting electronic reporting of drinking water data through the development of the Compliance Monitoring Data Portal (CMDP). In June 2019, EPA stated that as of May 31, 2019, 10 states and more than 200 laboratories were using CMDP. According to EPA, as a result of using CMDP, these states reported a 30-70 percent reduction in staff time for data processing and a 90-99 percent reduction in errors for data.