Recommendation: The Chairman of the National Mediation Board should develop and execute a plan to address the rail arbitration case backlog. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: National Mediation Board
Status: Open

Comments: NMB agreed with this recommendation and stated that it is examining the growing arbitration backlog and investigating steps the Board may take to reduce it. In particular, the agency noted that it is discussing proposals with stakeholders and formulating a plan to reduce the backlog in 2018.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the National Mediation Board should develop and implement policies for approval and monitoring of employee requests for outside employment and other outside activities to prevent violations of ethics rules, consistent with Office of Government Ethics standards of conduct and federal internal control standards. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: National Mediation Board
Status: Open

Comments: NMB agreed with this recommendation. The agency stated that it has taken significant steps to investigate this matter and has established new controls in order to prevent this type of activity in the future, including establishing a relationship with the IG of the National Labor Relations Board to operate a telephone hotline and email address for the reporting of suspected fraud, waste and abuse at NMB.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the National Mediation Board should complete and take actions on the organizational climate assessment and survey results as a means to address employee concerns. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: National Mediation Board
Status: Open

Comments: NMB agreed with this recommendation. The agency stated that the Board is concerned that the 2017 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey revealed a level of dissatisfaction among NMB employees. It plans to conduct an Internal Climate Assessment in 2018 and agency looks forward to the opportunity to better understand and address any employee concerns.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the National Mediation Board should revise NMB's travel policy and develop appropriate internal controls to ensure compliance with federal requirements for travel. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: National Mediation Board
Status: Open

Comments: NMB agreed with this recommendation. The agency stated that it is in the process of reviewing the current travel policy, and will revise the policy to be in compliance with federal travel regulations as necessary.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the National Mediation Board should revise NMB's telework policy and develop appropriate internal controls to ensure compliance with federal requirements for telework. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: National Mediation Board
Status: Open

Comments: NMB agreed with this recommendation and stated that it will revise its telework policy and strengthen internal controls, as necessary.

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 enable the department to meet its Africa-related missions at the least cost, the Secretary of Defense should conduct a more comprehensive and well-documented analysis of options for the permanent placement of the headquarters for AFRICOM, including documentation as to whether the operational benefits of each option outweigh the costs. These options should include placing some AFRICOM headquarters personnel in forward locations, while moving others to the United States. In conducting this assessment, the Secretary should follow key principles GAO has derived for such studies, as well as principles found in DOD Instruction 7041.3, to help ensure that the results are comprehensive, well-documented, accurate, and credible. Should DOD determine that maintaining a location in Stuttgart is the best course of action, the Secretary of Defense should provide a detailed description of why the operational or other benefits outweigh the costs and benefits of relocating the command.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially agreed with GAO's recommendation. In its comments on GAO's September 2013 report DOD noted that to meet the requirements of the Budget Control Act of 2011 it would consider a wide range of options, and if any of these options required additional analysis of the location of AFRICOM headquarters, DOD would conduct a more comprehensive and well-documented analysis. However, in June 2019, DOD officials stated that the department had not conducted any additional analysis on the permanent placement of AFRICOM headquarters. Furthermore, DOD officials stated that AFRICOM would remain in Stuttgart, Germany, for the foreseeable future and no additional analysis was being planned. As of January 2020, DOD had not provided additional information to indicate progress on this recommendation. GAO maintains that such an analysis is needed and until the costs and benefits of maintaining AFRICOM headquarters in Germany are specified and weighed against the costs and economic benefits of moving the command, the department may be missing an opportunity to accomplish its missions successfully at a significantly lower cost.

Recommendation: To better ensure that CBP's Office of Field Operations' (OFO) staffing processes are transparent and to help ensure CBP can demonstrate that these resource decisions have effectively addressed CBP's mission needs, the Commissioner of CBP should document the methodology and process OFO uses to allocate staff to land ports of entry on the southwest border, including the rationales and factors considered in making these decisions.

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

Comments: In May 2017, CBP's Office of Field Operations began working with a contractor to develop a comprehensive CBP position allocation methodology and tool. According to CBP officials, the purpose of this tool was to ensure a data driven, transparent process for allocating CBP resources--including staff--to land ports of entry on the southwest border. CBP officials stated that the contractor completed the tool in January 2018, CBP tested the tool in fiscal year 2018, and CBP planned to implement the tool in fiscal year 2019. However, CBP officials told us in September 2020 that a subsequent reorganization of the Office of Field Operations rendered the tool unusable without further modification. As a result, they used a manual method to allocate staff in fiscal year 2020 and plan to do the same in fiscal year 2021. As of September 2020, CBP officials planned to document the methodology and process they are now using to allocate staff to land ports of entry, including rationales and factors considered, by November 2020. This recommendation remains open.