Recommendation: FERC should review its current interagency agreements that pertain to its onshore LNG permitting process, and implement any needed updates. FERC's review should include input from cooperating agencies and CEQ. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open

Comments: In FERC's comments on a draft of our report, the Chairman of the Commission agreed with our findings and recommendations and stated that he has directed FERC staff to develop appropriate steps to implement the recommendations.

Recommendation: Once FERC has completed the review and implemented any necessary updates to interagency agreements, FERC should establish a process to regularly conduct such reviews and, as necessary, update the agreements. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open

Comments: In FERC's comments on a draft of our report, the Chairman of the Commission agreed with our findings and recommendations and stated that he has directed FERC staff to develop appropriate steps to implement the recommendations.

Recommendation: FERC should review its LNG regulations and replace the reference to the outdated 1984 earthquake standard. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open

Comments: In FERC's comments on a draft of our report, the Chairman of the Commission agreed with our findings and recommendations and stated that he has directed FERC staff to develop appropriate steps to implement the recommendations.

Recommendation: FERC should establish a process to conduct a standards-specific review of regulations that incorporate standards every 3 to 5 years and to update the regulations, if necessary. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open

Comments: In FERC's comments on a draft of our report, the Chairman of the Commission agreed with our findings and recommendations and stated that he has directed FERC staff to develop appropriate steps to implement the recommendations.

Recommendation: The Administrator of PHMSA should conduct a standards-specific review of regulations that incorporate standards and, if necessary, update the regulations or document its decision for not updating them. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In the Department of Transportation's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and said that PHMSA is currently developing a proposed rule that would incorporate updated standards, as described in our report.

Recommendation: The Administrator of PHMSA should establish a process to conduct a standards-specific review of regulations that incorporate standards every 3 to 5 years and to update the regulations, if necessary. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In the Department of Transportation's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and said that PHMSA has established a timeline for conducting a standards-specific review of LNG facility regulations every 3 to 5 years. We plan to follow-up on the status of the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should conduct a standards-specific review of the Coast Guard's regulations that incorporate standards and, if necessary, update the regulations or document its decision for not updating them. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: In the Department of Homeland Security's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and stated that it conducts such reviews as part of its ongoing public rulemaking process. We plan to follow-up on the status of the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should update the agency's process for conducting standards-specific reviews to include time frames for completing such reviews every 3 to 5 years. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: In the Department of Homeland Security's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and stated that the Coast Guard is in the process of updating its policy, "Standards Program For Marine Safety, Security, and Environmental Protection Programs," with timeframes for completing standards-specific reviews. The department estimated this would be completed in September 2021.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop and implement workforce planning for the Office of Operating and Environmental Standards that addresses the four remaining key principles for strategic workforce planning. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: In the Department of Homeland Security's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and stated that it is in the process of updating its Manpower Requirements Plan to include timeframes and milestones for completing manpower requirements analyses and determinations for positions and units. The Coast Guard anticipates promulgating the updated plan in March 2022.

Recommendation: The Director of Water Security of EPA, as Chair of the Water Sector Government Coordinating Council, should work with the council to identify existing technical assistance providers and engage these providers in a network to help drinking water and wastewater utilities incorporate climate resilience into their projects and planning on an ongoing basis. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In June 2020, EPA said that it will continue to work with its wide-ranging, existing technical assistance providers and coordinate with its stakeholders to identify additional providers as applicable. According to the agency, it is already taking action on the recommendation. While we agree that EPA should continue to work with its providers to improve technical assistance to utilities, our recommendation was for EPA to work with stakeholders to develop a network to provide coverage for the many drinking water and wastewater utilities across the country. EPA has not provided information to show that its plans will develop such a network. We will continue to monitor this recommendation to determine how the agency is working with stakeholders to build a network of providers.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of the Permitting Council should incorporate selected best practices we have identified (maintaining the baseline schedule and conducting a risk analysis) into the Permitting Council's process for developing performance schedules for the infrastructure sectors covered under FAST-41. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should ensure that the Deputy Commandant for Mission Support implements risk management processes that more fully align with the five key steps outlined in DHS's Critical Infrastructure Risk Management Framework to better guide agency shore infrastructure investment decisions. This should include (1) setting goals and objectives, (2) identifying critical infrastructure, (3) assessing and analyzing risks and costs, (4) implementing risk management activities, and (5) measuring the effectiveness of actions taken. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with the spirit of GAO's recommendation to formalize its shore infrastructure risk management processes. As noted in their formal comment, the Coast Guard was mandated by the DHS Under Secretary for Management to follow risk management guidance outlined in the DHS Resilience Framework in March 2018. The Coast Guard reported that progress towards implementing GAO's recommendation is expected to be concurrent with the development and implementation of the Component Resilience Plan in accordance with the DHS Resilience Framework. According to the Coast Guard, the DHS-mandated Component Resilience Plan assigns a mission criticality level and resilience factor to each shore facility based on a criticality assessment, inter-dependencies between mission essential assets and functions, and risk. It will then align its current resilience factor formulation to that defined through the process in the DHS Resilience Framework. Risks identified through the Framework will be managed through a strategic combination of risk acceptance, mitigation, engineering, and operational controls. The Coast Guard stated that it intends to complete these multiple efforts by the end of 2021. In a March 2020 update, the Coast Guard stated that its Office of Civil Engineering was developing the Work Plan, newly named the 2020 Civil Engineering Program Work Plan: Initiatives and Tactics and said it would include goals and objectives for identifying and addressing infrastructure resilience gaps and resource needs in alignment with the Coast Guard's Component Resilience Plan. The Coast Guard expected to publish this Civil Engineering Work Plan by July 31, 2020, after which it said it would begin implementing and measuring the effectiveness of the actions identified in the Work Plan. In June 2020, the Coast Guard reported that it now anticipates finalizing the Civil Engineering Work Plan by September 30, 2020.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner, in conjunction with the DHS Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer, should develop and implement a plan to ensure that CBP executes its Facility Condition Assessments (FCA) program by conducting FCAs at each CBP-owned land border crossing consistent with DHS Directive 119-02-004. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in March 2020, provided a plan for conducting FCAs at some, but not all, CBP-owned land border crossings. According to officials, CBP will update this plan to include all CBP-owned land border crossings and may coordinate with the DHS Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer to ensure the plan is consistent with DHS Directive 119-02-004. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should complete the FCA plan to include all CBP-owned land border crossings.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner should share FCA reports with GSA and use facility condition information in GSA's Building Assessment Tool to inform FCAs. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in February 2020, GSA confirmed that it received FCA reports from CBP for GSA-owned land border crossings. GSA also confirmed that it provided CBP with a spreadsheet containing data from GSA Building Assessment Tools. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it is using GSA Building Assessment Tool information to inform its FCAs at GSA-owned land border crossings.

Recommendation: The GSA Administrator should share Building Assessment Tool reports with CBP and use facility condition information in CBP's FCAs to inform its assessments through the Building Assessment Tool. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: GSA concurred with the recommendation and, in April 2020, provided documentation that it received CBP FCAs and provided Building Assessment Tool information to CBP. GSA further provided updated guidance describing how it will share this information with CBP going forward. To fully address this recommendation, GSA should demonstrate that it using CBP FCA reports to inform its Building Assessment Tool assessments.

Recommendation: The GSA Administrator, in conjunction with CBP, should share with CBP information on GSA maintenance and repair work at GSA-owned land border crossings at the level of detail necessary to inform CBP's data in TRIRIGA. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: GSA concurred with the recommendation and, in December 2019, stated that it would share this information with CBP on a monthly basis until it is available to CBP for self-service on a shared data system. To fully address this recommendation, GSA should provide documentation that CBP has access to the shared data system.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner should use information on maintenance and repair work conducted by GSA at GSA-owned land border crossings to update facility condition information in TRIRIGA on an ongoing basis. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in December 2019, reported that it began documenting processes for validating and correcting existing records in TRIRIGA using information on maintenance and repair work conducted by GSA. In addition, CBP reported that it is developing a standard operating procedure for TRIRIGA data entry. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it is regularly receiving information on maintenance and repair work performed by GSA and that it is using this information to update data in TRIRIGA.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner should establish review time frames for stakeholders involved in its Five-year Capital Investment Plan review and approval process. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in April 2020, provided a document establishing time frames for stakeholders involved in the five-year plan review and approval process. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it has communicated these time frame expectations to stakeholders.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner should establish and document a methodology for its annual land border crossing capital prioritization process that includes procedures and time frames for each step. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in April 2020, provided a document that formally establishes and documents a methodology for its land border crossing prioritization process, including procedures and time frames for each step. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it is implementing this methodology during its annual five-year capital investment planning process.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should direct the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to develop written criteria for ranking Section 219 projects for funding, taking into account a clear set of priorities, such as those identified by recent congressional direction.

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

Comments: In November 2019, the Department of Defense indicated that the Army Corps of Engineers plans to develop and implement written criteria for ranking Section 219 projects by March 2020. We will evaluate actions taken by the Corps once they are complete.

Recommendation: Congress should consider taking legislative action to resolve the long-standing issues between the Corps and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation over the Corps Regulatory Program's procedures for implementing section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should develop a documented policy or clarify existing policy to implement the statutory requirement to consult with Alaska Native Corporations (ANC) on the same basis as Indian tribes under Executive Order 13175. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, the Department of Energy plans to clarify and consolidate its consultation policies and practices for consultation with Alaska Native Corporations by June 2021.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency should develop a documented policy or clarify existing policy to implement the statutory requirement to consult with ANCs on the same basis as Indian tribes under Executive Order 13175. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2019, EPA created a draft document, Guiding Principles for Consulting with Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act Corporations, and issued it for consultation with Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs). The draft guiding principles seek to clarify EPA's consultation and coordination practices with ANCs. Additionally, according to agency officials, an EPA working group is in the process of developing an internal, best practices implementation guide. As of April 2020, EPA expects to finalize these guidance documents in 2020

Recommendation: The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should develop a documented policy or clarify existing policy to implement the statutory requirement to consult with ANCs on the same basis as Indian tribes under Executive Order 13175. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
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 Homeland Security should establish a time frame for developing or updating policy to implement the statutory requirement to consult with ANCs on the same basis as Indian tribes under Executive Order 13175. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2019, the Department of Homeland Security provided GAO documentation supporting a planned time frame of March 2020 for developing and updating its consultation policy to implement the statutory requirement to consult with ANCs in response to this recommendation. We plan to close the recommendation after reviewing documentation that the policy has been updated.

Recommendation: The Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on proposed infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Development
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 Civil Works of the Corps should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Corps of Engineers: Civil Works
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 for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2019, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) plans to amend its tribal consultation policy with policies and procedures for communicating with tribes after consultation by December 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, the Department of Energy indicated that it plans to document policies for communicating about how input from tribal consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects by June 2021.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 14)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration
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 Homeland Security should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 16)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
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 Housing and Urban Development should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 17)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 19)

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory 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 Secretary of Transportation should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 20)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should direct program managers to establish shore infrastructure performance goals, measures, and baselines to track the effectiveness of maintenance and repair investments and provide feedback on progress made. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. As of April 2020, the Coast Guard continues to develop and refine its shore infrastructure measures with associated goals and estimates that it will complete these efforts in December 2020. When we confirm actions the Coast Guard has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should work with Congress to develop and implement a process to routinely align Coast Guard's shore infrastructure portfolio with mission needs, including by disposing of all unneeded assets. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. As of April 2020, the Coast Guard continues work to establish a formalized process to assess current and projected operational and mission support needs to identify and recommend disposal of unneeded land, buildings, and structures. The Coast Guard anticipates completing these efforts by December 2020. When we confirm actions the Coast Guard has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should establish guidance for planning boards to document inputs, deliberations, and project prioritization decisions for infrastructure maintenance projects. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. As of April 2020, the Coast Guard is reviewing its existing guidance for planning boards and expects to complete these efforts in December 2020. When we confirm actions the Coast Guard has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should employ models for its asset lines for predicting the outcome of investments, analyzing trade-offs, and optimizing decisions among competing investments. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In 2019, GAO reported that the Coast Guard generally has not employed models for predicting the outcome of maintenance investments and optimizing among competing investments, as called for in leading practices. GAO found that, in one instance, the Coast Guard used a model to optimize maintenance for its aviation pavement and, according to Coast Guard officials, found that it could save nearly $14 million by accelerating investment in this area (e.g., paving runways) sooner rather than deferring such maintenance. Coast Guard officials told GAO that such modeling could be applied within and across all of its shore infrastructure asset types, but the Coast Guard did not implement the results of this model and does not require their use. Employing models to predict the future condition and performance of facilities could potentially identify and achieve cost savings, according to leading practices. The Coast Guard concurred with GAO's recommendation that it employ models for its asset lines for predicting the outcome of investments, analyzing trade-offs, and optimizing decisions among competing investments. As of January 2020, the Coast Guard has not employed models to evaluate its asset lines. Instead, the Coast Guard reported that it is evaluating alternative models for its asset lines, and estimated that the Coast Guard will complete this analysis by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should include supporting details about competing project alternatives and report trade-offs in Congressional budget requests and related reports. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2019, GAO reported that Coast Guard budget requests did not provide Congress with accurate information about its funding needs. Specifically, we found that the Coast Guard did not meet this leading practice as its budget requests (1) have not clearly identified funding allotted for routine shore infrastructure maintenance needs, and (2) have not generally addressed deferred maintenance and repair deficiencies, resulting in increases to its backlogs. Specifically, GAO found that budget requests related to shore infrastructure for fiscal years 2012 through 2019 did not provide Congress with required and complete information, as previously noted, necessary to inform decision-makers of the risks posed by untimely investments in maintenance and repair backlogs. GAO also reported that the Coast Guard annual Unfunded Priorities List does not clearly articulate prioritization decisions, including information about trade-offs among competing project alternatives, as well as the impacts on missions conducted from shore facilities in disrepair that had not been prioritized in previous years, or is it aligned with its requirements-based budget targets for shore infrastructure. DHS concurred with GAO's recommendation that the Coast Guard include supporting details about competing project alternatives and report trade-offs in Congressional budget requests and related reports. In its August 2019 180-day letter response, DHS stated that the Coast Guard Office of Budget and Programs will include additional information in the future Unfunded Priorities Lists. However, when the Coast Guard released its 2020 Unfunded Priorities List to Congress it did not contain additional details on competing priorities. GAO will continue to monitor Coast Guard budget requests and related reports, including the Unfunded Priorities Lists, for additional supporting details about competing project alternatives and trade-offs

Recommendation: The Principal Deputy Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service should direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to develop plans and time frames for improving its new consultation tracking system and develop appropriate internal controls, such as electronic safeguards and other data-entry procedures, to ensure accurate data on the time taken for consultations. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: The Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. When we confirm what actions the Fish and Wildlife Service has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of IHS should implement a targeted, resource-efficient method to identify additional eligible Indian homes that may have existing deficiencies to include in IHS's Home Inventory Tracking System (HITS). (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: In August 2018, IHS's Division of Sanitation Facilities Construction issued a memo to its Area Directors directing them to identify additional eligible Indian homes that may have existing deficiencies to include in HITS. The memo directed Area Offices to use existing staffing resources to leverage their annual efforts to gather sanitation needs data, in collaboration with tribes, to identify any additional homes. In December 2019, IHS officials stated that, as a result of implementing the 2018 memo, Area Directors had increased the number of eligible homes that they identified in 2019. We will continue to monitor the results of IHS's actions.

Recommendation: The Director of IHS should implement a mechanism to indicate in HITS whether each home with a deficiency level of 0 has been assessed. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: As of December 2019, IHS had developed a mechanism in HITS to indicate whether a home currently classified as deficiency level (DL) 0 had been assessed. IHS stated that it has eliminated the category of DL 0 from HITS; in its place, it created a new category of "Pending Assessment" for those homes that are in HITS but that have not been assessed. IHS also came up with a way to prioritize the homes in the Pending Assessment category based on their eligibility to receive assistance from IHS. Homes currently in HITS that have a DL 0 and received service through the Sanitation Facilities Construction Program from 2015 through today will be reassigned a DL 1 to indicate the deficiencies are only associated with routine operations and maintenance. IHS stated that the changes to HITS have been implemented and shared a proposal of how it will distribute the former DL 0 homes across the new categories. We will evaluate IHS's actions after they are complete.

Recommendation: The Director of IHS should reassess the point distribution across the Sanitation Deficiency System scoring factors as part of its program guidelines update, in light of trade-offs between funding projects that address the most severe sanitation deficiencies and projects that meet other needs. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: As part of its reassessment of the point distribution across the scoring factors, in 2018 and 2019 IHS consulted with tribes and analyzed various options for changing the point distribution. We have asked IHS to provide additional information about its reassessment efforts. We will evaluate IHS's actions after we receive the additional information.

Recommendation: The Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development should implement a scoring factor that awards points for proposed Native American program grant projects that address health risks from a lack of access to safe drinking water and wastewater disposal, as it does with the Colonias grant program. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, USDA stated it would prefer to use its discretionary points under its existing regulations to implement this scoring factor instead of making a regulation change to do so. USDA stated that using existing flexibility in the regulations could meet the intent of the recommendation more quickly than by permanently changing the regulation. USDA stated that it has established policy guidance to states that addresses scoring for projects with health and sanitation risks. We will monitor the actions that USDA has taken in response to this recommendation and evaluate them when complete.

Recommendation: The Director of IHS, in cooperation with other members of the tribal infrastructure task force, should review the 2011 task force report and identify and implement additional actions to help increase the task force's collaboration at the national level. (Recommendation 7)

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

Comments: As of December 2019, IHS had reviewed the 2011 task force report and summarized actions taken and challenges associated with implementing the remaining recommendations. IHS stated that it anticipated discussing its summary with the other members at a future tribal infrastructure task force meeting. We will evaluate IHS's actions when they are complete.

Recommendation: The Administrator of EPA, in cooperation with other members of the tribal infrastructure task force, should review the 2011 task force report and identify and implement additional actions to help increase the task force's collaboration at the national level. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, EPA had discussed the 2011 task force report with the other member agencies to identify and implement additional actions to increase collaboration at the national level. EPA published a summary matrix of relevant funding sources on the task force website and compiled a draft document summarizing actions the task force member agencies have taken to implement recommendations from the 2011 report. We will continue to monitor EPA's actions in response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development, in cooperation with other members of the tribal infrastructure task force, should review the 2011 task force report and identify and implement additional actions to help increase the task force's collaboration at the national level. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2019, the task force member agencies met to discuss the status of the recommendations in the 2011 task force report. The agencies each agreed to compile information about the actions they had taken and consider new actions in 2020. USDA stated in December 2018 that the task force agencies had made progress in developing efficiencies in environmental review processes and with online tribal resources and training, in addition to other areas. We will evaluate USDA's actions after the task force has compiled all actions taken in response to the 2011 report and evaluated what further actions or responses should be conducted.

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Native American Programs, in cooperation with other members of the tribal infrastructure task force, should review the 2011 task force report and identify and implement additional actions to help increase the task force's collaboration at the national level. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2019, the task force members had agreed to jointly consider the actions they have taken from the 2011 report and to discuss additional actions they could take to increase collaboration at the national level. We will evaluate HUD's actions once they are complete.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Reclamation, in cooperation with other members of the tribal infrastructure task force, should review the 2011 task force report and identify and implement additional actions to help increase the task force's collaboration at the national level. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Reclamation
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2018, Reclamation met with other members of the task force and the agencies reviewed and discussed the 2011 task force report recommendations. As of December 2019, the task force members had agreed to jointly consider the actions they have taken from the 2011 report and to discuss additional actions they could take to increase collaboration at the national level. We will evaluate the agency's actions once they are complete.

Recommendation: The Director of IHS, in cooperation with other members of the tribal infrastructure task force, should direct IHS area offices to identify and pursue additional mechanisms to increase their collaboration. (Recommendation 12)

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

Comments: As of December 2019, IHS headquarters hosted a meeting that included staff from IHS Areas, EPA headquarters, and EPA regions to discuss additional mechanisms to increase collaboration, including best practices for identifying projects for joint funding collaborations. In addition, IHS and the other tribal infrastructure task force members agreed to jointly draft a memo for distribution to their field offices that would include contact information for other member agencies and encourage interagency coordination. We will evaluate IHS's remaining actions to satisfy this recommendation when they are complete.

Recommendation: The Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development, in cooperation with other members of the tribal infrastructure task force, should direct USDA state offices to identify and pursue additional mechanisms to increase their collaboration. (Recommendation 13)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2018, USDA stated that it would send a memo to its state directors and program directors encouraging them to coordinate with tribal governments, IHS, EPA, and other members of the tribal infrastructure task force on funding infrastructure projects. As of December 2019, task force members had drafted a joint memo to distribute to their field offices encouraging additional coordination. We will evaluate USDA's actions in response to this recommendation once they are complete.