January 2001 Major Managem

Challenges and 

Program Risks

Environmental Protecti

Agency

GAO-01-257

Page 1 GAO-01-257 

Letter 

Overview 

Major 

Performance 

and 

Accountability 

Challenges

Related GAO 

Products

Performance 

and 

Accountability 

Series
Page 2 GAO-01-257 EP
of th

Page 3 GAO-01-257 

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

January 2001

The President of the Senate

The Speaker of the House of Representati

This report addresses the major performa

accountability challenges facing the Envir

Protection Agency (EPA) as it seeks to me

of protecting human health and the enviro

includes a summary of actions that EPA h

that are under way to address these challe

outlines further actions that GAO believes 

This analysis should help the new Congre

administration carry out their responsibil

improve government for the benefit of the 

people.

This report is part of a special series, first 

January 1999, entitled the Performance an

Accountability Series: Major Management 

and Program Risks. In that series, GAO ad

Congress that it planned to reassess the m

and criteria used to determine which fede

government operations and functions sho

highlighted and which should be designat

risk.” GAO completed the assessment, con

comments provided on a publicly availabl

draft, and published its guidance docume

Determining Performance and Accountab

Challenges and High Risks (GAO-01-159SP

November 2000.

This 2001 Performance and Accountabilit

contains separate reports on 21 agencies—

each cabinet department, most major inde

agencies, and the U.S. Postal Service. The 

includes a governmentwide perspective on 
Page 4 GAO-01-257 EP

and management challenges across the fede

government. As a companion volume to this 

is issuing an update on those government op

and programs that its work identified as “hig

because of either their greater vulnerabilitie

fraud, abuse, and mismanagement or major c

associated with their economy, efficiency, or 

effectiveness.

David M. Walker

Comptroller General 

of the United States
Page 5 GAO-01-257 
Page 6 GAO-01-257 

The Environmental Protection Agency (E

18,000 employees and an annual budget o

approximately $7 billion, funds diverse re

research, enforcement, and technical assi

programs and activities that are directed t

controlling pollution of the air, land, and w

nation’s annual costs to comply with envi

regulations are substantial and have been 

costs estimated at about $148 billion in 20

identified the following performance and 

challenges that have hindered EPA in its e

establish an integrated, cost-effective fram

meeting its critical mission of protecting h

and the environment. 

Over the years, we have made recommend

to help the agency address these challeng

concurred with most of our recommendat

generally has made modest progress, but k

remain. A notable exception is the Superf

in which EPA has made significant progre

long-standing management challenges. We 

• Improve environmental and performance 

 information management to set priorities an

 measure results

• Place greater emphasis on developing a 

 comprehensive human capital approach

• Strengthen working relationships with the st
Page 7 GAO-01-257 

the program as a high-risk area in 1990 becau

recurring management problems heightened 

government’s financial risk, given the potent

waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. Th

has made significant progress in addressing 

recommendations and thus we are no longer 

the program as high risk. Nonetheless, our w

that in the Superfund program and in other a

still confronted with challenges that will req

sustained attention by the agency’s leaders. 

Environmental and 

Performance 

Information 

Management

Responding to our recommendations and tho

entities, EPA has given greater attention in r

to improving its management of information

example, in 1999, EPA reorganized the agenc

information management activities by establ

Office of Environmental Information, which 

as the focal point for agencywide informatio

management. EPA concurred with the recom

we made in 1999 that it develop a comprehen

information management strategy to ensure 

completeness, compatibility, and accuracy o

However, the agency has made slow progres

developing and implementing such a strategy 

its long-standing and continuing information 

management challenges.

Important gaps in information still exist con

environmental conditions and the effects of 

conditions on human health. For example, g

data on the quality of the nation’s waters ma

difficult for the agency to effectively assess t

condition of these waters and to report on th

its efforts to achieve water quality goals. Wa

assessment data, which are collected by the 

provided to EPA, are available for only 6 per

nation’s shorelines, 19 percent of its rivers an

and 40 percent of its lakes. In response to ou

recommendations, EPA has taken steps towa
Page 8 GAO-01-257 EP

greater use of other national and regional 

assessments. These efforts should close s

the agency’s data. 

Furthermore, despite public concern abou

risks posed by exposures to toxic chemic

exposure data are being collected for only 

percent of the more than 1,450 potentially 

chemicals we recently reviewed. We reco

fiscal year 2000 that EPA and the Departm

and Human Services develop a coordinate

the monitoring and reporting of human ex

potentially toxic chemicals. Both agencies 

our recommendation and stated that they 

together to develop such a coordinated st

Obtaining and managing environmental in

been a long-standing challenge for EPA. W

comprehensive picture of environmental c

difficult for EPA to set risk-based prioritie

programs, evaluate performance progress 

environmental results, and report on its 

accomplishments in a credible way as req

Government Performance and Results Ac

preparing its strategic and annual perform

EPA has not had the information it needs 

environmental conditions and changes ov

identify problem areas that are emerging 

additional regulatory actions or other atte

According to EPA managers, the annual p

measures established under GPRA are oft

the basis of available data that focus prim

outputs rather than on environmental resu

credible data are often lacking. Although 

measures can provide important informat

managers to use in managing their program

recognizes that it needs to link more of its 

results and to develop additional outcome 

assess progress in protecting human healt

environment. 
Page 9 GAO-01-257 

Moreover, as part of EPA’s efforts to improve 

information management, it is very importan

agency continue strengthening its security o

computerized information systems. We have 

recommended that it take a number of steps 

strengthen access controls associated with i

computer operating systems and agencywide 

enhance computer incident management eff

improve security program management and 

EPA concurred with our recommendations a

informed us of related corrective actions tha

properly implemented, can begin to address 

serious problems. However, without ongoing 

and top management support and attention, 

efforts may not have a lasting effect. 

EPA’s Human 

Capital

With a large and diverse staff spread across t

is important for EPA to focus greater attenti

strategic human capital management to impr

performance and accountability in accompli

critical and complex mission of protecting hu

and the environment. EPA’s human capital pr

be seen as part of a broader pattern of huma

shortcomings that have eroded mission capa

across the federal government. See our High-

An Update (GAO-01-263, January 2001) for a 

of human capital as a newly designated gover

high-risk area. To its credit, the agency has r

initiated some improvements to its human ca

activities. For example, EPA prepared an ove

strategy in November 2000 to guide its huma

activities, which are being taken to align its p

policies with the mission and strategic goals 

objectives established for the agency under G

has not, however, linked these actions to spe

capital issues related to each of the agency’s 

goals, although it plans to do so in future upd

strategic plan. 
Page 10 GAO-01-257 EP

As part of its human capital strategy, EPA 

specific strategy for assessing its human c

but the agency has not yet implemented it

of a strategy has made it difficult for EPA 

human capital investments with its strateg

objectives and (2) determine the number 

and types of competencies needed and th

deployment of its workforce across the or

When the agency does implement the stra

among other things, need to determine th

employees and the specific competencies 

where they should be deployed among va

goals and objectives, across program area

various parts of the country. Once the age

such specific determinations, EPA’s senio

will need to remain committed to and pro

resources for ensuring that needed emplo

recruited, developed, and retained to mee

goals and objectives. The agency will also 

ensure that it collects and analyzes accura

amount of time being spent on various pr

activities. Without such data, EPA cannot 

determine the costs of carrying out its str

and objectives and ensure that its workfo

used in the most effective manner consist

intent of GPRA and congressional approp

EPA-State Working 

Relationships

EPA, as authorized by various environmen

has increasingly delegated responsibilities 

environmental programs to the states. EP

relationships with the states at times has 

owing, in large part, to fundamental disag

respective roles, the priorities among stat

environmental programs, and the appropr

federal oversight. EPA, the states, industr

key environmental stakeholders now reco

nation’s complex future environmental ch

require adopting fundamentally different r

approaches that are more flexible and les
Page 11 GAO-01-257 

administratively burdensome. EPA has initia

strategies with its state partners and other st

that it hopes will foster a climate conducive 

addressing past concerns. These strategies a

to create an atmosphere in which an improv

environmental regulatory system can be dev

one that is more focused on results and relie

common set of performance measures to help 

the agency’s progress toward meeting its stra

and objectives under GPRA. While EPA’s rec

strategies appear to be positive steps, their ef

is not yet known. 

EPA’s primary vehicle for addressing long-sta

problems between the agency and the states 

National Environmental Performance Partne

System (NEPPS). Although the program has 

some benefits most states we contacted for 

review believed that their investments in NE

outweighed the benefits and that the program 

achieved its full potential. We recommended 

work with state officials to initiate a joint ev

process that (1) seeks agreement on the key 

impeding progress in developing a more effe

partnership system and (2) develops mutuall

remedies for these issues. EPA has deferred 

evaluation and is instead focusing on making 

of specific program improvements. While the 

taken positive steps, time will tell whether th

improved this important program as intende

continue to believe that the agency and the st

commit to conducting the type of joint evalu

process we recommended. Consequently, we 

continue monitoring the program and believ

continued congressional oversight also rema

warranted. 

Superfund EPA has significantly improved its managem

Superfund program—the agency’s effort to c
Page 12 GAO-01-257 EP

nation’s abandoned hazardous waste sites

designated in 1990 that the program was a

fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement

consistent with our recommendations, the 

made significant progress in (1) allocating 

partly on the basis of the risk that sites po

health and the environment, (2) implemen

process to recover more of its site cleanu

those parties responsible for the contamin

(3) better controlling contractors’ costs. W

longer designating Superfund as a high-ris

given that some program administration c

remain and uncertainty exists about the p

future policy direction, we will continue m

policy and program administration issues 

program. 
Page 13 GAO-01-257 

y g

EPA has the critical and complex mission 

implementing numerous federal laws and 

aimed at protecting human health and the 

To carry out its mission, the agency has an 

budget of approximately $7 billion that su

of over 18,000 employees in locations acro

country. This report summarizes our more 

findings on the status and effectiveness o

efforts to (1) improve its management of i

(2) develop a comprehensive strategic hu

framework, (3) strengthen its working rel

with its state partners and other key envir

stakeholders to develop improved approa

environmental regulation, and (4) strength

management of its Superfund program. Th

performance and management issues that 

confronting EPA are particularly complex 

involve EPA, the states, other environmen

stakeholders, and a public that continues 

improvements in environmental condition

EPA Needs to 

Improve 

Environmental 

and Performance

Information 

Management to 

Set Priorities and 

Measure

Program Results 

EPA needs comprehensive information on 

environmental conditions to identify prob

are emerging and that require additional r

action or some other attention. Such infor

needed to inform agency decisionmakers, 

researchers, and the public of EPA’s progr

carrying out its mission of protecting hum

the environment. Absent sufficient enviro

performance information, it is difficult for 

risk-based priorities for its programs, eva

success of its programs and activities, and 

accomplishments in a credible way as req

Government Performance and Results Ac

In recent years, the agency has made strid

improving its data, better informing the sc

community and general public of environm
Page 14 GAO-01-257 EP

public health risks, and measuring environm

improvements. However, EPA’s management 

to make a long-term commitment to (1) fillin

data gaps, (2) achieving compatibility among 

(3) establishing performance measures that 

results-oriented to assess the effectiveness o

programs and activities, and (4) strengthenin

security of computerized information system

needs a comprehensive information manage

strategy to address these challenges. 

Significant Gaps 

Exist in 

Environmental Data

Although EPA and the states collect extensiv

of environmental data, important gaps still e

environmental conditions and the effects of 

conditions on human health. Information ob

monitoring environmental conditions and hu

exposures to toxic pollutants is limited, and 

health and ecological effects of many chemic

pollutants are not well understood. Such gap

data have hindered EPA’s efforts to perform 

human exposure and risk assessments, to co

in setting program priorities, and to obtain a 

comprehensive understanding of environme

conditions and changes over time. 

Information on the risks posed by exposures 

chemicals is critical to EPA’s decisionmaking

needed to credibly assess these risks often d

For example, in a May 2000 report on enviro

health data needs, we reported that human e

data were limited because data were being c

nationwide for only 81 (or about 6 percent) o

potentially harmful chemicals we reviewed. 

chemicals that EPA identified as most in nee

under the Toxic Substances Control Act, onl

percent, were being measured for human ex

recently recommended that EPA and the Dep

Health and Human Services develop a coord

strategy for the monitoring and reporting of 
Page 15 GAO-01-257 

exposures to potentially toxic chemicals. 

agreed with our recommendation and hav

they will work together to develop such a 

strategy.

Important data gaps also exist in EPA’s Int

Information System, which is a database c

information on human health effects that 

from exposure to chemicals in the environ

example, the database lacks basic data on 

about two-thirds of the known hazardous 

and contains limited information on the e

effects of pollutants. 

Similarly, there are significant data gaps in 

National Water Quality Inventory, the prim

the condition of the nation’s waters, becau

small percentage of U.S. waters are asses

quality and, importantly, only a limited nu

assessments are based on current, site-sp

monitoring information. Gaps in water qu

information make it difficult for EPA to ef

assess the condition of the nation’s waters 

on the progress being made toward achiev

established water quality goals. As we not

March 2000 report, the gaps are problemat

inventory is used to help agency officials 

management decisions, including determi

certain Clean Water Act funds are to be all

the states. According to the 1996 National 

Inventory (the latest report available at th

review), assessment data were available f

percent of the nation’s shorelines, 19 perce

and streams, and 40 percent of its lakes. (
Page 16 GAO-01-257 EP

Figure 1: Percentage of Waters Monitored, Evaluat

Assessed

Source: 1996 National Water Quality Inventory.

To supplement its current information, we h

recommended that EPA take actions to more 

use other available water quality data. In resp

recommendation, EPA has taken some steps 

making greater use of other national and reg

quality assessments. 

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Types of waters

Waters assessed using monitoring data

Waters evaluated

Waters assessed using unspecified means

Waters not assessed

Ocean

shorelines

(mi.)

Rivers and 

streams 

(mi.)

Lakes 

(acres)

Estuaries 

(sq. mi.)
Page 17 GAO-01-257 

EPA acknowledges the existence of nume

significant data gaps and has recently und

initiatives to address this problem. For ex

agency launched the High Production Volu

Program in October 1998, which asked ch

companies to voluntarily generate data on 

the chemicals they manufacture or impor

2000, over 400 companies had agreed that 

of 2005 they will release basic hazard data 

of 2,800 high-production-volume chemica

are manufactured or imported into the Un

amounts equal to or greater than 1 million 

year. 

Nonetheless, EPA’s efforts to collect bette

been hampered by various factors, includ

cost of meeting the agency’s information n

important decisions need to be made abo

fill the agency’s critical data gaps, we reco

September 1999 report that EPA develop 

set priorities for filling such gaps and iden

milestones and needed resources. EPA ag

recommendation, but its progress has bee

Currently, the agency is in the initial phase 

such a strategy.

Incompatible Data 

Systems Limit the 

Usefulness of 

Environmental Data

EPA’s data management system is outmod

ways, including having separately designe

that are generally not technically compati

of compatibility has made it difficult for E

aggregate data to present comprehensive i

chemicals, industrial sectors, localities, an

environmental conditions and trends. EPA 

the importance of making the databases c

with each other and with those of its state 

example, the agency has a major initiative 

standardize basic data elements so that in

contained in EPA and state databases can 
Page 18 GAO-01-257 EP

to present a more comprehensive picture of 

environmental conditions and results. 

EPA officials also see data standardization a

reduce the reporting burden for states and in

enabling more integrated, and thus more effi

reporting of information. The agency has agr

recommendation we made in a September 19

that it coordinate its data standardization eff

the states, federal agencies, and other organi

maintain major environmental databases. In 

2000, EPA and the states created the Environ

Data Standards Council, comprising EPA and 

information managers, to work cooperativel

promote more rapid work on developing data 

EPA officials believe that the current effort t

compatibility with state agencies is an initial 

meeting EPA’s goal of complete data integrat

initiatives are under way to develop standard

selected elements in agency databases, and E

anticipates implementing six newly approve

across 13 major agency databases by fiscal y

EPA recognizes that its current data improve

efforts are only a first step towards its goal o

integration. For example, EPA has focused p

the compatibility of its data with those of sta

environmental agencies, rather than with the 

other federal agencies and nongovernmental 

a May 2000 report, we stated that improved 

collaboration among federal agencies in mee

needs for human exposure data is essential b

individual agencies have different capacities 

and (2) separate attempts have fallen short o

supporting the large efforts that are needed. 

lines, EPA’s Science Advisory Board, created 

Congress to provide the agency with externa

advice, recommended that EPA do more to l

databases with external sources, noting that 

many health-related questions frequently req
Page 19 GAO-01-257 

linking environmental data with census, c

registry data or other data systems (such 

distribution maps) to determine whether 

relationship between the environmental m

health.” Although EPA officials agree on t

of linking the agency’s databases with tho

agencies, they stated that efforts have bee

resource constraints and a lack of statuto

require other agencies to collect and repo

formats compatible with those used by EP

Data Limitations 

Hinder 

Development of 

Outcome-Oriented 

Performance 

Measures 

For over a decade, internal and external s

called for EPA to “manage for environmen

a way to improve and better account for i

performance. As we have pointed out, dev

effective environmental measures is impo

they can help in (1) informing decisionma

researchers, the Congress, and the public 

environmental conditions; (2) assessing th

risks posed by pollution and contaminatio

assessing the extent to which EPA’s progra

to environmental improvements; and (4) s

program priorities, planning, and budgetin

Our analyses show that most of EPA’s per

measures focus on outputs, such as the nu

environmental standards the agency estab

fig. 2). These types of activity-based outpu

can provide important information for age

to use in managing their programs. Nonet

recognizes that it needs to link more of its 

activities to results and to develop additio

measures that can be used to assess the a

term progress towards meeting its mission 

human health and the environment. 
Page 20 GAO-01-257 EP

Figure 2: Percentage of EPA’s Output and Outcome Performance Measures for Fisca

Source: GAO’s analysis of EPA data.

According to agency officials, getting the dat

measure results remains EPA’s biggest challe

developing more outcome-oriented performa

and measures—especially since EPA must re

on its state partners and regulated entities to 

provide much of the data required to measur

environmental outcomes. According to EPA 

the selection of annual performance measur

established under GPRA is often based on av

that focus primarily on outputs rather than o

environmental results, for which credible da

lacking. Although output measures can prov

important information for EPA managers to 

managing their programs, the agency recogn

needs to link more of its activities to results 

develop additional outcome measures to ass

progress in protecting human health and the 

environment. 

19%

Outcome

measures

81%

Output

measures

Reduce pe

poisonings 

20 percent

Reduce em

of toxic air 

5 percent

91 percent 

population 

by commun

systems w

drinking wa

has not vio

any health-

standards

Outcome me

Establish standards

for hazardous levels 

of lead in paint, dust,

and soil

Issue report 

summarizing the 

results of two 

additional evaluations 

for arsenic control

Produce report on 

the number of civil

and criminal 

enforcement actions 

initiated and concluded

Output measures
Page 21 GAO-01-257 

Data gaps have made it difficult to link pr

activities with changes in environmental c

the lack of standardized data collection an

methods has made it hard to aggregate da

determine outcomes. For example, the sta

use the same survey methods and criteria 

water quality, and these inconsistencies m

to develop national performance goals an

EPA officials recognize the importance of 

such problems. They said that developing 

environmental results will be a major part 

agency’s evolving efforts to overhaul how 

manages, and disseminates information. 

Recently, the agency has taken actions tha

run, should strengthen its ability to develo

oriented measures. For example, EPA is d

processes and strategies to improve the q

performance measures and link the activit

offices with environmental results. Noneth

challenges remain. Considerable resource

expertise will be needed to (1) identify an

results-oriented performance measures th

and (2) gather and analyze the data. In add

need to work effectively with the states an

entities to balance the demand for more d

efforts to reduce the reporting burden. Mo

be difficult to assess the progress being m

annual goals and measures because the lon

of environmental programs means that th

may not yield measurable results for many 

future. 

EPA Needs to 

Strengthen Its 

Information 

Security Program 

In addition to the above critical informati

management challenges, EPA’s manageme

information security is an area needing co

improvement. Our recent work identified 

computer security weaknesses that have p

data and operations at significant risk of t
Page 22 GAO-01-257 EP

disruption, and inappropriate disclosure. Fo

we found that the agency’s security program 

and management was largely a paper exercis

done little to substantively identify, evaluate

mitigate risks to EPA’s data and systems. In a

tests of computer-based controls identified w

weaknesses associated with EPA’s operating 

and agencywide computer network that supp

its mission-related and financial operations. 

particular concern, many of the most serious 

weaknesses we identified—those related to 

protection from intrusion via the Internet an

security planning—had been reported in 199

agency’s Inspector General (IG). The IG desi

computer security a material weakness in a 

report. 

In our July 2000 report on EPA’s information 

program, we recommended that the agency t

number of steps to strengthen access contro

associated with its major computer operatin

and agencywide network, enhance compute

management efforts, and improve security p

management and planning. The agency conc

our recommendations and informed us of re

corrective actions that, if properly implemen

begin to address these serious problems. Fo

agency officials told us that steps had been t

strengthen its access controls, enhance its in

detection capabilities, and improve its inform

security management structure. Although it 

to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of t

taken or planned by EPA, the actions describ

represent a comprehensive approach to imp

agency’s information security program. Neve

sustaining improvements will require ongoin

and top management support and leadership 

Thus, we are concerned that, unless EPA ins

fundamental changes in the way it manages 

these efforts may not have a lasting effect. 
Page 23 GAO-01-257 

EPA Needs a 

Comprehensive 

Information 

Management 

Strategy

In 1999, EPA established an Office of Env

Information to function as the focal point 

agencywide information management. Th

functions include integrating and coordin

collected by the agency’s diverse informat

and ensuring that EPA has the data it need

for results. However, EPA has made limite

developing a comprehensive information 

strategy to ensure the completeness, com

accuracy of data. The development of a lo

strategy would provide the agency’s mana

Congress with what is currently missing—

information they need to make the best de

costs, benefits, and trade-offs involved in 

resources to meet critical information req

We recommended in September 1999 that 

develop a comprehensive strategy that inc

establishing milestones and identifying re

needed to fill key data gaps, (2) identifyin

developing necessary data standards, and 

coordinating its data standardization effo

federal agencies, the states, and other ent

concurred with our recommendation but 

limited progress toward developing and im

comprehensive strategy. Although the age

yet have a comprehensive plan, it told us t

completed a plan for its new Information 

Initiative. Through this initiative, EPA inte

a national network that helps facilitate th

environmental information with the states 

stakeholders. EPA intends to eventually in

initiative into its overall information plan, 

of which will cover broad options for man

information over the next several years. A

2000, EPA had not completed this stage o

agencywide information management pla

originally anticipated. Because EPA has lo

and continuing challenges in how it mana
Page 24 GAO-01-257 EP

environmental information, this remains a ke

requiring the continued monitoring of the sta

results of EPA’s evolving initiatives. 

EPA Needs to 

Place Greater 

Emphasis on 

Developing 

a Comprehensive 

Human Capital 

Approach

Effective alignment and management of an 

organization’s employees—its human capital

essential for achieving the highest level of pe

and accountability. Human capital planning m

treated as an integral aspect of an organizati

performance management process because h

capital policies and practices affect an agenc

effectively carry out management functions, 

strategic planning and budget formulation an

execution, that are critical to meeting the ag

mission. EPA, much like other federal agenc

historically given insufficient attention to str

managing its human capital. With an aging w

that has grown in recent years to over 18,000 

it is important for EPA to align its human cap

and practices to best support its mission and 

its strategic goals and objectives. 

EPA acknowledges the importance of better 

its human capital and has recently developed 

agencywide human capital strategy. In the ab

such a strategy, it has been difficult for EPA 

its human capital investments with its strate

and objectives and (2) determine the numbe

employees and types of competencies neede

appropriate deployment of its workforce acr

organization. EPA will face management and 

performance challenges as it strives to ensur

people are aligned to accomplish its mission 

strategic goals and objectives. 
Page 25 GAO-01-257 

EPA Needs to Better 

Link Its Human 

Capital Efforts With 

Its Strategic Plan

EPA has not given sufficient attention to a

human capital policies and practices to be

strategic goals and objectives. Consequen

cannot be certain that its investments in h

are appropriate. EPA’s human capital plan

like those of other federal agencies, have 

relatively weak link in the overall manage

agency. Moreover, EPA’s strategic plan and 

performance plans have generally provide

information on how EPA plans to strategi

its human capital. 

However, the agency’s most recent strateg

in September 2000, acknowledges that pro

managing the agency’s human capital mus

and that the agency’s approaches will be c

achieving its 10 strategic goals and improv

outcomes to better protect human health 

environment. In reviewing the agency’s la

found that it includes more detailed inform

human capital under its “Effective Manag

strategic goal. Under this goal, EPA states 

its human capital will be a key priority for 

develop and retain the diverse, highly skil

it needs to carry out its mission and that i

hard to attract and retain a skilled workfo

such initiatives as workforce planning and 

additional information provided under thi

useful. However, the plan would be more 

contained a thorough discussion of huma

initiatives as they relate to meeting the pla

strategic goals and their associated object

how various human capital activities will 

toward achieving clean air, clean and safe 

food, and pollution prevention. 

In November 2000, EPA issued a comprehe

for managing human capital to provide th

linkage to the agency’s overall strategic go
Page 26 GAO-01-257 EP

objectives. We noted that the strategy contai

useful components indicating that the agenc

in the right direction. For example, the strate

information on the agency’s (1) human capit

values, and strategic goals and (2) strategies 

steps for achieving the strategic goals. Altho

are positive features, the strategy did not con

information on how the action steps would a

specific human capital issues related to each 

strategic goals under GPRA. EPA officials to

future updates to the strategic plan will integ

capital strategies for achieving agency goals 

objectives.

EPA Needs to 

Implement a 

Workforce Strategy

Effective implementation of results-oriented 

management, as envisioned by GPRA, hinges 

managers’ willingness and ability to strategic

manage all of an agency’s resources—includ

capital—to achieve its mission and goals. Sp

this includes (1) identifying current and futu

competencies needed to meet current and fu

and any gaps, (2) developing a workforce act

addressing any identified gaps or surpluses i

number or competencies of the existing wor

(3) monitoring and evaluating the workforce 

actions that are taken. EPA’s November 2000 

comprehensive strategy for managing human 

includes a specific strategy for assessing its 

capital needs, but the agency has not yet imp

The importance of such a strategy is undersc

fact that during the past decade, when most 

agencies reduced their staffing, EPA’s workfo

from 15,277 in fiscal year 1990 to 18,100 in fi

2000, an increase of about 18 percent. The gr

EPA’s personnel levels during this period has 

accompanied by substantial changes in the r

responsibilities of the agency and its state pa

example, EPA’s responsibilities increased wi
Page 27 GAO-01-257 

legislation, including major amendments t

Air Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and 

Quality Protection Act. At the same time, 

authorized by federal statutes, was delega

significantly more responsibility to the sta

carrying out federal environmental progra

states were responding by expanding thei

workforces to accommodate these increa

responsibilities. (See fig. 3).

Figure 3: Staff Growth in EPA and State Environ

Agencies, 1990-2000

Source: GAO’s analysis of EPA and state data.

Because EPA does not have a system in p

its human capital requirements and to allo

Number of staff years

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

EPA States

1990

2000

49% increase

18% increase
Page 28 GAO-01-257 EP

accordingly, the allocations made to its head

and regional offices are based primarily on t

of staff years that were allocated in previous 

However, we believe that an approach based 

historical data may not accurately reflect the 

that EPA faces today and is likely to face in t

For example, over the past decade, technolo

changes have made a major impact on the sk

expertise needed to carry out federal progra

addition, changes have occurred in EPA’s reg

environmental responsibilities as states have 

more responsibility for the day-to-day implem

federal environmental statutes. For example

only eight states had accepted responsibility 

implementing provisions of the Safe Drinking 

By 1998, 36 states had done so. Such change

responsibilities may reduce EPA’s activities i

areas, such as carrying out inspections, but m

create the need for additional people and co

in other areas, such as providing technical as

and reviewing and measuring the effectivene

programs. 

The need for taking a more strategic approac

managing EPA’s human capital is further sup

an analysis of the age of the agency’s workfo

example, our analysis of EPA’s data shows th

approximately 29 percent of the agency’s em

either currently eligible for retirement or wil

eligible in the next few years. (See fig. 4).
Page 29 GAO-01-257 

Figure 4: Age Distribution of EPA Employees, a

Source: GAO’s analysis of EPA’s most recent data.

Despite the shift in responsibility from EP

and changes in the size and age of its wor

has given limited sustained attention to w

planning. As a result, EPA lacks assurance 

carry out its mission and achieve its strate

objectives. For example, EPA has not bee

fully informed decisions during the prepa

annual budget requests because it has not 

information needed to determine how ma

necessary to implement its strategic goals 

objectives.

Nor can EPA determine whether it has an

gaps in needed competencies within its va

headquarters and field components. EPA 

completed a study that enabled the agenc

develop a workforce profile identifying th

competencies, such as communication an

skills, of the people employed by the agen

34%• 40-4

28%• 30-3

• 9%

Unde

•29%

50-6
Page 30 GAO-01-257 EP

estimate what competencies it would need in 

under various scenarios. Using this study, EP

the competencies it believes are vital and dif

obtain and maintain. 

However, the study was not designed to dete

many employees need specific competencies 

employees should be deployed among variou

goals and objectives, across program areas, 

various parts of the country. Once the agenc

such specific determinations, EPA’s senior m

will need to remain committed to and provid

resources for ensuring that needed employe

recruited, developed, and retained to meet th

goals and objectives. Furthermore, as part o

workforce strategy, EPA will need to ensure 

collects and analyzes accurate data on the am

time employees spend on various programs 

activities. Without such data, EPA cannot ac

determine the costs of carrying out its strate

and objectives and ensure that its workforce 

used in the most effective manner consisten

intent of GPRA and congressional appropria

Clearly, substantial challenges remain for EP

of designing, implementing, and maintaining 

results-oriented human capital management 

that enables the agency to maximize the valu

people to effectively accomplish its overall m

Because overcoming these obstacles is of su

importance to the effective management of t

we will continue to monitor EPA’s efforts. 

Good Working 

Relationships With 

the States Remains 

a Challenge for 

EPA

A key aspect of EPA’s performance managem

involves working cooperatively with its state 

managing environmental programs. Cultivati

relationships with its state partners is especi

important for EPA because, as authorized by 
Page 31 GAO-01-257 

environmental statutes, the agency has de

states the responsibility for day-to-day im

of most federal environmental programs. 

EPA’s working relationships with states ha

strained by fundamental disagreements ov

roles, priorities among state environment

and the appropriate degree of federal ove

problems in the current jointly managed E

environmental regulatory system have be

difficult to resolve. Facing pressures to de

results-oriented approach, EPA is pursuin

that include the National Environmental P

Partnership System, which is focused on u

environmental data, jointly setting prioriti

states and their respective EPA regions, an

results-oriented goals and measures while 

states with needed flexibility. 

Cooperation Has 

Improved, but 

Difficulties Remain

More than a decade ago, we reported that 

greater flexibility to tailor programs to me

opportunities to participate in decisions a

implementation, and EPA’s trust in their a

day-to-day decisions. More recently, in 19

that financial constraints were impeding s

to perform key functions such as monitor

environmental quality, setting standards, i

permits, and enforcing compliance. Other 

affecting EPA’s relationships with states in

concerns that the agency had been incons

oversight across regions, had sometimes m

state programs, and had not provided suff

technical support. 

Since then, although difficulties continued

instances of cooperation that resulted in m

and efficient environmental protection. Fo

April 1997, we obtained information on fiv

experience leading cleanups of contamina

hazardous waste sites. Critical factors aff
Page 32 GAO-01-257 EP

ability to successfully lead cleanups included 

(1) whether EPA and the state had forged a c

and efficient relationship with a clear divisio

responsibility and (2) an appropriate level of 

oversight. EPA and the state of Washington, f

signed an agreement that reduced conflicts a

duplication of efforts.

Nonetheless, problems continue to affect EP

relationships with states and the effectivene

administered programs. Enforcement has be

the most problematic areas, with EPA and st

frequently at odds over the direction of state 

enforcement programs and the degree of EPA 

with many states fundamentally disagreeing 

on how to best ensure compliance by regula

and the roles of federal and state authorities 

that compliance. 

In addition, the current joint EPA-state regul

system has proven to be costly and, at times

Although the environmental community gen

recognizes that future challenges are comple

require fundamentally different approaches, 

other stakeholders have disagreed on the dir

their collective efforts to “reinvent” environm

regulation. In acknowledging the need for fun

different regulatory approaches, EPA, in Mar

announced a series of significant, high-priori

to improve the current regulatory system an

groundwork for a new system of environmen

protection. Many reinvention efforts are con

GPRA’s goal of focusing on results and with t

Partnership for Reinventing Government’s p

recommendations to achieve a more integrat

effective approach to environmental protect

EPA officials have noted that the initiatives a

to, among other things, help achieve better 
Page 33 GAO-01-257 

environmental results through the use of i

flexible approaches to environmental pro

make it easier for businesses to comply w

environmental laws by offering them com

assistance and incentives to prevent pollu

source. Among EPA’s initiatives are (1) th

Sense Initiative, termed the “centerpiece” 

reinvention efforts, which seeks to identif

regulatory practices, and (2) Project XL, w

individual industrial facilities to test innov

achieve protection if they can demonstrat

proposed changes will yield enhanced env

performance. 

Although EPA has been working with its s

industry, and other stakeholders to develo

implement a series of initiatives, obstacle

For example, disagreements and misunde

have occurred over the role of EPA and th

developing and implementing reinvention 

much flexibility the states would have in h

projects, and how they were to obtain sta

consensus. Environmental stakeholders a

expressed concerns over the large numbe

and demanding initiatives that EPA has un

recent years. In addition, disagreement re

whether the current environmental statut

revised for reinvention to succeed. EPA o

recognized the importance of overcoming 

the agency’s reinvention efforts and the n

effectively with its stakeholders, but many 

remain unresolved. 
Page 34 GAO-01-257 EP

Opportunities Exist 

for Strengthening 

Relationships and 

Establishing 

New Approaches for 

Environmental 

Protection 

To address many of the long-standing challen

affecting the EPA-state relationship, EPA and 

partners have developed the National Enviro

Performance Partnership System (NEPPS). L

1995, key components are the increased use 

environmental goals and indicators, state ass

of environmental and program performance

negotiation of performance partnership agre

between EPA and the states to help in determ

matters as (1) which problems will receive p

attention, (2) what their respective roles wil

(3) how the states’ progress in achieving clea

program objectives will be assessed. 

EPA points to NEPPS as its primary vehicle 

addressing long-standing problems, includin

communication and concerns over microma

In our June 1999 report on the partnership sy

identified some progress, noting that NEPPS 

afforded some state participants a means of 

in for innovative or unique projects and has 

tool to divide an often burdensome workloa

efficiently between federal and state regulat

keeping with GPRA’s intent to focus on resul

the states had structured the system to inclu

common set of indicators (called “core perfo

measures”) to help measure the effectivenes

success of the states’ programs and to provid

understanding of whether programs are achi

intended results. Recently, we reported that E

states had agreed to a revised set of core per

measures for fiscal year 2000 that are regard

significantly improved over measures negoti

previous years. 

Although initiatives sponsored under NEPPS 

yielded some benefits, challenges remain. Sp

our most recent examination, most state offi

the view that (1) the benefits from their inve
Page 35 GAO-01-257 

NEPPS should be greater and (2) the prog

achieve its full potential. We recommende

work with state officials to initiate a joint 

process that seeks agreement on the key i

impeding progress in developing a more e

partnership system and that develops mut

agreeable remedies for these issues.

At the time our report was issued, EPA ag

a joint evaluation process was warranted. 

time, however, the agency and the states h

defer a formal joint evaluation and instead 

making a number of specific program imp

These improvements resulted from a joint 

evaluation of the program that occurred a

workshop sponsored by EPA and the Env

Council of the States in December 1999. S

efforts are addressed in EPA’s September 

Plan, which stipulates, for example, that E

enhance the program by (1) developing gu

make the NEPPS process more consisten

(2) integrating NEPPS concerns into EPA’

processes, particularly strategic planning 

and (3) improving the use of outcome-bas

performance measures in performance pa

agreements to provide more comprehensi

on environmental protection efforts natio

officials also told us recently that the agen

midst of completing a comprehensive wor

intended, among other things, to ensure s

management’s attention to the program an

NEPPS-related training needs. While thes

be positive steps, time will tell whether th

intended effect in improving this importan

also continue to believe that the agency a

should commit to conducting, at some po

future, the type of joint evaluation proces

recommended in our June 1999 report. Co

intend to continue to monitor the program 
Page 36 GAO-01-257 EP

that continued congressional oversight also 

warranted. 

EPA Has Made 

Significant 

Progress in 

Solving Some 

Superfund 

Management 

Problems

EPA’s Superfund program, created by the Co

1980, is intended to help clean up the nation

thousands of abandoned hazardous waste si

including many owned by the federal govern

focuses on getting those parties responsible 

contamination to clean up sites or conducts 

itself using contractors and then seeks to rec

costs from the responsible parties. Cleaning 

has proven to be far more complicated and c

anticipated. Cleanup costs could exceed $30

the federal government (including those cos

by EPA and the departments of Defense and 

hundreds of billions of dollars for the private 

For over a decade, our work has identified r

problems that have put Superfund at risk. To 

these problems, we recommended that EPA 

funding priorities taking into account the he

environmental risks posed by sites, (2) recov

in certain cleanup costs from parties respon

contaminating sites, and (3) better control c

costs. These collective problems led us, start

to designate Superfund as a high-risk area, vu

waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. 

EPA has taken steps to address many of our 

recommendations and, as a result, has impro

management of the program. Because of the 

progress, we are no longer designating Supe

high-risk area. 
Page 37 GAO-01-257 

Table 1: EPA’s Superfund Program Improvemen

Changes in the nature of the program also 

our decision to remove Superfund’s high-r

designation. Specifically, EPA has selected 

methods for most sites in the Superfund p

the cleanup is under contract or complete

EPA has partnered more extensively with 

accomplish additional cleanups nationwid

working with the Congress to consider th

future policy direction. Given the uncerta

future policy direction, we will continue m

policy and program administration issues 

program. 

EPA Is Using Risk to 

Set Priorities

In response to our recommendations, EPA 

working with the states to determine whic

remaining sites in EPA’s inventory posing 

risks should be considered for a Superfun

September 2000, EPA officials reported th

had taken action in response to our recom

on this issue, including (1) reaching agree

states on who would be responsible for as

percent of the 1,789 backlogged sites we i

posing a potentially significant risk and (2

resolve the management of the remaining 

agreed to track those sites undergoing sta

its Superfund information management sy

should help in determining whether the w

being addressed first. 

✔ Setting funding priorities taking into account the 

environmental risks posed by sites

✔ Implementing a new process to help EPA recove

costs from responsible parties

✔ Taking steps to better control contractors’ costs
Page 38 GAO-01-257 EP

The agency is also now considering health an

environmental risks as factors in setting its f

priorities for sites already in the Superfund p

Because EPA cannot fund cleanups of all the 

are ready for a cleanup remedy, the agency c

National Risk-Based Prioritization Panel, com

regional and headquarters cleanup managers

set funding priorities. The panel ranks all sit

construction nationwide, taking into accoun

environmental risks along with other import

considerations, such as cost-effectiveness. E

approves funding for projects on the basis o

rankings. Those sites not selected in one yea

compete again for funding the following yea

EPA Is Making 

Progress in 

Recovering More 

Cleanup Costs

The Superfund program has posed a significa

risk to the government, in part because EPA 

formerly charge responsible parties for certa

of its costs to operate the program. The agen

about $3 billion in indirect costs for such ite

personnel and facilities from its final settlem

responsible parties. EPA has agreed with mo

recommendations to use more complete and 

data for its cost recovery settlements, which 

increase recoveries. For example, EPA adop

indirect cost rate in October 2000 in respons

governmentwide requirement to adopt new c

accounting standards. Using this rate should 

recoup a total of over $600 million in indirect 

responsible parties for cleanups currently aw

settlement and, on average, about $100 millio

in future settlements. 

EPA is also addressing our past concerns ab

reliability of its information and financial ma

systems, including eliminating the time-cons

inefficient process of manually entering som

into its financial management system and us

electronic imaging system to store and retrie
Page 39 GAO-01-257 

documents. Its effort to link its financial a

management information systems should 

the agency to better track unrecoverable c

easily generate related reports.

EPA has made progress in addressing our 

about cost recovery. However, EPA does n

our recommendation that it better track t

costs it actually has recovered compared 

amount that it potentially could have reco

determine the underlying factors for diffe

amounts recovered each year, and identify 

needed to improve its cost recovery perfo

noted, we believe that because EPA does 

systematically analyze the underlying reas

recovery rate, it cannot effectively tell wh

recovery performance reflects internal fac

can control, such as poor cost documenta

inexperienced negotiators, or external fac

parties that cannot afford to pay EPA for t

cleanups. EPA and the Department of Just

the position that tracking such data acros

meaningful or appropriate because each s

factors, such as the responsible parties’ ab

cleanup costs, that determine the amount 

settlements. As we have pointed out, esta

performance measures to better track the 

EPA’s cost recovery efforts is consistent w

which calls for agencies to set measures t

program performance. We believe that a p

measure to track cost recovery outcomes 

a useful indicator for EPA to identify any 

problems it might need to address. 

EPA Has Made 

Significant Progress 

in Controlling 

Contractors’ Costs

EPA spends about one-half of its annual S

budget of approximately $1.5 billion on co

help clean up Superfund sites and to mon

done by private parties for EPA. Conseque

important that the agency pay particular a
Page 40 GAO-01-257 EP

critical program management activity. In pas

noted that EPA has had difficulties controllin

of its contractors, finding that the agency (1) 

heavily on contractors’ cost proposals to det

price for cleanup contracts, rather than deve

own estimates of what contracted work shou

(2) had a significant backlog of contract aud

increased the risk for fraud, waste, and abus

contractors; and (3) spent a higher proportio

cleanup funds on contractor support costs ra

on actual cleanup. 

EPA has taken steps to address these long-st

contract management challenges and to resp

recommendations. First, EPA has increased 

independent cost estimates to negotiate bett

prices for the government. As we recommen

asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to e

EPA’s cost estimation process. In December 

Corps made a number of recommendations, 

which EPA is in the process of implementing

include (1) establishing a clear policy on the 

of controlling contract costs, (2) completing 

based cost-estimating guide by March 2001 th

more details on the costs of various types of 

activities, and (3) providing EPA staff with m

on cost estimation. Although EPA is in the pr

implementing many of these recommendatio

continue to monitor EPA’s progress in this ar

it has not implemented all of its planned acti

addition, the effectiveness of some actions al

remains unknown, including whether EPA ca

effectively monitor the success of initiatives 

prove the quality of its cost estimates.

Effective Superfund program management a

the auditing of contractors that conduct clea

activities for EPA. Such audits serve as a prim

for deterring and detecting fraud, waste, and 

the contractors. EPA and the Defense Contra
Page 41 GAO-01-257 

Agency (DCAA) share the workload for au

Superfund contracts. Under this arrangem

audits contractors that work exclusively f

DCAA audits cleanup contractors that als

other federal agencies with cleanup respo

Although EPA and DCAA have had long-st

contract audit backlogs, our recent review

that both agencies have nearly eliminated 

and have improved the timeliness of their 

Finally, EPA has taken significant steps to 

concern that it was paying contractors a h

cover their program support costs. One m

the high support costs has been that EPA 

contracts than available work, but neverth

continued to pay contractors for monthly 

costs. Thus, the agency was spending a hig

its funds on overhead (such as personnel 

costs) rather than cleanups. As of June 20

program support cost rates had decreased 

Only 5 of the 18 existing contracts had pro

cost rates that exceeded EPA’s goal of 11 p

costs, ranging from 12 to 18 percent. The 

remaining 13 contracts were well within E

ranging from 1 to 11 percent. In contrast, 

1998 review, 10 of 15 contracts exceeded 

with support costs ranging from 16 to 59 p

contract cleanup costs. (See fig. 5). 
Page 42 GAO-01-257 EP

Figure 5: Program Support Costs Compared With Cleanup Costs for Superfund Con

September 1999 and June 2000

 Source: GAO’s analysis of EPA data.

EPA has lowered its program support costs b

other things, reducing the number of Superfu

contracts. It is also implementing its Contrac

strategy for building more contracting comp

increasing small and minority business parti

and adopting new types of contracts, such as 

performance-based contracts. In September 

officials told us that the agency had develope

plan and associated milestones for implemen

contract strategy, in response to recommend

contained in our April 1999 report. 

Key Contact David G. Wood, Director

Natural Resources and Environment

(202) 512-3841

woodd@gao.gov

September 1998 June 2000

Program support

costs

Cleanup costs

15%

7%

85% 93%
Page 43 GAO-01-257 

Environmental 

and Performance 

Information 

Management

Environmental Information: EPA Needs B

Information to Manage Risks and Measure 

(GAO-01-97T, Oct. 3, 2000).

Observations on the Environmental Prote

Fiscal Year 1999 Performance Report and 

2001 Performance Plan (GAO/RCED-00-20

2000).

Toxic Chemicals: Long-Term Coordinated 

Needed to Measure Exposures in Humans

(GAO/HEHS-00-80, May 2, 2000).

Managing for Results: EPA Faces Challeng

Developing Results-Oriented Performance 

Measures (GAO/RCED-00-77, Apr. 28, 200

Water Quality: Key EPA and State Decisio

Inconsistent and Incomplete Data (GAO/R

Mar. 15, 2000).

Information Security: Fundamental Weakn

EPA Data and Operations at Risk (GAO/A

July 6, 2000).

Environmental Information: EPA Is Takin

Improve Information Management, but Ch

Remain (GAO/RCED-99-261, Sept. 17, 199

Environmental Information: Agencywide 

Procedures Are Needed for EPA’s Informa

Dissemination (GAO/RCED-98-245, Sept. 

EPA’s Human 

Capital 

Human Capital: Observations on EPA’s Ef

Implement a Workforce Planning Strategy

(GAO/T-RCED-00-129, Mar. 23, 2000).
Page 44 GAO-01-257 EP

Human Capital: Key Principles from Nine Pri

Organizations (GAO/GGD-00-28, Jan. 31, 200

Human Capital: A Self-Assessment Checklist 

Leaders (GAO/GGD-99-179, Sept. 1999).

EPA−State 

Working 

Relationships

Environmental Protection: More Consistency 

Among EPA Regions in Approach to Enforce

(GAO/RCED-00-108, June 2, 2000).

Environmental Protection: Collaborative EPA

Effort Needed to Improve Performance Part

System (GAO/T-RCED-00-163, May 2, 2000).

Environmental Protection: Collaborative EPA

Effort Needed to Improve New Performance 

Partnership System (GAO/RCED-99-171, Jun

Environmental Protection: EPA’s and States’ 

Focus State Enforcement Programs on Resu

(GAO/RCED-98-113, May 27, 1998).

EPA’s Regulatory 

Reinvention

Environmental Protection: EPA’s and States’ 

“Reinvent” Environmental Regulation (GAO/

98-33, Nov. 4, 1997).

Regulatory Reinvention: EPA’s Common Sen

Needs an Improved Operating Framework an

Measures (GAO/RCED-97-164, July 18, 1997)

Environmental Protection: Challenges Facin

Efforts to Reinvent Environmental Regulatio

(GAO/RCED-97-155, July 2, 1997).
Page 45 GAO-01-257 

Superfund Superfund: Progress Made by EPA and Ot

Agencies to Resolve Program Managemen

(GAO/RCED-99-111, Apr. 29, 1999).

Hazardous Waste: Information on Potenti

Sites (GAO/RCED-99-22, Nov. 30, 1998).

Hazardous Waste: Unaddressed Risks at M

Superfund Sites (GAO/RCED-99-8, Nov. 30

Superfund: Analysis of Contractor Cleanu

(GAO/RCED-98-221, Aug. 4, 1998).
Page 46 GAO-01-257 

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Governmentwide Perspective (GAO-01-24

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Agriculture (GAO-01-242)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Commerce (GAO-01-243)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Defense (GAO-01-244)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Education (GAO-01-245)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Energy (GAO-01-246)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Health and Human Service

(GAO-01-247)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Housing and Urban Develo

(GAO-01-248)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of the Interior (GAO-01-249)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Justice (GAO-01-250)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Labor (GAO-01-251)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of State (GAO-01-252)
Page 47 GAO-01-257 

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Transportation (GAO-01-25

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of the Treasury (GAO-01-254)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Veterans Affairs (GAO-01-2

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Agency for International Development (G

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Environmental Protection Agency (GAO-0

Major Management Challenges and Progr

National Aeronautics and Space Administ

(GAO-01-258)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (GAO-01

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Small Business Administration (GAO-01-2

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Social Security Administration (GAO-01-2

Major Management Challenges and Progr

U.S. Postal Service (GAO-01-262)

High-Risk Series: An Update (GAO-01-263
Ordering 

Information

The first copy of each GAO report is free. Addi

reports are $2 each. A check or money order sh

out to the Superintendent of Documents. VISA 

credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a 

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100

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

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders by phone:

(202) 512-6000

fax: (202) 512-6061

TDD (202) 512-2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available r

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the dai

from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-60

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide 

how to obtain these lists.

Orders by Internet:

For information on how to access GAO reports 

send an e-mail message with “info” in the body 

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web home page at: 

http://www.gao.gov

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, or Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact one:

• Web site: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraud

• e-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

• 1-800-424-5454 (automated answering syst

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested