Federal Reports

What We Looked AtGeospatial data--which Federal agencies use to achieve their missions--contain information tied to locations, including geographic location identifiers. Transportation related geospatial data include instrument-flight-rule navigation charts and pipeline inspection boundary maps. In October 2018, Congress passed the Geospatial Data Act (GDA) on the management of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI). NSDI has 18 geospatial data themes that cover data used by Federal agencies, including a transportation theme. Section 756 of the GDA requires Federal Geographic Data Committee to identify one or more covered agencies to serve as the lead covered agency for a specific data theme. The act's section 759 sets requirements for covered agencies. As the lead covered agency for the transportation theme, the Department of Transportation (DOT) must address requirements under GDA section 756(b) for the transportation theme, and as a covered agency the requirements under sections 759(a) and 759(b). The act also requires inspectors general of covered agencies to report to Congress once every 2 years on their agencies' geospatial data-related activities. Our audit objective was to assess DOT's progress since our 2020 GDA audit. Specifically, we assessed the Department's progress implementing its responsibilities (1) as a lead covered agency under section 756(b) and (2) as a covered agency under sections 759(a) and 759(b) of the act.What We FoundDOT has made progress complying with lead covered agency requirements. In 2020, DOT met two of the five lead covered agency requirements--information on user needs and theme administration. In 2022, DOT fully meets four requirements and partially meets one--a plan to implement standards for theme data. DOT has also made progress on the 12 applicable covered agency requirements. In 2020, DOT had met 4 of the 12 applicable requirements and in 2022, fully meets 9. The Department has not yet fully complied with the requirements for implementation of a geospatial information system strategic plan, records preparation, and the use of geospatial information. DOT complied with the requirements on annual reporting and maintenance of a geospatial data asset inventory.RecommendationsWe made one recommendation to help DOT comply with the requirements for lead covered agencies in the act's section 756(b). DOT concurred with our recommendation.

What We Looked AtUnmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), commonly known as “drones,” are rapidly growing in number in the National Airspace System. Currently, there is limited infrastructure available to manage widespread expansion of small UAS operations in low-altitude airspace (below 400 feet) where the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) does not provide air traffic services. Congress directed FAA to conduct activities that will allow implementation of UAS Traffic Management (UTM), including a UTM Pilot Program. Citing the importance of UAS traffic management, the Ranking Members of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and its Aviation Subcommittee requested that we evaluate FAA’s efforts to develop and implement UTM, including the pilot program and any interactions FAA has had with other Government agencies. Our objectives were to assess FAA’s (1) progress with UTM development and implementation, including results of its UTM Pilot Program, and (2) collaboration with other Government agencies regarding UTM. What We FoundFAA has made initial progress in developing a UTM framework and testing UTM concepts through the UTM Pilot Program. For example, FAA continues to develop and refine its concept of operations and has deployed some initial UTM capabilities, such as an automated system for authorizing UAS operations near airports. However, FAA has not established milestones for implementing the policies and processes necessary to allow for UTM deployment or finalized how the Agency plans to use the UTM Pilot Program results to inform near-term efforts. While UTM stakeholders stated that the pilot program was successful, they noted common areas of concern with UTM implementation, such as slow progress, the need for additional rules for remotely identifying UAS, and lack of information on next steps. In addition, FAA has not yet completed coordination with other Government agencies. Our RecommendationsFAA concurred with two of our four recommendations to improve FAA’s efforts to develop and implement a UTM and partially concurred with the other two. Based on FAA’s response, we consider all four recommendations resolved but open pending completion of planned actions.

What We Looked AtThis report presents the results of our quality control review (QCR) of an audit of the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) information security program and practices. The Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA) requires agencies to develop, implement, and document agencywide information security programs and practices. FISMA also requires inspectors general to conduct annual reviews of their agencies’ information security programs and report the results to the Office of Management and Budget. To meet this requirement, we contracted with CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (CLA) to conduct this audit subject to our oversight. The audit objective was to determine the effectiveness of DOT’s information security program and practices in five function areas—Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover. What We FoundOur QCR disclosed no instances in which CLA did not comply, in all material respects, with generally accepted Government auditing standards. Our RecommendationsDOT concurs with all eight of CLA’s recommendations. CLA considers all eight recommendations resolved but open pending completion of planned actions.

“According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), lead-based paint and lead-contaminated dust are some of the most widespread and hazardous sources of lead exposure for young children in the United States. When lead-based paint peels and cracks, it results in lead-contaminated paint chips and dust. Children can be poisoned if they chew on surfaces coated with lead-based paint, eat flaking paint chips, or eat or breathe in lead dust. CDC has reported that there is no safe blood lead level in people and there is no cure for lead poisoning, which is why it is important to prevent exposure to lead, especially among young children. Approximately 126,380 public housing buildings and 696,260 units were built before 1978, which was the year the Federal Government banned lead-based paint. As of March 2022, HUD’s Real Estate Assessment Center—an office within HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing—was establishing the Environmental Shared Services office (ESS) to improve its risk assessment and inspection capabilities for health and safety hazards, including lead-based paint hazards. ESS will provide insight into potential and existing environmental hazards, compliance issues, and data gaps to improve HUD’s decision making and facilitate allocating resources to drive effective hazard management strategies. As part of its purpose, ESS will rank risks related to four environmental hazards—carbon monoxide, mold, lead, and radon. In establishing its risk-ranking model, ESS identified five indicators for its lead risk ranking. Using the best available data collected from both HUD and sources external to HUD, we identified nine indicators of potential risk for lead-based paint hazards in public housing:American Healthy Homes Survey II estimated regional percentage of lead-based paint hazards.Number and percentage of public housing units in the region constructed before 1978.Number of recorded children with EBLLs living in public housing.Number of substandard or troubled Public Housing Assessment System scores.Number of public housing agencies (PHA) on the Lead-Based Paint Response tracker.Amount of funding received from HUD’s Lead-Based Paint Capital Fund or Housing Related Hazards Capital Fund grant programs.Amount of funding received from CDC childhood lead poisoning prevention programs.Number and percentage of confirmed EBLLs in tested children greater than 5 µg/dL, as reported by CDC.Lead Exposure Risk Index.Based on our analysis of these nine risk indicators, we identified five HUD regions and six States within those regions—New York, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Kentucky, Illinois, and Texas—with the most potential risk of having PHAs with lead-based paint hazards. In addition, our analysis identified eight other States that, while not measuring as the most at-risk State in their respective regions, also have a higher potential risk of having lead-based paint hazards. Although HUD has identified its own risk indicators for lead-based paint hazards, of which four overlap with our indicators, this report may be helpful to HUD as it continues identifying and evaluating risk indicators and evaluating how well those indicators are identifying potential issues of lead-based paint in HUD-assisted public housing.”