ENVIRONMENTAL 

PROTECTION

Status of GAO 

Recommendations to EPA

Statement of Alfredo Gómez, Director, 

Natural Resources and Environment

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Superfund, 

Waste Management, and Regulatory 

Oversight, Committee on Environment 

and Public Works, U.S. Senate

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 3:00 p.m. ET

Tuesday, June 14, 2016

GAO-16-722T

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-16-722T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Superfund, 

Waste Management, and Regulatory 

Oversight, Committee on Environment and 

Public Works, U.S. Senate

June 14, 2016

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Status of GAO Recommendations to EPA

What GAO Found

As of May 23, 2016, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had

implemented 174 of the 325 recommendations GAO made in fiscal years 2006 

through 2015. EPA had not yet implemented the remaining 151

recommendations. The figure below shows the status of the 325

recommendations, which fall into six broad categories that relate to EPA 

programs and operations. These are: (1) management and operations; (2) water 

issues; (3) environmental contamination and cleanup; (4) toxics, chemical safety, 

and pesticides; (5) air quality, climate change, and energy efficiency; and (6) 

public health and environmental justice. Almost three-fourths of the 

recommendations fall into the first three categories and include actions to better 

manage grants, improve regulation of drinking water contaminants, and better 

manage hazardous waste cleanup. Most of the recommendations not yet

implemented concern EPA management and operations and water issues. For 

example, regarding management and operations, EPA has not yet implemented 

GAO’s recommendation to improve procedures for processing congressional 

committee requests for scientific advice. Similarly, for water issues, EPA has not 

fully implemented GAO’s recommendations related to providing oversight 

guidance and working with states on water quality protection measures. 

Status of GAO Recommendations to EPA, Fiscal Years 2006-2015, as of May 23, 2016

GAO has identified many benefits— programmatic and process improvements 

and financial benefits—based on EPA taking actions on these recommendations 

and related work. For example, in 2010, GAO found that EPA had not 

maintained attention to children’s health issues through agency strategies and 

priorities since 2000. GAO recommended that EPA’s strategic plan expressly 

articulate children-specific goals, objectives, and targets. EPA agreed, and on 

September 30, 2010, EPA submitted its fiscal year 2011-2015 strategic plan to 

Congress, which included children's health and environmental justice as a crosscutting strategy, and children-specific goals. In addition, GAO has identified 

financial benefits from implementation of its recommendations and related work. 

For example, in 2008, GAO identified an error in EPA’s calculation of 

reimbursable indirect costs for hazardous waste cleanup. EPA acknowledged the 

error and published revised indirect costs rates. As a result, GAO estimated in 

2010 that EPA had recovered or would recover $42.2 million. 

View GAO-16-722T. For more information, 

contact Alfredo Gómez at (202) 512-3841or 

gomezj@gao.gov. 

Why GAO Did This Study

EPA’s mission is to protect human 

health and the environment. To 

accomplish this mission, EPA develops 

and enforces environmental 

regulations; awards grants; and studies 

environmental issues, among other 

things. GAO has conducted reviews 

focused on various aspects of EPA's 

programs and operations. Through this 

work, GAO has made numerous 

recommendations to improve EPA’s 

performance and the efficiency and 

effectiveness of its programs and

operations. 

GAO continuously engages with 

executive branch agencies to ensure 

its recommendations are implemented. 

For example, GAO regularly follows up 

with agencies on its recommendations 

and posts their status online. Also, in 

2015, GAO sent letters to the heads of 

key executive branch agencies, 

including EPA, identifying 

unimplemented recommendations that 

warrant priority attention. 

This statement discusses (1) the status 

of EPA’s implementation of GAO 

recommendations for fiscal years 2006 

through 2015 and how these 

recommendations relate to EPA 

programs and operations and (2) 

benefits realized by EPA based on 

GAO’s work, including through

implementing GAO’s

recommendations. It is based on 

GAO’s prior work from October 2005 

through September 2015 and an 

analysis of recommendations GAO 

made to EPA during this period from 

data maintained in an internal 

database used to track the status of 

GAO recommendations.
Letter

Page 1 GAO-16-722T 

Chairman Rounds, Ranking Member Markey, and Members of the 

Subcommittee:

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the status of recommendations 

GAO has made to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As 

you know, the mission of EPA is to protect human health and the 

environment, with the purpose of protecting all Americans from significant 

risks to human health and the environment where they live, learn, and 

work, among other things. To accomplish this mission, EPA develops and 

enforces environmental regulations; awards grants to state environmental 

programs, non-profits, educational institutions, and others; studies 

environmental issues; and sponsors partnerships, among other things. 

We have conducted reviews focused on various aspects of EPA’s 

programs and operations. For example, we have conducted reviews on 

EPA programs to manage toxic chemicals, improve water infrastructure, 

and clean up hazardous waste sites. We have also conducted reviews 

focused on aspects of EPA’s operations, such as workforce planning, 

processes for developing and enforcing regulations, and mechanisms for 

securing information. Through these reviews, we have made numerous 

recommendations to improve EPA’s performance and the efficiency and 

effectiveness of its programs and operations. Today I will discuss (1) the 

status of EPA’s implementation of our recommendations from fiscal year 

2006 through fiscal year 2015 and how these recommendations relate to 

EPA programs and operations and (2) benefits realized by EPA based on 

our work, including through implementation of our recommendations.

This statement is based on our reports issued from October 2005 through 

September 2015.1 To determine the number and status of 

recommendations we made to EPA from October 1, 2005, through 

September 30, 2015, we analyzed data from our internal database that 

maintains information on the status of recommendations we have made 

to all agencies. To determine how these recommendations relate to EPA 

programs and operations, we developed categories based on areas of 

EPA’s work and its organizational structure. Two analysts then 

independently categorized each of the recommendations and resolved 

any differences. To identify benefits realized by EPA in implementing our 

recommendations, we also relied on our internal database for information 

 1

App. 1 lists the products upon which this statement is based.

Letter
Page 2 GAO-16-722T 

on financial and non-financial benefits. To assess the reliability of the 

recommendations and benefits data, we reviewed documentation about 

the database used to produce the data and interviewed our staff 

members responsible for maintaining and updating the database. We 

found the data to be sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this 

testimony.2 Detailed information about the scope and methodology used 

to conduct our prior work can be found in each of our issued reports.

The work on which this statement is based was conducted in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards 

require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate 

evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions 

based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained 

provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on 

our audit objectives.

Many of our reports and testimonies include recommendations that, if 

acted upon, may result in tangible benefits for the U.S. taxpayer by 

improving the federal government’s efficiency, effectiveness, and 

accountability. Implemented recommendations can result in financial or 

nonfinancial benefits for the federal government.3 An estimated financial 

benefit is based on actions taken in response to our recommendations, 

such as reducing government expenditures, increasing revenues, or 

reallocating funds to other areas. For example, in fiscal year 2015, our 

work across the federal government resulted in $74.4 billion in financial 

benefits. Other benefits that result from our work cannot be measured in 

dollar terms, and we refer to them as nonfinancial or other benefits. 

These benefits are linked to specific recommendations or other work that 

we completed over several years and could include improvements to 

agency programs, processes, and policies. During fiscal year 2015, we 

recorded a total of 1,286 other benefits government-wide that resulted 

 2

EPA officials also reviewed the data.

3

For the purpose of this testimony, we consider financial benefits to be net benefits—that 

is, estimates of financial benefits that have been reduced by the costs associated with 

taking the action that we recommended.

Background
Page 3 GAO-16-722T 

from our work, including improved services to the public and government 

business operations.4

As part of our responsibilities under generally accepted government 

auditing standards, we continuously follow up on recommendations we 

have made and report their status to Congress. Agencies also have a 

responsibility to monitor and maintain accurate records on the status of 

our recommendations.5 After issuing a report, we follow up with audited 

agencies at least once a year to determine the extent to which our 

recommendations have been implemented and the benefits that have 

been realized.6 During this follow-up, we identify what additional actions, 

if any, would be needed to address our recommendations. A 

recommendation is considered implemented when actions have been 

taken that, consistent with our recommendation, address the issue or 

deficiency we identified and upon which the recommendation is based. 

Experience has shown that it takes time for some recommendations to be 

implemented. For this reason, we actively track unaddressed (i.e., open) 

recommendations for 4 years and review them to determine whether 

implementation can be reasonably expected. The review includes 

consideration of alternative strategies the agency may have for 

 4

GAO, Performance and Accountability Report Fiscal Year 2015, GAO-16-3SP 

(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 16, 2015).

5

These responsibilities are detailed in both the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

Circulars A-50 and A-123. For example, OMB Circular A-50 provides the policies and 

procedures for use by executive agencies when considering reports issued by GAO and 

inspectors general, other executive branch audit organizations, and nonfederal auditors 

where follow-up is necessary. OMB Circular A-123 addresses internal management 

control systems and requires that agencies track GAO recommendations and provide a 

response to Congress on actions taken on the recommendations. Specifically, among the 

requirements of Circular A-123 are that the agency (1) appoint a top-level audit follow-up 

official, (2) maintain accurate records on the status of recommendations, and (3) assign a 

high priority to following up on audit recommendations. In addition, when we issue a report 

containing recommendations to an agency, the agency head is required to submit a 

written statement of the actions taken in response to the recommendations to the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and Committee 

on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives not later than 60 

days after the date of the report. 31 U.S.C. § 720(b) (providing further that the statement 

shall be submitted to the Committees of Appropriations of both Houses of Congress in the 

first request for appropriations submitted more than 60 days after the date of the report).

6

We work with agencies to establish processes for recommendation follow-up. We 

recently worked with EPA to revise our process to increase the frequency of follow-up 

from annually to semiannually.
Page 4 GAO-16-722T 

implementing the recommendations. We will close the recommendation 

as not implemented if an agency has indicated that it was not planning to 

take action or we determined that it was unlikely that the agency would 

take action to address the recommendation. Figure 1 shows our process 

for monitoring and reporting on recommendations.

Figure 1: GAO’s Process for Monitoring and Reporting on Recommendations

We maintain a publicly available database with information on the current 

status of most open recommendations.7 The database allows searches 

by agency, congressional committee, or key words and is available at 

http://www.gao.gov/openrecs.html.

 7

Because of the sensitive or classified nature of certain recommendations, we are unable 

to include them in our publicly accessible database.
Page 5 GAO-16-722T 

In addition to our process for monitoring and reporting on 

recommendations, we use other mechanisms to encourage agencies to 

implement our recommendations in a timely manner. For example, in 

2015, we undertook an effort to call attention to unimplemented 

recommendations that we believe warrant priority attention by the 

Secretary or agency heads at key departments and agencies. We sent 

letters to the heads of key executive branch agencies, including EPA, 

identifying these high priority recommendations and urging the agency 

head to continue to provide attention to these issues.

As of May 23, 2016, EPA had implemented 174 of the 325

recommendations we made in fiscal year 2006 through fiscal year 2015, 

and the recommendations fall into six broad categories that relate to EPA 

programs and operations. EPA had not yet implemented the remaining 

151 recommendations.8 Figure 2 shows the status of the 325

recommendations. For recommendations that we made over 4 years ago 

(i.e., fiscal years 2006 to 2011), EPA had implemented 77 percent. For 

recommendations made more recently within the last 4 years (i.e., fiscal 

years 2012 to 2015), EPA had implemented 17 percent.

 8

GAO continually works with EPA to verify implementation of recommendations and close 

them out in our database, so the number of implemented recommendations can change 

on a daily basis. Also, some of these recommendations were addressed to other agencies 

in addition to EPA. Finally, the numbers of recommendations reported here do not include 

any recommendations to EPA that were sensitive or classified in nature.

EPA Has 

Implemented 174 of 

325 GAO 

Recommendations, 

Which Relate to a 

Variety of EPA 

Programs and 

Operations
Page 6 GAO-16-722T 

Figure 2: Status of GAO Recommendations to EPA, Fiscal Years 2006 through 2015, as of May 23, 2016

The 325 recommendations we made to EPA in fiscal years 2006 through 

2015 fall into six broad categories that relate to EPA programs and 

operations and generally align with many of the goals and strategies 

identified in EPA’s Strategic Plan.9 These six broad categories are: (1) 

management and operations; (2) water issues, which include water 

infrastructure, drinking water, water quality, and ecosystem restoration; 

(3) environmental contamination and cleanup, which includes 

environmental cleanup, pollution prevention, hazardous and other waste 

programs, and emergency management; (4) toxics, chemical safety, and 

pesticides; (5) air quality, climate change, and energy efficiency; and (6) 

public health and environmental justice. The percentage of 

recommendations implemented within each category ranged from 68 

percent for the environmental contamination and cleanup category to 35 

percent in the toxics, chemical safety, and pesticides category.10 Figure 3 

9

EPA, Fiscal Year 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 10, 2014).

10The percentages of implemented and not implemented recommendations include 

recommendations that EPA is in the process of implementing, including many made within 

the last 4 years. 
Page 7 GAO-16-722T 

shows the number of recommendations we identified in each of these 

categories and the percentage of recommendations within each category 

that has been implemented and not implemented.

Figure 3: Categories of GAO Recommendations to EPA and Percent Implemented and Not Implemented, Fiscal Years 2006 

through 2015, as of May 23, 2016

Note: The percentages of implemented and not implemented recommendations include 

recommendations that EPA is in the process of implementing, including many made within the last 4 

years.

Almost three-fourths of our recommendations from fiscal years 2006 

through 2015 fall into three categories: management and operations, 

water issues, and environmental contamination and cleanup. The 

recommendations to EPA relating to management and operations 

included actions for better managing its grants, better coordinating 

management of its laboratories, and improving the agency’s information 

security. Recommendations on water issues included actions targeted at 
Page 8 GAO-16-722T 

improving the regulation of contaminants in drinking water, improving 

water quality and ecosystem health in regions such as the Great Lakes 

and Chesapeake Bay, and better managing water pollution from both 

point and nonpoint sources.11 Recommendations related to environmental 

contamination and cleanup included actions for better managing cleanup 

at hazardous waste sites; enhancing responses to disasters, such as the 

World Trade Center collapse on September 11, 2001, and Hurricane 

Katrina in August 2005; and promoting proper disposal and recycling of 

electronic waste. The remaining quarter of the recommendations fell into 

the other three categories of toxics, chemical safety, and pesticides; air 

quality, climate change, and energy efficiency; and public health and 

environmental justice. Appendix I lists our reports from fiscal years 2006 

through 2015 with recommendations to EPA, by category; the number of 

recommendations made to EPA in each of these reports; and the number 

of recommendations in each report that were implemented and not 

implemented as of May 23, 2016.

Of the 151 recommendations that EPA has not implemented, we made 

105, or 70 percent, of these recommendations within the past 4 years 

(i.e., fiscal years 2012 to 2015) and 46, or 30 percent, earlier (i.e., fiscal 

years 2006 to 2011).12 Most of the recommendations not yet implemented 

concern EPA management and operations and water issues. Some 

examples of more recent open recommendations in these categories 

include the following:

• Management and operations: In June 2015, we made four 

recommendations to EPA to help better ensure compliance with the 

Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration 

Authorization Act of 1978, as amended, which requires that EPA’s 

Science Advisory Board (SAB) provide both the EPA Administrator 

and designated congressional committees with scientific advice as 

 11A point source discharges pollutants from a discrete point, such as a pipe carrying 

effluent from a wastewater treatment plant or an industrial facility. Nonpoint source 

pollution is water pollution from diffuse sources, such as runoff from farms or construction 

sites.

12In general, we continue to believe that our prior recommendations are valid and should 

be addressed. While we recognize that agencies need time to act on our 

recommendations, in our experience, recommendations that have not been implemented 

after 4 years are generally not implemented in subsequent years.
Page 9 GAO-16-722T 

requested.13 Specifically, we recommended that EPA take steps to 

improve its procedures for processing congressional committee 

requests to the SAB for advice by (1) clarifying which EPA offices 

should receive and process congressional requests, (2) documenting 

procedures for reviewing congressional committee requests, (3) 

clarifying in policy documents when it is and is not appropriate for the 

EPA Administrator to forward advice to the requesting committee, and 

(4) specifying in policy documents how the SAB should respond to a 

congressional committee’s request for scientific advice unrelated to an 

existing EPA charge question. In written comments on the report, EPA 

concurred with these recommendations and provided information on 

planned actions to address each recommendation. In an update 

provided by EPA in March 2016, an EPA official said that the agency 

is developing a written process to address these recommendations. 

The recommendations remain open pending finalization of the written 

process by the agency and our review to determine whether it meets 

the intent of our recommendations.

• Management and operations: In our 2014 report on EPA’s 

Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIA), which are analyses of the benefits 

and costs of proposed regulations, we recommended, among other 

things, that EPA enhance the agency’s review process for RIAs to 

ensure the transparency and clarity of information presented for 

selected elements such as clear descriptions of baselines and 

alternatives considered in and across RIAs.14 In its written comments 

on our report, EPA generally agreed with all of our recommendations 

in the report, also noting then, and in a March 2016 update, that EPA 

stands behind the quality of its RIAs but will continue to strive to 

enhance transparency and clarity in the RIAs. This recommendation 

remains open pending evidence that EPA has taken action to 

enhance its review process as recommended. In addition, we also 

recommended that EPA identify and prioritize for research key 

categories of benefits and costs that the agency cannot currently 

monetize that, once monetized, would most enhance the agency’s 

 13GAO, EPA’s Science Advisory Board: Improved Procedures Needed to Process 

Congressional Requests for Scientific Advice, GAO-15-500 (Washington, D.C.: June 4, 

2015). 

14GAO, Environmental Regulation: EPA Should Improve Adherence to Guidance for 

Selected Elements of Regulatory Impact Analyses, GAO-14-519 (Washington, D.C.: July 

18, 2014).
Page 10 GAO-16-722T 

ability to consider economic trade-offs associated with different 

regulatory alternatives. In its comments on the report, EPA 

acknowledged the importance of making continual improvements in 

valuing the benefits and costs of its regulatory actions. Since our 

report, EPA has worked on several critical areas to advance economic 

valuation including a long-term effort to examine the factors affecting 

the estimated costs of regulations and convening a scientific panel on 

modeling economywide impacts, among other things. While EPA has 

made progress toward implementing this recommendation, it remains 

open pending the incorporation of these efforts into its RIAs.

• Water issues: In May 2012, we reported on a key EPA program 

under section 319 of the Clean Water Act to address water pollution 

from nonpoint sources.15 Under this program, EPA provides grants to 

states to implement programs and fund projects that address nonpoint 

source pollution. We found that EPA regional offices had varied widely 

in the extent of their oversight and the amount of influence they had 

exerted over state nonpoint source pollution management programs. 

In addition, EPA’s primary measures of effectiveness of state 

management programs may not always demonstrate the achievement 

of program goals, which are to eliminate remaining water quality 

programs and prevent new threats from creating future water quality 

problems in water bodies currently of high quality. To help protect 

water quality, we recommended that EPA: (1) provide guidance to its 

regional offices on overseeing state programs and, (2) in its revised 

reporting guidelines to states, emphasize measures that more 

accurately reflect the overall health of targeted water bodies and 

demonstrate states’ focus on protecting high-quality water bodies, 

where appropriate.16 EPA agreed with these recommendations in its 

comments on the report. In 2013, EPA issued final guidelines laying 

out expectations for EPA regional oversight and issued a 

memorandum to its regional managers highlighting their oversight 

responsibilities. In addition, according to EPA, the agency is working 

with states on new measures for protecting unimpaired waters, among 

other things. Although EPA has taken action, these recommendations 

remain open pending our review of the guidelines’ implementation and 

 15GAO, Nonpoint Source Water Pollution: Greater Oversight and Additional Data Needed 

for Key EPA Water Program, GAO-12-335 (Washington, D.C.: May 31, 2012).

16We included these recommendations in our 2015 letter to EPA highlighting 

recommendations warranting priority attention. 
Page 11 GAO-16-722T 

completion of EPA’s efforts to work with states on water quality 

protection measures.

• Water issues: In May 2011, we reported on EPA’s implementation of 

requirements under 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act 

to determine whether regulation of additional contaminants, not 

already regulated, is warranted.17 Among other things, we found that 

EPA issued health advisories for several contaminants it determined 

did not warrant regulation. These health advisories are provided to 

inform states, localities, and public water systems that action may be 

required on their part to protect public health from exposure to 

contaminants in public drinking water, and establish concentrations of 

contaminants at which adverse health effects are not anticipated to 

occur over specific durations of exposure.18 However, several factors 

could hamper efforts by states and localities to use the health 

advisories in a timely and effective manner to protect public health. 

These factors include the lack of actual comprehensive data on the 

occurrence of these contaminants in public water systems, 

widespread state and local government budget constraints, and, in 

some cases, limitations in states’ ability to require systems to conduct 

testing. We recommended that EPA: (1) determine whether the use of 

health advisories provide sufficient information on unregulated 

contaminants to support timely and effective actions by states, 

localities, public water systems, and the public to ensure the safety of 

public drinking water, and if not, (2) develop a plan to more effectively 

communicate such information to these entities. In its comments on 

the report, EPA agreed with our recommendation, stating that it would 

determine whether and how to revise the advisories to better serve 

states, localities, public water systems, and the public. In a June 2016 

update, EPA officials identified actions the agency plans to take 

during fiscal years 2016 and 2017 in response to the 

recommendation, including documenting a process for updating 

health advisories and issuing concise updated health advisories. This 

recommendation remains open pending implementation of these 

 17GAO, Safe Drinking Water Act: EPA Should Improve Implementation of Requirements 

on Whether to Regulate Additional Contaminants, GAO-11-254 (Washington, D.C.: May 

27, 2011).

18Drinking water health advisories are not legally enforceable standards, and according to 

EPA, are subject to change as new information becomes available. 
Page 12 GAO-16-722T 

actions and our review and determination that actions taken have met 

the intent of the recommendation.

We have identified many benefits—programmatic and process 

improvements and financial benefits—based on EPA taking actions on 

our recommendations and related work. From fiscal years 2006 through 

2015, we have identified improvements to EPA’s programs and 

operations in categories such as public health and environmental justice; 

water issues; and toxics, chemical safety, and pesticides. In addition, we 

have identified financial benefits resulting from the implementation of our 

recommendations and our related work.19 The following are examples of 

programmatic and process improvements and financial benefits we have 

identified based on actions EPA took in response to our 

recommendations.

• Water issues: Under the Clean Water Act, EPA currently regulates 

58 industrial categories of wastewater pollution, such as petroleum 

refining, fertilizer manufacturing, and coal mining, with technologybased regulations called effluent guidelines. Such guidelines are 

applied in permits to limit the pollutants that facilities may discharge. 

The Clean Water Act also calls for EPA to revise the guidelines when 

appropriate. EPA has done so, for example, to reflect advances in 

treatment technology or changes in industries. EPA uses a two-phase 

process to identify industrial categories needing new or revised 

effluent guidelines, including an initial “screening” phase in which EPA 

ranks industrial categories according to the total toxicity of their 

 19Our findings and recommendations can produce measurable financial benefits for the 

federal government after the Congress or agencies act on them and government 

expenditures are reduced or funds are reallocated to other areas. To calculate our 

financial benefits we rely on estimates from non-GAO sources. These sources are 

typically the agency that acted on our work, a congressional committee, or the 

Congressional Budget Office.

EPA’s Implementation 

of GAO 

Recommendations 

and Related Work 

Has Resulted in 

Programmatic and 

Process 

Improvements and 

Financial Benefits

Programmatic 

Improvements
Page 13 GAO-16-722T 

wastewater.20 In September 2012, we concluded that limitations in 

EPA’s screening phase may have led the agency to overlook some 

industrial categories that warrant further review for new or revised 

effluent guidelines.21 For example, during its screening phase, EPA 

had not considered the availability of advanced treatment 

technologies for most industrial categories. We recommended that 

EPA modify the screening phase of its review process to include 

thorough consideration of information on the treatment technologies 

available to industrial categories as it considered revisions to its 

screening and review process. In its comments on the report, EPA 

agreed that factoring treatment technology information into its reviews 

would be valuable. In September 2014, EPA published a combined 

Final 2012 and Preliminary 2014 Effluent Guidelines Program report 

that discussed revisions to its screening process in response to our 

report. Specifically, EPA stated that it recognized the need to consider 

the availability of treatment technologies, process, changes, or 

pollution-prevention practices in the screening phase of its process 

and said that it is targeting new data sources to provide such 

information. In July 2015, EPA published its “Final 2014 Effluent 

Guidelines Program” with a diagram showing the change to EPA’s 

screening process to include screening of treatment technologies.

• Public health and environmental justice: In January 2010, we 

found that EPA had not maintained attention to children’s health 

through agency strategies and priorities. In 1996, EPA had created a 

national agenda on children’s health, and its 1997 and 2000 strategic 

plans highlighted children’s health as a key cross-agency program. 

However, the agency had not updated the agenda since 1996, and 

the focus on children was absent from the agency’s 2003, 2006, and 

 20EPA’s 2002 draft Strategy for National Clean Water Industrial Regulations was the 

foundation for EPA’s process. In the first, or “screening,” phase, EPA uses data from two 

EPA databases to rank industrial categories according to the total toxicity of their 

wastewater. Using this ranking, public comments, and other considerations, EPA has 

identified relatively few industrial categories posing the highest hazard for the next, or 

“further review,” phase. In this further review phase, EPA evaluates the categories to 

identify those that are appropriate for new or revised guidelines because treatment 

technologies are available to reduce pollutant discharges.

21GAO, Water Pollution: EPA Has Improved Its Review of Effluent Guidelines but Could 

Benefit from More Information on Treatment Technologies, GAO-12-845 (Washington, 

D.C.: Sept. 10, 2012).
Page 14 GAO-16-722T 

2009 draft strategic plans.22 We recommended, among other things, 

that EPA’s strategic plan, which was under development at the time, 

expressly articulate children-specific goals, objectives, and targets. 

EPA agreed to implement our recommendation. On September 30, 

2010, EPA submitted its fiscal year 2011-2015 strategic plan to 

Congress, which included children’s health and environmental justice 

as a cross-cutting strategy.23 The strategic plan contains childrenspecific goals including reducing the concentration of particular 

chemicals, such as those in certain pesticides, in children by 2014. 

EPA’s annual action plans support the strategic plan goals. The action 

plans also contain children-specific goals, such as advancing the use 

of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in settings where children are 

present, with the long-term goal that every school in America be 

managed under a verifiable IPM program.24

• Toxics, chemical safety, and pesticides: EPA’s Integrated Risk 

Information System (IRIS) contains EPA’s scientific position on the 

potential human health effects of exposure to more than 540 

chemicals. In 2008, we examined EPA’s efforts to address a backlog 

of 70 ongoing IRIS assessments, that, as of December 2007, most of 

which had been in progress for more than 5 years, and found that 

EPA’s productivity problems stemmed from several key factors, 

including required reviews of IRIS assessments by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and other agencies; EPA’s 

management decision in some cases to suspend ongoing 

assessments while waiting for additional scientific studies to be 

completed; and the compounding effects of delays—even one delay 

can have a domino effect, requiring the process to essentially be 

 22GAO, Environmental Health: High-level Strategy and Leadership Needed to Continue 

Progress toward Protecting Children from Environmental Threats, GAO-10-205 

(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 28, 2010). 

23In its fiscal year 2014-2018 strategic plan, EPA identified children’s environmental health 

as an ongoing priority area.

24IPM focuses on long-term prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of 

techniques, such as biological control, habitat manipulation, modification of cultural 

practices, and use of resistant varieties (e.g., planting pest-resistant crop varieties), paired 

with monitoring to reduce unnecessary pesticide applications.

Process Improvements
Page 15 GAO-16-722T 

repeated to incorporate changing science.25 We recommended, 

among other things, that EPA establish a policy that: (1) endorsed 

conducting IRIS assessments on the basis of peer-reviewed scientific 

studies available at the time of the assessment, and (2) developed 

criteria that only allows assessments to be suspended, to await the 

completion of scientific studies, under exceptional circumstances.26 In 

commenting on our report, EPA agreed to consider our 

recommendations in revising the IRIS development process.27 In 

addition to other changes made since our 2008 report, EPA 

announced “stopping rules” in July 2013 that outlined (1) a cut-off 

point for accepting new studies for individual IRIS assessments and 

raising scientific issues related to the assessment, and (2) criteria 

under which the agency will suspend assessments to await new 

studies. EPA stated that these changes are intended to increase the 

number of IRIS assessments completed each year and provide more 

accurate assessment development timelines to the public.

• Water issues: Rural and small communities could require $190 billion 

over the coming decades for water and wastewater infrastructure, 

according to federal agencies. In our body of work on water and 

wastewater infrastructure, we have concluded that improved 

coordination and funding could enhance federal efforts to help meet 

 25GAO, Chemical Assessments: Low Productivity and New Interagency Review Process 

Limit the Usefulness and Credibility of EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System, 

GAO-08-440 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 7, 2008). 

26This recommendation remains open pending implementation of EPA’s “stopping rules”

and our review and determination that actions taken by EPA have met the intent of the 

recommendation. We included this recommendation in our 2015 letter to EPA highlighting 

recommendations warranting priority attention.

27We added EPA’s processes for assessing and controlling toxic chemicals as a high-risk 

area in our 2009 biennial status report on governmentwide risk areas requiring increased 

attention by executive agencies and Congress. The high-risk designation stemmed from 

our conclusion that EPA has insufficient chemical assessment data from the IRIS 

program, as well as under the Toxic Substances Control Act, to determine whether it 

should establish controls to limit public exposure to many chemicals that may pose 

substantial health risks.
Page 16 GAO-16-722T 

communities’ needs.28 Specifically, in October 2012, we concluded 

that given the reliance of rural communities on federal grants and 

loans to meet their water and wastewater infrastructure needs, it was 

important to make the most of limited federal funds to help as many 

communities as possible and to eliminate the potential duplication of 

effort by communities when they apply for funds.29 To improve 

coordination and reduce the potential for inefficiencies and duplication 

of effort, we recommended, among other things, that EPA and the 

Department of Agriculture ensure the timely completion of an 

interagency effort to develop guidelines to assist states in developing 

their own uniform preliminary engineering reports—a step in the 

application process for assistance programs—to meet federal and 

state requirements for assistance.30 Although EPA neither agreed nor 

disagreed with the recommendation, EPA and the Department of 

Agriculture issued guidance in January 2013 that made it easier for 

rural communities to apply for funding and are working with states to 

adopt the guidelines.

• Environmental contamination and cleanup: During the course of 

work related to a July 2008 report on the funding and reported costs 

of Superfund enforcement and administrative activities,31 we reviewed 

EPA’s methodology for calculating the indirect costs—or 

administrative costs for managing the Superfund program—that EPA 

charged responsible parties for in fiscal year 2006. In conducting this 

work, we identified two spending codes for which associated 

 28GAO, Rural Water Infrastructure: Federal Agencies Provide Funding but Could Increase 

Coordination to Help Communities , GAO-15-450T (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 27, 2015; 

reissued on Nov. 6, 2015); GAO, Rural Water Infrastructure: Additional Coordination Can 

Help Avoid Potentially Duplicative Application Requirements, GAO-13-111 (Washington, 

D.C.: Oct. 16, 2012); GAO, Rural Water Infrastructure: Improved Coordination and 

Funding Processes Could Enhance Federal Efforts to Meet Needs in the U.S.-Mexico 

Border Region, GAO-10-126 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 18, 2009); GAO, Water Resources: 

Four Federal Agencies Provide Funding for Rural Water Supply and Wastewater Projects, 

GAO-07-1094 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 7, 2007). 

29GAO-13-111.

30Preliminary engineering reports describe the proposed project, including its purpose, 

features of the proposed location, condition of any existing facilities, alternative 

approaches considered, design features, and costs. 

31GAO, Superfund: Funding and Reported Costs of Enforcement and Administrative 

Activities, GAO-08-841R (Washington, D.C.: July 18, 2008).

Financial Benefits
Page 17 GAO-16-722T 

administrative costs had not been carried over into EPA’s calculations 

of the indirect cost rate applicable to each region for fiscal year 

2006.32 As a result of this error, the percentage that EPA was 

charging responsible parties for indirect costs associated with fiscal 

year 2006 spending was lower than it should have been. To correct 

the error, EPA published revised indirect cost rates for fiscal years 

2005 and 2006 in May 2008. EPA acknowledged that correcting this 

error would result in more money being potentially recoverable from 

responsible parties. In 2010, we estimated that the additional amount 

EPA had recovered (or would recover) had a present worth value of 

about $42.2 million.33

• Management and operations: Beginning in fiscal year 2000, we 

have issued a body of work aimed at raising the level of attention 

given to improper payments across government.34 Through our work, 

we found that improper payments were a long-standing, widespread, 

and significant problem in the federal government and contributed to 

Congress passing the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 

(IPIA). This act, as amended, requires that all agencies annually 

identify and review programs and activities that may be susceptible to 

significant improper payments, provisions that coincide with 

recommendations we made that agencies estimate, reduce, and 

publicly report improper payments.35 Subsequently, in 2005, EPA 

began reporting on the improper payment rate for the Clean Water 

 32We identified this error and EPA corrected it during the course of our work. Therefore, 

we did not report on it in GAO-08-841R.

33Precise data were not available on the exact amount of the additional fiscal year 2005 

and 2006 indirect costs that EPA had recovered (or would recover) as a result of 

correcting the error we identified. 

34GAO, Improper Payments: Progress Made but Challenges Remain in Estimating and 

Reducing Improper Payments, GAO-09-628T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 22, 2009); GAO 

Improper Payments: Status of Agencies’ Efforts to Address Improper Payment and 

Recovery Auditing Requirements, GAO-08-438T (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 31, 2008); GAO, 

Improper Payments: Agencies’ Fiscal Year 2005 Reporting under the Improper Payments 

Information Act Remains Incomplete, GAO-07-92 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 14, 2006); 

GAO, Financial Management: Coordinated Approach Needed to Address the 

Government’s Improper Payments Problems, GAO-02-749 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 9, 

2002); GAO, Financial Management: Increased Attention Needed to Prevent Billions in 

Improper Payments, GAO/AIMD-00-10 (Oct. 29, 1999).

35See, for example, GAO-02-749.
Page 18 GAO-16-722T 

and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds.36 By 2009, the most 

recent year for which we identified financial benefits from the agency 

addressing improper payments, EPA reported that its total improper 

payment error rates for the State Revolving Funds declined by 0.16 

percent since the first reporting. This resulted in about a $4.5 million 

decrease in improper payments in Clean Water and Drinking Water 

State Revolving Funds program payments for fiscal years 2008 and 

2009.37

In conclusion, as the fiscal pressures facing the government continue, so 

too does the need for executive branch agencies to improve the efficiency 

and effectiveness of government programs and activities. Our 

recommendations provide a significant opportunity to improve the 

government’s fiscal position, better serve the public, and make 

government programs more efficient and effective. EPA’s implementation 

of our outstanding recommendations will help the agency continue to 

improve its performance and the efficiency and effectiveness of its 

operations. We will continue to work with Congress to monitor and draw 

attention to these important issues.

Chairman Rounds, Ranking Member Markey, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, this completes my prepared statement. I would be 

pleased to answer questions that you may have at this time.

 36The federal government provides some financial support to communities for their 

drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects. The largest sources of federal 

funding are EPA’s Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) program, created under the 

Water Quality Act of 1987, which provides funds to repair and replace wastewater 

infrastructure, and EPA’s Drinking Water SRF program, created under the Safe Drinking 

Water Act Amendments of 1996, which provides funds to upgrade and replace drinking 

water infrastructure. 

37We confirmed with EPA officials that there were no offsetting implementation costs 

associated with this program. Data used to calculate these benefits were derived from 

EPA’s reported independent estimates of improper payments.
Page 19 GAO-16-722T 

If you or your staff members have any future questions about this 

testimony, please contact Alfredo Gómez, Director; at (202) 512-3841 or 

gomezj@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional 

Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this 

statement. Key contributors to this testimony include Barb Patterson, 

Assistant Director; Megan Darnley; Cindy Gilbert; Anne Hobson; Richard 

Johnson; Celia R. Mendive; Marie Suding; Sara Sullivan; and Kiki 

Theodoropoulos.

GAO Contacts and 

Staff 

Acknowledgements
Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations to 

EPA, by Category

Page 20 GAO-16-722T 

Table 1: GAO Reports Containing Recommendations to EPA, by Category, and Status of Recommendations as of May 23, 

2016

Number of recommendations, fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015

Category and report Implemented

Not 

implemented Total

Management and Operations 53 51 104

GAO-06-95 1 — 1

Indian Tribes: EPA Should Reduce the Review Time for Tribal Requests to Manage 

Environmental Programs

GAO-06-625 7 — 7

Grants Management: EPA Has Made Progress in Grant Reforms but Needs to Address 

Weaknesses in Implementation and Accountability

GAO-06-831 1 — 1

Enterprise Architecture: Leadership Remains Key to Establishing and Leveraging 

Architectures for Organizational Transformation

GAO-07-883 3 1 4

Environmental Protection: EPA-State Enforcement Partnership Has Improved, but 

EPA’s Oversight Needs Further Enhancement

GAO-08-265 3 1 4

Health and Safety Information: EPA and OSHA Could Improve Their Processes for 

Preparing Communication Products

GAO-08-304 4 — 4

Environmental Protection: EPA Needs to Ensure That Best Practices and Procedures 

Are Followed When Making Further Changes to Its Library Network

GAO-08-742 1 1 2

Federal Records: National Archives and Selected Agencies Need to Strengthen E-Mail 

Management

GAO-08-925 — 1 1

Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish Comprehensive Policies to 

Address Changes to Projects’ Cost, Schedule, and Performance Goals

GAO-08-1111R 6 — 6

Environmental Enforcement: EPA Needs to Improve the Accuracy and Transparency of 

Measures Used to Report on Program Effectiveness

GAO-09-205 1 — 1

Federal Rulemaking: Improvements Needed to Monitoring and Evaluation of Rules 

Development as Well as to the Transparency of OMB Regulatory Reviews

GAO-09-446 1 — 1

Biofuels: Potential Effects and Challenges of Required Increases in Production and Use

GAO-10-202 2 — 2

Information Security: Agencies Need to Implement Federal Desktop Core Configuration 

Requirements

Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations 

to EPA, by Category
Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations to 

EPA, by Category

Page 21 GAO-16-722T 

Number of recommendations, fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015

Category and report Implemented

Not 

implemented Total

Management and Operations (cont.)

GAO-10-413 — 2 2

Workforce Planning: Interior, EPA, and the Forest Service Should Strengthen Linkages 

to Their Strategic Plans and Improve Evaluation

GAO-10-947 3 3 6

Environmental Protection Agency: EPA Needs to Complete a Strategy for Its Library 

Network to Meet Users' Needs

GAO-11-347 6 1 7

Environmental Protection Agency: To Better Fulfill Its Mission, EPA Needs a More 

Coordinated Approach to Managing Its Laboratories

GAO-11-548R — 1 1

Mentor-Protege Programs Have Policies That Aim to Benefit Participants but Do Not 

Require Postagreement Tracking

GAO-11-565 2 — 2

Data Center Consolidation: Agencies Need to Complete Inventories and Plans to 

Achieve Expected Savings

GAO-11-605 2 — 2

Social Media: Federal Agencies Need Policies and Procedures for Managing and 

Protecting Information They Access and Disseminate

GAO-12-629 — 2 2

Information Technology Cost Estimation: Agencies Need to Address Significant 

Weaknesses in Policies and Practices

GAO-12-635 — 1 1

EPA Regulations and Electricity: Better Monitoring by Agencies Could Strengthen 

Efforts to Address Potential Challenges

GAO-12-692 1 — 1

Human Capital: HHS and EPA Can Improve Practices Under Special Hiring Authorities

GAO-12-696 8 4 12

Information Security: Environmental Protection Agency Needs to Resolve Weaknesses

GAO-12-791 — 2 2

Organizational Transformation: Enterprise Architecture Value Needs to Be Measured 

and Reported

GAO-13-115 — 2 2

Environmental Protection: EPA Should Develop a Strategic Plan for Its New 

Compliance Initiative
Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations to 

EPA, by Category

Page 22 GAO-16-722T 

Number of recommendations, fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015

Category and report Implemented

Not 

implemented Total

Management and Operations (cont.)

GAO-14-65 — 3 3

Information Technology: Additional OMB and Agency Actions Are Needed to Achieve 

Portfolio Savings

GAO-14-249 — 2 2

Petroleum Refining: Industry’s Outlook Depends on Market Changes and Key 

Environmental Regulations

GAO-14-413 — 6 6

Federal Software Licenses: Better Management Needed to Achieve Significant Savings 

Government-Wide

GAO-14-519 — 4 4

Environmental Regulation: EPA Should Improve Adherence to Guidance for Selected 

Elements of Regulatory Impact Analyses

GAO-14-612 — 2 2

Information Security: Agencies Need to Improve Oversight of Contractor Controls

GAO-14-713 1 — 1

Data Center Consolidation: Reporting Can Be Improved to Reflect Substantial Planned 

Savings

GAO-15-431 — 3 3

Telecommunications: Agencies Need Better Controls to Achieve Significant Savings on 

Mobile Devices and Services

GAO-15-500 — 4 4

EPA’s Science Advisory Board: Improved Procedures Needed to Process 

Congressional Requests for Scientific Advice

GAO-15-617 — 1 1

Information Technology Reform: Billions of Dollars in Savings Have Been Realized, but 

Agencies Need to Complete Reinvestment Plans

GAO-15-618 — 4 4

Grants Management: EPA Has Opportunities to Improve Planning and Compliance 

Monitoring

Water Issues 47 36 83

GAO-06-96 3 3 6

Chesapeake Bay Program: Improved Strategies Are Needed to Better Assess, Report, 

and Manage Restoration Progress

GAO-06-148 10 1 11

Drinking Water: EPA Should Strengthen Ongoing Efforts to Ensure That Consumers 

Are Protected from Lead Contamination
Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations to 

EPA, by Category

Page 23 GAO-16-722T 

Number of recommendations, fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015

Category and report Implemented

Not 

implemented Total

Water Issues (cont.)

GAO-06-390 1 — 1

Securing Wastewater Facilities: Utilities Have Made Important Upgrades but Further 

Improvements to Key System Components May Be Limited by Costs and Other 

Constraints

GAO-06-639 4 — 4

Clean Water: Better Information and Targeted Prevention Efforts Could Enhance Spill 

Management in the St. Clair-Detroit River Corridor

GAO-07-479 1 — 1

Clean Water: Further Implementation and Better Cost Data Needed to Determine

Impact of EPA’s Storm Water Program on Communities

GAO-07-591 2 1 3

Great Lakes: EPA and States Have Made Progress in Implementing the BEACH Act, 

but Additional Actions Could Improve Public Health Protection

GAO-10-549 1 — 1

Nanotechnology: Nanomaterials Are Widely Used in Commerce, but EPA Faces 

Challenges in Regulating Risk

GAO-10-604 1 — 1

Recovery Act: States’ and Localities’ Uses of Funds and Actions Needed to Address 

Implementation Challenges and Bolster Accountability

GAO-11-254 13 4 17

Safe Drinking Water Act: EPA Should Improve Implementation of Requirements on 

Whether to Regulate Additional Contaminants

GAO-11-346 1 — 1

Environmental Health: Action Needed to Sustain Agencies’ Collaboration on 

Pharmaceuticals in Drinking Water

GAO-11-381 1 3 4

Drinking Water: Unreliable State Data Limit EPA’s Ability to Target Enforcement 

Priorities and Communicate Water Systems’ Performance

GAO-11-802 3 1 4

Chesapeake Bay: Restoration Effort Needs Common Federal and State Goals and 

Assessment Approach

GAO-12-335 — 2 2

Nonpoint Source Water Pollution: Greater Oversight and Additional Data Needed for 

Key EPA Water Program

GAO-12-845 3 — 3

Water Pollution: EPA Has Improved Its Review of Effluent Guidelines but Could Benefit 

from More Information on Treatment Technologies
Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations to 

EPA, by Category

Page 24 GAO-16-722T 

Number of recommendations, fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015

Category and report Implemented

Not 

implemented Total

Water Issues (cont.)

GAO-13-39 — 1 1

Water Quality: EPA Faces Challenges in Addressing Damage Caused by Airborne 

Pollutants

GAO-13-111 2 1 3

Rural Water Infrastructure: Additional Coordination Can Help Avoid Potentially 

Duplicative Application Requirements

GAO-13-797 1 6 7

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative: Further Actions Would Result in More Useful 

Assessments and Help Address Factors That Limit Progress

GAO-14-80 — 4 4

Clean Water Act: Changes Needed If Key EPA Program Is to Help Fulfill the Nation’s 

Water Quality Goals

GAO-14-103 — 3 3

Drinking Water: EPA Has Improved Its Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Program, 

but Additional Action Is Needed

GAO-14-555 — 4 4

Drinking Water: EPA Program to Protect Underground Sources from Injection of Fluids 

Associated With Oil and Gas Production Needs Improvement

GAO-15-567 — 2 2

State Revolving Funds: Improved Financial Indicators Could Strengthen EPA Oversight

Environmental Contamination and Cleanup 38 18 56

GAO-06-45 — 1 1

Environmental Protection: More Complete Data and Continued Emphasis on Leak 

Prevention Could Improve EPA’s Underground Storage Tank Program

GAO-06-47 2 1 3

Electronic Waste: Strengthening the Role of the Federal Government in Encouraging 

Recycling and Reuse

GAO-06-99 2 — 2

Hazardous Waste: EPA Needs to Clarify the Types of Mercury Waste That Can Be 

Treated and Disposed of Using the Debris Regulations

GAO-07-37 1 — 1

Recycling: Additional Efforts Could Increase Municipal Recycling

GAO-07-152 4 — 4

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks: EPA Should Take Steps to Better Ensure the 

Effective Use of Public Funding for Cleanups

GAO-07-651 5 1 6

Hurricane Katrina: EPA’s Current and Future Environmental Protection Efforts Could Be 

Enhanced by Addressing Issues and Challenges Faced on the Gulf Coast
Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations to 

EPA, by Category

Page 25 GAO-16-722T 

Number of recommendations, fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015

Category and report Implemented

Not 

implemented Total

Environmental Contamination and Cleanup (cont.)

GAO-07-763 1 — 1

Aboveground Oil Storage Tanks: Observations on EPA’s Economic Analyses of 

Amendments to the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Rule

GAO-07-1091 3 — 3

World Trade Center: EPA’s Most Recent Test and Clean Program Raises Concerns 

That Need to Be Addressed to Better Prepare for Indoor Contamination Following 

Disasters

GAO-08-71 3 — 3

Hazardous Materials: EPA May Need to Reassess Sites Receiving AsbestosContaminated Ore from Libby, Montana, and Should Improve Its Public Notification 

Process

GAO-08-482 — 3 3

Aboveground Oil Storage Tanks: More Complete Facility Data Could Improve 

Implementation of EPA’s Spill Prevention Program

GAO-08-944 — 1 1

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations: EPA Needs More Information and a Clearly 

Defined Strategy to Protect Air and Water Quality from Pollutants of Concern

GAO-08-1044 4 — 4

Electronic Waste: EPA Needs to Better Control Harmful U.S. Exports through Stronger 

Enforcement and More Comprehensive Regulation

GAO-09-278 1 — 1

Superfund: Greater EPA Enforcement and Reporting Are Needed to Enhance Cleanup 

at DOD Sites

GAO-09-656 2 — 2

Superfund: Litigation Has Decreased and EPA Needs Better Information on Site 

Cleanup and Cost Issues to Estimate Future Program Funding Requirements

GAO-10-348 2 1 3

Superfund: Interagency Agreements and Improved Project Management Needed to 

Achieve Cleanup Progress at Key Defense Installations

GAO-10-380 1 — 1

Superfund: EPA’s Estimated Costs to Remediate Existing Sites Exceed Current 

Funding Levels, and More Sites Are Expected to Be Added to the National Priorities List

GAO-10-626 1 1 2

Electronic Waste: Considerations for Promoting Environmentally Sound Reuse and 

Recycling

GAO-11-513 1 — 1

Biofuels: Challenges to the Transportation, Sale, and Use of Intermediate Ethanol 

Blends
Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations to 

EPA, by Category

Page 26 GAO-16-722T 

Number of recommendations, fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015

Category and report Implemented

Not 

implemented Total

Environmental Contamination and Cleanup (cont.)

GAO-11-514 1 — 1

Hazardous Waste: Early Goals Have Been Met in EPA’s Corrective Action Program, but 

Resource and Technical Challenges Will Constrain Future Progress

GAO-12-74 — 1 1

Electronic Waste: Actions Needed to Provide Assurance That Used Federal Electronics 

Are Disposed of in an Environmentally Responsible Manner

GAO-12-488 1 — 1

Anthrax: DHS Faces Challenges in Validating Methods for Sample Collection and 

Analysis

GAO-12-505 — 1 1

Phosphate Mining: Oversight Has Strengthened, but Financial Assurances and 

Coordination Still Need Improvement

GAO-12-544 1 — 1

Uranium Mining: Opportunities Exist to Improve Oversight of Financial Assurances

GAO-12-585 1 — 1

Oil Dispersants: Additional Research Needed, Particularly on Subsurface and Arctic 

Applications

GAO-13-252 — 4 4

Superfund: EPA Should Take Steps to Improve Its Management of Alternatives to 

Placing Sites on the National Priorities List

GAO-14-323 1 — 1

Uranium Contamination: Overall Scope, Time Frame, and Cost Information Is Needed 

for Contamination Cleanup on the Navajo Reservation

GAO-15-35 — 3 3

Hazardous Waste: Agencies Should Take Steps to Improve Information on USDA’s and 

Interior’s Potentially Contaminated Sites

Toxics, Chemical Safety, and Pesticides 14 26 40

GAO-06-595 3 — 3

Human Health Risk Assessment: EPA Has Taken Steps to Strengthen Its Process, but 

Improvements Needed in Planning, Data Development, and Training

GAO-08-440 5 3 8

Chemical Assessments: Low Productivity and New Interagency Review Process Limit 

the Usefulness and Credibility of EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System

GAO-09-353 3 — 3

Biomonitoring: EPA Needs to Coordinate Its Research Strategy and Clarify Its Authority 

to Obtain Biomonitoring Data
Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations to 

EPA, by Category

Page 27 GAO-16-722T 

Number of recommendations, fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015

Category and report Implemented

Not 

implemented Total

Toxics, Chemical Safety, and Pesticides (cont.)

GAO-10-549 2 3 5

Nanotechnology: Nanomaterials Are Widely Used in Commerce, but EPA Faces 

Challenges in Regulating Risk

GAO-12-42 — 6 6

Chemical Assessments: Challenges Remain with EPA’s Integrated Risk Information 

System Program

GAO-13-145 — 3 3

Pesticides: EPA Should Take Steps to Improve Its Oversight of Conditional 

Registrations

GAO-13-249 — 3 3

Toxic Substances: EPA Has Increased Efforts to Assess and Control Chemicals but 

Could Strengthen Its Approach

GAO-13-369 — 3 3

Chemical Assessments: An Agencywide Strategy May Help EPA Address Unmet 

Needs for Integrated Risk Information System Assessments

GAO-14-274 1 1 2

Chemical Safety: Actions Needed to Improve Federal Oversight of Facilities with 

Ammonium Nitrate

GAO-14-289 — 4 4

Pesticide Safety: Improvements Needed in EPA’s Good Laboratory Practices Inspection 

Program

Air Quality, Climate Change, and Energy Efficiency 12 11 23

GAO-06-97 1 — 1

Climate Change: EPA and DOE Should Do More to Encourage Progress Under Two 

Voluntary Programs

GAO-06-669 — 5 5

Clean Air Act: EPA Should Improve the Management of Its Air Toxics Program

GAO-08-944 2 1 3

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations: EPA Needs More Information and a Clearly 

Defined Strategy to Protect Air and Water Quality from Pollutants of Concern

GAO-08-980 2 — 2

Indoor Mold: Better Coordination of Research on Health Effects and More Consistent 

Guidance Would Improve Federal Efforts

GAO-08-1080 1 — 1

Climate Change: Federal Actions Will Greatly Affect the Viability of Carbon Capture and 

Storage As a Key Mitigation Option

GAO-09-446 1 — 1

Biofuels: Potential Effects and Challenges of Required Increases in Production and Use
Appendix I: GAO Reports from Fiscal Years 

2006 through 2015 with Recommendations to 

EPA, by Category

Page 28 GAO-16-722T 

Number of recommendations, fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015

Category and report Implemented

Not 

implemented Total

Air Quality, Climate Change, and Energy Efficiency (cont.)

GAO-10-336 3 — 3

Vehicle Fuel Economy: NHTSA and EPA’s Partnership for Setting Fuel Economy and 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards Improved Analysis and Should Be Maintained

GAO-11-888 1 — 1

Energy Star: Providing Opportunities for Additional Review of EPA’s Decisions Could

Strengthen the Program

GAO-12-79 — 1 1

Green Building: Federal Initiatives for the Nonfederal Sector Could Benefit from More 

Interagency Collaboration

GAO-12-261 — 1 1

Diesel Pollution: Fragmented Federal Programs That Reduce Mobile Source Emissions 

Could Be Improved

GAO-12-590 — 2 2

Air Pollution: EPA Needs Better Information on New Source Review Permits

GAO-13-135 1 — 1

Energy Efficiency: Better Coordination among Federal Programs Needed to Allocate 

Testing Resources

GAO-13-242 — 1 1

Climate Change: Future Federal Adaptation Efforts Could Better Support Local 

Infrastructure Decision Makers

Public Health and Environmental Justice 10 9 19

GAO-08-1155T 2 — 2

Environmental Health: EPA Efforts to Address Children’s Health Issues Need Greater 

Focus, Direction, and Top-Level Commitment

GAO-09-60 — 1 1

Genetically Engineered Crops: Agencies Are Proposing Changes to Improve Oversight, 

but Could Take Additional Steps to Enhance Coordination and Monitoring

GAO-10-205 8 — 8

Environmental Health: High-level Strategy and Leadership Needed to Continue 

Progress toward Protecting Children from Environmental Threats

GAO-12-77 — 4 4

Environmental Justice: EPA Needs to Take Additional Actions to Help Ensure Effective 

Implementation

GAO-13-254 — 4 4

Environmental Health: EPA Has Made Substantial Progress but Could Improve 

Processes for Considering Children’s Health

Total 174 151 325

Source: GAO

(100891)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. 

Listen to our Podcasts and read The Watchblog.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.