Resource Type

Language

Ballistic Missile Defense: Actions Needed to Address Implementation Issues and Estimate Long-Term Costs for European Capabilities (open access)

Ballistic Missile Defense: Actions Needed to Address Implementation Issues and Estimate Long-Term Costs for European Capabilities

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The Department of Defense (DOD) met the presidentially announced time frame to deploy initial ballistic missile defense (BMD) capabilities in Europe under the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) but did not fully identify and plan to resolve implementation issues before deployment. As a result, DOD experienced implementation issues, such as incomplete construction of housing facilities for soldiers arriving at the EPAA radar site in Turkey and incomplete implementing arrangements defining how to operate with allies when certain BMD elements arrived in the host country. U.S. Strategic Command, in coordination with other combatant commands, developed criteria to assess whether a BMD capability is ready for operational use to ensure that BMD capabilities can be used as intended when they are delivered. However, the assessment criteria used during this process focused on effectiveness, suitability, and interoperability areas—such as whether BMD elements can work together to track ballistic missile threats—and did not explicitly require DOD to comprehensively identify and plan to resolve implementation issues prior to deploying these capabilities. DOD plans to continue to use its existing process to accept BMD capabilities planned for Europe in the future. Without …
Date: April 11, 2014
Creator: United States. Government Accountability Office.
Object Type: Report
System: The UNT Digital Library
Federal Rulemaking: Regulatory Review Processes Could Be Enhanced (open access)

Federal Rulemaking: Regulatory Review Processes Could Be Enhanced

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "In 2007, GAO found that agencies had conducted more retrospective reviews of the costs and benefits of existing regulation than was readily apparent, especially to the public. Requirements in statutes or executive directives were sometimes the impetus for reviews, but agencies more often conducted these retrospective reviews based on their own discretionary authorities. Agencies reported that discretionary reviews more often generated actions, such as amending regulations or changes to guidance. GAO also found that multiple factors, such as data limitations and lack of transparency, impeded agencies' reviews. GAO made 7 recommendations in 2007 to improve the effectiveness and transparency of retrospective regulatory reviews. Among GAO's recommendations were: minimum standards for documenting and reporting completed review results; including public input as a factor in regulatory review decisions; and consideration of how agencies will measure the performance of new regulations. In 2011 and 2012, the administration issued new directives to agencies on how they should plan and conduct analyses of existing regulations that addressed each of GAO's recommendations."
Date: March 11, 2014
Creator: United States. Government Accountability Office.
Object Type: Report
System: The UNT Digital Library
Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request: U.S. Government Accountability Office (open access)

Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request: U.S. Government Accountability Office

Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "GAO's fiscal year (FY) 2015 budget request of $525.1 million seeks an increase of 3.9 percent to maintain staff capacity as well as continue necessary maintenance and improvements to our information technology (IT) and building infrastructure. Additionally, receipts and reimbursements, primarily from program and financial audits, and rental income, totaling $30.9 million are expected in FY 2015."
Date: March 11, 2014
Creator: United States. Government Accountability Office.
Object Type: Text
System: The UNT Digital Library
Personnel Security Clearances: Actions Needed to Ensure Quality of Background Investigations and Resulting Decisions (open access)

Personnel Security Clearances: Actions Needed to Ensure Quality of Background Investigations and Resulting Decisions

A statement of record issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Several agencies have key roles and responsibilities in the multi-phased personnel security clearance process, including the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) who, as the Security Executive Agent, is responsible for developing policies and procedures related to security clearance investigations and adjudications, among other things. The Deputy Director for Management at the Office of Management and Budget chairs the Performance Accountability Council that oversees reform efforts to enhance the personnel security process. The security process includes: the determination of whether a position requires a clearance, application submission, investigation, and adjudication. Specifically, agency officials must first determine whether a federal civilian position requires access to classified information. After an individual has been selected for a position that requires a personnel security clearance and the individual submits an application for a clearance, investigators—often contractors—from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) conduct background investigations for most executive branch agencies. Adjudicators from requesting agencies use the information from these investigations and federal adjudicative guidelines to determine whether an applicant is eligible for a clearance. Further, individuals are subject to reinvestigations at intervals based on the level of security clearance."
Date: February 11, 2014
Creator: United States. Government Accountability Office.
Object Type: Text
System: The UNT Digital Library
U.S.-China Trade: United States Has Secured Commitments in Key Bilateral Dialogues,  but U.S. Agency Reporting on Status Should Be Improved (open access)

U.S.-China Trade: United States Has Secured Commitments in Key Bilateral Dialogues, but U.S. Agency Reporting on Status Should Be Improved

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "GAO identified 298 trade and investment commitments made by China in the U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT)—184 since 2004—and the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) and its predecessor—114 since 2007. The commitments range from affirmations of open trade principles to sector-specific actions. GAO identified 11 issue areas to characterize the content of each commitment. The prominence of issue areas, measured in number of commitments associated with an issue area, differs between the dialogues, reflecting differences in the dialogues' structure and focus. Intellectual property rights commitments are among those most common in the JCCT and investment commitments are among those most common in the S&ED. (For a detailed inventory of commitments and their categorization, see GAO-14-224SP .)"
Date: February 11, 2014
Creator: United States. Government Accountability Office.
Object Type: Report
System: The UNT Digital Library