Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Management should develop and implement a mechanism to compare component marine operating costs across components and locations, including a cost per vessel underway (float) hour methodology (Recommendation 1).

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FDA should establish a process for the agency to communicate directly with all U.S.-based commercial airlines, including regional airlines, to encourage them to request construction inspections to ensure compliance with the agency's standards for the sanitary construction of aircraft galleys and lavatories. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: HHS concurs with GAO's recommendation. FDA agrees that enhancing communication with U.S.-based commercial airlines, including major national and regional commuter airlines, to encourage them to request construction inspections can have a positive impact on efforts to gain compliance with the Agency's standards for aircraft galley and lavatory sanitation and potable water system installation. FDA has a long history of working collaboratively with interstate travel conveyance stakeholders to provide public health oversight to the industry. As part of this collaboration, FDA and the airline industry connect through a variety of mechanisms to provide access to diverse industry partners. To effectively engage all relevant stakeholders, FDA will consider ways to enhance current mechanisms and coordinate with airlines on better communication. FDA will review its existing outreach channels to allow airline stakeholders to actively and directly engage with the Agency on construction inspections. FDA will review its Interstate Travel Program website to determine if updates can be made to emphasize airline construction and reconstruction information. FDA maintains open dialog with airline organizations, including the Airlines for America (A4A), the Regional Airline Association (RAA), and the International Flight Services Association (IFSA). Members of A4A are comprised of major national airlines, whereas those of RAA are comprised of regional commuter airlines and those in IFSA include airlines and airline food suppliers. These industry associations are valuable partners in developing solutions to problems that concern the airlines and airline construction. FDA will continue to engage with these organizations in written correspondence and at relevant national industry meetings (such as the Environmental Protection Agency biennial meeting on aircraft drinking water safety) and will include the topic of construction inspections. FDA will also continue to use these existing mechanisms to develop a better communication process with the airline industry on its efforts to improve industry practice and government oversight.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should assign authority to an office or other entity to oversee use of the Compliance Program across program offices. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should collect and analyze data to monitor use of the Compliance Program across all program offices. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should conduct an evaluation of the Compliance Program to assess the effectiveness of the program in meeting its goals. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should ensure that a comprehensive metric (or set of metrics) is established to track the progress of its combined accession and retention efforts to obtain sufficient quantities of RPA pilots and sensor operators needed to achieve its objective of implementing the combat-to-dwell policy as planned. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. It stated that its ongoing efforts could be better integrated to allow for greater analysis in tracking progress toward meeting the combat-to -dwell policy. DOD also stated that it results from an ongoing study will inform the analysis for this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the status of the study and any other actions the department takes to address the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should ensure that the number of instructor positions needed at the RPA training unit at Holloman Air Force Base is updated by applying more complete, accurate and timely information to better reflect the training curriculum and instructor needs. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. It noted that it is planning to conduct a study on the appropriate pilot and sensor operator instructor manning. The department estimated that they study would be completed in about a year. We will continue to monitor the status and results of the study.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that Naval Air Systems Command and Commander, Fleet Readiness Centers effectively use historical data to analyze turnaround time and establish accurate turnaround time targets for fixed-wing aircraft depot maintenance packages. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the Navy has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that Commander, Naval Air Forces and Commander, Naval Air Force, Pacific provide depot planners regular reporting on fixed-wing aircraft maintenance performed outside the Navy aviation depots by an operational unit or at an intermediate maintenance facility to ensure they have information on the current condition and depot maintenance needs of individual aircraft. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the Navy has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that Naval Air Systems Command and Commander, Fleet Readiness Centers establish formal processes and related guidance for communication and coordination between depot stakeholders to inform maintenance requirements planning. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the Navy has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The OUSD (A&S) should direct the F-35 program office to provide information that is similar to that which is statutorily required after the milestone C review to Congress ahead of the milestone C review (full-rate production decision). This submission should include an evaluation of the production risks associated with critical production processes that are not in control, reliability and maintainability (R&M) targets that are not met, and supplier readiness—particularly for those replacing Turkish suppliers, along with the steps it is taking to address those risks. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation, citing updates the F-35 program office provides to oversight entities within DOD. We maintain that the program office should provide these same updates to Congress as well. Without a substantive assessment highlighting specific production risks, as well as the steps DOD will take to mitigate them, Congress may not have key insights into the risks that remain with the program and to the overall effort to deliver F-35s to the warfighter. DOD has agreed to keep the Congress apprised of these matters in its quarterly briefings to the defense committees.

Recommendation: The OUSD (A&S) should direct the F-35 program office to establish a Block 4 cost estimate baseline that includes all Block 4 costs, including incurred costs and future costs in its reports to Congress as required by the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2017, so that Congress has a complete understanding of all Block 4 costs and can compare this baseline to future cost estimates and performance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In response to our report, DOD stated that future reports to Congress will include prior and future costs, outside of the Future Years Defense Program costs. As of September 15, 2020, DOD has not yet issued an updated report to Congress. We will monitor DOD's efforts to address this recommendation once it releases its next report.

Recommendation: The OUSD (A&S) should direct the F-35 program office to complete a program office level, product-oriented work breakdown structure for the next update to its Block 4 cost estimate to ensure that the estimate meets the comprehensive leading practices. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: Though DOD did not concur with this recommendation, in response to this report, DOD agreed to evaluate moving to a program-level, product-oriented work breakdown structure in 2021. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The OUSD (A&S) should direct the F-35 program office to conduct risk and uncertainty analyses for the next update to its Block 4 cost estimate to ensure that the estimate meets the credible leading practices. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In response to this report, DOD stated that the F-35 program office estimate is aligned with the DOD's Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation's approach and methodology for performing development cost estimates. However, DOD did not identify specific actions it plans to take to include risk and uncertainty into its next Block 4 cost estimate update. We will continue to monitor any actions DOD takes in this regard.

Recommendation: The OUSD (A&S) should direct the F-35 program office to consider the results of its future technology readiness assessment of all Block 4 technologies and incorporate the cost and schedule risks of developing those technologies in the next update to its Block 4 cost estimate to ensure that the estimate meets the comprehensive leading practices. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In response to this report, DOD stated that it continues to evaluate technology readiness levels for Block 4. It noted that Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering would conduct and independent technology readiness assessment of the Block 4 effort, which the program would use to inform future cost estimates. In May 2020, the F-35 Program Office issued a Technology Readiness Assessment Plan for Block 4. This plan outlines an incremental assessment approach aligned with Block 4 capability drops beginning with the drop scheduled for April 2021. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: Congress should consider revising Section 224(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, Pub. L. No. 114-328, to extend DOD's Block 4 reporting requirement until all Block 4 capabilities are fielded to ensure that Congress is aware of cost and schedule growth beyond 2023. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: Congress has not extended the Block 4 reporting requirement in Section 224(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017. We will continue to monitor any action the Congress may take in this regard.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should direct the Chief Architect to develop a plan to attain mature technologies when needed for each ABMS development area, which includes an initial list of technologies and an assessment of their maturity that is updated to reflect changes, and update Congress quarterly. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force: Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition)
Status: Open

Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation but, as of August 2020, has not yet taken any action to implement it. Officials indicated that in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021 the department expects to provide Congress with an initial list of technologies and an assessment of their maturity, and a plan to attain mature technologies for each development area. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should direct the Chief Architect to prepare a cost estimate that is developed in accordance with cost estimating leading practices, to include regularly updating the estimate to reflect ABMS changes and actual costs, and update Congress quarterly. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force: Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition)
Status: Open

Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation but, as of August 2020, has not yet taken any action to implement it. Officials indicated that in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021 the department expects to provide Congress with a cost estimate of ABMS development activities. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should direct the Chief Architect to prepare an affordability analysis that should be regularly updated, and update Congress quarterly. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force: Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition)
Status: Open

Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation but, as of August 2020, has not yet taken any action to implement it. Officials indicated that in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020 the department expects to provide Congress with the affordability analysis for the fiscal year 2021 budget request. In addition, the department plans to provide an affordability analysis as part of the fiscal year 2022 budget request submission to Congress. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should formalize and document acquisition authority and decision-making responsibilities of the Air Force offices involved in the planning and execution of ABMS, to include the Chief Architect. This document should be included as part of the submission to Congress in June 2020 and communicated to the Air Force offices that support ABMS. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force: Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition)
Status: Open

Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation but, as of August 2020, has not yet taken any action to implement it. Officials indicated that in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020 the department expects to provide Congress with documentation of decision-making authorities. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Director of CAPE, in coordination with the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Matters, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy, and the Joint Staff Deputy Director for Strategic Stability, as co-chairs of the Nuclear Deterrent Senior Oversight Group, update the applicable guidance for methods of tracking and evaluating progress on implementation of the recommendations from the 2014 nuclear enterprise reviews, requiring DOD components to keep information—including any revised time frames—current. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that the Nuclear Deterrent Senior Oversight Group co-chairs or, as necessary, the Deputy Secretary of Defense as the chair of Nuclear Deterrent Enterprise Review Group (NDERG), will update the applicable guidance to ensure that time frames and other information associated with planned actions are kept up to date. In April 2020, the acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Matters issued a memo requesting updates to information that is included in the 2014 tracker by June 1, 2020; however, no additional guidance requiring continuing updates beyond June 1 has been issued as of September 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment updates the applicable guidance for methods of tracking and evaluating progress on implementation of the recommendations of the 2015 NC3 report, requiring DOD components to keep information—including metrics for measuring progress and outcomes as well as any revised time frames that may extend out more than 1 year—complete and current. 49 (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that the DOD Chief Information Officer and, as appropriate, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment as the NC3 capability portfolio manager, will update the applicable guidance to ensure that metrics, time frames, and other information associated with planned actions are kept up to date and complete.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should conduct and document a risk assessment that considers inherent and residual fraud and abuse risks that may enable criminal, national security, or safety risks. (Recommendation 1)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should determine impact, likelihood, and risk tolerance as part of a risk assessment. (Recommendation 2)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should develop a strategy that outlines specific actions to address analyzed risks, including periodic assessments to evaluate continuing effectiveness of the risk response. (Recommendation 3)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should collect and record information on individual registrants, initially including name, address, date of birth, and driver's license or pilot's license, or both, with subsequent PII elements informed by the risk assessment, once completed. (Recommendation 4)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should collect and record information on legal entities not traded publicly—on each individual and entity that owns more than 25 percent of the aircraft; for individuals: name, date of birth, physical address, and driver's license or pilot's license, or both; and for entities: name, physical address, state of residence, and taxpayer identification number. (Recommendation 5)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should verify aircraft registration applicants' and dealers' eligibility and information. (Recommendation 6)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should increase aircraft registration and dealer fees to ensure the fees are sufficient to cover the costs of FAA efforts to collect and verify applicant information while keeping pace with inflation. (Recommendation 7)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should ensure, as part of aircraft registry IT modernization, that information currently collected in ancillary files or in PDF format on (1) owners and related individuals and entities with potentially significant responsibilities for aircraft ownership (e.g., beneficial owners, trustors, trustees, beneficiaries, stockholders, directors, and managers) and (2) declarations of international operations is recorded in an electronic format that facilitates data analytics by FAA and its stakeholders. (Recommendation 8)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should link information on owners and related individuals and entities with significant responsibilities for aircraft ownership through a common identifier. (Recommendation 9)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should, as part of IT modernization, develop an approach to check OFAC sanctions data on owners and related individuals and entities with potentially significant responsibilities for aircraft ownership for coordination with OFAC and to flag sanctioned individuals and entities across aircraft registration and dealer systems. (Recommendation 10)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should use data collected as part of IT modernization as well as current data sources to identify and analyze patterns of activity indicative of fraud or abuse, based on information from declarations of international operations, postal addresses, sanctions listings, and other sources, and information on dealers, noncitizen corporations, and individuals and entities with significant responsibilities for aircraft ownership. (Recommendation 11)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should develop and implement risk-based mitigation actions to address potential fraud and abuse identified through data analyses. (Recommendation 12)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should develop mechanisms, including regulations if necessary, for dealer suspension and revocation. (Recommendation 13)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA, in coordination with relevant law-enforcement agencies, should enhance coordination within the Aircraft Registry Task Force through collaborative mechanisms such as written agreements and use of liaison positions. (Recommendation 14)

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA, in coordination with relevant law-enforcement agencies, should develop a mechanism to provide declarations of international operations for law-enforcement purposes. (Recommendation 15)

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

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in consultation with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, develops a program-wide process for measuring, collecting, and tracking information on how ALIS is affecting the performance of the F-35 fleet to include, but not be limited to, its effects on mission capability rates. (Recommendation 1)

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

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in consultation with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, develops and implements a strategy for the re-design of ALIS. The strategy should be detailed enough to clearly identify and assess the goals, key risks or uncertainties, and costs of re-designing the system. (Recommendation 2)

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

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

Recommendation: The TSA Administrator should develop performance goals for its Insider Threat Program that assess progress achieving the strategic objectives in the insider threat strategic plan. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2020, TSA published its strategic framework, the TSA Insider Threat Roadmap, for mitigating insider threats in the transportation sector. The Roadmap contains three overarching strategic priorities and specific objectives for each of these priorities to refine and continue to improve its efforts to detect, deter, and mitigate insider threats. TSA described that its next steps will be to develop implementation plans for each of these priorities and objectives, including detailed plans of actions with timelines and performance measures to assess its progress achieving the Roadmap's priorities and objectives. We will continue to monitor TSA's efforts to implement our recommendation.

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

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

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

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment should ensure that the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Materiel Readiness create, share, and maintain a comprehensive and up-to-date list of all DOD sharing venues (i.e., working groups), including points of contact, related to depot maintenance. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In response to our report, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Materiel Readiness will create, share, and maintain a comprehensive and up-to-date list of all DOD sharing venues related to depot maintenance with associated points of contact. The estimated completion date is August 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that Army Materiel Command reestablish and maintain organizations dedicated to sharing materiel best practices and lessons learned, as required by Army regulations. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In response to our report, the Army is working to update policies to accurately reflect current activities for capturing, preserving, and distributing lessons learned and best practices throughout the organic industrial base. The estimated completion date is no later than December 2022. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should develop a plan for analyzing currently-collected UAS test site data to determine how they could be used to advance UAS integration, and whether the collection of any additional test site data, within the agency's authority to request, could be useful for informing integration. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: DOT partially concurred with this recommendation. In DOT's official response dated March 2020, DOT officials indicated that FAA does not intend to collect any additional type of test site data, unless FAA funds new research or demonstrations. Further, officials noted that FAA has gathered data since the UAS test site program became operational in 2014, through several vehicles including details of flight tests entered into the Mission Logging System (MLS). Officials noted that FAA has and will continue to use data collected from the test sites to, among other things, better understand the challenges facing future UAS integration. We continue to believe that FAA implementing this recommendation would enable the agency to better leverage test site research and data to inform its decisions related to UAS integration. When we confirm what actions FAA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of TSA should document which rule review process TSA I&A uses (exigent or standard) for each new rule or rule change; (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and agreed to document which rule review process TSA I&A uses (exigent or standard) for each new rule or rule change. In March 2020, TSA updated its SOP to require that the selected rule review process be documented for each new rule and rule change. TSA's policy change is a positive first step, but to fully address this recommendation, TSA will need to demonstrate that the selected rule review process is now being documented.

Recommendation: The Administrator of TSA should explore additional data sources measuring the effectiveness of Silent Partner and Quiet Skies rules. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and, in May 2020, DHS officials stated that they are reviewing data sources and assessing potential ways to assess the effectiveness of Quiet Skies and Silent Partner screening rules. DHS officials stated that they plan to fully address this recommendation by December 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the FAA should identify existing or new data and information needed to evaluate oversight activities and develop a mechanism for capturing these data as needed. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: FAA has concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, GAO was working to analyze and evaluate the actions the agency has taken in response.

Recommendation: The Runway Safety Manager should develop a process to identify and remove duplicate excursion records. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2019, FAA concurred with this recommendation. FAA noted that it will include actions to identify and remove duplicate excursion records in its Runway Safety Evolution Plan, which is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2020. We will review the Runway Safety Evolution Plan when it is available.

Recommendation: The Runway Safety Manager should take steps to analyze data on ramp area incidents in FAA's new surface safety metric. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2019, FAA concurred with this recommendation. FAA noted that it will identify actions to implement this recommendation in its Runway Safety Evolution Plan, which is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2020. We will review the Runway Safety Evolution Plan when it is available.

Recommendation: The Runway Safety Manager should establish a plan to assess the effectiveness of all of FAA's terminal area-safety efforts, including Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X (ASDE-X) and the Runway Safety Program. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of December 2019, FAA has concurred with the recommendation, but needs to take additional steps to address the recommendation. FAA noted that it would identify actions to assess the effectiveness of all of its terminal-area safety efforts in a Runway Safety Evolution Plan, which the agency expects to complete by September 30, 2020. We will review the Runway Safety Evolution Plan when it is available.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should require Flight Standards to share the results of its investigations with the Runway Safety Group, in a timely manner. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2019, FAA concurred with this recommendation. FAA noted that it will include an initiative in its 2020 Aviation Safety Business Plan Goal to make information from Flight Standards more accessible to the Runway Safety Group. FAA said the 2020 Aviation Safety Business Plan Goal is scheduled to be completed by September 3, 2020. We will review the Aviation Safety Business Plan Goal when it is available.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FAA should require air traffic control managers to share information on terminal area incidents, such as operational incidents and pilot deviations, with airport operators, in a timely manner. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2019, FAA concurred with this recommendation. FAA noted that it will identify actions to implement this recommendation in its Runway Safety Evolution Plan, which is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2020. We will review the Runway Safety Evolution Plan when it is available.

Recommendation: The Associate Administrator of AST should develop workload metrics that encompass the whole office and that would allow AST to determine an appropriate workforce size and composition. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, AST has developed an initial set of metrics for the office's workload and is working with the Federal Aviation Administration's Office of Labor Analysis to enhance and validate the metrics.

Recommendation: The Associate Administrator of AST should establish a timeline for finalizing workload projections that extend beyond the 2-year budget cycle and that include an approach for addressing uncertainty. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, AST said that it has extended the projection period of the staffing model to five years and that it is working with the Federal Aviation Administration's Office of Labor Analysis to validate the extended projections and to include an approach to address uncertainty.

Recommendation: The Associate Administrator of AST should ensure that its skills assessment survey collects information from staff on skills and competencies in those areas that are both currently needed and may be needed in the future. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2020, AST provided documentation showing that in November and December 2019, AST administered surveys to engineering staff and supervisors to assess the skills of engineering staff in specific competency areas that are needed to successfully perform their jobs. The documentation provided also showed that the surveys asked engineering staff and supervisors about the skills they believed AST would need in the future.

Recommendation: The Associate Administrator of AST should develop and document a plan for periodically assessing whether staff possess the necessary skills and competencies to achieve programmatic goals, such as annually administering a skills assessment survey. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, AST officials told us they plan to assess employee skills and competencies on a 3-year cycle and that they will establish a process to do so by the end of 2020. We will continue to monitor AST's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, the Secretaries of the Air Force and Navy, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps, conducts a comprehensive review of the F-35 supply chain to determine what additional actions are needed to close the gap between warfighter requirements for aircraft performance and the capabilities that the F-35 supply chain can deliver, in light of the U.S. services' affordability constraints. Potential actions could include adjustments to the quantities of parts DOD is planning to procure, or developing a mechanism for providing increased availability of parts to operational units, as a means to mitigate fleet-wide shortages. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that it is addressing the recommendation by completing the supply-chain related actions in its January 2019 Life Cycle Logistics Plan, which involved a comprehensive review of warfighter gaps and the detailed Program of Actions and Milestones required to close them. DOD also cited specific actions to increase the availability of parts, such as increasing funding for parts and allocating more parts to combat-coded units to enable them to meet the 80 percent mission capability goal. DOD's Plan of Action for the supply chain is in continuous development and GAO has not yet been provided with detailed documentation of these planning efforts and associated actions. We will continue to monitor DOD's ongoing planning efforts in this area.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, the Secretaries of the Air Force and Navy, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps, develops a process to modify the afloat and deployment spares packages, to include reviewing the parts within the packages to ensure that they match deploying aircraft and account for updated parts demand, and aligning any necessary funding needed for the parts updates. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that it has developed a process for managing the configurations of the parts within the afloat and deployment spares packages, which has been approved by the F-35 Product Support Manager. According to DOD, it has established a working group to codify the details of the process and is working to correct the part configurations of already-delivered spares packages. These efforts are part of a broader ongoing DOD effort to execute a F-35 Configuration Management Plan for the global spares pool, which includes identifying all of the parts that may require an upgrade. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts in these areas.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, completes a detailed plan for the establishment of the global network for moving F-35 parts that outlines clear requirements and milestones to reach full operational capability, and that includes mechanisms to identify and mitigate risks to the F-35 global spares pool. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that its draft program instruction for the establishment of the global network for moving parts is being coordinated with stakeholders. We will review the instruction when it is finalized and continue to monitor DOD's efforts to complete a detailed plan for the global network.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, issues a policy consistent with DOD guidance that clearly establishes how DOD will maintain accountability for F-35 parts within the supply chain, and identify the steps needed to implement the policy retrospectively and prospectively—for example, how DOD will obtain the necessary data from the contractor. This policy should provide clarity on how F-35 parts will be categorized, specify how the program will implement DOD regulations, and define prime contractor roles and responsibilities. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that it is developing guidance to address this recommendation. Specifically, it has developed a draft directive that is currently in coordination with stakeholders and it plans to develop a subsequent program instruction. We will review this guidance when it is completed and continue to monitor DOD's efforts in this area.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, develops a methodical approach to consistently obtain comprehensive cost information from the prime contractor for F-35 spare parts within the supply chain. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that the Joint Strike Fighter affordability strategy addresses price verification as a goal and DOD is in the process of implementing a price verification program, which will include verification for the prices of parts. Additionally the F-35 program office has developed a framework for the contractor to provide all data associated with supply chain assets to include cost and pricing. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to obtain comprehensive cost information for all F-35 parts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the Department of Defense Comptroller, the Secretaries of the Air Force and Navy, and the F-35 Program Executive Officer, completes and formalizes a methodology for the U.S. services to use in recording on their financial statements the funds spent on F-35 parts within the global spares pool. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that the Department of Defense Comptroller, with collaboration from the Services and the F-35 Program developed the Transfer of Pooled Assets Methodology as a candidate accounting construct under which the F-35 Program would become the single financial reporting entity for F-35 pooled assets, thus removing the need to allocate "shares" of the pool to the Services and participants. Prior to endorsement and implementation of this methodology, the Department of Defense Comptroller is assessing whether the Department of Navy or the U.S. Air Force would provide more streamlined financial accountability of the F-35 spare parts in the global spares pool. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts in this area.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, the Secretaries of the Air Force and Navy, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps, clearly defines the strategy by which DOD will manage the F-35 supply chain in the future and update key strategy documents accordingly, to include any additional actions and investments necessary to support that strategy. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, DOD had not taken steps to address this recommendation. To implement this recommendation, DOD needs to clearly define the strategy by which DOD will manage the F-35 supply chain in the future and update key strategy documents accordingly. This should include determining the roles of both the prime contractor and DOD in managing the supply chain, and the investments in technical data needed to support DOD-led management.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should develop annual retention goals for aircraft maintainers by skill level—for both loss and reenlistment rates—in alignment with authorized levels. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Air Force concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the Air Force stated that it was analyzing a more deliberate promotion rate to fill maintainer staffing gaps at the 5- and 7- levels within the next three years while retaining experienced maintainers longer in those skill levels.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should develop an aircraft maintainer retention strategy, including initiatives that are tailored to the specific needs and challenges of maintainers to help ensure that the Air Force can meet and retain required staffing levels. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Air Force concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the Air Force stated that it was developing monetary and non-monetary levers that incentivize behaviors to influence retention as well as unit level retention programs and tools, a "Master Technician" Program, and repurposing selective reenlistment bonuses to target mission generation functions versus inventory numbers.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy updates its policy and instruction on providing support to the Secret Service to define the requirements for producing semiannual reports of expenditures required by the Presidential Protection Assistance Act of 1976, as amended. These requirements should, at a minimum, include (1) the steps and time frames for completing updates to the policy and instruction, (2) time frames for reporting the expenditures, and (3) an oversight mechanism to ensure that the Department of Defense consistently submits these reports to specified congressional committees. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of July 31, 2019, DOD has not updated its policy or instruction.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy defines the steps, including time frames, necessary to achieve near term reporting requirements under the Presidential Protection Assistance Act of 1976, as amended, and submit the reports as required. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of July 31, 2019, DOD has not updated its policy.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment updates or issues new policy clarifying the requirements for documenting sustainment strategies for legacy weapon systems, including fixed-wing aircraft. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. In August 2019, DOD told us that draft language reinforcing and clarifying the requirement that all weapon system programs - including legacy weapon systems - have a current Life Cycle Sustainment Plan that is updated every five years had been drafted and submitted as part of the internal DOD coordination process for an update to DOD Instruction 5000.02. DOD estimates that the DOD Instruction 5000.02 will be updated by December 2019.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should update or issue new guidance clarifying the requirements for documenting sustainment strategies for legacy weapon systems, including fixed-wing aircraft. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Navy concurred with the recommendation. In August 2019, DOD told us that the Navy is working to update its policy to reinforce and clarify the requirement that all weapon system programs - including legacy weapon systems - have a current Life Cycle Sustainment Plan that is updated every five years. The Navy estimates that the policy will be updated by December 2019.

Recommendation: The F-35 Program Executive Officer should formally share or make available, through a new or existing communications mechanism, F-35 operational lessons learned across the services. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. According to DOD officials, the Air Force, the Marine Corps and the Navy all have robust systems for capturing and sharing F-35 operational lessons learned. However, although these systems are accessible by members of the other services, there is a general lack of awareness of how to access systems across military services. As of December 2019, DOD officials stated that they were developing a Lessons Learned Database, which they estimate will be completed during the third quarter of 2020. We are encouraged that the department is aware of the importance of sharing operational lessons learned across the services and that a solution is likely on the horizon. However, until the department implements the solution, this recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should ensure that the Director of Operations and the Air Force Manpower Analysis Agency reevaluate fighter pilot squadron requirements, to include updating current assumptions of fighter pilot workload, and assessing the impact of future incorporation of UAS platforms into combat aviation. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its initial response, DOD noted that across the Air Force, many organizations and offices, in addition to the Director of Operations and Air Force Manpower Analysis Agency will play integral roles in determining the future size and mix of manpower requirements for fighter pilot squadrons. DOD also noted that the Air Force will review fighter wing manpower determinants to accurately account for fighter pilot workloads and analyze support organization manning to ensure adequate support to operational units. In December 2018, the Air Force provided a report to Congress on the efforts to implement GAO's recommendation, among other things. The report noted that an Air Force reevaluation of pilot staff requirements resulted in a reduction to requirements of 106 positions (4 percent). In addition, the report discussed how fighter pilot workload is impacted by UAS platforms, specifically that the growth of UAS platforms has allowed the Air Force to reduce the need for fighter aircraft operations in uncontested environments, and that the growth of the UAS pilot community has allowed that community to begin filling staff positions that would formerly have been filled by fighter pilots. Further, the report stated that the Air Force Manpower Analysis Agency - in coordination with other Air Force offices - was conducting a study of fighter squadron workloads, anticipated to be completed in mid-2019. We requested a copy of the Air For Manpower Analysis Agency study in March 2020, and again in August 2020 - but as of September 2020 a copy has not been provided. Once we have an opportunity to review the study we will update the status of this recommendation as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Chief of Naval Operations reevaluate fighter pilot squadron requirements, to include updating current assumptions of fighter pilot workload, and assessing the impact of future incorporation of UAS platforms into combat aviation. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its initial response, DOD noted that across the Navy, many organizations and offices including the resource sponsor (Naval Air Forces) will play integral roles in determining the future size and mix of manpower requirements for fighter pilot squadrons. As of August 2020, DOD officials told us that the Navy has updated most of the fighter pilot requirements for most squadrons, is taking action to update requirements for the remaining squadrons, and will provide us with documentation when the process is complete. When we obtain documentation of the updates to fighter pilot squadron requirements we will update the recommendation status as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Commandant of the Marine Corps and the Deputy Commandant for Aviation reevaluate fighter pilot squadron requirements. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its initial response, DOD noted that across the Marine Corps, many organizations and offices in addition to the Deputy Commandant for Aviation play integral roles in the continuous evaluation and determination regarding current and future size and mix of manpower requirements for fighter and attack squadrons. As of August 2020 DOD has not taken actions in response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of Defense and of Transportation should address ADS-B Out security concerns by approving one or more solutions that address ADS-B Out -related security risks or incorporating mitigations for security risks into the existing draft memorandum of agreement. These approved solutions should address operations, physical, cyber-attack, and electronic warfare security risks; and risks associated with divesting secondary-surveillance radars. The solution or mitigations should be approved as soon as possible in order to allow sufficient time for implementation.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2018, DOD and the FAA signed a memorandum of agreement that that establishes a framework for DOD and FAA to jointly address the provision to allow certain aircraft not to broadcast and airspace monitoring and defense security issues related to ADS-B, and identifies a path to fully address the recommendations in our report. The memorandum of agreement was a first step to address the security issues we highlighted in the report; however, FAA still needs to publish a National Procedural Guidance for accommodation of DOD needs for mixed-equipment operations and operational security concerns (expected December 2018).

Recommendation: The Secretaries of Defense and of Transportation should address ADS-B Out security concerns by approving one or more solutions that address ADS-B Out -related security risks or incorporating mitigations for security risks into the existing draft memorandum of agreement. These approved solutions should address operations, physical, cyber-attack, and electronic warfare security risks; and risks associated with divesting secondary-surveillance radars. The solution or mitigations should be approved as soon as possible in order to allow sufficient time for implementation.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: DOT concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2018, DOD and the FAA signed a memorandum of agreement that that establishes a framework for DOD and FAA to jointly address the provision to allow certain aircraft not to broadcast and airspace monitoring and defense security issues related to ADS-B, and identifies a path to fully address the recommendations in our report.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct DOD components to implement key tasks that would facilitate consistent, long-term planning and implementation of NextGen--such as those tasks that the Deputy Secretary of Defense originally directed in 2007, or any tasks that the Secretary deems appropriate based on a current assessment of the original tasks.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2018, DOD has not taken action regarding the eight tasks GAO identified in the 2007 Deputy Secretary of Defense memorandum on ADS-B implementation.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in coordination with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, should re-examine the metrics that it will use to hold the contractor accountable under the fixed-price, performance-based contracts to ensure that such metrics are objectively measurable, are fully reflective of processes over which the contractor has control, and drive desired behaviors by all stakeholders. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, documentation provided by DOD stated that it had established a joint working group to assess the feasibility of and examine options for DOD's planned 5-year performance-based logistics contract. A DOD official said that this group is also working to identify appropriate metrics to hold the contractor accountable under a potential long-term performance-based contract. DOD has not provided us with a timeline of when the working group's assessment will be complete. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to re-examine metrics to ensure that they are objectively measureable, fully reflective of processes over which the contractor has control, and drive desired behaviors by all stakeholders.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in coordination with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, should, prior to entering into multi-year, fixed-price, performance-based contracts, ensure that DOD has sufficient knowledge of the actual costs of sustainment and technical characteristics of the aircraft after baseline development is complete and the system reaches maturity. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, documentation provided by DOD stated that it had established a joint working group to assess the feasibility of and examine options for DOD's planned 5-year performance-based logistics (PBL) contract. As a product of this assessment, DOD expects that the department will be able to outline what level of knowledge is required of the actual costs of sustainment and technical characteristics of the aircraft in order to enter into a PBL sustainment construct. DOD has not provided us with a timeline of when the working group's assessment will be complete. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts in this area.

Recommendation: The Administrator of TSA should explore and pursue methods to assess the deterrent effect of TSA's passenger aviation security countermeasures; such an effort should identify FAMS—a countermeasure with a focus on deterring threats—as a top priority to address. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and has begun taking steps intended to address it. In May 2018, officials with DHS's Requirements and Capabilities Analysis (RCA) reported conducting a literature review to identify ways DHS might be able to measure deterrence. ORCA officials reported looking to published studies and other agencies to identify data sources and methods, and were in the process of developing a model to assess the deterrent value of various aviation security countermeasures. In July 2019, TSA officials reported that they were continuing to develop this model which could better inform deployment of deterrence-related countermeasures. As of October 2020, DHS has provided no further updates on steps taken to implement this recommendation. To fully address this recommendation, TSA will need to fully develop this or another method to assess the deterrent effect of TSA's aviation security countermeasures.

Recommendation: To help the Air Force in its effort to address UAS pilot shortfalls, and to help ensure that the Air Force strategies to address UAS pilot shortages are tailored to address remaining issues, such as the significant amount of pilots who are temporarily assigned to the UAS pilot career, the limited amount of cadet interest in the UAS pilot career, and the workload of UAS pilots, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to revise the Get Well Plan to address these issues.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: Although the Air Force has taken some steps to address issues such as the use of pilots temporarily assigned to the UAS pilot career and has accelerated its efforts to increase recruit interest in this particular field, high operational tempo, manning shortages and increased workload among UAS pilots still exist. As noted earlier, in July 2018, the Air Force established a new office within its headquarters a focal point for overseeing RPA personnel matters throughout the Air Force and it established a career field manager (CFM) specifically for RPA personnel, placing the career field on par with manned aircraft pilot career fields. These latest efforts show that the Air Force is taking actions to address challenges to the RPA community beyond the stated goals of the Get Well Plan that we identified and on an enterprise-wide level. Because the Air Force efforts are newly instituted and it remains to be seen how UAS aircrew workloads will be affected, we believe that as of November 2019 this recommendation should remain open until more progress is made.

Recommendation: To help the Air Force in its effort to address UAS pilot shortfalls, and to help the Air Force ensure that its strategies are having the intended effects, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to monitor the extent to which that achieving the human capital goals in its strategy helps the Air Force achieve its programmatic goals.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to headquarters Air Force officials, the Air Force has three program goals that are related to addressing UAS pilot shortfalls: to (1) meet combat demand, (2) staff enough personnel to UAS units to allow UAS pilots time to train and take part in development activities, and (3) provide surge UAS combat capabilities when needed. As of September 2019, the Air Force does not have enough personnel in UAS units to allow UAS pilots time to train and take part in developmental activities-known as being in "dwell." As of November 2019, Air Force officials state that they are able to "meet combat demand" but are not able to provide enough manpower to "surge UAS combat capabilities when needed." Therefore, we believe this recommendation should remain open.

Recommendation: To help the Air Force in its effort to address UAS pilot shortfalls, and to help the Air Force ensure that it is poised to meet future needs for UAS pilots, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to explore the potential use of additional flexibilities that would enable it to increase the number of UAS pilots in its workforce.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In a March 2018 report to Congress, the Air Force stated it had developed a deliberate plan to integrate enlisted pilots in the RQ-4 Global Hawk UAS as it provided the ideal environment to expand mission flexibility. Further, as another way to build capability in support of human capital strategies by using flexibilities, an Air Force selection board met in July 2017 to consider total force officer as well as civilian candidates for various test pilot positions to include test UAS pilots. Finally, the Air Force is seeking legislative changes to allow the Air Reserve Component to perform full time, 24/7, 365 operational missions such as the UAS mission, in Active Guard Reserve status. Additionally, in July 2018, Air Force is in the process of establishing a new division to be the Headquarters focal point for overseeing RPA personnel matters throughout the Air Force and they also stated the Air Force established a career field manager (CFM) specifically for RPA personnel, placing the career field on par with manned aircraft pilot career fields. Further, the Air Force is working on an initiative that would enable it to provide UAS pilots with "dwell time"-a time during which servicemembers are at their home station during which they are able to take leave, attend training, and recuperate. As of November 2019, the Air Force had not implemented this initiative. Additionally, the Air Force has increased the maximum annual retention pay for UAS pilots (and all other pilots) to $35,000. While the Air Force has taken some steps, it is too early to tell whether these steps will result in effective workforce planning outcomes that reduce Air Force UAS pilot shortages. Therefore, we believe that this recommendation should remain open until more progress is made.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army identify challenges that UAS pilots face in completing their training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to collect feedback from UAS pilots in UAS units, such as by surveying, or conducting focus groups with them.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its initial comments, DOD stated that incorporating feedback from the field is already an element of the Army's strategy for improving the sustainability, maturity, and health of its UAS workforce. DOD stated that our findings will reinforce the importance of using feedback to improve and refine the Army's overall strategy. In September 2019, Army Headquarters officials reiterated previous statements that they made that the Army has multiple agencies and systems that gather feedback to refine and improve UAS programs. However, the Army has not collected feedback from UAS pilots in UAS units via surveys, focus groups, to help the Army identify challenges that UAS pilots face in completing their training.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army identify challenges that UAS pilots face in completing their training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to incorporate such feedback into the Army's strategy to address UAS training shortfalls.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, and in its initial comments, DOD stated that incorporating feedback from the field is already an element of the Army's strategy for improving the sustainability, maturity, and health of its UAS workforce. DOD stated that our findings will reinforce the importance of using feedback to improve and refine the Army's overall strategy. In July 2018, Army Headquarters officials stated that the Army has multiple agencies and systems that gather feedback to incorporate and improve UAS programs. The officials listed a number of the systems in place to gather feedback on UAS units. However, the Army did not describe any efforts to collect feedback from UAS pilots in UAS units such as by surveying them or conducting focus groups with them. In September 2019, Army officials reiterated their 2018 comments and stated that Army has a number of the systems in place to gather feedback on UAS units. However, the Army has not collected feedback from UAS pilots in UAS units such as by surveying them or conducting focus groups with them and incorporated such feedback into an Army strategy to address UAS training shortfalls.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help ensure that Army Shadow units meet minimum training requirements, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to revise its strategy to address UAS training shortfalls to ensure that it is fully tailored to address training issues and address factors such as lack of adequate facilities, lack of access to airspace, and the inability to fly more than one UAS at a time.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation that the Army revise its strategy to address UAS training shortfalls to ensure that it is fully tailored to address training issues and address factors such as lack of adequate facilities, lack of access to airspace, and the inability to fly more than one UAS at a time. DOD stated that the Army has already taken steps to continuously improve its training strategy and that our findings will underline the importance of those initiatives, but that additional direction related to our recommendation is not necessary. In their July 2018 written update, Army officials responded to this recommendation by discussing a regulation regarding readiness reporting; however, the response did not clarify how the regulation might address our recommendation. As of November 2019, the Army has not issued an updated UAS strategy that addresses UAS training shortfalls including a lack of adequate facilities, lack of access to airspace, and the inability to fly more than one UAS at a time.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army ensure that it is basing its decisions to select individuals for UAS pilot training on sound evidence and to help it take advantage of the key benefits associated with effective personnel selection that could include reducing training costs, improving job performance, improving retention of qualified personnel, enabling leadership development, and enhancing organizational effectiveness, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to validate that the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery is an effective predictor of UAS pilot candidate performance in UAS pilot training and job performance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation that the Army validate that the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery is an effective predictor of UAS pilot candidate performance in UAS pilot training and job performance. DOD stated that it believes that the current graduation rate of soldiers from its UAS pilot school of 98 percent is an indication that the existing personnel resource predictors and practices are sufficient. It also stated that periodic re-validation is prudent, but specific direction to do so is not necessary. In its July 2018 written update about this recommendation, Army officials stated that the successful graduation rate from UAS Advanced Individual Training and suggested that this graduation rate may indicate that the existing Army approach is adequate. As we stated in our report, Army officials told us that senior Army leaders pressure officials at the Army UAS pilot schoolhouse to ensure that UAS pilot candidates make it through training. As a result, graduation rates may not provide the Army with reliable evidence that its approach to selecting personnel to serve as UAS pilots is providing the Army with personnel who have the aptitude for this career. Validating that the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery is an effective predictor of training and job performance of UAS pilot is an important step that would help the Army ensure that it is basing its decisions to select individuals for the UAS pilot career field on sound evidence. As of November 2019, the Army continued to maintain that the successful graduation rate from UAS Advanced Individual Training and suggests that the existing Army approach is adequate.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army ensure that it is basing its decisions to select individuals for UAS pilot training on sound evidence and to help it take advantage of the key benefits associated with effective personnel selection that could include reducing training costs, improving job performance, improving retention of qualified personnel, enabling leadership development, and enhancing organizational effectiveness, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to assess existing research that has been performed that identifies UAS pilot competencies.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendations that the Army assess existing research that has been performed that identifies UAS pilot competencies. In its comments, DOD stated that incorporating findings regarding UAS pilot competencies is already an integral part of both workforce and community management and that effective and efficient resource management, as well as force shaping and management processes, will help ensure that the Army's selection of candidates is consistent with the findings of existing research in this area. DOD stated that it does not believe it is necessary to provide additional direction or guidance to the Army to leverage existing research that identifies UAS pilot competencies. In it's July 2018 written update about this recommendation, Army officials indicated that the Army will assess existing research on UAS operator competencies to improve UAS operator selection. As of November 2019, the Army continued to express interest in assessing existing research on UAS operator competencies to improve UAS operator candidate selection.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army ensure that it is basing its decisions to select individuals for UAS pilot training on sound evidence and to help it take advantage of the key benefits associated with effective personnel selection that could include reducing training costs, improving job performance, improving retention of qualified personnel, enabling leadership development, and enhancing organizational effectiveness, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to incorporate relevant findings from such research into the Army's approach for selecting UAS pilot candidates, as appropriate.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendations that the Army incorporate relevant findings from such research into the Army's approach for selecting UAS pilot candidates, as appropriate. DOD stated that incorporating findings regarding UAS pilot competencies is already an integral part of both workforce and community management and that effective and efficient resource management, as well as force shaping and management processes, will help ensure that the Army's selection of candidates is consistent with the findings of existing research in this area. DOD stated that it does not believe it is necessary to provide additional direction or guidance to the Army to leverage existing research that identifies UAS pilot competencies. In its July 2018 written update on this recommendation, Army officials indicated that the Army will consider a cost benefit analysis on techniques that would potentially improve a process, product, or result related to selecting UAS pilot candidates. Officials went on to state that once the assessment is complete, the Army will incorporate relevant findings into the approach for selecting UAS pilot candidates. As of November 2019, the Army expressed interest in incorporating findings from relevant research into processes for selecting UAS pilot candidates.

Recommendation: To ensure that annual training plans are aligned with the Air Force's stated goals to ensure that its forces can successfully achieve missions across a broad range of current and emerging threats, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to comprehensively reassess the assumptions underlying its annual training requirements--including, but not limited to, the total annual training requirements by aircraft, the criteria for designating aircrews as experienced or inexperienced, and the mix between live and simulator training--and make any appropriate adjustments in future training plans.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD non-concurred with the recommendation. The Air Force has taken steps to address this recommendation. Specifically, Air Force officials stated they have completed one study and have an ongoing study, intended to reassess the assumptions underlying its annual training requirements for fighter aircrews. For example, Air Force officials stated a study was completed in August 2017 reassessing the criteria for designating aircrews as experienced or inexperienced for 4th generation fighter aircraft. In addition, Air Force officials stated that another study was intended to define the optimum mix of annual training requirements for fighter aircrews. These officials stated that the study results were provided to Air Force senior leaders in July 2018 for approval. As of August 2020, the Air Force did not provide any additional documentation on steps taken to address the recommendation. Completion of these studies and the corresponding adjustments to annual training requirements should help the Air Force ensure that their training plans are aligned to achieve a range of missions for current and emerging threats as recommended by GAO in September 2016.

Recommendation: To improve the Air Force's ability to consistently monitor training results and better position it to allocate resources to address factors that limit the effectiveness of training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to establish desired learning objectives and training support elements needed to accomplish the training expectations in its annual Ready Aircrew Program tasking memorandums, and develop a process to collect data to assess the effectiveness of annual training against these features.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD non-concurred with the recommendation, stating that the Air Force's Ready Aircrew Program training differs significantly from other syllabus-directed courses of instruction and that desired learning objectives for this training are set at the squadron level in accordance with current Air Force guidance. As of August 2020, DOD did not provide any documentation on steps taken to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance FAA's risk-based approach for oversight of repair stations, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to develop and implement a process in Flight Standards for incorporating into SAS the volume of critical maintenance that each U.S. airline contracts to repair stations.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: FAA did not concur with this recommendation. In July 2019, GAO confirmed that FAA does not plan to implement the recommendation because the agency continues to believe the subjective nature of volume of work makes it an ineffective risk indicator. However, the agency monitors many factors as primary risk indicators at repair stations. Many of these risk indicators are associated with important aspects of work volume such as high workforce turnover; changes in management; rapid growth or downsizing; changes in aircraft complexity/programs; financial conditions; age of fleet and increases in aircraft discrepancies. FAA considers these factors and the criticality of a specific maintenance action on an aircraft to be the most important risk indicators.

Recommendation: To enhance FAA's risk-based approach for oversight of repair stations, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to develop and implement an evaluative process with measurable performance goals and measures to determine the effectiveness of SAS as the SMS safety assurance component.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2019, GAO confirmed that FAA plans to develop overall program goals and metrics as part of the next implementation phase of its new Safety Assurance System. These metrics are expected to be fully developed based on the final design of the new system and the program requirements identified. Final system testing and deployment into production for the Safety Assurance System is expected to be completed by February 2021, with final implementation scheduled to be completed by May 2022. Additionally, prior to deploying the system, FAA plans to provide training courses to the aviation safety workforce who will be using the new system, and plans to issue new policy documentation in June 2020 that will be used to provide additional guidance to that workforce on properly using the system.

Recommendation: To improve transparency in allocating its limited resources, and to help ensure that its resource allocation decisions are the most effective ones for fulfilling its missions given existing risks, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should document how the risk assessments conducted were used to inform and support its annual asset allocation decisions.

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

Comments: In February 2018, the Coast Guard liaison stated that Coast Guard management made a decision to not to address this recommendation within the annual Strategic Planning Direction (SPD) or Operational Planning Direction (OPD) products as previously planned, but rather within the Standard Operational Planning Process/Global Force Management Process Guide. The liaison further stated that both of these documents are currently under revision and expected to be completed by March 31, 2018. On October 11, 2018, the Coast Guard liaison stated that The Standard Operational Planning Process/Global Force Management Instruction is in routing for edits, comment, and final approval. The new estimated completion date is the 2nd quarter of FY 2019. GAO sent an inquiry to the Coast Guard on April 24, 2019 and is awaiting a reply. On March 30, 2020, the Coast Guard liaison informed GAO that the update to the Standard Operational Planning Process (SOPP)/Global Force Management (GFM) Instruction, which includes the addition and test of Strategic Priorities Planning Guidance and the new Coast Guard Force Allocation Matrix, was further delayed due to recent discussions of changing to a 2-year SOPP planning cycle to align with the Department of Defense Global Force Management process. This change would further require an update of the SOPP/GFM Instruction. The COVID-19 crisis as well as the need to finalize the Strategic Planning Direction by June 2020 are also factors in this delay. New Estimated Completion Date (ECD): June 30, 2021.

Recommendation: To ensure that high priority mission activities are fully supported with the appropriate number of staff possessing the requisite mix of skills and abilities, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop a systematic process that prioritizes manpower requirements analyses for units that are the most critical for achieving mission needs.

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

Comments: On December 14, 2016, the Coast Guard noted that it submitted two FY 2019 Resource Proposals to staff and equip the Manpower Requirements Determination Division to conduct the analysis as described in the recommendation. In April, 2016, the Coast Guard liaison stated that, resources permitting, the Coast Guard is to address the following steps: (1) Validate the "unit-type" list so that it encompasses the vast majority of active duty and civilian billets in a logical framework that can be readily analyzed, review/update the list as changes (e.g., asset mix, organizations) occur. (2) Develop the requirements for the envisioned Manpower Analysis & Simulation Tool (MAST). (3) Prioritize unit list according to strategic alignment and risk assessment (4) Conduct the manpower requirements analyses (MRA) in accordance with established priorities. As of August 2020, the Coast Guard reported it had not implemented the actions. Specifically, the Coast Guard reported that in response to GAO's February 2020 modernization report (GAO-20-223, rec#2), it was developing new guidance for executing the manpower requirement determination process. Officials told us that the new guidance would include a systematic process for prioritizing manpower analysis. In this way, the actions for implementing the GAO-20-223 recommendation may also serve to meet the intent of the recommendation for GAO-16-379. Officials told us the Coast Guard estimated implementing the actions by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve the strategic allocation of assets, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should incorporate field unit input, such as information on assets' actual performance from Operational Performance Assessment Reports and Planning Assessments, to inform more realistic asset allocation decisions--in addition to asset performance capacities currently used--in the annual Strategic Planning Directions to more effectively communicate strategic intent to field units.

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

Comments: In February 2018, the Coast Guard liaison stated that Coast Guard management made a decision to not to address this recommendation within the annual Strategic Planning Direction (SPD) or Operational Planning Direction (OPD) products as previously planned, but rather within the Standard Operational Planning Process/Global Force Management Process Guide. The liaison further stated these documents are under revision and expected to be completed by March 31, 2018. On October 11, 2018, the Coast Guard liaison stated that The Standard Operational Planning Process/Global Force Management Instruction is in routing for edits, comment, and final approval. The new estimated completion date is the 2nd quarter of FY 2019. GAO sent an inquiry to the Coast Guard on April 24, 2019 asking for an update. On March 30, 2020, the Coast Guard liaison informed GAO that the update to the SOPP/GFM Instruction, which includes the addition and test of Strategic Priorities Planning Guidance and the new Coast Guard Force Allocation Matrix, was further delayed due to recent discussions of changing to a 2-year SOPP planning cycle to align with the Department of Defense Global Force Management process. The liaison stated that the COVID-19 crisis as well as the need to finalize the Strategic Planning Direction by June 2020 are also factors in this delay. The new estimated completion date for this recommendation is June 30, 2021.

Recommendation: To ensure that risks associated with ALIS are addressed expediently and holistically, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer to improve the reliability of its cost estimates, conduct uncertainty and sensitivity analyses consistent with cost-estimating best practices identified in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to DOD officials, as of July 2018, this recommendation conflicts with established Office of the Under Secretary of Defense/Cost Estimation and Program Evaluation guidance for cost estimation and uncertainty analysis. Absent a change in policy at that level, the Joint Program Office will continue to follow Office of the Under Secretary of Defense/Cost Estimation and Program Evaluation policy on this issue. We continue to believe that in order for any risks associated with ALIS to be addressed expediently and holistically, uncertainty and sensitivity analysis must be used on the F-35s cost estimates to improve its overall reliability. Thus, this recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: To ensure that risks associated with ALIS are addressed expediently and holistically, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer to improve the reliability of its cost estimates, ensure that future estimates of ALIS costs use historical data as available and reflect significant program changes consistent with cost-estimating best practices identified in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to DOD officials, since April 2016, the F-35 program has continued to update the ALIS estimate with the latest available cost data, based on recent contracts. Until more reliable actual costs become available, the program utilizes negotiated contract costs, incorporates program initiatives, and ensures the estimate reflects the latest technical baseline and requirements. Until actual costs associated with ALIS historical data are incorporated in the F-35 cost estimate, we believe that the estimate will not be as reliable as it could be. For this reason, this recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: To help improve the U.S. aviation sector's preparedness for future communicable disease threats from abroad, the Secretary of Transportation should work with relevant stakeholders, such as the Department of Health and Human Services, to develop a national aviation-preparedness plan for communicable disease outbreaks. Such a plan could establish a mechanism for coordination between the aviation and public health sectors and provides clear and transparent planning assumptions for a variety of types and levels of communicable disease threats.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Transportation (DOT) has not developed a national aviation-preparedness plan to respond to communicable disease threats from abroad. In June 2020, we urged Congress to take legislative action to require the Secretary of Transportation to work with relevant agencies and stakeholders to develop a national aviation-preparedness plan to limit the spread of communicable disease threats, and minimize travel and trade impacts (see GAO-20-625). GAO's periodic updates on the CARES Act of 2020 provide information about actions taken by Congress to address this matter. DOT partially concurs with our recommendation and agrees that an aviation preparedness plan is needed, but continues to suggest that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have responsibility for communicable disease response and preparedness planning, respectively, and that these departments should lead any efforts to address planning for communicable disease outbreaks, including for transportation. In the absence of a national aviation-preparedness plan, DOT officials point to ongoing efforts to engage with interagency partners at DHS and HHS, as well as industry stakeholders, to better collaborate on communicable disease response and preparedness as they relate to civil aviation. For example, in July 2020, DOT, HHS, and DHS issued guidance to airports and airlines for implementing measures to mitigate public health risks associated with COVID-19. While this guidance is a positive step, DOT has not yet taken action to develop an aviation preparedness plan for future communicable disease threats that incorporate such things as protocols for responding to the threat and coordination among stakeholders.

Recommendation: To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to enable DOD to better identify, address, and mitigate performance issues with the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) that could have an effect on affordability, as well as readiness, to establish a performance-measurement process for ALIS that includes, but is not limited to, performance metrics and targets that (1) are based on intended behavior of the system in actual operations and (2) tie system performance to user requirements.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. According to DOD officials, as of July 2018, plans are emerging between the services and the Joint Program Office on a path forward for ALIS, focusing on both the current iteration of ALIS and the future state. Going forward, the services and the Joint Program Office are developing plans for the necessary re-architecture of ALIS. Once these current improvements and future requirements are finalized, appropriate performance metrics, tying system performance in operations environments to user requirements, will be incorporated. As of January 2020, DOD officials stated that there was no update to this status. Although DOD has a way ahead as it relates to developing performance metrics for ALIS, DOD has yet to develop any metrics that are based on intended behavior of the system and tie system performance to user requirements. Until DOD takes this action, our recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to develop a high level of confidence that the aircraft will achieve its R+M goals, to develop a software reliability and maintainability (R+M) assessment process, with metrics, by which the program can monitor and determine the effect that software issues may have on overall F-35 R+M issues.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. According to DOD officials, as of July 2018, the department and the Joint Program Office, as part of their focus on agile software development, are working to incorporate software reliability and maintainability metrics into future software development and sustainment contracts. Some of the proposed metrics under consideration include: change failure rate; number of errors in developmental/user/operational testing; time to fix on critical errors; and mean time to restore. As of September 2019, DOD officials stated that there was no update to this status. Although attention is being paid to software Reliability & Maintainability, until DOD develops a process focused on software and its effects on overall Reliability & Maintainability issues, this recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to promote competition, address affordability, and inform its overarching sustainment strategy, to develop a long-term Intellectual Property (IP) Strategy to include, but not be limited to, the identification of (1) current levels of technical data rights ownership by the federal government and (2) all critical technical data needs and their associated costs.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. According to DOD officials, as of January 2020, in the updated F-35 Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP) issued in January 2019, "Secure Use of Appropriate Technical Data" was one of the identified elements of success necessary to improve F-35 readiness and reduce sustainment costs. As part of the ongoing Plans of Action & Milestones (POAM) implementation process for the LCSP success elements, the F-35 Joint Program Office is working with the OEMs to determine the data rights the government already has, and to determine the specific technical data the government needs, and what it needs that data to accomplish. Significant progress has been made on both fronts with the prime contractor. We acknowledge that progress surrounding technical data rights is being made; however, until an Intellectual Property strategy is developed and released, this recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: To help ensure that it receives accurate information on the full effect of funding decisions on acquisition programs, Congress should consider amending the law that governs the 5-year Capital Investment Plan to require the Coast Guard to submit cost and schedule information that reflects the impact of the annual President's budget request on each acquisition across the portfolio--in addition to the current practice of reporting the cost and schedule estimates in current program baselines.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, Congressional action has not been taken. GAO will continue to follow up with relevant congressional committees.

Recommendation: To help the Coast Guard improve the long-term outlook of its portfolio, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop a 20-year fleet modernization plan that identifies all acquisitions needed to maintain the current level of service and the fiscal resources necessary to build the identified assets. The plan should also consider trade-offs if the fiscal resources needed to execute the plan are not consistent with annual budgets.

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

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation. Since the issuance of GAO's report, in February 2016, Congress directed the Coast Guard to develop a long-term plan to cover fiscal year 2017 and 20 years thereafter and that it should be updated every two years. In November 2017, officials told GAO that the Coast Guard was developing a 20-year long-term plan that specifically focused on the highest priority recapitalization and sustainment efforts for its assets and will focus on meeting the intent of the 2016 congressional mandate. However, as of July 2020, the Coast Guard has not completed this plan. At that time, officials said that the Coast Guard continues to refine the process to define the long term acquisition and capital sustainment needs of the Service and align them with published and anticipated fiscal top line budgets. The Coast Guard is working with internal and external stakeholders to define useful parameters in order to complete work to close this recommendation. GAO will continue to monitor the Coast Guard's actions in completing its long-term plan given that GAO's recent work has found that the Coast Guard continues to pursue an unaffordable acquisition portfolio that is not likely to fully address all known and anticipated capability gaps.

Recommendation: In light of declining discretionary budgets, to reduce or eliminate the reliance of the AQI program on taxpayer funding, Congress should consider allowing USDA to set AQI fees to recover the aggregate estimated costs of AQI services--thereby allowing the Secretary of Agriculture to set fee rates to recover the full costs of the AQI program.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, Congress had not passed legislation to give the Secretary of Agriculture authority to set fee rates to fully recover the aggregate costs of agricultural quarantine inspection (AQI) services, as GAO suggested in March 2013. The current AQI fee authority does not permit the U.S. Department of Agriculture to set AQI fees to recover the aggregate estimated costs of AQI services. Authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to set fee rates to recover the full costs of the AQI program would save the federal government money by reducing the program's reliance on U.S. Customs and Border Protection's annual Salaries and Expenses appropriation.

Recommendation: Congress should consider amending USDA's authorization to assess AQI fees on bus companies, private vessels, and private aircraft and include in those fees the costs of AQI services for the passengers on those buses, private vessels, and private aircraft.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, Congress had not passed legislation to give the Secretary of Agriculture authority to assess agricultural quarantine inspection (AQI) fees on private vessels, private aircraft, and commercial buses and include in those fees the costs of AQI services for the passengers on those vehicles. The current AQI fee authority does not permit the U.S. Department of Agriculture to assess AQI fees on private vessels, private aircraft and commercial buses and to recover, through those fees, the costs of AQI services for the passengers on those vehicles.

Recommendation: To help maximize the use of available capacity at slot-controlled airports, enhance competition through greater airline access to slots, and enhance transparency of slot information, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA Administrator to apply slot rules to individual slots, as opposed to pools of slots within a slot period.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2015, the FAA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for the New York City area airports. The proposal included changes to how the FAA would determine compliance with minimum slot usage rules similar to GAO's recommendation and the WSG. Under that concept, a slot would only be considered for a flight or series of flights in a single slot and not potentially applied or averaged to more than one slot. The NPRM was withdrawn by DOT and FAA in April 2016 to allow further evaluation of recent changes in demand, competition, operations, and other factors in the New York City area airports. The FAA and the Office of the Secretary continue to evaluate the circumstances at the New York City area airports and DCA and, if necessary, will consider steps to ensure compliance with minimum slot usage, including future rulemaking. In March 2018, DOT indicated that it has no plans to initiate a rulemaking on this issue. As of June 2019, DOT plans no further action on this recommendation. However, GAO believes this recommendation continues to have merit.

Recommendation: With respect to possible future regulatory action, the DOT Secretary should consider requiring airlines to schedule a certain percentage, or all, of their slot allocations, similar to practices maintained elsewhere in the world.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: The Department concurs that any future rulemaking should consider changes to the minimum slot usage rules to improve slot utilization at the slot controlled airports and provide greater harmonization with industry standards applied at airports outside the U.S. The FAA and the Department of Transportation stated that they will evaluate the circumstances at the New York City area airports and DCA and, if necessary, will consider steps to improve slot utilization, including future rulemaking. As of June 2019, DOT plans no further action on this recommendation. However, GAO believes this recommendation continues to have merit.