Posthearing Questions Related to Strategic Human Capital Management and Endangered Species
Gao ID: GAO-03-777R May 21, 2003This letter contains GAO's response to questions for the record from the House Committee on Armed Services' May 1, 2003, hearing on "The Defense Transformation for the 21st Century Act." Congressmen Neil Abercrombie and Sylvestre Reyes submitted the questions.
GAO outlined various examples illustrating how compliance with the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act have affected military training on various bases. GAO stated that Department of Defense (DOD) has not made adequate efforts to assess the extent to which military readiness has been affected by compliance with these environmental statutes. GAO also gave its opinion on DOD's recent proposal to grant certain government agencies broad based exemptions from existing law. GAO felt that Congress should take an active role in overseeing these efforts. GAO also stated that DOD does not have the needed infrastructure in place to efficiently integrate its capital planning process with the department's program goals and mission. GAO also suggested that Congress establish additional safeguards to ensure the fair, merit-based, transparent, and accountable implementation of DOD's proposed National Security Personnel System.
GAO-03-777R, Posthearing Questions Related to Strategic Human Capital Management and Endangered Species
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-777R
entitled 'Posthearing Questions Related to Strategic Human Capital
Management and Endangered Species' which was released on May 21, 2003.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. 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.
United States General Accounting Office:
GAO:
GAO-03-777R:
Comptroller General of the United States:
United States General Accounting Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
May 21, 2003:
The Honorable Duncan Hunter:
Chairman:
The Honorable Ike Skelton:
Ranking Minority Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
House of Representatives:
Subject: Posthearing Questions Related to Strategic Human Capital
Management and Endangered Species:
We are responding to questions for the record from your May 1, 2003,
hearing on ’The Defense Transformation for the 21st Century Act.“
[Footnote 1] Congressmen Neil Abercrombie and Sylvestre Reyes submitted
the questions.
Questions from Congressman Abercrombie:
1. Has GAO been able to gather a comprehensive list of bases/ranges and
types of training activities affected by the need to comply with the
Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act?
Our prior work in this area identified various examples to illustrate
how compliance with the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal
Protection Act have affected military training on various military
bases; however, we have not, nor has the Department of Defense (DOD),
attempted to aggregate this information for all bases. [Footnote 2]
Nonetheless, on the basis of our observations and discussions with
officials at installations and major commands we visited last year here
in the United States, we obtained numerous examples where encroachment
issues, such as those related to compliance with the Endangered Species
Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act, had affected some training
range capabilities, requiring workarounds”or adjustments to training
events”and, in some cases, limited training. For example, endangered
species habitat considerations have limited off-road vehicle training at
Fort Lewis, Washington, to preserve an endangered plant and at Yakima
Training Center, Washington, to protect the western sage grouse
habitat. In addition, prior to the beginning of live-fire exercises in
the Atlantic, Navy aircraft and ships search the training area and then
maintain a constant watch for marine mammals during exercises. If a
mammal enters the training area, the exercise is suspended until it
leaves.
2. Is there quantitative evidence to prove that military readiness has
been degraded by the need to comply with the Endangered Species Act and
the Marine Mammal Protection Act? If so, can you please provide these
numbers?
DOD has accumulated limited quantitative information to fully assess
the magnitude of any impact of compliance with environmental statutes
on military training. Our prior work found that, despite concerns
voiced repeatedly by DOD officials about the effects of encroachment on
training, DOD‘s readiness reports did not indicate the extent to which
encroachment was adversely affecting training readiness and costs. This
suggests inadequate efforts on the part of DOD to fully assess and
report on the magnitude of the encroachment problem.
In the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2003, Congress required the Secretary of Defense to develop a
comprehensive plan for using existing authorities available to the
Secretary of Defense and the secretaries of the military departments to
address training constraints on the use of military lands, marine
areas, and airspace that are available in the United States and
overseas for training. As part of the preparation of the plan, the
Secretary of Defense was expected to conduct an assessment of current
and future training range requirements of the armed forces and an
evaluation of the adequacy of current DOD resources (including virtual
and constructive training assets as well as military lands, marine
areas, and airspace available in the United States and overseas) to
meet those current and future training range requirements. The act also
requires annual reports to Congress dealing with encroachment issues
beginning this year and requires GAO to review those reports. The first
of those reports was required to be submitted along with the
President‘s budget for fiscal year 2004. That report was to describe
the progress in developing a comprehensive plan to address training
constraints. However, DOD has not completed a comprehensive plan or
provided Congress with the progress report. Officials of the Office of
the Secretary of Defense said that they plan to report to Congress
later this calendar year. The act also requires the submission of a
report not later than June 30, 2003, on the department‘s plans to
improve its readiness reporting to reflect the readiness impact that
training constraints have on specific units of the armed forces.
Questions from Congressman Reyes:
1. Do you believe that DOD is going too far, too fast?
We believe that many of the basic principles underlying DOD‘s civilian
human capital proposals have merit and deserve serious consideration.
[Footnote 3] However, given the massive size of DOD and the nature and
scope of the changes that are being considered, DOD‘s proposal also has
important precedent-setting implications for federal human capital
management in general, and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), in
particular. As a result, the National Security Personnel System (NSPS)
should be considered in that context. Several critical questions are
raised by the department‘s proposal, including should DOD and/or other
agencies be granted broad-based exemptions from existing law, and if so,
on what basis; and whether they have the institutional infrastructure
in place to make effective use of the new authorities.
In our view, it would be more prudent and appropriate for Congress to
address certain authorities that DOD is seeking on a governmentwide
basis and in a manner that assures that appropriate performance
management systems and safeguards are in place before the new
authorities are actually implemented (or operationalized) in any
respective agency. This approach would accelerate needed human capital
reform throughout the government in a manner that assures reasonable
consistency on key principles within the overall civilian workforce. It
also would provide agencies with reasonable flexibility while
incorporating key safeguards to help maximize the chances of success
and minimize the chances of abuse. It would also serve to prevent
further fragmentation within the civil service system.
We believe that agencies should have the institutional infrastructure
to make effective use of new authorities. This includes, at a minimum,
a human capital planning process that integrates the agency‘s human
capital policies, strategies, and programs with its program goals and
mission and desired outcomes; the capabilities to effectively develop
and implement a new human capital system; and importantly, the
existence of a modern, effective, and credible performance management
system that includes adequate safeguards, including reasonable
transparency and appropriate accountability mechanisms, to ensure the
fair, effective, and nondiscriminatory implementation of a new system.
2. In your written testimony to the Government Reform Committee you
state, ’Quite frankly, in the absence of the right institutional
infrastructure, granting additional human capital authorities will
provide little advantage and could actually end up doing damage if the
new flexibilities are not implemented properly.“ In your opinion, does
DOD have the right infrastructure?
Based on our experience, while the DOD leadership has the intent and
the ability to implement the needed infrastructure, it does not have
the needed infrastructure in place across most of DOD at the present
time. Our work has shown that while progress is being made, additional
efforts are needed by DOD to integrate its human capital planning
process with the department‘s program goals and mission. In addition,
the practices that have been shown to be critical to the effective use
of flexibilities provide a validated roadmap for DOD and Congress to
consider.
3. Do you believe that DOD has provided the sufficient safeguards in its
proposal to ensure the fair, merit-based, transparent, and accountable
implementation of its proposed changes to the civil service system?
In our view, Congress should consider establishing additional
safeguards to ensure the fair, merit-based, transparent, and
accountable implementation of NSPS. As we were asked at the hearing, we
have provided suggestions for possible safeguards for Congress to
consider to help ensure that DOD‘s NSPS is designed and implemented in
a manner that maximizes the chance of success and minimizes the
possibility for abuse. A copy of that correspondence, dated May 6,
2003, will be provided to Congressman Reyes.
For additional information on our work on human capital issues at DOD,
please contact me on 512-5500 or Derek Stewart, Director, Defense
Capabilities and Management, on 512-5559 or at stewartd@gao.gov or J.
Christopher Mihm, Director, Strategic Issues, on governmentwide human
capital issues at 512-6806 or at mihmj@gao.gov.
Signed by:
David M. Walker:
Comptroller General Of the United States:
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] U.S. General Accounting Office, Defense Transformation: DOD‘s
Proposed Civilian Personnel System and Governmentwide Human Capital
Reform, GAO-03-741T (Washington, D.C.: May 1, 2003).
[2] U.S. General Accounting Office, Military Training: DOD Lacks a
Comprehensive Plan to Manage Encroachment on Training Ranges, GAO 02-
614 (Washington, D.C.: June 11, 2002) and Military Training: DOD
Approach to Managing Encroachment on Training Ranges Still Evolving,
GAO-03-621T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 2, 2003).
[3] U.S. General Accounting Office, Defense Transformation: DOD‘s
Proposed Civilian Personnel System and Governmentwide Human Capital
Reform, GAO-03-741T (Washington, D.C.: May 1, 2003) and Defense
Transformation: Preliminary Observations on DOD‘s Proposed Civilian
Personnel Reforms (Washington, D.C.: April 29, 2003).
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The General Accounting Office, the 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.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov] contains abstracts and full-text files of current
reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older products. The
Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents using
key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety,
including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts"
under the "Order GAO Products" heading.
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. General Accounting Office:
441 G Street NW:
Room LM:
Washington D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. General Accounting Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
