Reports & Testimonies
Recommendations Database
GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed. GAO’s priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. Below you can search only priority recommendations, or search all recommendations.
Our recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Moreover, when implemented, some of our priority recommendations can save large amounts of money, help Congress make decisions on major issues, and substantially improve or transform major government programs or agencies, among other benefits.
As of October 25, 2020, there are 4812 open recommendations, of which 473 are priority recommendations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented.
Browse or Search Open Recommendations
Have a Question about a Recommendation?
- For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
- For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
Results:
Topic: "Natural Resources and Environment"
GAO-21-169T, Oct 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-554, Sep 29, 2020
Phone: (206) 287-4804
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-722, Sep 29, 2020
Phone: (206) 287-4804
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.
GAO-20-597, Sep 28, 2020
Phone: (617) 788-0580
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-658, Sep 23, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-595, Sep 14, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8612
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-619, Aug 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-20-555, Jul 28, 2020
Phone: (202)512-3149
Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-529, Jul 23, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: International Joint Commission--United States and Canada
Status: Open
Comments: The International Joint Commission (IJC) agreed with our recommendation. IJC stated that it intends to develop an updated communications plan that incorporates best practices for public relations efforts by December 31, 2020. We will continue to monitor IJC's actions in response to this recommendation.
Agency: International Joint Commission--United States and Canada
Status: Open
Comments: The International Joint Commission (IJC) agreed with our recommendation. IJC is compiling a list of entities with which it shares information to explore formal data and information sharing arrangements with them. We will continue to monitor IJC's actions in response to this recommendation.
Agency: International Joint Commission--United States and Canada
Status: Open
Comments: The International Joint Commission (IJC) agreed with our recommendation. IJC plans to produce a comprehensive adaptive management strategic plan that fully incorporates the key elements and essential characteristics of the adaptive management process by December 31, 2020. We will continue to monitor IJC's actions in response to this recommendation.
GAO-20-488, Jul 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 19, 2020, no action had been taken to establish a pilot program to identify and provide assistance to climate migration projects.
GAO-20-511, Jun 25, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2775
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment will oversee updates to relevant guidance related to supply processes and that they anticipate the updates to be complete by May 31, 2021. The department further noted that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment will ensure updates are made to the acquisition policies, when and if appropriate. However, the department stated that its Adaptive Acquisition Framework currently provides all of the necessary flexibility required. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Army would update, as appropriate, Army guidance related to acquisition and supply upon updates to DOD's climate adaptation directive and other applicable DOD or federal regulations. However, DOD noted that it does not plan to update its acquisition guidance in response to our recommendation that DOD do so. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Department of the Navy had suggested that the recommendation be restated to recommend that the Department of the Navy ensure that its guidance and procedures are updated to align with DOD's directive on climate adaptation upon issuance of an updated directive. However, DOD has not identified any plans to update its directive on climate change adaptation. Thus, we continue to believe that the Department of the Navy should update its guidance related to acquisition and supply to incorporate the current guidance in DOD's climate adaptation directive, which it has not yet done. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Air Force will work with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the other military services to develop specific policies that address climate-related risks to DOD contractors. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that formal mission assurance assessments are limited in scope in order to provide additional rigor to protect DOD's most critical capabilities. However, the department stated that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy would work with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment's Defense Contract Management Agency to better understand DOD's commercial dependencies. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that it concurs with the need to clarify steps that officials may take to apply the mission assurance framework to defense critical infrastructure and critical defense industrial base commercially owned facilities, to include consideration of risks related to climate change and extreme weather. However, the department further noted that it does not concur with doing this for all commercial facilities because conducting such assessments for all commercially owned facilities falls outside the capacity and authority of DOD to conduct mission assurance assessments. However, we had not recommended they conduct such assessments for all commercial facilities. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
GAO-20-254, Jun 23, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: OMB did not provide comments on this recommendation. As of July 2020, we are following up with the agency and will update the status of the recommendation when we receive requested information from OMB.
GAO-20-373, May 13, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In providing comments on this report, DOE concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken actions necessary to implement it. In July 2020, DOE officials told us that the Office of Legacy Management (LM) and the Office of Environmental Management will work together to expand on agreements and procedures for identifying and addressing new cleanup work beyond LM's mission scope of providing long-term stewardship. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by September 30, 2021.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In providing comments on this report, DOE concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken actions necessary to implement it. In July 2020, DOE officials told us that the Office of Legacy Management (LM) will work with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to develop agreements and procedures for identifying and addressing new cleanup work beyond LM's mission scope of providing long-term stewardship. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by September 30, 2021.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In providing comments on this report, DOE concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken actions necessary to implement it. In July 2020, DOE officials told us that the Office of Legacy Management (LM) uses models to evaluate sites' vulnerability and resilience to environmental trends over time. DOE officials said that LM will build upon its current operations to develop assessment and mitigation plans that take into account any significant effects of climate change and that incorporate principles from GAO's Disaster Resilience Framework, as appropriate. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by September 2022.
GAO-20-460, Apr 29, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation: Committee on the Marine Transportation System
Status: Open
Comments: CMTS partially concurred with our recommendation but also noted several areas of disagreement with our conclusions, which we addressed directly in our report. For example, we note in our report that CMTS itself has previously noted the importance of evaluating risks on a government-wide basis, and that it previously proposed a model for determining risk that considered the likelihood of adverse events actually occurring, vulnerability to damage, and potential consequences. Given its previous work in the U.S. Arctic and its coordinating role with its member agencies, CMTS is well suited to conduct a government-wide assessment of the risks posed by gaps in maritime infrastructure in the U.S. Arctic. As such, we stand by our recommendation and will continue to report on steps taken by CMTS to address it.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open
Comments: OSTP neither agreed nor disagreed with the report's recommendations. OSTP acknowledged the Arctic is of critical national importance and noted interagency coordination can be implemented through the entities of the National Science and Technology Council, which is located within OSTP. As we note in our report, without a strategy for addressing U.S. Arctic maritime infrastructure that identifies goals and objectives, performance measures to monitor agencies' progress over time, and the appropriate responses to address risks, agencies lack assurance that their actions are effectively targeting priority areas and decision makers cannot gauge the extent of progress in addressing maritime infrastructure gaps. As such, we stand by our recommendation and will continue to evaluate OSTP's efforts to fully address it.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open
Comments: OSTP neither agreed nor disagreed with the report's recommendations. OSTP acknowledged the Arctic is of critical national importance and noted interagency coordination can be implemented through the entities of the National Science and Technology Council, which is located within OSTP. OSTP noted the need for, and role of additional federal coordination, such as the Arctic Executive Steering Committee, is under consideration by OSTP. We continue to believe that the appropriate entities within the Executive Office of the President, including OSTP, should designate the interagency group responsible for leading and coordinating federal efforts to address maritime infrastructure in the U.S. Arctic that includes all relevant stakeholders. As we note in our report, without an interagency collaboration mechanism designated to lead these efforts, it is unclear who has responsibility for whole-of-government efforts to address U.S. Arctic maritime infrastructure. We will continue to monitor OSTP's efforts to fully address our recommendation.
GAO-20-216, Mar 31, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.
GAO-20-329, Mar 30, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Interior, on behalf of BLM, did not concur with this recommendation. As of August 2020, BLM has not taken steps to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Interior, on behalf of BLM, did not concur with this recommendation--although, it did state that it agreed with the premise of the need to further improve its formal change management procedures. As of August 2020, BLM has not taken actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Interior, on behalf of BLM, agreed with this recommendation. In its agency comment letter, the Department said that the BLM AFMSS team would implement adjustments and improvement based on the collected lessons learned. They also stated that upon completion of the last Field Office implementation and conversion to AFMSS II, BLM will conduct a formal program review and an annual operational assessment, which will also present opportunities for annual corrective actions and additional lessons learned considerations. As of August 2020, BLM has not taken actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-20-397R, Mar 6, 2020
Phone: (202)512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-307, Feb 5, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, USIBWC stated that two teams have been established with members, one in the Nogales, Arizona and Nogales, Sonora region and one in the San Diego and Tijuana region. IBWC continues to take actions to formalize the binational rapid response teams. We will review the final documents for each team when they are completed and available.
Agency: International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, the U.S. Commissioner of the IBWC stated that it had conducted long-term capital planning for the facilities for which it is responsible. They noted the 5-year plan that USIBWC had developed for the South Bay plant and the 10-year plan that it had developed for the Nogales plant. We noted these plans in our original report and stated that they needed to be broadened to identify needs in the Santa Cruz River Basin and Tijuana River Valley watersheds. The agency only partially concurred with our recommendation in the report and noted that to the extent our report envisions USIBWC undertaking long-term capital planning for (1) nonfederal infrastructure; (2) infrastructure that does not yet exist; and/or (3) infrastructure that the USIBWC is not yet authorized to construct or maintain, it does not concur. The agency is a key player in managing water quality on the border and has the infrastructure and organization that will be part of the solution. Without the information that USIBWC would generate by comprehensively assessing its long-term needs, such as through long-term capital planning efforts, Congress cannot authorize specific work that needs to be done. We recommended that the agency conduct long-term planning, including for infrastructure that does not exist and for infrastructure that is not yet authorized specifically to address this problem. We continue to believe that USIBWC should recognize its role along the border and start planning for it, including by undertaking long-term capital planning for existing and potential future infrastructure and identifying alternatives to address the long-standing water quality problems.
GAO-20-95, Jan 31, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In written comments reproduced in appendix I of this report, EPA stated that it agreed with this recommendation. In July 2020, EPA stated that in a September 30, 2019 guidance document, the agency defined an informal enforcement action. However, on March 24, 2020, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) suspended the September guidance because informal enforcement actions as defined appear to be inconsistent with Section 6 of the White House's Executive Order (EO) 13892, Promoting the Rule of Law Through Transparency and Fairness in Civil Administrative Enforcement and Adjudication, issued on October 9, 2019. EPA said that it would amend the September 2019 guidance to be consistent with the Executive Order. Our recommendation focused on guidance on how regional offices should use the definition of informal enforcement action and we will continue to monitor EPA's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In written comments reproduced in appendix I of this report, EPA stated that it agreed with this recommendation and would collect data on compliance assistance for each of the National Compliance Initiatives and maintain those data in ICIS. Specifically, in July 2020, the agency stated that in order to further its compliance assistance efforts, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance (OECA) is including a compliance assistance tool as an important part of each of EPA's National Compliance Initiatives. According to EPA, data on compliance assistance efforts that are part of the NCI will be collected and tracked for management review in the Integrated Compliance Information System. In addition, EPA stated it has collected data in the past on webpage visits related to its national Compliance Assistance Centers and would continue to do so in the future. We will continue to monitor the status of EPA's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In written comments reproduced in appendix I of this report, EPA stated that it agreed with this recommendation and acknowledged the importance of providing information about a dataset to facilitate proper interpretation. For that reason, EPA said that, in time for its fiscal year 2020 report, the agency will create a webpage to describe how best to interpret the data presented in its "Fiscal Year EPA Enforcement and Compliance Annual Results" report and include a reference to that webpage in the report itself as well as the "Year in Review" report. In July 2020, EPA reiterated its written comments on the report. We will update the status of EPA's implementation of this recommendation upon the release of its annual reports.
GAO-20-161, Jan 21, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management: Environmental Management Consolidated Business Center
Status: Open
Comments: DOE concurs with this recommendations and has agreed to conduct a root cause analysis examining the programmatic cause leading to the Hanford PUREX tunnel collapse. In DOE's October 2020 Audit Report regarding the implementation of recommendations in our report, DOE states that the Office of Environmental Management is taking action to implement this recommendation, but that action is still insufficient to satisfy the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: DOE concurs with this recommendation and the Office of Environmental Management agreed to conduct an assessment, in coordination with headquarters oversight offices, of the Richland Operations Office's management and oversight of the Hanford Site contractor's surveillance and maintenance activities for contaminated excess facilities. In DOE's October 2020 Audit Report regarding the implementation of recommendations in our report, DOE states that the Office of Environmental Management is taking action to implement this recommendation, but that action is still insufficient to satisfy the recommendation.
GAO-20-24, Jan 16, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 1 priority recommendation
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.
GAO-20-63, Dec 17, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, DOE officials told us that its Office of Environmental Management (EM) Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office (PPPO) is in the process of developing a program management master plan, to include site-integrated master schedules and life-cycle cost estimates, for the Portsmouth and Paducah gaseous diffusion plants (GDPs). Officials stated that the plan will incorporate program management leading practices as appropriate. According to DOE officials, EM will direct PPPO to use actual collected cost and schedule information for integration of relevant lessons learned from ETTP cleanup into integrated program plans, schedules, and estimates. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, DOE officials told us that its Office of Environmental Management (EM) is assessing and identifying an appropriate mechanism for tracking expenditures for both the Portsmouth and Paducah GDP sites, using a standardized approach with an Earned Value Management System (EVMS) reporting on, at a minimum, an annual basis. According to DOE officials, PPPO is in the process of using the ETTP data as a basis of comparison for contractor estimates and assessing the potential development of cost estimating tools for independent cost estimating. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, DOE officials told us that its Office of Environmental Management (EM) has directed the Portsmouth and Paducah GDP sites to review and incorporate the practices from GAO's Cost Estimating Guide (GAO-20-195G), as appropriate, into the next revision of each site's life-cycle cost baselines. According to DOE officials, Oak Ridge is in the process of procuring a follow-on cleanup contract, which includes the scope to complete the cleanup of ETTP. According to DOE officials, given that the cleanup of the ETTP GDP is nearly complete, the baseline for the entire ETTP GDP will not be included in the life cycle cost estimate review. Officials stated the remaining scope of work for the ETTP GDP will, however, become part of the performance baseline for the next Oak Ridge cleanup contractor. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, DOE officials told us that its Office of Environmental Management (EM) has incorporated the use of an independent facilitator on a case-by-case basis to help resolve any disagreements, in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Kentucky and Tennessee state regulators over cleanup priorities, remedies, and cost estimation assumptions. Officials stated that most recently, the Paducah GDP site used an independent facilitator to resolve disagreements with EPA Region IV and Kentucky state regulators. According to DOE officials, in the future, EM will continue the use of an independent facilitator, as deemed appropriate. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, DOE officials told us that its Office of Environmental Management (EM) has prepared the triennial Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund Report, providing accomplishments through fiscal year 2019 and disclosing the most recent environmental liability estimate associated with remaining challenges and scope of cleanup at the GDPs. Officials stated that the report is being circulated for approval. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by December 31, 2020.
GAO-20-43, Nov 26, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Assistant Secretary (Civil Works)
Status: Open
Comments: In its letter dated January 14, 2020, the Department of Defense concurred with GAO's recommendation and provided a corrective action plan in response to the recommendation. According to the corrective action plan, the Corps estimates that guidance will be issued to ensure that Corps reports adequately describe and justify the models, analytical choices, assumptions, and data used such that it is consistent with best practices by December 31, 2020.
GAO-20-19, Oct 29, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-4431
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.
GAO-20-127, Oct 23, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, no action had been taken to establish a federal organizational arrangement to periodically identify and prioritize climate resilience projects for federal investment.
GAO-20-73, Oct 18, 2019
Phone: (202)512-3841
including 3 priority recommendations
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In its June 2020 response, EPA stated that it had convened a working group comprising of Superfund and regional officials to collect and disseminate geospatial information for all NPL sites to help EPA analyze, communicate, and respond to the impacts of natural disasters and weather. EPA has not, however, provided a schedule for completing this effort.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of June 2020, EPA has stated that it agrees with the recommendation but does not plan to take any action to respond to it because it believes its actions are aligned with agency goals and objectives. We continue to believe that clarifying this alignment to the agency's current goals and objectives is warranted.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of June 2020, EPA stated that it will be issuing a memorandum that would provide direction on integrating information on the potential impacts of climate change effects into risk assessments at nonfederal NPL sites in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. At that time, we will review the memorandum to determine if it is responsive to our recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of June 2020, EPA stated that it will be issuing a memorandum that would provide direction on integrating information on the potential impacts of climate change effects into risk response decisions at nonfederal NPL sites in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. At that time, we will review the memorandum to determine if it is responsive to our recommendation.
GAO-20-167, Oct 16, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Transportation: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, the Department of Transportation (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is collaborating with an organization of state government oil and gas oversight officials to assess the factors affecting their participation in its underground natural gas storage inspections, according to DOT. PHMSA plans to use this information by December 2020 to assess whether additional measures can be undertaken to increase state participation for its use starting in Fiscal Year 2022.
GAO-20-5, Oct 9, 2019
Phone: (404) 679-1875
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation. On 7/28/2020, FEMA provided updates on three separate efforts to help states carry out sheltering and housing missions and a larger effort to standardize its continuous improvement process. FEMA officials said they have begun deploying sheltering and housing field teams to disaster affected areas, as necessary, to develop strategies. Officials described efforts to update direct housing guidance and expect to incorporate results of a JFO-level review into a new version (3) of the guidance by June 2021. Officials also described efforts to administer a pilot program for state-administered direct housing grants for temporary housing and permanent construction authorized by the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 (pilot authority expires October 2020). FEMA expected the grant program would help states, territories, and tribes build capacity and capability to administer disaster housing missions in a manner that proactively addresses hazards (including wildfires) that are common within a particular jurisdiction. According to officials, FEMA developed guidance for this effort in November 2019 and shared the draft with OMB for interagency review in December 2019. Upon issuance of the guidance, FEMA planned to begin assisting with developing housing strategies and administrative plans required to qualify for a grant, following a presidentially-declared major disaster declaration. (FEMA did not provide an update on the status of this state administered housing mission in the July 2020 update.) FEMA officials also reported that FEMA has finalized National Collection Analysis Priorities (NCAP) to guide disaster assessment efforts across all FEMA Regions by establishing focus areas for continuous Improvement activities. The priorities are to be regularly reviewed by all Associate Administrators, directing continuous improvement analysts at Headquarters and in the Regions to examine select issues at all disaster operations and report findings on a quarterly basis. FEMA is then to brief senior leadership quarterly (which officials said happened in December 2019 and March 2020). Officials also said they provided a 2019 summary of findings highlighting the most common findings across disasters for senior leader consideration. FEMA did not specify whether any of these efforts resulted in updates to policy, procedures, or training specific to wildfire disasters. Note: in its management letter response to the report, FEMA reported plans for the development of a project to analyze and improve capabilities and identify areas of innovation in response to a wildfire disaster. Neither of its two updates to date (4/2020 and 7/2020) have referenced this project. To respond to this recommendation, DHS will need to demonstrate that it has completed a broad-based review of management controls--policies, procedures, and training--and taken action to ensure than any changes necessary to ensure the applicability of those controls to response and recovery for large-scale and severe wildfires.
GAO-19-653, Sep 25, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated that its Administrator, in consultation with interagency committee member agencies, will determine criteria and other factors for evaluating federal agency interest and will formalize and document the interagency committee's membership process. NOAA anticipates documenting the process in the committee's charter by August 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated that the agency, in coordination with interagency committee member agencies, will define the term "senior official" so that it can be consistently applied across all member agencies. NOAA stated it will consider seniority requirements of similar advisory committees and the ability to make decisions on behalf of an agency, among other factors, when developing the definition. NOAA plans to include the definition in the committee's charter by August 31, 2020.
Agency: Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated the agency will work with interagency committee member agencies to review and update the committee's recommendations. As part of this process, the committee will develop metrics to analyze the effectiveness of the committee's recommendations and strategies. NOAA stated that the recommendations and assessment of effectiveness will be included in the committee's 2018-2019 biennial report, which NOAA expects to publish by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated that it will, in coordination with interagency committee member agencies, develop a process to identify priority funding needs which can be reflected in each agency's respective budgeting process and shared in the committee's biennial reports. NOAA expects to publish the committee's 2018-2019 biennial report by December 31, 2020.
GAO-19-531, Sep 25, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Status: Open
Comments: Interior agreed and indicated that BOEM will develop such a plan.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Interior stated it did not agree with our characterization of BOEM's delayed valuations and stated that BOEM believes it is neither necessary nor cost effective to enlist an independent third party. However, BOEM agreed to (1) examine its delayed value calculation, particularly as it relates to the impact of biannual lease sales, (2) develop a plan to perform a comprehensive internal review of delayed value calculations and make appropriate changes, and (3) institute a peer-review process for all potential changes.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Interior partially agreed. Specifically, Interior stated it agreed with the recommendation, but did not agree with our characterization of BOEM's bid valuation process.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Status: Open
Comments: Interior partially agreed. Specifically, Interior stated it agreed with the recommendation, but did not agree with our characterization of BOEM's bid tract evaluation process and review procedures.
GAO-19-643, Sep 25, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: BLM agreed with our recommendation and stated it intends to revise its policy and develop a plan to complete required facility security assessments. As of November 2019, BLM had not yet completed its plan.
Agency: Department of the Interior: National Park Service
Status: Open
Comments: Park Service agreed with our recommendation and cited its efforts to develop a plan that includes training and tools so that park unit staff can conduct the required assessments. As of November 2019, Park Service had not yet completed its plan.
Agency: Department of the Interior: National Park Service
Status: Open
Comments: Park Service agreed with our recommendation to update its facility security assessment methodology to comply with requirements in the ISC Standard. As of November 2019, Park Service had not yet updated its methodology.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: BLM agreed with our recommendation and said it would revise its policy and develop a facility security assessment methodology that complies with requirements in the ISC Standard. As of November 2019, BLM had not yet developed its methodology.
Agency: Department of the Interior: United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Status: Open
Comments: FWS agreed with our recommendation and cited its efforts to develop a facility security assessment methodology that complies with requirements in the ISC Standard. As of November 2019, FWS had not yet developed its methodology.
GAO-19-615, Sep 18, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: Congress has not taken action as of April 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In a August 2019 letter to GAO, BLM noted Instruction Memorandum 2019-014, "Oil and Gas Bond Adequacy Reviews", related to the agency's response to this recommendation. The Instruction Memorandum does not increase regulatory minimums to reflect inflation or incorporate the consideration of the number of wells on each bond and their characteristics, but BLM is collecting data to determine the effectiveness of this Instruction Memorandum. BLM noted any further action will depend on the results of the data analysis, expected to be continued through the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2021. As of April 2020 this recommendation remains open.
GAO-19-339, Sep 18, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, DOE officials told us that its Office of Environmental Management (EM) had recently reinvigorated efforts to develop a comprehensive program-wide strategy to address risks in a consistent manner to align cleanup plans and activities with programmatic priorities and available budgets. According to DOE officials, EM plans to revise and replace its 2017 Cleanup Policy with a Cleanup Project Management Protocol and and EM Cleanup Program Management Policy. Officials stated that the Cleanup Program Management Policy will establish an approach for the EM program and DOE sites to apply the essential elements of risk-informed decision-making framework. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, DOE officials told us that DOE's Office of Environmental Management (EM) is developing a new Cleanup Program Management Policy that will incorporate the essential elements of risk-informed decision-making, as appropriate, into EM program management policy. DOE officials estimated that this effort will be completed by December 31, 2020.
GAO-19-436R, Sep 18, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2020, BLM officials stated that they will revise the LR2000 Bond Review Report to identify all instances in which a state office needs to develop a corrective action plan in accordance with BLM policy. They estimate this will be completed by June 2021.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, the agency has made progress in implementing this recommendation. Specifically, the agency has modified the bonding portion of the Natural Resource Manager data system to include required data fields to record the initial bond received, adjustments made to required bonding amount, and date of last annual review when a needed adjustment was determined. The agency has also added a remarks field to record any increase or decrease in the estimated cost of reclamation that resulted in the revised required bond amount. The agency is currently working to update its internal guidance so that staff are aware of the requirement and process to document these items. We agreed to check back on the status of that guidance in early 2021 and will update the recommendation status at that time.
GAO-19-543, Sep 16, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The department did not provide comments on our report or recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, the department agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, Education stated that we did not sufficiently account for the limitations on its legal authority to carry out environmental justice activities. Education also stated that it does not believe this is the most appropriate course of action for the department or an efficient use of resources. We believe that Education can develop a strategic plan within its existing authorities. We will continue to review the department's actions to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the department agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the department neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, the department agreed to review its environmental justice strategy and to revise it if needed. It also stated that as part of that review, it will consider any guidance issued by the Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (EJ IWG) concerning what agencies should include in environmental justice strategic plans. The department stated that it anticipated receiving such guidance by the end of 2020. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, the department stated that its role is tangential to achieving environmental justice goals, but it is committed to integrating environmental justice into its responsibilities to protect workers. It stated that it has no plans at this time to update its environmental strategic plan. We agree that Labor should develop an environmental plan that contains goals consistent with its mission and authorities. We will continue to review its actions to implement our recommendation.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, the agency agreed with our recommendation. We will continue to review the agency's actions to update its progress in implementing the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, the department committed to updating its environmental justice strategic plan. It said that it will update its strategic plan pending the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) guidance on what agencies should include in their plans. It also set a goal of completing the update within 6 months of EPA's issuance of guidance. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, USDA agreed with our recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The department did not provide comments on our report or recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, the Department of Defense (DOD) disagreed with this recommendation. First, DOD stated that it had achieved the intent of Executive Order 12898 by including environmental justice considerations in its decision-making processes, primarily by using the environmental review process. Second, the department stated that it is bound by its mission with limited opportunities to change where the department operates. DOD stated that these reasons make it a significant challenge for the department to meet our recommendation and therefore does not see a tangible benefit to additional reporting. As we stated in our report, DOD would be reporting on goals that it set within its mission and authorities. We will continue to review DOD's actions to carry out this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, Education stated that we did not sufficiently account for the limitations on its legal authority to carry out environmental justice activities. Education also stated that it does not believe this recommendation is the most appropriate course of action for the department or an efficient use of resources. We believe that Education can develop a strategic plan within its existing authorities, and then it should report its progress on these activities annually. We will continue to review the department's actions to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the department agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, Department of Energy officials stated that they had issued progress reports for fiscal years 2017 and 2018 and would issue progress reports annually after this point. We will review the department's reports in upcoming years to determine that it has carried out this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the department agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, the department agreed with our recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, the department stated that its role is tangential to achieving environmental justice goals and therefore it has no real chance to update its progress reports. We agree that Labor should develop an environmental strategic plan containing goals consistent with its mission and authorities. It can develop progress reports annually related to these goals. We will continue to review its actions to implement our recommendation and update this information.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, the department stated that it partially agreed with this recommendation. It stated that it would update its progress reports as needed. As we stated in our report, leading practices for performance management indicate that annual performance reporting helps an agency to keep track of and achieve its goals. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, the department committed to issuing annual progress reports. The department also stated that it will use EPA or Interagency Working Group (IWG) guidance on methods agencies could use to assess progress towards their environmental justice goals. It stated that it would begin issuing progress reports following issuance of such guidance and per reporting schedule established by the Environmental Justice IWG. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, EPA agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the agency's actions and update this information.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, EPA agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the agency's actions to update its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, EPA disagreed with this recommendation, but also stated that it would lead efforts to update the working group's fiscal year 2016-2018 Framework for Collaboration to include guidance for strategic plans, tracking progress toward goals, and defining alignment with the executive order. We believe that if the agency carries out these actions, it will meet the intent of the recommendation. We will continue to review the agency's actions to update its progress in implementing the recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, EPA disagreed with this recommendation and stated that it should be combined with the recommendation to update the Environmental Justice working group's strategic documents. We believe the agency misunderstood the recommendation. As we stated in the report, we believe that the MOU needs to be updated to address the matter of participation by the members who signed it but do not participate. We will continue to review the agency's actions to update its progress in implementing this recommendation.
GAO-19-494, Sep 9, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In an update provided in April 2020, DOE said that it had taken steps to ensure the cost estimates will meet best practices for being comprehensive (e.g., account for all costs) as part of contract negotiations for the cleanup project. GAO has requested additional information from DOE and will update the status of this recommendation after it has received and analyzed this information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In an update provided by DOE in April 2020, DOE said that in negotiating the Idaho Cleanup Project contract it had taken steps to ensure the schedule estimates for the IWTU reengineering project and the SBW treatment operations will meet best practices for being well constructed. Further, DOE stated that the remaining baseline scope and schedule estimate received an external review by its contractor's parent corporation and DOE's Office of Environmental Management to ensure that the schedule meets best practices for being well-constructed. GAO has requested additional information from DOE and will update the status of this recommendation after it has received and analyzed this information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In an update provided by DOE in April 2020, DOE said that cost and performance data for the IWTU is being tracked against the cost and schedule baselines incorporated in the core contract for the Idaho Cleanup Project, and that the data meets best practices for reliability. GAO has requested additional information from DOE and will update the status of this recommendation after it has received and analyzed this information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In an update provided by DOE in April 2020, DOE said that EM will assess the range of potential strategies and pathways for disposal of the treated SBW. Once this effort is completed, GAO will review EM's strategy and timeline for achieving its preferred disposal pathway, or an alternative, and update the status of this recommendation accordingly.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In an update provided by DOE in April 2020, DOE said that DOE's Idaho Operations Office is in the process of chartering a team of subject matter experts to update an analysis of alternatives for calcine treatment and disposal. DOE said that this evaluation will be completed by September 30, 2020. GAO will request additional information from DOE on this analysis once completed and will update the status of this recommendation after it has received and analyzed this information.
GAO-19-561, Jul 29, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. According to documentation provided by the agency, the Secretary of the Army will sign a memorandum by March 2020 directing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to develop an implementation plan to address study acceleration. Upon receipt of that memorandum, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will work with the Army Corps of Engineers to develop an implementation plan to address study acceleration. This implementation plan is expected to be signed by September 2020. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. According to documentation provided by the agency, the Secretary of the Army will sign a memorandum by March 2020 directing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the impacts of the agency's feasibility study acceleration reforms. Upon receipt of that memorandum, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will work with the Army Corps of Engineers to develop an implementation plan for this evaluation, which is expected to be signed by September 2020. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. According to documentation provided by the agency, the Secretary of the Army will sign a memorandum by March 2020 directing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to clarify the Army's policy on entry of key study data to include milestone dates. Upon receipt of that memorandum, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will work with the Army Corps of Engineers to develop an implementation plan for this effort, which is expected to be signed by September 2020. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.
GAO-19-280, Jul 8, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
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.
GAO-19-391, Jun 21, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with this recommendation. As of June 2020, EPA indicated that its proposed completion date is October 2020. EPA published joint and individual agency accomplishments in each of the six priority areas listed as contributing efforts on EPA's webpage (https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/winning-reducing-food-waste-federal-interagency-strategy). In addition, EPA indicated that it is coordinating with government and other stakeholders through: (1) monthly high-level check-in calls for senior USDA and FDA officials, in which the meeting chair rotates among agencies; (2) twice a month (or as needed) staff work group meetings, led by the recently appointed USDA food loss and waste liaison, to explore potential activities aligned with the six priority areas in the interagency strategy to reduce food loss and waste; and (3) participation in quarterly meetings with relevant stakeholders, such as ReFED, the Food Waste Reduction Alliance (FWRA), and Further with Food, to coordinate efforts and learn of opportunities to collaborate on reducing food loss and waste. We will continue to follow up with the agency. When we confirm what additional actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with this recommendation. As of December 2019, we are following up with the agency. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with this recommendation. As of December 2019, we are following up with the agency. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-487, Jun 13, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
GAO-19-453, Jun 12, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9627
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation, and stated that it is in the process of developing guidance to incorporate projections for sea level change into DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria standard for installation master planning, using a DOD-vetted source of data. DOD also stated that it will continue to tailor additional sources of climate projections data to other planning requirements and integrate these into departmental criteria as appropriate. In February 2020, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment issued a memorandum with guidance on incorporating sea level change projections in installation master planning, and as of April 2020, was researching additional sources of climate projection data to tailor to other planning requirements. DOD estimated that it would complete implementation of this recommendation in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of these efforts.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation, and stated that it is in the process of developing guidance to incorporate projections for sea level change into Unified Facilities Criteria for facilities design, using a DOD-vetted source of data. DOD also stated that it will continue to tailor additional sources of climate projections data to other engineering requirements and integrate these projections into its criteria as appropriate. In February 2020, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment issued a memorandum with guidance on incorporating sea level change projections into facilities designs, and as of April 2020, was researching additional sources of climate projection data to tailor to other planning requirements. DOD estimated that it would complete implementation of this recommendation in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of these efforts.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, DOD stated that the update of Unified Facilities Criteria to implement this recommendation was pending the issuance of additional guidance by DOD on the use of such projections in project designs, as recommended by GAO. DOD estimated it would complete the actions to implement this recommendation in the second quarter of fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this effort.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, DOD stated that the update of Unified Facilities Criteria to implement this recommendation was pending the issuance of additional guidance by DOD on the use of such projections in project designs, as recommended by GAO. DOD estimated it would complete the actions to implement this recommendation in the second quarter of fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this effort.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, DOD stated that the update of Unified Facilities Criteria to implement this recommendation was pending the issuance of additional guidance by DOD on the use of such projections in project designs, as recommended by GAO. DOD estimated it would complete the actions to implement this recommendation in the second quarter of fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this effort.
GAO-19-346, May 31, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, BLM reported it had awarded a contract to develop a new data system that will allow for centralized data collection on acquisition method and ownership interest. In addition, the agency issued updated guidance and procedures related to data entry to help ensure complete and accurate recording, which will improve BLM's ability to track acquisition method and interest acquired in the interim.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, BLM reported it was planning to develop specific guidance to ensure land acquisition data is entered correctly into its new data system.
GAO-19-410, May 31, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by December 31, 2021.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by April 30, 2021.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by December 31, 2022.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by June 30, 2021.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by November 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by November 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by March 31, 2021.
GAO-19-468, Apr 4, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: NRC disagreed with this recommendation, and NRC did not provide us with documentation of any actions it plans to take to implement this recommendation. NRC maintains that the current regulatory requirements provide for the safe and secure use of all radioactive materials, regardless of category. We disagree with NRC's assessment. We continue to believe that by implementing our recommendation NRC would have better assurance that it was considering more likely and more significant consequences of an RDD when establishing its security requirements for this material. We encourage NRC to take action to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: NRC neither explicitly agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation, but stated that it would consider our recommendation as part of a working group the agency has established. The working group provided a staff analysis on these issues to the Commission in August 2017, but NRC has not updated this analysis taking into account the new information we provided in our April 2019 report. We continue to believe that implementing our recommendation would provide greater assurance that NRC's requirements are sufficient to help ensure all high-risk radioactive material are protected from theft and use in an RDD. We encourage NRC to take action to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: NRC disagreed with this recommendation. NRC maintains that the issue of aggregation of radioactive material has already been considered and NRC has taken or is in the process of taking actions to clarify relevant guidance and procedures. We disagree with NRC's assessment. We believe that by implementing our recommendation NRC would have better assurance that licensees are not storing multiple quantities of category 3 americium-241 at a single facility that in total reach a category 1 or 2 quantity of material.
GAO-19-22, Mar 20, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-19-5, Feb 26, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) concurred with the recommendation. In February 2020, NNSA issued its fiscal year 2020 Corporate Performance Evaluation Process Annual Implementation Guidance. This guidance included a new section specifying the process for collecting contractor performance information and further details regarding the preparation of interim feedback reports and final performance evaluation reports. However, the guidance is unclear regarding how this information can be traced to rating determinations. In order to provide more transparency and ensure this traceability, NNSA guidance and the Performance Evaluation Reports themselves should more clearly link how collected performance information tracks to rating determinations.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) partially concurred with the recommendation. As of April 2020, EERE officials stated that cost performance feedback was included in the 2019 final performance evaluation for the EERE Management and Operating contractor. EERE officials also stated that they had incorporated cost performance evaluation criteria into the fiscal year 2020 Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan (PEMP) for NREL. EERE officials noted that these actions ensure cost performance will be included as part of the ongoing contractor evaluation process. We have requested documentation of the new PEMP and performance evaluation report and, in order to ensure cost performance evaluation criteria are included in the future, EERE should update its policy to require quality information on cost performance going forward.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Environmental Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Environmental Management (EM) concurred with the recommendation. As of April 2020, EM officials stated that they will include the requirement for quality information on cost performance in EM's Cleanup Project Management Policy. According to officials, EM is working on this policy, along with an additional Cleanup Program Management Policy that they expect to complete by the end of fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Fossil Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) concurred with the recommendation. As of April 2020, FE officials stated that they had revised and executed the Performance Evaluation and Measurements Plan (PEMP), for the current Management and Operating contract to add a new PEMP measure that addresses monitoring cost growth, additional activities in internal audit, and data quality that addresses our recommendation. We have requested documentation of the PEMP showing the new measures and an updated policy requiring inclusion of quality information on cost performance in Performance Evaulation Reports. Upon receiving those, we will review to determine if it addresses our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) concurred with the recommendation. In February 2020, NNSA issued its fiscal year 2020 Corporate Performance Evaluation Process Annual Implementation Guidance. This guidance provides instructions regarding the evaluation of cost performance, including examples of the types of cost information that should be collected and how cost data should be analyzed and described. However, the guidance's template for Performance Evaluation and Measurement Plans does not include any explicit cost performance Objectives or Key Outcomes and it is unclear how the cost performance information discussed in the guidance would enable an overall assessment of Management and Operating contractor cost performance. In order to provide quality cost information that does enable such an overall assessment, NNSA should clarify its guidance regarding cost performance information and how this information links to overall Management and Operating contractor performance.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Nuclear Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) partially concurred with the recommendation. As of May 2020, NE officials stated that they will include criteria for "day-to-day" cost performance in the annual Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan (PEMP) for fiscal year 2020. NE's evaluation of the contractor's performance against those criteria will be included in the year-end performance reports of its Management and Operating contractor beginning in fiscal year 2020. NE officials stated that modifying the fiscal year 2020 PEMP with added cost criteria, usually done in April, has been delayed due to COVID-19 and that they expect to complete the modification by the end of May 2020. Once the cost criteria are included and evaluated in the Performance Evaluation Report, we will review to determine if it addresses our recommendation. In addition to changes to the fiscal year 2020 report, NE should update its policy to require such criteria for evaluating contractor cost performance going forward.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Science
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Science (SC) partially concurred with the recommendation. In commenting on our report in August 2019, DOE stated that by focusing on the annual Performance Evaluation Reports (PER), our report does not capture the cost performance reviews conducted in day-to-day contract oversight, the annual laboratory planning process, and contract extend/compete decisions. In its comments, DOE stated that since SC conducts cost performance reviews in normal operations and at the year-end annual evaluation process, adequate information is available to assess whether the contractor cost performance is acceptable to the department. As of April 2020, SC had not updated these comments. In the report, we note that SC conducts some cost performance evaluation activities outside of the annual performance evaluation process, although we did not assess these efforts. While there may be adequate information available, SC does not commonly document this information or assessments from such activities in the PERs. We continue to believe that the PERs are important sources of information for contract management--particularly for acquisition decisions and oversight of spending on cost-reimbursement contracts--and that action is needed to improve these formal records of contractor performance. By not including quality information on overall cost performance and assessments in PERs, SC is missing a valuable opportunity to better document contractors' cost performance, improve acquisition decision-making, and strengthen oversight of billions of dollars in contracting. We continue to believe that it is important for SC to implement the recommendation and that by doing so, the office would have better assurance that Management and Operating contractor performance evaluations fully address required elements.
GAO-19-207, Feb 14, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation, but as of March 2020, DOE has not fully implemented this recommendation. DOE officials told us that they established an Integrated Project Team (IPT) to review GAO's recommendation. The IPT recommended that DOE continue to use DOE's Integrated Planning, Accountability and Budgeting System (IPABS) for tracking compliance with milestones, accompanied by a new policy providing direction to the field to use IPABS, a new data dictionary for the use of IPABS, guidance, and training. Using recommendations from the IPT, DOE has drafted policy and guidance documents for tracking compliance and is in the process of testing the draft policy using a pilot site. DOE officials told us that they plan to update the schedule for completing the final policy and guidance by September 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation, but as of March 2020, DOE has not fully implemented the recommendation. DOE officials told us they have completed an options analysis to identify the costs and benefits of conducting root cause analyses of historical milestone changes. DOE officials said they recognized a benefit to a developing a more complete root cause analysis and considered whether an analysis of historical milestone changes could provide best practices in negotiating milestone changes. DOE said they have initiated a pilot project with a major DOE site to determine the benefit of additional analyses and that the analysis of historical milestone changes will be completed by December 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation, but as of March 2020, DOE has not fully implemented the recommendation. DOE officials told us that DOE completed an options analysis to identify the costs and benefits of conducting root cause analyses of historical milestone changes. DOE officials added that they will identify what historical analyses are appropriate to conduct based on value to the government. According to DOE officials, the results of this analysis are being incorporated into a pilot project, and they plan to complete a final reporting methodology by the end of that pilot project.. DOE officials noted that they have analyzed options for reporting on regulatory compliance and the results will be part of DOE policy and guidance to be issued by June 2021.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation, but as of March 2020, DOE has not fully implemented the recommendation. DOE officials told us that they established an Integrated Project Team (IPT) to review GAO's recommendation. DOE officials told us that the IPT identified root causes for missed or delayed milestones, which according to DOE officials, will be used in a pilot test of the draft policy. DOE officials told us that they plan to develop an appropriate list of root causes after the pilot project is completed, and officials noted that they plan to revisit the list of root causes on a recurring basis to verify that the options are still valid. According to DOE officials, DOE plans to issue a final policy and guidance, which will include the list of root causes that sites will input into the tracking system (the Integrated Planning, Accountability and Budgeting System, or IPABS) when milestones are modified or cancelled. DOE plans to issue this guidance no later than June 30, 2021.
GAO-19-7, Feb 14, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2019, BLM's Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management wrote a letter to GAO stating that the bureau agreed that there are additional opportunities to improve the Inspection and Enforcement program's internal control reviews and that policies should be updated and widely circulated. Specifically, BLM wrote that by early August 2020, the bureau will issue updated guidance and procedures for conducting internal control reviews and that this guidance would take the form of a manual, handbook or Instruction Memorandum. BLM also wrote that it is establishing teams to conduct internal control reviews, monitoring the status of any past-due reviews and actively engaging across its multiple state offices to ensure timely resolution. In late August 2020, BLM's Audit Liaison Officer informed GAO that due to competing workload priorities and key management vacancies, BLM now plans to implement this recommendation by the end of June 2021.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In responding to our report, BLM stated that its July 2012 oversight policy, which expired in September 2013, should not have been allowed to lapse and given the importance of internal control reviews, the bureau will continue to use the July 2012 policy to conduct future reviews. In July 2019, BLM's Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management wrote a letter to GAO stating that the bureau agreed that there are additional opportunities to improve the Inspection and Enforcement program's internal control reviews and that policies should be updated and widely circulated. In addition, BLM wrote that by early August 2020, the bureau will issue updated guidance and procedures for conducting internal control reviews and that this guidance would take the form of a manual, handbook, or Instruction Memorandum. In late August 2020. BLM's Audit Liaison Officer informed GAO that due to competing workload priorities and key management vacancies, BLM now plans to implement this recommendation by the end of June 2021.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2019, BLM's Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management wrote a letter to GAO stating that the bureau agreed that there are additional opportunities to improve the Inspection and Enforcement program's internal control reviews and that policies should be updated and widely circulated. Specifically, BLM wrote that by early August 2020, the bureau will issue updated guidance and procedures for conducting internal control reviews and that this guidance would take the form of a manual, handbook, or Instruction Memorandum. In addition, BLM noted that the guidance will help ensure that the bureau completes internal control reviews in a timely manner using a consistent risk-based approach. In late August 2020. BLM's Audit Liaison Officer informed GAO that due to competing workload priorities and key management vacancies, BLM now plans to implement this recommendation by the end of June 2021.
GAO-19-28, Jan 29, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of February 2020, DOE's Office of Environmental Management has not developed a program-wide strategy that addresses this recommendation. DOE officials said they are "developing a strategic options analysis to evaluate the current approaches to cleanup and other recently identified opportunities across the complex that could reduce risk and life-cycle costs through more efficient and innovative approaches." According to DOE officials, the analysis will consider risk-based approaches across sites, with the goal of reducing human health and environmental risks and the associated environmental liability.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, DOE's Office of Environmental Management has not implemented this recommendation. DOE officials stated that DOE will coordinate with the Office of Management and Budget on the preparation of the Future-Years Defense Environmental Management Plan, or other reporting, to supplement Congressional Budget documentation. Officials also stated that EM is currently undertaking an analysis of EM's environmental liability growth.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, DOE's Office of Environmental Management has not implemented this recommendation. DOE officials stated that DOE will coordinate with the Office of Management and Budget to include such information in the Future-Years Defense Environmental Management Plan, or another appropriate report.
GAO-19-123, Jan 23, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA concurred with our recommendation. EPA stated that during the course of our work on this report, SEMS tribal data was reviewed for quality control and corrections were made to the existing data. In addition, EPA's Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation plans to create a schedule to review tribal data in SEMS and disseminate tribal data to Superfund regional coordinators annually for their quality assurance review starting in April 2019.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA concurred with our recommendation. EPA plans to issue a memo to regions that clarifies circumstances under which regions may consider tribal consultation for the Superfund program by March 2020.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA concurred with our recommendation and planned four actions in response. According to EPA, it (1) issued a memorandum to all Assistant Administrators and Regional Administrators on the importance of tribal consultation in April 2019; (2) plans to issue monthly TCOTS report to Deputy Assistant Administrators and Regional Assistant Administrators on the status of consultations recorded in TCOTS; (3) developed training slides targeted to EPA's Regional Superfund staff on when and how to document consultation actions in TCOTS, presented during the annual 2019 National Association of Remedial Project Managers training in August 2019; and (4) revised a training module and draft TCOTS User Guide with particular emphasis on entering consultation information into TCOTS, with trainings scheduled in 2019.
GAO-19-166, Jan 17, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3149
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of State has revised its integrated country strategy guidance to inform posts that they have the option to include a climate risk assessment annex when they change or update their strategies. State noted that they plan to disseminate this guidance to posts in 2020.
GAO-19-31, Jan 3, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2020, the U.S. Coast Guard informed GAO that the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Oil Pollution Research (ICCOPR) review of non-member agencies was complete and that the formal process to invite the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for membership has been initiated. To formalize membership, a majority of current ICCOPR members must approve USGS by vote, which is expected. This will be followed by a letter of invitation from the Coast Guard Commandant to USGS making the membership official.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2020, the Coast Guard informed GAO that the ICCOPR FY 2022-2027 Research and Technology Plan will include a process to engage Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) trustees. Once updated and finalized, ICCOPR will execute this plan to coordinate with the NRDA trustee councils.
GAO-19-20, Nov 7, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Corps of Engineers
Status: Open
Comments: As of December 2019, the Corps has developed a definition for "deferred maintenance" for civil works and plans to request funding to establish a team to review maintenance data. The Corps anticipates implementing this recommendation by the end of 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Corps of Engineers
Status: Open
Comments: As of December 2019, the Corps is working to review existing authorities, funding, and contracting mechanisms to identify potential courses of action to address GAO's recommendation. The Corps anticipates implementing this recommendation in 2021.
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, GAO confirmed that FERC had developed new standard operating procedures related for tracking deficiencies and follow-up items arising from dam safety inspections and other dam safety reviews. In addition, FERC told GAO that they plan to update their tracking system beginning in fiscal year 2021, which will facilitate the complete recording and subsequent analysis of safety deficiencies from inspections across FERC's portfolio of regulated dams. GAO will continue to monitor FERC's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2019, FERC told GAO that it had begun developing a screening-level risk-assessment program to assess safety risks across the inventory of regulated dams and to help guide safety decisions. In February 2020, GAO confirmed that FERC had completed this screening-level risk assessment, and conducted some preliminary analysis of the results. In addition, FERC told GAO that the results of the screening level risk analyses will be used to revise the potential timing, frequency, and technical disciplines represented on dam safety inspections; to confirm or revise the urgency of existing and potential new follow up dam safety actions; and to identify previously unrecognized dam safety concerns and issues; to identify new dam safety priorities. GAO will continue to monitor FERC's efforts to implement this program.
GAO-18-561, Aug 24, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA reconvened the Columbia River Toxics Reduction Working Group. As of May 2019, EPA officials told us they are working on the development of a program management plan to identify the actions and timeline for implementing the Columbia River Basin Restoration Program. In July 2019, EPA released a status update entitled, "2019 Status Update: Columbia River Basin Toxics Reduction" that provides a summary of the working group's major accomplishments since 2010, as well as priority efforts for future work. In September 2019, EPA announced the availability of $900,000 in grants to reduce toxics throughout the Columbia River Basin for the Clean Water Act Section 123 Columbia River Basin Restoration Grant Program for fiscal year 2019 through fiscal year 2020. As of October 2020, we have not received additional information from EPA regarding this recommendation. We will update the recommendation's status when we do.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, OMB staff did not provide an update. When we receive an update, we will provide information on actions taken.
GAO-18-473, Aug 16, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: The 2020 OMB Crosscut Budget states that the implementation of the Delta Plan has been conducted by the Delta Plan Interagency Implementation Committee, which was created in 2013, and includes participation and leadership from federal agencies at the regional and DC headquarters levels. It also states that the Council is primarily responsible for coordinating federal activities in the Delta. This language clarifies the role of federal agencies in relation to the Council and the Delta Plan, as we recommended. However, in December 2019, Bureau of Reclamation officials stated that they were not aware of any communication of federal agencies' role. We will continue to monitor this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Council on Environmental Quality
Status: Open
Comments: The 2020 OMB Crosscut Budget states that the implementation of the Delta Plan has been conducted by the Delta Plan Interagency Implementation Committee, which was created in 2013, and includes participation and leadership from federal agencies at the regional and DC headquarters levels. It also states that the Council is primarily responsible for coordinating federal activities in the Delta. This language clarifies the role of federal agencies in relation to the Council and the Delta Plan, as we recommended. However as of January 2020, CEQ officials had not provided an update on this recommendation, although Bureau of Reclamation officials stated that they were not aware of any communication of federal agencies' role. We will continue to monitor this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, Interior reported that the California Delta Stewardship Council (a state agency) had met twice and asked Reclamation to develop a template on financial detail for the Science Tracker, the Council's web-based tracking system. The Council compiles and reports on funding information and progress for federal and state agencies. The template will be used by a subgroup of agencies to collect their 2019 expenditures and this will be put into the Science Tracker in preparation for a February 15, 2020 reporting date. The subgroup is working on establishing common accounting and reporting protocols, supporting web-based tracking, and coordinating a review of science in the Delta.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, OMB staff did not provide an update. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, OMB staff had not provided an update on this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken, we will provide updated information.
GAO-18-593, Aug 15, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-18-537, Aug 6, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Homeland Security and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: Since August 2018, Interior's Office of International Affairs has updated its contact list for international repatriation assistance with information on the Department's roles and responsibilities in support of international repatriation. In addition, Interior's interagency working group members have developed a description of the interagency working group. However, the statement does not include outcomes and objectives for the group's work. GAO made the same recommendation to each of the four agencies covered in the review because implementing leading collaboration practices will require the collective participation of group members. GAO will keep the recommendation open until further collaborative actions are taken.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Justice and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: Since August 2018, the Department of State shared a statement of its roles and responsibilities with other working group members. However, the statement does not include outcomes and objectives for the group's work. GAO made the same recommendation to each of the four agencies covered in the review because implementing leading collaboration practices will require the collective participation of group members. GAO will keep the recommendation open until further collaborative actions are taken.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Homeland Security and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Justice and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Homeland Security and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2019, Interior is working to develop an assessment of legislative options for discussion with the interagency working group, and plans to meet with tribes later this fall to discuss the assessment. Interior anticipates a September 30, 2020, completion date for the assessment of these legislative options. Interior has also reviewed legislative proposals related to the export, theft, and trafficking of Native American cultural items and has prepared for Congressional hearings on this topic.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Justice and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, the Department of State, in conjunction with other interagency working group members, circulated a draft legal assessment and draft legislative options. The interagency working group members conducted a listening session with tribal members in November 2019, and conducted a tribal consultation in January 2020. GAO will continue monitoring the agencies' efforts toward implementing this recommendation.
GAO-18-536, Jul 19, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4431
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.
GAO-18-453, Jul 19, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA agreed with this recommendation, and in June 2019 EPA provided GAO with a written update on the status of actions being taken in response to the recommendation. EPA stated that the leader of the management conference, the Puget Sound Partnership, has initiated an effort to review and revise the Puget Sound recovery vital signs, including updating their associated indicators and targets. EPA estimated that this effort will be completed in fiscal year 2021 for use in the 2022 comprehensive conservation and management plan (CCMP) update. In December 2019, EPA stated that work is ongoing. We will continue to monitor the status of this effort and will assess the extent to which it addresses our recommendation.
GAO-18-410, Jul 12, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, the Long Island Sound Study (Study) stated that it has incorporated two leading practices into the reporting format for its progress reports. In addition, the Study website shows the progress toward ecosystem targets compared to the recovery plan, and for a preceding period of time when data are available. According to the Study, EPA hired a contractor to develop a report addressing our recommendations. The Study is using the contractor report to finalize its reporting format and plans to develop an online reporting and tracking system that fully incorporates leading practices of performance reporting. We will review the format of the online tracking system when it becomes available and provide updated information as appropriate.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, the Study reported that it had hired a contractor to develop a report including the range of costs, including uncertainty bounds, needed to attain each of the targets in the 2015 plan. The contractor has completed its study. Cost estimates for each ecosystem target were developed by adding up the existing cost ranges for each of the implementation actions in the 2015 plan. The report is posted and accessible to the public on the Long Island Sound Study website (https://longislandsoundstudy.net/2019/11/addressing-gaos-recommendations-liss-performance-reporting-and-cost-estimating/). The report contains recommendations for the Study to continue estimating costs in future reports. We are following up with EPA to determine whether the Study will do this.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, the Study said that as part of the Plan 2020-2024 implementation action update, it will include a range of costs for implementation actions. We will review the supplemental documents when they are available and provide updated information as appropriate.
GAO-18-382, Jul 5, 2018
Phone: (617) 788-0580
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Education agreed with this recommendation. The agency said it would identify and include an information portal dedicated to enhancing the usability of federal resources related to testing for and addressing lead in school drinking water. Also, Education said it is interested in increasing coordination across all levels of government and it shares the view expressed in our report that improved federal coordination, including with EPA, will better enhance collaboration to encourage testing for lead in school drinking water. In 2019, Education said it planned to complete work on this recommendation by January 1, 2020. We will consider closing this recommendation when these efforts are complete.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Education agreed with this recommendation. Education stated it has held multiple meetings with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and stated that it plans to hold a virtual meeting with EPA to share information and resources about safe drinking water and raise awareness of the importance of testing for lead. Education also stated it is developing a timeline to conduct additional collaboration activities with EPA. Education officials said they are considering joining an EPA-led Memorandum of Understanding to, among other things, encourage schools to test drinking water for lead. We will consider closing this recommendation when these efforts are complete.
GAO-18-411, Jun 4, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: BLM concurred with this recommendation. However, the Bureau has yet to provide information concerning the current status of this recommendation. We will update the recommendation's status when we receive such information.
GAO-18-477, May 30, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 3 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2018, DOE partially agreed with the recommendation to supplement the 2016 long-term strategic review with an additional analysis that takes into account private-sector response, oil market projections, and costs and benefits of a wide range of different SPR sizes. In September 2018, the agency agreed to conduct two additional studies related to the future size of the SPR. According to DOE, the first study is currently underway and will determine the future configuration of the SPR at the end of all sales currently enacted into law. The SPR post-sale configuration study is expected to be completed by the end of calendar year 2018. DOE is beginning another study designed to assess the purpose, goals, and objectives of the SPR, which would ultimately lead to an optimal size of the SPR. To complete this study, DOE will focus on analyzing future requirements of the SPR rather than analyzing the benefits of various SPR sizes. As of December 2019, according to DOE, the Office of Fossil Energy, Office of Petroleum Reserves, presented a draft of the SPR post-sale configuration study to the Office of Fossil Energy for review. A draft of the requirements study, which assess the purpose, goals, and objectives of the SPR, was also presented to the Office of Fossil Energy for review.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In May 2018, DOE agreed with the recommendation for periodic strategic reviews of the SPR and providing this information to Congress. In September 2018, DOE stated that a 5-year time interval between reviews is an appropriate timeframe. According to DOE, 5 years is sufficient time to allow current strategic plans to be implemented and assessed; the time period would also allow for adjustments as necessary. Given that the agency completed the SPR Long-Term Strategic Review in 2016 as the first of such strategic plans, the next strategic review of the SPR should be completed by the end of fiscal year 2021, according to DOE in December 2019.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In May 2018, DOE disagreed with the recommendation to conduct or complete studies on the costs and benefits of regional petroleum product reserves. DOE stated that the agency's position is that government-owned and -operated regional petroleum product reserves are an inefficient and expensive solution to respond to regional fuel supply disruptions. In September 2018 and December 2019, DOE noted that given the inefficient and expensive nature of storing refined petroleum products in above-ground tanks, it would be an inappropriate use of taxpayer funds to conduct any additional studies on the use of federal government owned storage of refined petroleum products. However, the Quadrennial Energy Review of 2015 recommended that similar analyses be completed for other areas deemed by DOE to be vulnerable to fuel supply disruptions. Therefore, we continue to believe that conducting these analyses, as recommended in the Quadrennial Energy Review of 2015, will provide Congress with information needed to make decisions about regional product reserves.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOE agreed with GAO's May 2018 recommendation and has taken steps to implement it. As of December 2019, according to DOE officials, the agency completed its analysis of leasing storage (e.g. excess assets) and is including this analysis in a broader study of the reserve's configuration, which is currently under review. However, DOE has not provided documentation of its analysis or study to GAO. DOE stated that it is having discussions with at least one country that may be interested in leasing storage from the United States to meet its international obligations. In September 2018, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 6511, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Reform Act, which would provide the Secretary of Energy with the authority to establish a program to lease certain underutilized Strategic Petroleum Reserve storage facilities to the private sector, or a foreign government or its representative, and would require that the Secretary of Energy establish and carry out a pilot program to make available for lease (1) up to 200 million barrels of petroleum products at Strategic Petroleum Reserve storage facilities and (2) related facilities. The bill was not passed by the Senate and had not been reintroduced in the 116th Congress as of February 18, 2020. Without examining a full range of options for handling potentially excess reserve assets, DOE risks missing beneficial ways to modernize the Strategic Petroleum Reserve while saving taxpayer resources.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: On July 18, 2019, S. 2175-Acting on the Annual Duplication Report Act of 2019-was introduced and referred to the Senate, Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The bill would require the Secretary of Energy to conduct a review of options for a long-range target for the optimal size and configuration of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and report to Congress no later than 180 days after enactment of the legislation. The report is to describe the findings of the Department of Energy's review and recommendations for legislation needed to optimize the size and configuration of the reserve. No further action has been taken on this bill in the 116th Congress. Congress setting a long-range target for the size and configuration of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, as GAO recommended in May 2018, could better position DOE to ensure the efficiency and efficacy of federal funds spent on the reserve.
GAO-18-250, May 16, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: BLM concurred with this recommendation and, in July 2019, the agency developed a new funding code to track the costs incurred when reclaiming orphaned wells and issued written guidance to state and field offices in order to implement the bureau-wide use of the code. Also in July 2019, BLM officials stated that the agency will expand existing reporting capabilities to provide the ability to track orphaned and inactive well records over time. As of September 2020, we are working to confirm what actions BLM has taken to track the number of orphaned and inactive wells over time, and we will provide updated information when we obtain it.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: BLM officials stated that the agency conducts annual work planning processes which facilitates the decisions regarding the allocation of agency resources. In July 2019, BLM included additional language in its annual work plan that underscores the importance and relevance of well and bond adequacy reviews. The agency also developed a new fund code to track the actual reclamation costs incurred from reclaiming orphaned wells. The annual work plan also lists identifying and cataloging orphaned wells as a performance goal and the plan states that BLM is working with state regulatory agencies to plug wells within funding levels and state agreements. However, as of September 2020, absent identification of funds needed to reclaim orphaned wells and where those funds will come from, BLM does not have a plan to reclaim wells that are currently orphaned.
GAO-18-309, May 15, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In a July 2018 letter, OMB reiterated its disagreement with this recommendation, as described in the Agency Comments and Our Evaluation section of the report. OMB also stated that it does not anticipate providing funding information for federal programs with fiscal exposure to climate change concurrent with future climate change reports to Congress. We continue to believe that OMB would have better assurance that it was providing policymakers with the information necessary to make climate change spending trade-offs, if in addition to the funding information for science, technology and international assistance it has previously reported to Congress, OMB also reported funding information for programs whose costs were likely to increase due to climate change impacts. In July 2019, the Disclosing Aid Spent to Ensure Relief Act or the DISASTER Act passed the House and was referred to the Senate. If enacted, this legislation would require OMB to annually report to Congress on all disaster-related assistance provided by the federal government, which includes all federal obligations related to disaster response, recovery, mitigation efforts, and administrative costs associated with these activities for specified agencies and programs. As of October 2020, the legislation has not progressed in the Senate. We will provide updated information regarding this recommendation when it becomes available.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In a July 2018 letter, OMB reiterated its disagreement with this recommendation, as described in the Agency Comments and Our Evaluation section of the report. OMB also stated that it does not anticipate providing a separate, detailed analysis of federal climate change programs that it considers to be fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative. We continue to believe that because OMB collects and reports information on federal climate change funding, OMB is uniquely situated to conduct an assessment of potentially fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative programs across the full range of agencies engaged in climate change activities and that by providing this information to Congress in conjunction with future funding reports, OMB could help decision makers more effectively target limited resources. As of October 2020, OMB has not provided a climate change funding report to Congress since the issuance of our April 2018 report.
GAO-18-241, Apr 24, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation. As of June 15, 2020, DOE has started to take action to implement this recommendation, but actions are not sufficient to close it yet. DOE has directed the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) construction contractor to determine the full extent to which problems exist in all WTP structures, systems, and components and plans to complete full implementation of this recommendation by February 15, 2021.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation. As of July 1, 2020, DOE has taken some action to implement this recommendation, but actions are not sufficient to close it yet. To implement this recommendation, DOE strengthened and evaluated the existing Office of River Protection (ORP) Stop Work process to ensure it is sufficiently rigorous. In June 2020, ORP activated this new process. However, ORP has not yet used its authority to stop work in areas in areas where quality assurance problems are recurring.
GAO-18-305, Mar 6, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, no further action has been taken by Congress to amend SMCRA to eliminate the use of self-bonding. We will continue to monitor and provide updated information as it becomes available.
GAO-18-56, Jan 31, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9869
Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open
Comments: The Forest Service generally agreed with this recommendation and stated that its financial policies concerning budget execution have been revised to address our concerns with allotments, unliquidated obligations, commitments, and administrative control of funds as prescribed by OMB Circular A-11. Further, the Forest Service stated that it has undertaken an in-depth review of its unliquidated obligations and modified the certification process to comply with the USDA requirement. However, the Forest Service has not yet provided support for the review and approval of the administrative control of funds by USDA and OMB. GAO will continue to follow up on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open
Comments: The Forest Service generally agreed with this recommendation and stated that it has made significant progress to address this recommendation. Specifically, the Forest Service stated that its financial policies concerning budget execution have been revised to address allotments, unliquidated obligations, commitments, and administrative control of funds as prescribed by OMB Circular A-11. Further, the Forest Service stated that it has undertaken an in-depth review of its unliquidated obligations and modified the certification process to comply with the USDA requirement. However, as of August 2020, the Forest Service has not provided support for the training provided to implement the revised procedures. GAO will continue to follow up on the status of this recommendation.
GAO-18-102, Jan 26, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, EPA Office of Water said that it had revised guidance for conducting Sanitary Surveys for drinking water plants, adding questions related to workforce needs to the "utility management" section of the guidance manual (see Sanitary Survey Learner's Guide (https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-08/documents/sanitary_survey_learners_guide_508_8.27.19.pdf), which includes questions on strategic workforce planning topics in section 14.7. As the recommendation applies to wastewater utilities, EPA did not provide an update. In August 2020, EPA officials stated that they plan to incorporate strategic planning questions into its existing guidance documents. According to EPA, it has taken other actions to support the water workforce by announcing a "Water Workforce Initiative," the goal of which is to provide federal leadership and increase public awareness of water sector careers. We will continue to follow-up with EPA Office of Water to determine what actions have been taken in the wastewater area to add questions on workforce issues in inspection guidance.
GAO-18-89, Nov 22, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Transportation: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2019, we are following up with PHMSA regarding this recommendation and will provide updated information when we confirm agency actions.
GAO-18-206, Nov 13, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-4523
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, it was continuing to review DOD Directive (DODD) 4715.21 on climate resilience; DOD reissued the directive in August 2018. The directive requires the military departments to incorporate adaptation to climate change impacts into their planning for facilities. Further, DOD has incorporated adaptation into other guidance that applies to each of the departments. For example, with revisions to DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria for Master Planning and High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, as well the issuance of the guide "Climate Adaptation for DOD Natural Resource Managers," DOD has instructed the military departments' planners to incorporate adaptation into installation-level plans. Further, in 2020 DOD issued guidance that requires the military departments to use a DOD database on sea level changes in their planning for coastal infrastructure (sea level change is one impact of climate change). However, as of June 2020, the Air Force had not provided evidence of required training for installation-level planners that incorporates the DOD guidance discussed in this summary. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will review evidence of such training if that evidence becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, it was continuing to review DOD Directive (DODD) 4715.21 on climate resilience; DOD reissued the directive in August 2018. The directive requires the military departments to incorporate adaptation to climate change impacts into their planning for facilities. Further, DOD has incorporated adaptation into other guidance that applies to each of the departments. For example, with revisions to DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria for Master Planning and High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, as well the issuance of the guide "Climate Adaptation for DOD Natural Resource Managers," DOD has instructed the military departments' planners to incorporate adaptation into installation-level plans. Further, in 2020, DOD issued guidance that requires the military departments to use a DOD database on sea level changes in their planning for coastal infrastructure (sea level change is one impact of climate change). However, as of June 2020, the Navy had not provided evidence of required training for installation-level planners that incorporates the DOD guidance discussed in this summary. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will review evidence of such training if that evidence becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, it was continuing to review DOD Directive (DODD) 4715.21 on climate resilience; DOD reissued the directive in August 2018. The directive requires the military departments to incorporate adaptation to climate change impacts into their planning for facilities. Further, DOD has incorporated adaptation into other guidance that applies to each of the departments. For example, with revisions to DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria for Master Planning and High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, as well the issuance of the guide "Climate Adaptation for DOD Natural Resource Managers," DOD has instructed the military departments' planners to incorporate adaptation into installation-level plans. Further, in 2020, DOD issued guidance that requires the military departments to use a DOD database on sea level changes in their planning for coastal infrastructure (sea level change is one impact of climate change). However, as of June 2020, the Army had not provided evidence of required training for installation-level planners that incorporates the DOD guidance discussed in this summary. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will review evidence of such training if that evidence becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Office of the Secretary of Defense continues to work with the military departments to evaluate how best to incorporate resilience measures into Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs), as appropriate. DOD also stated that UFCs are reviewed and revised on a rolling basis. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence of climate change data and projections integrated into UFCs. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as UFCs are updated, we will assess the extent to which the revised versions addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Office of the Secretary of Defense continues to work with the military departments to evaluate how best to incorporate resilience measures into Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs), as appropriate. DOD also stated that UFCs are reviewed and revised on a rolling basis. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence of climate change data and projections integrated into UFCs. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as UFCs are updated, we will assess the extent to which the revised versions addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Office of the Secretary of Defense continues to work with the military departments to evaluate how best to incorporate resilience measures into Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs), as appropriate. DOD also stated that UFCs are reviewed and revised on a rolling basis. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence of climate change data and projections integrated into UFCs. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as UFCs are updated, we will assess the extent to which the revised versions addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Department is continuing to review and update the processes and criteria governing host-nation cost-sharing negotiations to strengthen or incorporate resilience measures. Since each bilateral agreement is unique, these must be completed on a case-by-case basis. Further, DOD noted that any updates would occur on a "rolling basis." As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department has engaged in such updates. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as we become aware of new or updated host-nation cost-sharing agreements, we will assess the extent to which they (or the processes and criteria governing them) address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Department is continuing to review guidance for establishing agreements between host-nation communities and DOD installations. Further, DOD noted that any updates would occur on a "rolling basis." As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department has engaged in such updates. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as we become aware of new or updated agreements between host-nation communities and DOD installations, we will assess the extent to which they (or the guidance governing them) address the recommendation.
GAO-17-720, Sep 28, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Executive Office of the President
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 14, 2020, the Executive Office of the President has yet to take action on this recommendation.
GAO-17-546, Sep 26, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In a July 2018 update, DOE stated that it believes that the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) is the appropriate entity to lead interagency collaboration and coordinate science and technology policy. According to DOE, OSTP intends to charter an interagency working group under the NSTC on a government-wide strategy related to research on the health effects of low-dose radiation. As of December 2019, OSTP had begun to address a related requirement under the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act to coordinate federal efforts related to radiation biology research and planned to release a report on this topic in early 2020. When we confirm what actions OSTP has taken to establish this working group, we will provide updated information.
GAO-17-424, Sep 1, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 3 priority recommendations
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of July 2020 there has been no change in the status of this recommendation. In July 2019, EPA said that the 2016 America's Water Infrastructure Act (AWIA) requires EPA to conduct an assessment of the costs to replace lead service lines and that EPA would conduct this assessment (a survey) in 2020. In a previous update, EPA said that it would consider GAO's recommendation to require states to report available information about lead pipes along with those of other stakeholders as part of the development of the revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule. EPA officials estimated that the agency would publish a proposal for the revisions in 2019.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of July 2020 there has been no change in the status of this recommendation. In July 2019, EPA said that it would consider GAO's recommendation to require states to report all 90th percentile sample results for small systems along with those of other stakeholders as part of the development of the revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule. EPA officials estimated that a proposal for the revisions would be published in 2019.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of July 2020 there has been no change in the status of this recommendation. In July 2019, EPA stated that the agency developed a Lead and Cooper Rule (LCR) violation reporting tool that is updated and distributed to the EPA regional offices on a quarterly basis. This tool, according to EPA, enhances national oversight by fostering closer engagement with the regional offices to continuously assess any new water systems violating the LCR. EPA has stated that the agency has also developed, and shared with its regional offices, an internal resource to make ad hoc assessments of water systems, nationwide, that would benefit most from assistance with lead service line replacements or (for water systems without lead service lines) corrosion control treatment installation/re-optimization. According to EPA, this internal resource takes a multi-factor approach that considers historical action level exceedance occurrences and information on additional factors (for which information is already available through regulatory development efforts for the LCR long-term revisions or internet search engine queries). These additional factors include the number of lead service lines known to be present in a given water system; the proportion of a system's service connections that are served by lead service lines; and potential technical, managerial, and financial capacity challenges experienced by that system. Although EPA has made progress in addressing the recommendation, GAO will leave this recommendation open until SDWIS Prime is implemented.
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, based on information provided by the Corps, the agency has reviewed approximately half of the data and hopes to review the rest of the data by the end of June 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, the Corps is studying how data are captured in the OMBIL system to ensure the agency has a sustainable approach that can be used to collect and analyze data into the future. The Corps hopes to complete its actions on this recommendation by the end of December 2021.
GAO-17-510, Jun 15, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2018, NOAA reported that it had awarded a contract to assess hydrographic surveying needs and had drafted a Memorandum of Agreement to improve coordination with the U.S. Geological Survey on data acquisition and management. NOAA also reported that it planned to identify surveying tasks that could be accomplished using the private sector, and would take steps to improve the funding transfer process so that it could take advantage of Federal Emergency Management Agency and National Transportation Safety Board funds available for certain types of private sector survey activities. NOAA officials stated these tasks would be completed and a final strategy on working with the private sector issued by December 30, 2020.
GAO-17-306, May 3, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress is continuing to consider whether to implement this Matter.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of January 2020, DOE is taking steps to implement GAO's May 2017 recommendation. In 2017, DOE's Office of River Protection contracted with Savannah River National Laboratory, a federally funded research and development center, to evaluate viable treatment options for supplemental low-activity waste. According to DOE, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conducted a peer review of that laboratory's evaluation. The laboratory issued a final report in October 2019, and the National Academies issued a final report in late March 2020. According to DOE officials, both reports include information DOE may be able to use in making a decision about treating supplemental low-activity waste. DOE told GAO that they plan to use the studies as scoping documents as they move forward with the decision process. According to DOE officials, as of January 2020, DOE plans to decide how it will treat supplemental low-activity waste by 2026. In addition, in response to GAO's May 2017 recommendation, DOE said it successfully completed the first phase of a project--called the Test Bed Initiative--in December 2017 to demonstrate the feasibility of grouting, transporting, and disposing of three gallons of Hanford's low-activity waste at an alternate disposal site in Andrews, Texas. As of November 2018, DOE was beginning a second phase to demonstrate the feasibility of grouting, transporting, and disposing of 2,000 gallons of Hanford's low-activity waste at the same site in Texas. However, DOE stopped the demonstration project in spring 2019 when it withdrew its permit application for the Test Bed Initiative. According to DOE officials, this was because the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) proposed that DOE and Ecology engage in negotiations to develop a "holistic and realistic" approach to the retrieval and treatment of Hanford's tank waste. Congressional appropriations committees directed that DOE could spend up to $10 million to continue the Test Bed Initiative in fiscal year 2020, but DOE officials do not have specific plans for resuming the initiative. In October 2018, DOE requested public comment on a new interpretation of the statutory term "high level waste," which if the agency adopts it, could facilitate the use of alternate treatment and disposal methods. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 prohibits DOE from spending its fiscal year 2020 funds on applying this high-level radioactive waste interpretation at Hanford, and as a result, DOE officials stated that DOE does not have near-term plans to use this high-level waste interpretation for supplemental low-activity waste at Hanford. Until DOE develops information that reflects what is now known about the performance of alternate treatment and disposal methods, such as immobilizing tank waste in grout, congressional and agency decision makers will not have access to current scientific information as they decide how to best allocate limited financial resources among many competing needs. Moreover, having updated information on the effectiveness of alternate methods for treating supplemental low-activity waste will help to inform DOE's discussions with the state of Washington.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, DOE is taking steps to implement GAO's May 2017 recommendation. In 2017, DOE's Office of River Protection contracted with Savannah River National Laboratory, a federally funded research and development center, to evaluate viable treatment options for supplemental low-activity waste. According to DOE, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conducted a peer review of that laboratory's evaluation. The laboratory issued a final report in October 2019, and the National Academies issued a final report in late March 2020. According to DOE officials, both reports include information DOE may be able to use in making a decision about treating supplemental low-activity waste. DOE told GAO that they plan to use the studies as scoping documents as they move forward with the decision process. According to DOE officials, as of January 2020, DOE plans to decide how it will treat supplemental low-activity waste by 2026. In addition, in response to GAO's May 2017 recommendation, DOE said it successfully completed the first phase of a project--called the Test Bed Initiative--in December 2017 to demonstrate the feasibility of grouting, transporting, and disposing of three gallons of Hanford's low-activity waste at an alternate disposal site in Andrews, Texas. As of November 2018, DOE was beginning a second phase to demonstrate the feasibility of grouting, transporting, and disposing of 2,000 gallons of Hanford's low-activity waste at the same site in Texas. However, DOE stopped the demonstration project in spring 2019 when it withdrew its permit application for the Test Bed Initiative. According to DOE officials, this was because the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) proposed that DOE and Ecology engage in negotiations to develop a "holistic and realistic" approach to the retrieval and treatment of Hanford's tank waste. Congressional appropriations committees directed that DOE could spend up to $10 million to continue the Test Bed Initiative in fiscal year 2020, but DOE officials do not have specific plans for resuming the initiative. In October 2018, DOE requested public comment on a new interpretation of the statutory term "high level waste," which if the agency adopts it, could facilitate the use of alternate treatment and disposal methods. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 prohibits DOE from spending its fiscal year 2020 funds at Hanford on this high-level radioactive waste interpretation, and as a result, DOE officials stated that DOE does not have near-term plans to use this high-level waste interpretation for supplemental low-activity waste at Hanford. Until DOE develops information that reflects what is now known about the costs of alternate treatment and disposal methods, such as immobilizing tank waste in grout, congressional and agency decision makers will not have access to current cost information as they decide how to best allocate limited financial resources among many competing needs.
GAO-17-307, Apr 25, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, BLM issued a memo called "Documentation and Tracking Requirements for Waiver, Exceptions, and Modifications for Fluid Mineral Exploration and Development Activities." The memo states that BLM is updating its guidance for tracking waivers, exceptions, and modifications of fluid minerals stipulations and Conditions of Approval (COA) to ensure that these requests are consistently processed and documented until BLM completes database enhancements to its Automated Fluid Minerals Support System 2 to perform this function. To ensure consistent documentation, BLM has developed an "Exceptions Tracking Sheet" that BLM staff are to use when making decisions. Information captured on the tracking sheet include: field office, state, U.S. well number, exception decision date, COA or lease stipulation (LS) , category of COA or LS (e.g. air, community, wildlife), and the specific COA or LS involved. Additionally, the associated environmental analyses, documents, and authorized officer's decision must be consistent with guidance found in Chapter IV of BLM's Planning for Fluid Mineral Resources Handbook (H-1624-1). In August 2019, GAO requested additional information to support the implementation of the recommendation. In December 2019, Interior officials stated that it would implement the recommendation by August 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, BLM issued a memo called "Documentation and Tracking Requirements for Waiver, Exceptions, and Modifications for Fluid Mineral Exploration and Development Activities." The memo states that BLM is updating its guidance for tracking waivers, exceptions, and modifications of fluid minerals stipulations and Conditions of Approval (COA) to ensure that these requests are consistently processed and documented until BLM completes database enhancements to its Automated Fluid Minerals Support System 2 to perform this function. To ensure consistent documentation, BLM has developed an "Exceptions Tracking Sheet" that BLM staff are to use when making decisions. Information captured on the tracking sheet include: field office, state, U.S. well number, exception decision date, COA or lease stipulation (LS) , category of COA or LS (e.g. air, community, wildlife), and the specific COA or LS involved. Additionally, the associated environmental analyses, documents, and authorized officer's decision must be consistent with guidance found in Chapter IV of BLM's Planning for Fluid Mineral Resources Handbook (H-1624-1). In August 2019, GAO requested additional information to support the implementation of the recommendation. In December 2019, Interior officials stated that it would implement the recommendation by August 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2019, Interior officials stated that the BLM does not intend to make an exception tracking spreadsheet available to the public. According to Interior officials, the regulations at 43 CFR 3101.1-4 do not require it, and public posting is only applicable to waivers and modifications, not exceptions. Interior's position has been that the public can ask for this information in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Interior officials explained that the main concern in making an exception tracking spreadsheet available to the public is that a single consolidated tracking spreadsheet would require constant updates and posting to Interior's website. Since the numbers can change daily, any posted updates would only provide a brief snap shot which will not be meaningful. Interior officials stated that the BLM will aim to address this item in future database design enhancements in order to obtain a permanent tracking solution. We will update this recommendation when we have additional information from BLM.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, Interior officials stated that three of six corrective actions are substantially complete and that efforts are ongoing to clarify guidance related to documentation of environmental inspections with a target date for implementation of December 31, 2018. In May 2020, Interior officials stated the revised target date for implementation is September 30, 2020, at which time BLM will issue updated policies and procedures.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2018, Interior officials stated that efforts to provide guidance to field offices on how to collect and use date are ongoing with correction actions 10 percent complete. In May 2020, officials stated that they have a target date for implementation of December 31, 2020.
GAO-17-225, Apr 13, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.
GAO-17-293, Mar 21, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its June 9, 2017, response to our report, Interior indicated that BSEE is developing new strategies to improve trust and foster greater collaboration for consideration by the new Director. In September 2018, Interior provided documentation of several BSEE actions, including establishing an Employee Engagement Council, an Innovation Program, and Ombudsman position within the bureau. As of August 2020, BSEE indicated that these efforts remain ongoing. However, this recommendation remains open because BSEE has not yet demonstrated that these actions represent an enduring institutionalization of improved communication throughout the bureau.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In its June 2017 response to our report, Interior indicated that BSEE will incorporate lessons learned from its first enterprise risk management cycle in future cycles and that BSEE will incorporate a performance management dashboard in fiscal year 2018. In August 2019, BSEE provided documentation regarding actions it has taken to implement and institutionalize its enterprise risk management and performance measure initiatives. In August 2020, BSEE indicated that implementation of these processes remains ongoing. However, this recommendation remains open because BSEE has not yet demonstrated that these actions represent an enduring institutionalization of improved internal management initiatives and ongoing strategic initiatives throughout the bureau.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In its June 2017 response to our report, Interior indicated that BSEE's response to this recommendation would be incorporated into its corrective actions for recommendation one. In September 2018, Interior provided documentation of several BSEE actions, including establishing an Employee Engagement Council, an Innovation Program, and Ombudsman position within the bureau. As of August 2020, BSEE indicated that these efforts remain ongoing. However, this recommendation remains open because BSEE has not yet demonstrated that these actions represent an enduring institutionalization of expanded employee engagement throughout the bureau.
GAO-17-302, Feb 16, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: National Park Service
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2019, the agency provided an update of their recent efforts, including their revised Commercial Services Improvement Plan. This plan include performance goals and general time frames , however did not include performance measures or specific targets for each of the initiatives. The agency has subsequently reviewed this plan and determined that many of the goals and time frames identified were not realistic to achieve, making it difficult to establish performance measures or targets. As of July 2020, the agency is currently updating its 2015 Strategic Plan and reviewing the improvement plan to identify those items that will be feasible to implement. According to agency officials, they plan to develop goals and performance targets where feasible and develop time estimates for achieving them. Since this effort is currently underway, we will update the status of their efforts in the summer of 2021.
GAO-17-136, Dec 13, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: According to NPS officials, the agency is currently working to address this recommendation and expects to complete it in August 2020. GAO will update the status of the recommendation as soon as possible thereafter.
GAO-17-97, Dec 6, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation and in May 2008, the Corps reported that it developed implementation guidance for (1) nonfederal sponsor-led feasibility studies (ER-1165-2-209, dated February 4, 2016) and (2) construction projects (ER-1155-2-504, dated July 12, 2017). The Corps also reported that it established a Project Delivery Team to develop documented guidance for accurate recording of transactions and other relevant information related to nonfederal sponsor-led federal water resources projects, but it has not yet determined an estimated completion date for this effort. In August 2019, DOD informed GAO that the Civil Works Integration Division Deputy was evaluating the Corps' corrective action plan for the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.
GAO-17-3, Nov 30, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 5, 2020, NIST has not convened a governmentwide effort to provide the best available forward-looking climate information to standards developing-organizations.
GAO-16-742, Sep 29, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2017, Interior officials said the bureaus were developing, or had developed, the means by which they would assess their training needs and review, evaluate, and update their training programs for technical staff. Interior also told GAO that as part of its quarterly review of performance data, the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget will ensure that BLM, BSEE and BOEM are coordinating their training needs. Interior officials said that their Office of Strategic Employment and Organizational Development will validate the bureaus' active engagement in this activity and provide support in the fulfillment of this recommendation where needed. In February 2018, Interior officials said the agency had examined results from the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey to gauge how the bureaus' training program activities were being perceived by their workforce. In July 2019, Interior officials said they were looking at opportunities to share training resources, and that they would add in their scope an evaluation of training needs and effectiveness. However, as of March 2020, Interior had not provided us with evidence that it has conducted an evaluation of training needs, training effectiveness and sharing training resources.
GAO-16-827, Sep 28, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation. In October 2019, NOAA provided GAO with a written update on actions taken in response to this recommendation, including the development of agency-wide metrics for the NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy. In September 2020, NOAA informed GAO that it plans to update the performance metrics for the regional action plans to include our key attributes in 2021. We will continue to monitor NOAA's progress on this effort and will review the updated performance metrics to assess the extent to which the agency has addressed our recommendation.
GAO-16-699, Sep 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In December 2016, Commerce provided information on its implementation of the recommendation from GAO-16-699. Commerce stated that it had developed an action plan consisting of the following steps: (1) consulting with relevant offices and agencies, including: OSTP, DOD, the U.S. Geological Survey, DOE, the U.S. International Trade Commission, the Bureau of Industry and Security, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; (2) determining criteria to be used when it is necessary to collect information to identify and assess critical materials needs; (3) determining appropriate steps, which might include: (a) developing a summary of information that federal agencies currently collect on the domestic and international supply of critical raw materials; (b) soliciting input from a broad range of industries through a Federal Register notice; (c) assessing aggregate information, as allowable under law, that is submitted through the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill process over the course of fiscal year 2017; and (d) consulting with federal advisory groups for advice; (4) determining the audience for collected information and methodology for information dissemination; (5) determining the process for identifying further information collection needs and methodology for disseminating collected information; and (6) determining the timeline and responsibilities for information collection and distribution. In an April 2017 update, Commerce stated that it had identified points of contacts in seven of the eight agencies listed in its action plan and is in the process of contacting them for input. Commerce stated that it hoped to identify an appropriate contact in the eighth agency in the near future. Commerce stated that it had also drafted questions to ask the agencies in order to implement the action plan. Commerce did not provide a timeframe for when it expected to complete implementation of the action plan. In a June 2018 update, Commerce stated that since the change in Administration, Commerce has not been able to identify staff in all agencies to work with, but that Commerce is now in contact with several agencies who are aware of industry needs. Commerce did not provide a timeframe for when it expected to complete execution of its action plan. We requested additional information on Commerce's efforts to implement this recommendation, including plans to solicit industry input, and will update the status of the recommendation based on additional information received.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2017, OSTP provided updated information on its efforts to implement recommendations from GAO-16-699. OSTP stated that "the Subcommittee shares GAO's interest in improving data availability and granularity. However, in some cases, private entities and foreign governments may be unwilling or unable to provide (or even collect) such data. Additionally, the Subcommittee member agencies' financial and personnel resources are limited, and significant additional resources would be required to prioritize and pursue the data for additional materials and critical materials beyond minerals. Without the appropriation of additional resources, the Subcommittee's work on these additional items will be necessarily circumscribed." In its February 2018 report on the updated application of the early warning screening methodology, the Subcommittee stated that it saw the value in analyzing more minerals and non-minerals to help inform policy decisions, but that fulfilling this need will require additional dedicated personnel and financial resources for data collection, analysis, and distribution. In March 2020, OSTP stated that the Subcommittee has explored the possibility of expanding the scope of the early warning screening methodology to include critical materials beyond minerals. According to OSTP, possible expansion candidates include carbon fiber and critical chemicals. OSTP stated that it has initiated a discussion with the Department of Interior (U.S. Geological Survey), who has been leading the methodology development, and the Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis) with regard to possible data that would be needed for such an expansion. In August 2020, OSTP stated that the expertise to expand data collection to additional materials of interest exists in the National Minerals Information Center (NMIC) at the U.S. Geological Survey; however, the capacity to expand beyond the current portfolio is not available due to budgetary constraints. We will update this recommendation when we obtain additional information on these efforts.
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its agreement with this recommendation. EPA also stated that its vision for grants management includes having grant recipients submit performance reports and other information to the agency through a web-based portal. The portal would incorporate capabilities such as key word searches to allow for easier access to performance report information. EPA expected this recommendation to be addressed by its new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its general agreement with this recommendation and stated that it will apply it, where appropriate and cost effective, to program-specific databases, not only the Office of Water databases. EPA noted that not all data from program-specific databases may be appropriate for direct electronic transfer to the national performance system; some individual grant data may need to be analyzed before being rolled up into national data. As of December 2018, EPA officials said that continued work on this recommendation is dependent upon EPA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer's deployment of a new performance tracking system and individual program funds for developing systems that interact with it. As of April 2020, GAO is following up with EPA on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its agreement with this recommendation and stated that it will make conforming changes to the implementation guidance for the Environmental Results Order (directive). In December 2018, EPA stated that its existing environmental results directive may be superseded or incorporated into a different policy as part of the agency's migration to a new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). EPA stated that it would incorporate the recommendation into its new policy. However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its agreement with this recommendation and stated that it will make conforming changes to existing policy. In December 2018, EPA stated that its existing policies may be superseded or incorporated into different policies as part of the agency's migration to a new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). EPA stated that it would incorporate the recommendation into its new policy. However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its general agreement with this recommendation. However, EPA emphasized that identifying and deploying appropriate data quality controls is a long-term effort subject to budgetary considerations, completion of its new grants management system, and extensive collaboration with internal and external stakeholders. EPA officials said that the agency expected this recommendation to be addressed by its new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
GAO-16-559, Jul 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-16-607, Jul 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
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.
GAO-16-330, Jul 1, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 2 priority recommendations
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.
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.
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.
GAO-16-553, Jun 13, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In a meeting in December 2019, the Indian Energy and Minerals Steering Committee (IEMSC) members agreed that BIA should complete the review and approval of Indian communitization agreements (CA) within 120 days. This 120 days includes the requirement that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) complete its review in 30 days and that this review occurs concurrently. IEMSC is a committee within Interior that includes senior managers from BIA, BLM, and other agencies with a focus on Indian trust energy and mineral policies and issues. To fully implement this recommendation, BIA should formally establish required time frames for the review and approval of CA, such as including the time frames in its Onshore Energy and Mineral Lease Management Interagency Standard Operating Procedures. We will continue to monitor BIA's response to this recommendation.
GAO-16-305, Mar 21, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) stated that its Joint Committee on Biorisk Management Policy (JCBMP) would oversee the revisions of existing policies to include department-wide incident reporting requirements and time frames. As of July 2020, USDA estimated that these revisions should be completed by October 2020. Officials stated that updates to component agency policies would be completed shortly after issuance of the departmental policy. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee the revisions of existing outdated departmental policies. In addition, officials stated that APHIS reviews and updates agency policies every 3-5 years, and that this schedule will be reflected in the updated departmental policy. In October 2019, the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) updated its agency policy for its institutional biological safety committee, the entity responsible for ensuring biosafety in its laboratories. As of July 2020, USDA estimated that revisions to the departmental, APHIS, and Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) policies should be completed by December 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee efforts to collect and analyze laboratory inspection results and incident reports and share these reports and critical analyses with USDA senior leadership on an annual basis. As of July 2020, USDA estimated that revisions to its departmental policy-which would reflect the JCBMP's role in analyzing inspection results and incident reports, identifying potential trends, and sharing lessons learned-should be completed by October 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee the revisions of existing policies to include requirements for routine reporting of inspection results to senior USDA officials. In July 2020, USDA estimated that these revisions should be completed by October 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee the revisions of existing policies to include requirements for routine reporting of laboratory incidents to senior USDA officials. In July 2020, USDA estimated that these revisions should be completed by October 2020. Officials stated that updates to component agency policies would be completed shortly after issuance of the departmental policy. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In June 2018, DOD stated that it had completed evaluation of existing DOD and service level guidance related to inventory control. DOD also stated that it will continue to analyze the adequacy of existing policy and the need to expand that policy across the DOD Lab Enterprise as the draft Department of Defense Manual (DoDM) 6055.18 is finalized for publication. As of August 2019, DoD said the draft DoDM 6055.18 was still in review and the agency estimated it would complete work to respond to this recommendation in February 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. DOD stated that it had updated the Air Force policy (AF Instruction 10-2611-0) as of January 19, 2017; this document updates the biological safety standards used in AF labs and implements the draft update to Department of Defense Manual 6055.18M: Safety Standards for Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories. As of July 2019, DOD provided GAO with the updated Army policy AR 190-17; however DOD officials stated that as the draft Department of Defense Manual (DoDM) 6055.18 was still undergoing review, this recommendation should remain open. DOD estimated it would complete work to respond to this recommendation in February 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In August 2019, DOD reported that the Air Force is planning to close its BSAT program by the summer of 2019 and planning was underway to move the Air Force BSAT inventory to another DOD BSAT facility. Additionally, the Army was revising its AR 385-10, which contains biosafety criteria unique to the Army, and estimated the revision would be completed by December 2019. Finally, the draft Department of Defense Manual (DoDM) 6055.18 was still undergoing review, and DOD estimated it would complete work to respond to this recommendation in February 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In August 2019, DOD reported that the Air Force is planning to close its BSAT program by the summer of 2019 and planning was underway to move the Air Force BSAT inventory to another DOD BSAT facility. Additionally, the Army was revising its AR 385-10, which contains biosafety criteria unique to the Army, to include a new mishap classification for biosafety mishaps to effect better reporting and analysis of these mishaps, and estimated the revision would be completed by December 2019. Finally, the draft Department of Defense Manual (DoDM) 6055.18 was still undergoing review, and DOD estimated it would complete work to respond to this recommendation in February 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of June 2018, DOD stated that the draft directive DODD 5101.XXE, which is expected to be published in October 2018, formally designates the Executive Agent Responsible Official for Biosafety and Biosecurity and will establish roles and responsibilities including a role for reporting inspection results. Further, DOD stated that all inspection results of a joint inspection team are provided to the Executive Agent Responsible Official, and that the joint inspection team was established in September 2016. As of September 2019, DOD officials had provided updated documentation regarding this recommendation, and GAO was reviewing these updates.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that both CDC and FDA were working to incorporate incident reporting requirements and time frames into formal agency policies and practices but did not provide an anticipated completion date. In summer 2017, CDC and FDA reported that they were continuing to incorporate incident reporting, which includes all laboratory incidents, accidents, injuries, infections, and near-misses, into formal agency policies. In August 2019, FDA reported that it continues to work with the Biosafety and Biosecurity Coordinating Council to establish a process for the routine reporting of these results but had not yet completed its actions. As of September 2019 we had not received an update from HHS on the status of CDC's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that CDC plans to revise its policies to include training and inspection requirements for inspections for all high-containment laboratories but did not provide an anticipated completion date. In June 2017, HHS reported that CDC was in the process of revising its formal policies to ensure they included requirements for training and inspections for all of the agency's high-containment laboratories but did not provide an anticipated completion date. In December 2017, HHS reported that CDC's policies were in the initial stages of the clearance process and anticipated they would be finalized in fall 2018. As of September 2019, HHS had not provided an update on the status of these policies.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that CDC was working with FDA and NIH to establish a process for notifying HHS leadership of inspection results through the department's Biosafety and Biosecurity Coordinating Council. HHS did not provide us with an anticipated time frame for implementing this notification practice or when the agencies plan to begin notifying HHS of inspection results. In August 2019, FDA reported that it continues to work with the Biosafety and Biosecurity Coordinating Council to establish a process for the routine reporting of these results but had not yet completed its actions. As of September 2019, HHS had not provided an update on the status NIH's actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that NIH's ongoing practice is to report the results of external inspections to senior agency officials and, in May 2016, developed a standard operating procedure that outlines this reporting process. In March 2017, NIH officials provided assurance that its Division of Occupational Safety and Health provides NIH's intramural governing body with information about NIH's safety performance at least annually; officials further assured that this information includes the overall results of annual inspections (or audits, as NIH calls them) of all NIH laboratories and discussion of the top 10 most report safety infractions for the year. GAO considers NIH to have implemented the recommended action. GAO will close the overall recommendation once FDA has taken equivalent, appropriate action. As of August 2019, FDA reported that the agency began piloting a standardized agency-wide laboratory safety inspection checklist to ensure that all laboratories are inspected rigorously and consistently. As part of the pilot, all laboratories were to be inspected during the first 3 quarters of the calendar year. The agency said it planned to aggregate the results of the inspections, and trends and significant findings would be reported to FDA senior leadership in the fourth quarter of 2019. GAO will continue to monitor FDA's actions to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that its Biosafety and Biosecurity Council was working to establish incident reporting requirements for CDC, FDA, and NIH but did not provide an anticipated completion date. HHS noted that NIH formally adopted a standard operating procedure that lays out the agency's requirements for reporting incidents to senior officials. In August 2019, FDA reported that it continues to work with the Biosafety and Biosecurity Coordinating Council to establish a process for the routine reporting of these results but had not yet completed its actions. As of September 2019, HHS had not provided an update on the status of NIH or CDC actions.
GAO-16-220, Feb 10, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of October 2019, USDA had taken relevant and positive actions but had not yet fully implemented GAO's February 2016 recommendation for monitoring wild, native bees. According to a senior USDA official, a Native Bee Monitoring Steering Committee composed of representatives from four USDA agencies is developing a response to the recommendation. According to the official, the steering committee has taken or plans to take several steps regarding a monitoring plan. First, the steering committee held a stakeholder listening session in June 2017 to obtain public opinion regarding (1) why a native bee monitoring program is important, (2) the type of information and data needed to adequately conduct monitoring, and (3) how the public would like to see the monitoring data used. Highlights of the input received at the listening session and the goals of the national monitoring plan were discussed in a symposium held in November 2017 at the National Entomological Society of America Annual Meeting. USDA gathered additional recommendations from symposium participants based on monitoring programs for other declining species of concern, such as birds, bats, and butterflies. Second, the steering committee drafted a prospectus that will delineate activities being conducted by relevant federal agencies with responsibilities for surveying species of concern, including plans to coordinate activities and outline individual roles and responsibilities towards facilitating a national monitoring plan. According to the senior official, the committee worked with USDA officials to ask other federal agencies associated with the Pollinator Task Force to summarize their current and future activities in support of monitoring native bee populations. The committee completed its report entitled The Current State of Federal Agency Coordination in Monitoring Native Bee Health in January 2019. Third, the steering committee held a "Scientists' Summit" in April 2018 at the National Conservation Training Center. The purpose was to obtain scientific expert opinion regarding (1) why a native bee monitoring strategy is needed; (2) what such a monitoring strategy would measure and be used for; (3) standard minimum protocols that would improve data quality and sharing; and (4) databases that could be used to house data from a monitoring strategy. Participants included university and governmental experts on bees, statisticians, modelers and ecologists, and conservation biologists assessing other species in decline. Workshop discussion leaders subsequently drafted for publication in a scientific journal a whitepaper with recommendations on a U.S. national native bee monitoring strategy. However, as of October 2019, according to senior USDA officials, the white paper had not yet been accepted for publication. We support the agencies' efforts to date to implement the recommendation. However, we believe that the agencies must take additional steps to improve the effectiveness of federal efforts to monitor wild, native bee populations and will continue to monitor their actions. In 2020, according to a senior USDA official, a National Native Bee Monitoring Research Coordination Network is being formed to address GAO's recommendation to develop a federal monitoring plan for wild, native bees, with the project expected to begin in spring 2020. Some USDA officials told us that without a team to coordinate a monitoring plan, individual agency efforts may be ineffective in providing the needed information in trends on wild, native bees in the United States. The project is scheduled to be completed in 3 years.
GAO-16-245, Feb 10, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: According to BSEE documentation, the Safety and Incident Investigations Division (SIID) is working closely with the Office of Policy and Analysis and the Records, Delegations, and Directives Team to implement the requirements specified in the BSEE Directives System Manual Chapter and to convert a number of Bureau Interim Directives into Bureau Manual Chapters. In May 2018, BSEE provided the results of an internal control review it had conducted to assess compliance with the tiering process outlined in the National Investigations Handbook. In particular, the Internal Control Review recommended that BSEE (1) continue revision of its National Investigations Handbook, (2) evaluate investigation tier designation, and (3) develop additional investigative training. In July 2019, BSEE provided documentation that it had converted four Bureau Interim Directives into Bureau Manual Chapters and that, in response to the Internal Control Review, it had (1) revised its National Investigations Handbook, (2) evaluated investigative tier designation, and (3) implemented additional training. As of August 2020, BSEE leadership and SIID personnel are considering changes to improve the quality and consistency of its investigative tier designation with a planned completion date of December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: According to BSEE documentation, the BSEE Director has ordered an assessment. In the meantime, inspectors are being trained to assist with environmental oversight responsibilities as appropriate. BSEE informed us during the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 that it expected to develop a plan to address documented environmental oversight staffing needs by 2020. Officials said that the timeline was pushed out to allow time to finish policy and complete a work risk assessment. In September 2019, BSEE indicated that it had identified three corrective actions based on its evaluation of risks associated with the organizational structure of the bureau's environmental compliance program that will address this recommendation. As of August 2020, BSEE anticipates implementing these actions by the end of fiscal year 2021.
GAO-16-165, Jan 21, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the Forest Service said it has the statutory authority to issue a rule that establishes a fee structure, but it does not have the authority to collect and retain fees for hardrock mine plan processing activities. The Forest Service said it worked with the Department of Agriculture and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to submit a request through the President's Budget for authority from Congress to retain any fees collected from mine operations. The President's Budget for fiscal year 2021, developed by OMB, included such a request to Congress. If Congress grants this authority, the Forest Service said it will issue a rule that establishes a fee structure for hardrock mine operations so it can begin retaining collected fees.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: According to a letter received from the agency in April 2016, BLM expressed concern about whether promulgating a rule to assess cost recovery fees for environmental assessment would result in faster permitting times and noted that such an undertaking may be challenging to complete given resource limitation as a result of other high priority rule making efforts currently underway by BLM. The agency proposed conducting an internal analysis to determine whether requiring cost recovery would result in reduced permitting times and expected that report to be completed by the end of 2017. We contacted the Department of the Interior in April 2020 and it had no new information to provide at that time. We will update the status of this recommendation as more information becomes available.
GAO-16-37, Nov 23, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Executive Office of the President
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Executive Office of the President has yet to take action in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Executive Office of the President has yet to take action in response to this recommendation.
GAO-15-682, Sep 15, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-2623
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: In fiscal year 2019, the 116th Congress' House and Senate introduced bills H.R. 3301 and S. 865, respectively, to extend the per barrel tax expiration dates. In addition, the Senate bill proposes a ceiling to cut off the tax if the fund's balance is above a certain amount and to also restart based on meeting certain thresholds. We will continue to monitor legislation and congressional actions.
GAO-15-618, Aug 17, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: According to EPA officials, the Office of Grants and Debarment (OGD) established an agency-wide electronic grants record workgroup in fiscal year 2016. The workgroup identified the contents of the electronic grant file, technical options, and evaluation criteria. OGD completed its alternatives analysis for scope, general approach, and requirements in fiscal year 2017 and EPA expected this recommendation to be addressed by its new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: Implementation efforts are ongoing. According to EPA officials, OGD is conducting a multi-modular project to upgrade the agency's grants management IT system. EPA expected this recommendation to be addressed by its new grants management system (GrantsSolutions), which had been targeted for deployment in March 2020. However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
GAO-15-562, Jul 23, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-2623
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Interior's (DOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) agreed with our recommendation. In support of closing this recommendation, officials from BLM re-iterated their policy about sending updates regarding guidance changes, which is included in its directives handbook. They also provided us with an example of its timely communication to BLM employees to announce the issuance of its revised Fund Code Handbook. We reviewed the directives handbook and verified that it contains guidance for communicating policy and procedural changes affecting the mining law program's expenditure-related processes. While the guidance in the directives handbook is a good start towards meeting the intent of our recommendation, we communicated to BLM in fiscal year 2019 that the findings in the report were caused in part by inadequate communication processes and the accessibility of the guidance to staff. To address the recommendation, we would like to see evidence that BLM has established procedures to ensure proper communication of changes or policies to the staff using BLM guidance, which includes having written procedures on how BLM publishes updates or communicates policy information, where guidance should be published in BLM's internal page, and the BLM officials who are in charge of that process. In fiscal year 2020, we have sent additional follow-up questions to the agency and are currently waiting for a response. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-15-39, Apr 7, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2019, Interior officials stated BLM will not be conducting a separate internal review of the guidance for commingling agreement requests issued in July 2013. However, officials stated they are committed to performing the internal review as part of the internal review on its inspection and enforcement program and believed their pending actions related to implementing the recommendations in the GAO report "Oil and Gas Development: Actions Needed to Improve Oversight of the Inspection and Enforcement Program" (GAO-19-7) would also address this recommendation. Interior officials stated the target date for implementing this recommendation is June 30, 2021.
GAO-15-141, Oct 9, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In 2015 and 2016, the Department of Energy (DOE) solicited public comments as part of a policy to develop a consent-based siting process for high-level radioactive waste management facilities. However, DOE's solicitation of public comments does not reflect a coordinated outreach strategy to achieve and sustain public acceptance for the decades required to site, license, construct, and operate waste management facilities. As of March 2020, we are following up with DOE to determine the status of the agency's response to this recommendation.
GAO-15-38, Oct 7, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In February 2020, FDA said that the recommendation should be closed as not implemented. FDA has previously said that it remained concerned that the disclosure of pesticides for which FDA does not test would enable users to more easily circumvent the pesticide monitoring program, which could jeopardize public health and, at a minimum, would undermine FDA's law enforcement efforts. In addition, FDA said that it discloses in its annual reports all pesticides tested for within the reports' annual scope as required by the Pesticide Monitoring Improvements Act of 1988. FDA's annual reports also clarify that not all pesticides for which EPA has established tolerances were analyzed. FDA said that the Pesticide Monitoring Improvements Act of 1988 does not specifically direct the agency to report information on untested pesticides with EPA-established tolerances. We continue to believe that disclosing the pesticides that are not included in FDA's testing program would be consistent with OMB best practices for reporting limitations relevant to analyzing and interpreting results from a data collection effort. In particular, we continue to believe that FDA should be more transparent about the potential effect of not testing for all pesticides for which EPA has established tolerances. We also note that the Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service implemented a similar recommendation to disclose information about its pesticide monitoring program. As a result, we are keeping this recommendation open.
GAO-14-699, Aug 21, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. The Corps developed a list of projects for deauthorization in accordance with the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1986, Section 1001, and provided the list to OMB for clearance on January 26, 2018. Additionally, on December 9, 2019, the Corps reported that it provided a list of projects eligible for deauthorization in FY 2020 to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works for review. Upon approval, the list will be sent to OMB for clearance. After receiving OMB clearance, according to the Corps, the list will be provided to Congress and the public in accordance with WRDA. As of July 2020, we are continuing to monitor the Corps' progress in implementing the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and as of December 2016, a task order has been awarded for a contractor to prepare a comprehensive inventory of studies authorized by statute. The Corps reported that once the comprehensive inventory of studies is complete, the Corps will develop policies and procedures for the study deauthorization process and those policies and procedures will be used to carry out the process of deauthorizing studies. In March 2020, the Corps reported that it was working to develop a scheduled for providing us with a list of studies eligible for deathorization. As of July 2020, we are continuing to monitor the Corps' progress in implementing the recommendation.
GAO-14-446, May 30, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-4523
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2014, DOD concurred with our recommendation. Since then, DOD has made some limited progress toward integrating considerations of climate change into the processes of certain military services' military construction programs. For example, in 2016 briefing slides presented to congressional staff, the Army noted that two military construction projects were sited in a manner specifically designed to mitigate the impacts of climate change. However, as of March 2020, DOD had not provided us with evidence that the department's components have clarified instructions associated with the processes used to compare potential military construction projects for approval and funding. Thus, the recommendation remains open.
GAO-14-274, May 19, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-9345
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.
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.
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.
GAO-14-323, May 5, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, we are not aware of any legislation being enacted to address this matter for congressional consideration.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, BIA and EPA had selected a cleanup option for Tuba City Dump, but BIA had not created schedule or cost estimates for the cleanup action. BIA stated it anticipated completing the cleanup design, which will include cost and schedule estimates, by September 2022. GAO will assess BIA's actions once they are complete.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, BIA and EPA had selected a cleanup option for Tuba City Dump, but BIA had not initiated the acquisition planning process for the future cleanup contract. BIA stated it anticipated completing the cleanup design work, including the acquisition package, by September 2022. GAO will assess BIA's actions once they are complete.
GAO-13-145, Aug 8, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2020, EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs is providing status information on conditional registrations issued from 2000 through 2020 on the web at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-registration/conditional-pesticide-registration. However, because plans are not yet complete for automating data related to conditional registrations to more readily track their status and related information, this recommendation remains open. According to EPA, due to the government shutdown and delays in the award of its mission support IT contract, IT modernization efforts enabling the Office of Pesticide Programs to track conditionally registered products electronically are now targeted for completion in 2021 rather than 2020.
GAO-13-52, Oct 24, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2017, HUD stated that it has not developed a test to validate the performance of the whole-house ventilation specification. HUD reported that the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) did not agree with the testing validation recommendations. As of March 2018, HUD continues to move forward in updating its standards, including a test for whole house ventilation. However, as part of the overall HUD effort to review regulations, HUD officials stated they are currently conducting a review of current and planned federal regulations for manufactured housing with the goal to facilitate the affordability of manufactured housing and to promote durable, safe, and cost effective construction techniques for manufactured homes. As a result, HUD does not anticipate moving forward with any manufactured housing regulations until it completes its review. We continue to believe that developing such a test will better ensure that air ventilation systems in manufactured homes perform as specified and meet the HUD Code and will continue to monitor HUD's progress in implementing our recommendation.
GAO-12-791, Sep 26, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-3000
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce has not implemented this recommendation. Since we reported in 2012 that the department had established metrics for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes but not a method for measuring the metrics, the department issued an Enterprise Architecture Value Measurement Plan in April 2018. This plan included outcome metrics; however, the department had not documented a method for measuring the metrics. In January 2020, the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) stated that the department recently appointed a new CIO (acting) and was in the process of revisiting strategic planning initiatives and implementation to ensure they are congruent with the IT strategic vision and objectives. The Office of the CIO also said it was hiring a new Chief Enterprise Architect, which would impact previous initiatives and strategies. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In December 2019, the Department of Defense Office of the Chief Information Officer stated that it would establish an approach to measuring enterprise architecture outcomes defined in the DOD Digital Modernization Strategy, by September 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Navy has not demonstrated that it has implemented our recommendation. In November 2017, the department described steps it had taken to address the recommendation. However, as of January 2020, the department had not provided documentation demonstrating that it had established metrics and a method for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of the Army had taken steps to address this recommendation, but much more remains to be done. Specifically, in December 2013, the department developed its Army Business Management Strategy, which included metrics to measure the number of business systems retired over five years and cost savings and avoidance through use of the Army's business enterprise architecture. However, as of January 2020, the department had not demonstrated that it had documented the steps to measure the metrics. In January 2020, the department's chief architect stated that the department was in the process of establishing a baseline architecture. We will continue to monitor the Army's efforts to establish an architecture and an approach for measuring architecture outcomes in accordance with our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, the Department of Energy demonstrated that it had taken steps to implement the recommendation. Specifically, in March 2020, the department developed a draft plan to measure business architecture performance. We will monitor the department's efforts to finalize and implement its plan.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor has not addressed the recommendation. In August 2020, the department stated that it was continuing to evaluate processes for reviewing and assessing enterprise architecture value.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, the Department of State developed an enterprise architecture plan, which identified several benefits that may be achieved by executing the plan. These benefits included, for example, lower support and acquisition costs and reuse of technology and investments. However, the department did not demonstrate that it had established an approach for measuring the potential benefits in the plan. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency has not implemented this recommendation. In December 2019, the agency stated that its chief architect and technical architecture staff were working to reformulate the enterprise architecture program and described several goals and activities that were underway. The agency also stated that the program was examining industry best practices on architecture metrics to determine which would be best for EPA's enterprise architecture program. As metrics are adopted to assess the value of the architecture program, the program will work them into the agency-wide process for performance metrics. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has not yet implemented this recommendation. In July 2019, NASA's Associate Chief Information Officer for Enterprise Service and Integration said the agency was in the process of developing an enterprise architecture policy directive and procedural requirements. He anticipated that they would be completed in October 2020.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, the Small Business Administration had not implemented this recommendation. In August 2019, SBA developed an enterprise architecture program performance guide and value measurement plan. According to the plan, the agency plans to measure cost savings/avoidance and reduction of duplication. However, the agency has not demonstrated that it has documented the steps to be followed to measure the outcomes. Specifically, it did not demonstrate that it had established a method to measure the cost savings/avoidance or the number of duplicate investments reduced.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, a Senior Analyst in the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) Office of Internal Oversight and Compliance stated that, as of January 2020, OPM's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) had established an approach for developing an enterprise architecture. The liaison also stated that, since May 2019, the office of the CIO had established bi-weekly checkpoints with leadership and stakeholders to monitor and report progress and to document established metrics. However, the agency has not demonstrated that it has established a documented method and metrics for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, the Department of Agriculture demonstrated that it had established an approach to measuring enterprise architecture outcomes; however, it had not yet measured and reported them. The department conducted a survey in February 2020 that collected information such as the number of legacy systems that were identified and subsequently decommissioned, and the number of applications that have been eliminated as a result of application rationalization through use of enterprise architecture. The department stated that it will release the second survey in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021, and the differences in the responses between the first and second surveys will be presented to the CIO Council to show the impact of enterprise architecture. The department did not state when it plans to report the results. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce has not implemented this recommendation. In April 2018, the department issued an Enterprise Architecture Value Measurement Plan; however, the department has not demonstrated that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes. In January 2020, the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) stated that the department recently appointed a new CIO (acting) and was in the process of revisiting all strategic planning initiatives and implementation to ensure they are congruent with the IT strategic vision and objectives. The Office of the CIO also said it was hiring a new Chief Enterprise Architect, which would impact previous initiatives and strategies. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In December 2019, the Department of Defense Office of the Chief Information Officer stated that it would establish a documented approach to measuring enterprise architecture outcomes defined in the DOD Digital Modernization Strategy by September 2020, and report outcomes by December 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Navy has not demonstrated that it has implemented our recommendation. In November 2017, the department described steps it had taken to address the recommendation. However, as of January 2020, it had not provided documentation demonstrating that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2020, the Department of Energy had not implemented the recommendation. In May 2020, the department described steps it had taken to develop its enterprise architecture. For example, it said that the department had established a Technical Reference Model, which supports processes and criteria for selecting and reviewing software across the department's headquarters. The department said it used the reference model to identify software products that could be eliminated or consolidated to achieve cost savings. However, as of August 2020, the department had not provided documents demonstrating that it had measured and reported architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the status of the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor has not addressed the recommendation. In August 2020, the department stated that it was evaluating processes for reviewing and assessing enterprise architecture value.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, the Department of Veterans Affairs stated that it plans to measure enterprise architecture performance by the end of March 2020. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, the Department of State developed an enterprise architecture plan, which identified several benefits that may be achieved by executing the plan. These benefits included, for example, lower support and acquisition costs and reuse of technology and investments. However, the department did not demonstrate that it had measured and reported outcomes attributed to its architecture. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency has not implemented this recommendation. In December 2019, the agency stated that its chief architect and technical architecture staff were working to reformulate the enterprise architecture program and described several goals and activities that were underway. The agency also stated that the program was examining industry best practices on architecture metrics to determine which would be best for EPA's enterprise architecture program. As metrics are adopted to assess the value of the architecture program, the program will work them into the agency-wide process for performance metrics. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has not implemented this recommendation. In July 2019, NASA's Associate Chief Information Officer for Enterprise Service and Integration said the agency was in the process of developing an enterprise architecture policy directive and procedural requirements. He anticipated that they would be completed in October 2020.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, the Small Business Administration (SBA) had not implemented this recommendation. SBA's Office of the CIO stated that it achieved IT cost savings and avoidance as a result of IT infrastructure service and support reduction and data center optimization in fiscal years 2014 through the third quarter of fiscal year 2019. In a March 2020 memo to GAO, the Chief Information Officer explained that the agency's enterprise architecture team reviewed IT acquisition requests, which led to reducing duplicative IT investments and resulted in the cost savings and avoidance. However, the agency did not demonstrate that it had reliably measured the cost savings and avoidance. Specifically, it did not provide documentation demonstrating how it calculated most of the savings it reported.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, a Senior Analyst in the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) Office of Internal Oversight and Compliance stated that, as of January 2020, OPM's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) had established an approach for developing an enterprise architecture. The liaison also stated that, since May 2019, the office of the CIO had established bi-weekly checkpoints with leadership and stakeholders to monitor and report progress and to document established metrics. However, the agency has not provided documentation demonstrating that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services had not implemented this recommendation. Specifically, it had not demonstrated that it had measured architecture metrics that it had established in its April 2014 Enterprise Roadmap. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of December 2019, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not fully addressed our recommendation. In March 2013, the office required agencies to submit annually an Enterprise Roadmap, which was to include an appendix on enterprise architecture outcomes. To prepare the appendix, the office provided agencies with a template to document architecture metrics and measurement methods. The template included examples of outcome metrics and a field where agencies were to document measurement methods. However, OMB did not provide details on the methods that agencies could use to measure architecture outcomes or require that agencies include the steps to be followed for measuring outcomes. In March 2019, OMB said that it was working with agencies to determine approaches for measuring and reporting outcomes achieved through enterprise architecture. However, as of December 2019, OMB had not demonstrated that it had fully addressed the recommendation. We will continue to follow up with OMB on its efforts to implement the recommendation.
GAO-12-423, Jul 30, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Interior has taken steps to identify and evaluate drilling risks, and its work is ongoing. For example, according to BSEE officials, BSEE's SafeOCS program is one effort through which data is collected on risk factors associated with drilling. BSEE expanded the SafeOCS program in 2016 to include required reporting of well control equipment and barrier failure incidents. Additionally, in 2017, BSEE completed two retrospective analyses of factors associating with risk, however, according to BSEE officials, both analyses were limited by the quality of the data. In December 2019, Interior officials stated that the Gulf of Mexico Region's Office of District Operations Support (DOS) has been developing an approach to apply a secondary review to drilling permits deemed to be "high risk." According to these officials, this secondary review will be performed by pre-selected subject matter experts, identified because of their experience with certain aspects of drilling operations. To determine what drilling permits should receive a secondary review, DOS explored a variety of approaches before settling on a two-prong method. Because efforts remain ongoing, it is too soon to assess the extent to which these efforts will be successful. Until such policies are fully implemented and shown to be effective, Interior may not be able to adjust and evaluate its oversight--including inspections--in a cost-effective manner.
GAO-12-42, Dec 9, 2011
Phone: 202-512-9338
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of March 2020, we have not seen a formal written memo from the IRIS program laying out this information - in detail - publicly, or how timelines for assessments are influenced by various criteria. While IRIS program staff have discussed this issue, no written guidance has been created. Such communication from the IRIS Program, as well as more frequent updates of the timelines for chemicals currently in assessment and projected starting dates for every chemical listed as "under assessment" is needed.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Program has established the priority chemicals it is working on, and has published some timelines via the IRIS Program Outlook document. However, this information has not been published as an agenda in the Federal Register.
GAO-11-381, Jun 17, 2011
Phone: (202)512-9338
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of July 2020 there has been no change in the status of this recommendation. EPA, as of September 2019, had not resumed data verification audits to routinely evaluate the quality of the data states provide to the agency. The Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) Prime and the Compliance Monitoring Data Portal (CMDP) will replace the data verification audits in the future. EPA has made SDWIS Prime available through incremental interim releases to state drinking water agencies for exploring and testing but does not expect to fully release it until mid-2020. However, as of August 2019, SDWIS Prime was unavailable while EPA awaited progress on the SDWIS Modernization Project plan. According to EPA, the CMDP will enable utilities and laboratories to report data electronically to primacy agencies with fewer errors and in a more efficient manner; but it is not clear when it will be fully operational. According to data provided by EPA in September 2019, 10 states were using CMDP to varying degrees. EPA information identified another 6 states that plan to transition to CMDP between September and December 2019, 2 states that plan to transition in 2020, and 12 others that may transition in the future. In the meantime, EPA indicated that the agency will complete nine file reviews in 2019 to verify data in agencies that do not currently use CMDP. EPA's actions may improve its ability to oversee states' implementation of the act and provide more complete and accurate information on compliance, but because EPA's systems to replace data verification audits are not yet fully in place, we are keeping this recommendation open.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020 there has been no change in the status of this recommendation. EPA is developing the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) Prime, with several efforts underway as of September 2019 as we noted under recommendation 1, but until it is fully operational, EPA will not be able to work with states to establish a national goal for the quality of monitoring violations. EPA noted in 2017 that it expected SDWIS Prime to enable the agency and primacy agencies to better understand the nature of system violations and consider developing goals for monitoring and reporting violations. However, according to EPA, SDWIS Prime will not be released until mid-2020. EPA indicated plans to modify the Annual Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) Program Review requirements but the agency states that it is dependent on approval by the Office of the Inspector General. Despite the ongoing delays to address the call in the recommendation for establishing new goals, we are keeping this recommendation open while EPA continues its efforts to implement SDWIS Prime.
GAO-11-365, Mar 23, 2011
Phone: (202)512-7029
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS, as required by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 (PAMA), delayed until 2024 when the bundled payment for dialysis care is expanded to cover oral-only ESRD drugs. Because PAMA requires CMS to use the most recent year of data available to implement this payment change, CMS has been unable to implement our recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation upon receipt of additional information from CMS.
GAO-10-205, Jan 28, 2010
Phone: (202)512-6225
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.
GAO-08-440, Mar 7, 2008
Phone: (202)512-6225
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of February 2020, EPA officials indicated that the IRIS Program had almost completed internal review of a "Handbook for Developing IRIS Assessments," intended to guide staff through the sequential stages of the IRIS assessment process and ensure consistency across assessments. The Handbook, when finalized and used by staff, codifies the agency's effort to reevaluate their assessment process, but doesn't address the resources that should be dedicated to the IRIS Program. A workforce plan that includes both staff and budget resources consistent with user needs is necessary. As we reported in March 2019, the program has made strides utilizing project management software and project management techniques that enable the IRIS Program to better plan assessment schedules and utilize staff. However, we also reported in March 2019 that the President's budget requests since fiscal year 2018 have repeatedly cut the budget by as much as 40 percent for the Health and Environmental Risk Assessment (HERA) area, of which IRIS is a part. While these cuts were not enacted by Congress, the President's fiscal year 2021 budget request again cuts the HERA program by 34 percent, or approximately $12.7 million dollars. These cuts could have an impact on the IRIS program's ability to meet EPA program and regional office needs, if enacted by Congress.
GAO-07-119, Dec 12, 2006
Phone: (202)512-9471
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: On May 24, 2017, the Department of Interior (DOI) sent out an email to its staff showing the dissemination of the new format required for completing trip reports by the staff of the Office of Insular Affairs (OIA). The new format requires staff to include travel justification (i.e., purpose/objective, location, and travel period) and trip report (i.e., meetings, site visits, results, and next steps, as applicable.) The intent of the recommendation is for DOI to have a framework that includes (1) status of required single audit reports; (2) the progress of actions to resolve reported internal control weaknesses; and (3) current needs for technical assistance, capacity building, and staff level expertise. Further, the intent of GAO's recommendation is that this information be integrated into a comprehensive monitoring process. We did not see these elements included in DOI's new format. At present, the agency has been unable to provide additional information that supports the development of a framework for conducting sites visits that incorporates procedures about how information will be shared and monitored. In August 2020, the agency informed us that it has taken additional corrective actions some time ago and is in the process of trying to locate the supporting documentation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-06-148, Jan 4, 2006
Phone: (202)512-6225
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.