Recommendation: The Chairman of FCC should develop specific, measurable goals and performance measures for its efforts to monitor the performance of new WEA capabilities, such as enhanced geo-targeting and expanded alert message length. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Director of the IPAWS program should document how it plans to address key actions needed to educate alerting authorities in their use of IPAWS and implement a mechanism that will allow FEMA to regularly and systematically obtain and analyze feedback on alerting authorities' educational needs. (Recommendation 2)

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

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

Recommendation: The Director of the IPAWS program should establish procedures to prioritize pending IPAWS applications and to follow up with applicants to address these applications. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
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 FAA should direct the Aviation Workforce Steering Committee, as part of its ongoing efforts, to take steps to use existing FAA data and coordinate with other federal agencies to identify and gather the information it needs to measure progress and target resources toward its goal of promoting a robust, qualified, and diverse aviation maintenance workforce. For example, FAA could task a committee working group with developing and implementing ways to improve data sharing among federal agencies to inform decision-making on how to strengthen career pathways and better understand the supply and demand of certificated workers. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: DOT agreed with this recommendation. Specifically, the agency agreed that using existing data could potentially contribute to its efforts to develop the aviation maintenance workforce. DOT said it will ask the Aviation Workforce Steering Committee to consider using existing FAA data and to coordinate with other federal agencies regarding other potential data sources to support the FAA's aviation maintenance workforce goals. We will consider closing this recommendation when these and other efforts to address this recommendation are complete.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration should develop and implement a process to ensure that information on UAS-related costs is complete and reliable as capabilities and related regulations evolve. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration: Office of the Administrator
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 the Federal Aviation Administration, as part of UAS integration-planning efforts, should use available guidance on effective fee design to incorporate steps that will inform future fee-design considerations. For example, FAA may choose to incorporate these additional steps into its annual UAS implementation plan so that—as existing activities are adapted for UAS users or new regulations, services, or systems are introduced—costs and fee design options are considered. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) should create and implement a policy for standard posting requirements regarding comments and their identity information, particularly for duplicate comments, and should clearly communicate this policy to the public on the BLM website. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: BLM concurred with the recommendation. In December 2019, BLM indicated that it will develop and issue policy for standard posting requirements regarding public comments and associated identity information as well as duplicative comments which will be available on BLM's website. BLM officials estimate that this will be completed in March 2020. Until these items are completed, our recommendation to BLM remains open.

Recommendation: The Administrator of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) should create and implement a policy for standard posting requirements regarding comments and their identity information, particularly for duplicate comments, and should clearly communicate this policy to the public on the CMS website. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: In January 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services stated that CMS already has policies for standard posting requirements, and noted that they would update their policy and communicate it on the CMS website. However, while CMS provided us with an excerpt of the updated language, as written, it does not include information about how the agency posts duplicate comments. Further, CMS did not provide us with this policy, and our review of the website does not indicate any changes have been made. HHS stated it would provide additional follow up actions by 7/23/2020. Given that we found significant variation in the way that CMS posts comments, even within a single docket, we continue to believe that it is important for CMS to develop and implement a standard policy for posting duplicate comments and their identity information, in addition to communicating this policy to the public on the CMS website.

Recommendation: The Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) should finalize its draft policy for posting comments and their identity information, particularly for duplicate comments, and clearly communicate it to the public on the CFPB website. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open

Comments: CFPB concurred with the recommendation. In December 2019, CFPB indicated that it will develop new language for consumerfinance.gov to better explain the Bureau's "post all" policy, and any exceptions to it. Additionally, CFPB is finalizing internal procedures for posting comments. Until these items are completed, our recommendation to CFPB remains open.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of Labor for the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) should
1. create and implement a policy for standard posting requirements regarding comments and their identity information, particularly for duplicate comments;
2. clearly communicate this policy to the public on the EBSA website; and
3. evaluate the duplicative practice of replicating rulemaking dockets on the EBSA website, to either discontinue the practice or include a reference to Regulations.gov and explanation of how the pages relate to one another. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Labor: Employee Benefits Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: EBSA concurred with the recommendation. In September 2019, EBSA stated that it will develop a written policy regarding posting of comments, including that of duplicate comments. This information will be available on their website. Additionally, EBSA will post a reference to Regulations.gov as part of each Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) webpage that includes public comments together with an explanation of its relation to Regulations.gov as a means to access public comments on EBSA's rulemaking initiatives. EBSA officials did not provide a date by which these actions will be implemented. Additionally, while EBSA noted that internal and external users prefer the agency's current practice of replicating rulemaking dockets, the agency did not provide evidence that a formal evaluation had been conducted, and did not identify plans to do so. As a result, at this time our recommendation to EBSA remains open.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should finalize its draft policy for posting comments and their identity information, particularly for duplicate comments, and clearly communicate it to the public on the EPA website. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: EPA concurred with the recommendation. In January 2020, EPA indicated that it will finalize its Docket Center's Document Processing Standard Operating Procedure as well as its website. This update will include information detailing when all duplicate comments are posted to Regulations.gov and when just one representative sample of a duplicate comment is posted. EPA officials estimate that this will be completed in February 2020. Until these items are completed, our recommendation to EPA remains open.

Recommendation: The Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) should create and implement a policy for standard posting requirements regarding comments and their identity information, particularly for duplicate comments, and should clearly communicate this policy to the public on the FWS website. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of the Interior: United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Status: Open

Comments: FWS concurred with the recommendation. In December 2019, FWS stated that it will update its service manual to include all standard posting requirements regarding public comments and their identity information. Additionally, FWS will include a statement on the FWS' website to inform the public about posting of public comments and identity information to regulations.gov. FWS officials estimate that this will be completed in June 2020. Until these items are completed, our recommendation to FWS remains open.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division (WHD) should clearly communicate its policy for posting comments and their identity information, particularly for duplicate comments, to the public on the WHD website. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Labor: Wage and Hour Division
Status: Open

Comments: WHD concurred with the recommendation. In August 2019, WHD indicated that it will add text to each webpage for any rulemaking that invites public comments which states that any personal information included in the comments (including duplicate) will be posted to Regulations.gov without change. However, the text provided by officials does not explain WHD's policy of posting duplicate comments as a group under a single document ID, and therefore does not clearly communicate the agency's posting practices to the public. As a result, at this time our recommendation to WHD remains open.

Recommendation: Congress should consider developing comprehensive legislation on Internet privacy that would enhance consumer protections and provide flexibility to address a rapidly evolving Internet environment. Issues that should be considered include: (1) which agency or agencies should oversee Internet privacy; (2) what authorities an agency or agencies should have to oversee Internet privacy, including notice-and-comment rulemaking authority and first-time violation civil penalty authority; and (3) how to balance consumers' need for Internet privacy with industry's ability to provide services and innovate.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

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

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 Administrator of General Services should take steps to improve agency-wide monitoring of exchange/sale activities within GSA by specifying the Office of Administrative Services' responsibilities and by defining the scope of its authority. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of February 2020, GSA developed and distributed a Standard Operating Procedure that established the Office of Administrative Services as having jurisdiction and program oversight for all internal agency exchange/sale transactions. GSA's Office of Administrative Services had also taken steps to coordinate with other GSA offices to coordinate annual exchange/sale data reporting for the agency. We will continue to monitor GSA's actions in addressing the recommendation.

Recommendation: The VA's Deputy Assistant Secretary of Acquisition and Logistics, in collaboration with the Veterans Health Administration's Office of Procurement and Logistics, should revise VA's policy to include details on the exchange/sale authority, particularly those related to monitoring by Regional Offices and use of the authority for medical centers, and establish time frames with milestones for communicating such information. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: As of February 2020, VA's Office of Acquisition and Logistics, in conjunction with Veterans Health Administration's Procurement and Logistics Office, was working on updating the status of two policy notices to amend existing policy to include details on the exchange/sale authority and to collect data on exchange/sale usage within the agency as a basis for reviewing progress and compliance with VA utilization officers. We will continue to monitor the status of VA's actions to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should ensure that OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs staff, as part of the regulatory review process, examine the planned timeframes for implementing economically significant regulations or major rules and identify regulations that appear at potential risk of not complying with the Congressional Review Act's delay requirements and then work with the agencies to ensure compliance with these requirements (Recommendation 1).

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

Comments: In March 2020, OMB staff stated that they believe they have addressed the recommendation. They reiterated a statement made shortly before we issued our report that they already take steps to check agencies' compliance with the Congressional Review Act (CRA) during the regulatory review process. We published this statement in our report, but noted that OMB staff did not provide supporting documentation. Nor does the update we received in March 2020 provide supporting documentation and, thus, we cannot verify it. The update from OMB staff in March 2020 also refers to an April 2019 memorandum the Acting Director of OMB issued to the heads of executive agencies outlining updated guidance for complying with CRA. While the memorandum reminds agencies of the CRA requirement that they delay the effective date of a major rule to allow time for congressional review and following publication in the Federal Register, unless there is good cause to not delay the effective date, the Acting Director does not explain whether his office has made changes to the regulatory review process as we recommended. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Federal Reserve should develop and implement specific policies and procedures for how it will consistently comply with RFA requirements and key aspects of Office of Advocacy and OMB guidance that include the following three elements: (1) processes for creating and maintaining documentation sufficient to support analysis of economic impact and alternatives; (2) processes for disclosing the methodology--including criteria for assessing significant economic impact and a substantial number of small entities--and data sources of economic analysis supporting certification determinations and regulatory flexibility analyses; and (3) processes for considering to the extent practicable a rule's potential economic impacts on small entities, including for evaluating broad economic impacts of regulations in certification determinations and assessing alternatives that could minimize impact on small entities. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Federal Reserve System
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, Federal Reserve staff told us that they continue to review their policies and procedures to ensure compliance with RFA requirements. While Federal Reserve staff said that they use an RFA handbook developed by the SBA Office of Advocacy to support their analyses, the Federal Reserve has not made changes to its policies and procedures based on our recommendations. Until the Federal Reserve develops and implements RFA policies and procedures consistent with the recommendation, it remains open.

Recommendation: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission should develop and implement specific policies and procedures for how it will consistently comply with RFA requirements and key aspects of Office of Advocacy and OMB guidance that include the following four elements: (1) processes for creating and maintaining documentation sufficient to support analysis of economic impact and alternatives; (2) processes for disclosing the methodology--including criteria for assessing significant economic impact and a substantial number of small entities--and data sources of economic analysis supporting certification determinations and regulatory flexibility analyses; (3) processes for considering to the extent practicable a rule's potential economic impacts on small entities, including for evaluating broad economic impacts of regulations in certification determinations and assessing alternatives that could minimize impact on small entities; and (4) in developing policies and procedures for section 610 reviews, include processes for determining which rules require review, posting notices of upcoming reviews in the Federal Register, maintaining documentation supporting the analysis and conclusions of RFA-required considerations, and establishing procedures for publicly disclosing the review or summaries (such as in the Federal Register or on the agency's website). (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, CFTC staff told us that they formed a working group to enhance its implementation of RFA requirements. While this working group has begun drafting compliance procedures for RFA reviews, the procedures are incomplete and CFTC staff said it will have to finish updating the "small entity" definition before it can complete these procedures. CFTC staff told us that the working group has focused much of its work on updating the agency's definition of "small entity" because the definition was outdated. The identification of "small entity" is an important preliminary step for RFA analysis. CFTC staff does not expect to publish a proposal to amend the "small entity" definition until the summer 2020. Until CFTC finalizes and implements the new procedures for RFA reviews, this recommendation remains open.

Recommendation: SEC should publicly disclose its section 610 reviews, or summaries of the reviews, with the basis for any conclusions. Such disclosure could include publishing results in the Federal Register or on the agency's website. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2019, SEC provided us with supplemental policies and procedures it developed for compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), including section 610 reviews. The procedures require staff to publish on SEC's website a notice that section 610 reviews have been completed and, if the agency plans any further actions, a published RFA agenda would so indicate. Although these notices communicate with interested entities about the status of ongoing as well as completed section 610 reviews, they will not include any details about the basis for SEC's conclusions during the review. Therefore, they do not full implement GAO's recommendation, which remains open.

Recommendation: As DOT, in response to the FAST Act, conducts additional evaluation and analysis of ECP brakes and updates the regulatory impact analysis, the Secretary of Transportation should direct FRA and PHMSA to create a plan to collect data from railroads' ongoing and future operational experiences using ECP brakes. The plan should include details on how the agency will work with railroads to collect this data, ensure that such data are reliable, and analyze these data to conduct a retrospective analysis of the ECP brakes requirement that could help inform any potential future actions regarding ECP brakes.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2017, DOT announced that it would rescind the electronically-controlled pneumatic (ECP) brake rule because its updated Regulatory Impact Analysis estimated that the rule's costs would exceed its benefits. Subsequently, in September 2018, DOT rescinded the ECP brake rule. As a result, DOT confirmed with us in August 2019 that it does not intend to create a plan to collect data from railroads' use of ECP brakes.

Recommendation: As DOT, in response to the FAST Act, conducts additional evaluation and analysis of ECP brakes and updates the regulatory impact analysis, if, based on its updated analysis, DOT promulgates a new rule on the applicable ECP brake system requirements, the Secretary of Transportation should direct FRA and PHMSA to require that freight railroads, once they equip with ECP brakes in response to the requirement, collect and provide data to FRA on their ongoing operational experience with ECP brakes.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2017, DOT announced that it would rescind the electronically-controlled pneumatic (ECP) brake rule because its updated Regulatory Impact Analysis estimated that the rule's costs would exceed its benefits. DOT subsequently rescinded the ECP brake rule in September 2018. As a result, this recommendation is currently no longer relevant and DOT confirmed with us in August 2019 that it does not plan to implement this regulation.

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 better ensure the viability and safety of manufactured housing produced in accordance with the HUD Code, the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development should develop a plan to assess how FHA financing might further promote the affordability of manufactured homes and identify the potential for better securitization of manufactured housing financing.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: According to HUD officials, Ginnie Mae and FHA met to discuss their manufactured housing programs and produced a white paper. Once we receive a copy of the white paper, we will determine if it addresses our recommendation.

Recommendation: To better ensure that Congress, stakeholders, and agencies have complete information about changing costs and whether a fee needs to be changed, HUD should assess the feasibility, including an analysis of the benefits and costs, of putting in place user fees for its dispute resolution and installation programs.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2018, HUD stated that the Office of Manufactured Housing Programs continues to work toward fully implementing both the installation and dispute resolution programs in the default states using two new contractors for these purposes. As the implementation of these programs continues to mature, HUD stated that its Office of Manufactured Housing Programs will be monitoring program requirements and service delivery and gathering data that it can use in assessing the feasibility of putting in place user fees for these programs. We will continue to monitor HUD's progress in implementing our recommendation.

Recommendation: To better ensure that Congress, stakeholders, and agencies have complete information about changing costs and whether a fee needs to be changed, HUD should establish the goals for use of reserves of the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund, and the minimum and maximum thresholds for the reserves appropriate for meeting these goals.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In response to this recommendation, as of March 2018, HUD plans to consider user fee reserve best practices in evaluating any carryover balances and developing future operating budgets for its manufactured housing programs. The Office of Manufactured Housing Programs plans on reviewing best practices and determining next steps ideally by the end of Fiscal Year 2019. We continue to believe that setting clear goals for the reserve and clarifying how those reserves will be used helps ensure accountability and transparency both to Congress and users of fee-based programs. We will continue to monitor HUD's progress in implementing our recommendation.

Recommendation: To better balance the benefits of expedited rulemaking procedures with the benefits of public comments that are typically part of regular notice-and-comment rulemakings, and improve the quality and transparency of rulemaking records, the Director of OMB, in consultation with the Chairman of Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS), should issue guidance to encourage agencies to respond to comments on final major rules, for which the agency has discretion, that are issued without a prior notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

Comments: In a status update from OMB received on March 6, 2020, OMB stated that it agrees that agencies should respond to comments on final major rules, for which the agency has discretion, that are issued without a prior notice of proposed rulemaking. OMB says it will continue to prioritize this issue during review of regulations under EO 12866, and that it is currently considering whether additional guidance is appropriate and will consult with the staff of the Administrative Conference of the United States on this issue.

Recommendation: Disparities in tax rates on smoking tobacco products have negative revenue implications because they create incentives for manufacturers and consumers to substitute higher-taxed products with lower-taxed products. In light of that fact, as Congress continues its oversight of CHIPRA and Tobacco Control Act implementation, it may wish to consider modifying tobacco tax rates to eliminate significant tax differentials between similar products. Specifically, Congress may wish to consider equalizing tax rates on roll-your-own and pipe tobacco and, in consultation with Treasury, also consider options for reducing tax avoidance due to tax differentials between small and large cigars.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has not passed legislation to eliminate tax differentials between roll-your-own and pipe tobacco or between small and large cigars. In the 116th Congress, five bills have been introduced to create tax equity between roll-your-own and pipe tobacco, as GAO suggested in its April 2012 report. However, these bills have not been enacted. In addition, the 116th Congress has not passed legislation to address tax differentials between small and large cigars. Modifying tax rates to eliminate the tax differentials between similar tobacco products could address potential future revenue losses stemming from the substitution of higher-taxed products with lower-taxed products.