United States General Accounting Office

GAO Testimony

Before the Subcommittee on Government Management,

Information, and Technology Committee on Government

Reform and Oversight House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery

Expected at

2:00 p.m., EST

Wednesday

Nov. 5, 1997

FEDERAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE ACT

Overview of Advisory

Committees Since 1993

Statement of L. Nye Stevens

Director, Federal Management and Workforce Issues

General Government Division

GAO/T-GGD-98-24

Statement 

Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview

of Advisory Committees Since 1993

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here today to discuss our work on federal advisory

committees. Congress has recognized that when properly organized and

managed, advisory committees can provide a useful source of expertise

and advice. However, in 1972, because of its concern about the

proliferation and lack of effective management of advisory committees,

Congress enacted the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). FACA is

intended to keep the number of advisory committees to the minimum

necessary by ensuring that (1) valid needs exist for establishing and

continuing advisory committees, (2) the committees are properly managed

and their proceedings are open to the public, and (3) Congress is kept

informed of their activities. FACA directs the General Services

Administration (GSA) to establish and maintain a Committee Management

Secretariat to oversee advisory committee activities. In 1993, the President

issued an executive order that directed agencies to reduce by at least

one-third the number of discretionary advisory committees that they

sponsored (those not mandated by Congress or established by the

President) by the end of fiscal year 1993. FACA committees are either

established under agency authority, authorized by Congress, mandated by

Congress, or established by the President.

As agreed, we will focus our testimony today on (1) an assessment of

whether Executive Order 12838, signed by the President on February 10,

1993, achieved its goal of reducing the number of discretionary advisory

committees by at least one-third by the end of fiscal year 1993 and the

extent to which the costs and number of committee members changed

during the same period; and (2) an overview of GSA’s oversight

responsibilities under FACA. Also as agreed, we will continue our work on

GSA’s oversight of advisory committee activities and additional issues that

you and Senator John Glenn asked us to review—advisory committee

management, committee members’ independence, and participation of

outside parties. We will report on this work at a later date.

To assess whether the administration achieved its goal of reducing the

number of discretionary advisory committees and the extent to which

committees’ costs and membership had changed, we analyzed the annual

reports of the President on federal advisory committees from fiscal years

1993 through 1996 and reviewed GSA historical data. To identify GSA’s

Committee Management Secretariat oversight responsibilities under FACA,

we reviewed applicable laws, regulations, and GSA guidance to agencies

Page 1 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement 

Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview

of Advisory Committees Since 1993

regarding advisory committee activities and interviewed GSA’s Committee

Management Secretariat officials.

Number of Advisory

Committees Has

Declined, but the

Costs and Number of

Members Per

Committee Have

Risen

According to the President’s annual reports on advisory committees, the

total number of advisory committees decreased from a high of 1,305

during 1993 to a low of 1,000 during 1996, the most recent year for which

complete data were available. Nearly all of this reduction, 303 of the 305

drop, was due to cuts in the number of discretionary advisory committees.

The reduction in the number of advisory committees since 1993 follows

the President’s 1993 executive order, which called for at least a one-third

reduction in discretionary advisory committees. Discretionary committees

do not include advisory committees mandated by Congress and those

created by the President. Appendix I shows the number of advisory

committees by the four establishment authorities during fiscal years 1993

through 1996.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in providing guidance to

agencies on the 1993 executive order, established a maximum ceiling

number of discretionary advisory committees for each agency and a

monitoring plan. Under the guidance, agencies were to report their

committee levels annually to OMB and request its approval before creating

any new discretionary committees. Later, OMB dropped the requirement for

prior approval of new committees as long as agencies were beneath their

approved ceilings. In a June 1994 memorandum to agency heads, the Vice

President called for each agency to reduce advisory committee costs by at

least another 5 percent beyond the savings achieved by the one-third

reduction that resulted from implementation of the executive order.

According to GSA officials, and as reported in the President’s annual

reports, the overall number of advisory committees was on the rise before

1993, but in response to the 1993 executive order the number started to

drop in 1994. (See app. II.) Almost all of the reduction in advisory

committees (303 of 305) from fiscal year 1993 to 1996 was attributable to

the cut in discretionary committees. Although the President’s goal of

reducing the number of discretionary committees by one-third was not

achieved governmentwide by the end of fiscal year 1993,1

 the number of

discretionary committees dropped from 833 to 530 (36 percent) during the

4-year period; and the total number of advisory committees dropped from

1,305 to 1,000 (23 percent). The 530 discretionary committees that existed

1

The fiscal year 1993 Annual Report of the President on Federal Advisory Committees shows that 28 of

64 (44 percent) executive departments, independent agencies, and other organizations either met or

exceeded the one-third reduction.

Page 2 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement 

Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview

of Advisory Committees Since 1993

during fiscal year 1996 were 4 less than the governmentwide OMB ceiling of

534 committees. According to GSA, the number of discretionary

committees has continued to decline; and, as of mid-September 1997, the

number was 479, 55 below the ceiling.

Although the overall number of advisory committees declined during the

4-year period, their costs and the number of committee members

increased. The number of members serving on the committees increased

from 28,317 to 29,511 (4 percent), and the costs of committees increased in

nominal dollars from $143.9 to $148.5 million (3 percent). However, in

constant 1993 dollars, the costs decreased from $143.9 to $138.3 million

(4 percent) for the 4-year period.

On average, the number of members per committee rose from 22 to 30,

and the costs per committee rose from $110,276 to $148,519 from fiscal

year 1993 to 1996. In constant 1993 dollars, the average costs per

committee rose from $110,276 to $138,314 for the 4-year period. One

possible explanation for part of the increase in per committee costs and

members is mergers. According to a GSA report on the implementation of

the 1993 executive order, agencies recommended 196 discretionary

advisory committees for merger. Mergers would include moving some of

the functions and members to existing or new committees, according to

GSA Committee Management Secretariat officials.

Another possible explanation for some of the increase in costs is the

increase in the number of advisory committee meetings. During the same

4-year period, the number of advisory committee meetings increased from

4,387 to 5,008 (14 percent).

Although the number of meetings has risen, the percentage of open

meetings compared to the percentage that were closed and partially closed

has declined—49 percent of meetings were open in 1993 compared to

44 percent in 1996. Advisory committee meetings can be closed to the

public if specific administrative procedures and specific provisions of the

Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b) are followed. These

provisions provide for closed meetings to protect, for example, matters

that need to be kept secret in the interest of national security or foreign

policy, trade secrets, and information of a personal nature, the disclosure

of which would constitute an invasion of privacy. We did not examine the

appropriateness of the decisions to close or partially close the FACA

meetings. Appendix III shows a breakdown of the number of open, closed,

and partially closed meetings from fiscal year 1993 to 1996.

Page 3 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement 

Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview

of Advisory Committees Since 1993

GSA’s Committee

Management

Secretariat Oversight

Role

Under FACA and GSA regulations implementing FACA, GSA’s Committee

Management Secretariat is responsible for

• consulting with agencies on new and reauthorized advisory committees to

ensure that FACA requirements are met;

• making comprehensive annual reviews of each advisory committee and

making recommendations to the President and to the agency head or

Congress on any action the Secretariat deems necessary, including

abolishing the committee or merging it with another committee;

• preparing the President’s annual report to Congress on the activities,

status, and changes in the composition of advisory committees; and

• ensuring that follow-up reports are prepared on the status of

recommendations made by presidential advisory committees.

For fiscal year 1997, GSA’s Committee Management Secretariat had a

budget of $645,000 and 8 employees.

Consultation on Advisory

Committees

FACA and GSA regulations require that agencies consult with GSA before

establishing new and reauthorized advisory committees. As part of this

consultation, agencies are required to submit charters and justification

letters, which must contain specific information. FACA outlines that

agencies are to include 10 specific items in the charter, including the

committee’s objectives and scope of activities, the time period necessary

to carry out its purpose, and the estimated annual staff years and costs.

GSA regulations state that agencies must address three items in the

justification letter, including why the committee is essential to conduct the

agency’s business, why the committee’s functions cannot be performed by

the agency or other means, and how the agency plans to attain balanced

membership. GSA’s role is to review agency proposals to establish advisory

committees and determine whether FACA requirements are met. The

regulations say that GSA is to review the proposals and notify the agency of

its views within 15 days, if possible. However, GSA does not have the

authority to stop the formation of an advisory committee.

GSA regulations also require that agencies publish a notice in the Federal

Register when either new or reauthorized discretionary advisory

committees are established. Committees mandated by Congress or

established by the President are not required to issue such notices. New

discretionary committee notices are required to address three of the

specific items that must be contained in the charter and justification letter.

These items include a description of the nature and purpose of the

Page 4 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement 

Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview

of Advisory Committees Since 1993

committee, a discussion of the agency’s plan to attain a fairly balanced

membership, and a statement that the committee is necessary and in the

public interest. Notices for reauthorized committees do not need to

include these three items.

Comprehensive Annual

Reviews

FACA requires GSA to make an annual comprehensive review of each

advisory committee to determine whether it is carrying out its purpose,

whether its responsibilities should be revised, and whether it should be

abolished or merged with another committee. After completing the

reviews, GSA is required to recommend to the President and to the agency

head or Congress any actions GSA deems should be taken.

GSA regulations require that agencies prepare an annual report for each

committee, including the agencies’ recommendations for continuing,

merging, or terminating committees. For continuing committees (not new

or terminated), agencies are required to describe such things as how the

committee accomplishes its purpose, the frequency of meetings and the

reason for continuing the committee, and why it was necessary to have

closed committee meetings if such meetings were held. The committee’s

annual reports also are to include the committee costs.

GSA procedures call for it to use the data it receives in the agencies’ annual

reports, including the agencies’ recommendations to continue or terminate

the committees, in conducting the comprehensive annual review and in

preparing the President’s annual report.

President’s Annual Reports

to Congress

The President is required to report annually to Congress on the activities,

status, and changes in the composition of advisory committees. The

annual reports are due to Congress by December 31 for each preceding

fiscal year. GSA prepares the annual reports for the President with

information provided in agencies’ annual reports on each advisory

committee that existed during the fiscal year.

Follow-Up Reports to

Congress on Presidential

Advisory Committee

Recommendations

FACA requires the President, or his delegate, to report to Congress within 1

year on his proposals for action or reasons for inaction on

recommendations made by a presidential advisory committee to the

President. According to FACA’s legislative history, these follow-up reports

would help justify the investments in the advisory committees and provide

Page 5 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement 

Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview

of Advisory Committees Since 1993

accountability to the public and Congress that the recommendations are

being addressed.

According to GSA regulations, the agency providing support to the advisory

committee is responsible for preparing and transmitting the follow-up

report to Congress. However, the regulations also state that the Secretariat

is responsible for ensuring that the follow-up reports are prepared by the

agency supporting the presidential committee and may solicit OMB and

other appropriate organizations for help, if needed to ensure compliance.

Recent Proposal to

Amend FACA

A focus of today’s hearing is the proposal to amend FACA to specify that the

act does not apply to committees that are created by an entity other than

an agency or federal official and are not subject to actual management and

control by federal officials. This proposal is in response to a recent

decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that

FACA applied to panels of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

This development has not been the focus of our work and we have not

assessed the merits of the issue. I would like to make two observations,

however. First, the extent to which these entities are included under FACA

will likely have an impact on GSA in its oversight capacity. Under the Court

of Appeals decision, according to OMB, more than 450 NAS panels could

potentially become subject to FACA and therefore fall under GSA purview.

The inclusion of NAS panels, and perhaps other similarly situated entities

used by other organizations, could pose resource implications for GSA

whose staff of 8 employees is currently responsible for overseeing about

1,000 advisory committees.

Second, the inclusion of additional entities under FACA in accordance with

the Court of Appeals decision might also affect the federal agencies that

sponsor the panels (albeit somewhat indirectly in the instance of the NAS.)

FACA requires that advisory committees be managed and controlled by a

federal agency. This has not been the case for those committees that were

made subject to FACA pursuant to the Court of Appeals decision.

Management and control generally means that meetings are to be chaired

or attended by an agency employee and that certain meeting-related

decisions—such as whether a particular meeting should be open or closed

to the public—are to be made by the agency. Agencies also provide

administrative support to their committees. It is unclear whether agencies

would be required to provide the same active participation in the activities

of NAS-type panels. If they did, certain costs would have be incurred. While

Page 6 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement 

Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview

of Advisory Committees Since 1993

we do not know what those costs might be, we know from our analysis of

GSA records that the average annual cost for federal staff involved in the

1,000 advisory committees in existence during fiscal year 1996 was about

$75,000 per committee. We are not suggesting that the possibility of

additional costs is a reason for deciding whether or not to include certain

entities under FACA. But, we do believe it is important for the Congress to

be aware of such costs as it deliberates on the matter.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I will be pleased to answer

any questions you or any Members of the Subcommittee may have.

Page 7 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Appendix I 

Distribution of Federal Advisory

Committees by Establishment Authority

During Fiscal Years 1993-1996

Discretionary committees Nondiscretionary committees

Establishment authority

Fiscal Year

Agency

authority

Authorized by

Congress

Mandated by

Congress

Presidential

directive

1993 401 432 444 28

1994 316 423 429 27

1995 325 318 438 29

1996 286 244 438 32

Source: Annual Reports of the President on Federal Advisory Committees.

Page 8 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Appendix II 

Federal Advisory Committee Statistics

During Fiscal Years 1993-1996

Fiscal year

Total number

of committees

Number of

discretionary

committees

Total costs

in millions

(nominal dollars)

Number of

members

1993 1,305 833 $143.9 28,317

1994 1,195 739 133.4 30,446

1995 1,110 643 157.0 29,766

1996 1,000 530 148.5 29,511

Source: Annual Reports of the President on Federal Advisory Committees.

Page 9 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Appendix III 

Types of Federal Advisory Committee

Meetings During Fiscal Years 1993-1996

Type of meetings

Fiscal year Open Closed

Partially

closed Total

1993 2,162 1,210 1,015 4,387

1994 1,826 1,502 781 4,109

1995 2,443 2,233 503 5,179

1996 2,208 2,379 421 5,008

Source: Annual Reports of the President on Federal Advisory Committees.

(410155) Page 10 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,

send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100