GAO Reports
Here's a look at Government Accountability Office reports
Featured Stories
Future Vertical Lift: Senior Leaders Restructured the Army Aviation Portfolio to Reduce Costs
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Future Vertical Lift: Senior Leaders Restructured the Army Aviation Portfolio to Reduce Costs
*
Fast Facts
The Army relies on "vertical lift systems," such as helicopters, for reconnaissance and attack missions and to transport troops and equipment on the battlefield. The Army's fleet of helicopters is aging and, starting in 2019, the Army prioritized funding to improve its vertical lift portfolio.
However, the Army reprioritized its efforts in 2024. Specifically, the Army canceled
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Future Vertical Lift: Senior Leaders Restructured the Army Aviation Portfolio to Reduce Costs
*
Fast Facts
The Army relies on "vertical lift systems," such as helicopters, for reconnaissance and attack missions and to transport troops and equipment on the battlefield. The Army's fleet of helicopters is aging and, starting in 2019, the Army prioritized funding to improve its vertical lift portfolio.
However, the Army reprioritized its efforts in 2024. Specifically, the Army canceledone design due to cost concerns and moved funding to other opportunities. For example, it increased investments in drones.
This Q&A report reviews the Army's decision to shift priorities and its plans to address future capability needs.
Soldiers Using a Virtual Prototype of the Army's Future Long Range Assault Aircraft
Two individuals in camouflage uniform inside a helicopter flight simulator cockpit.
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Army relies on what it calls vertical lift systems, primarily helicopters, to accomplish reconnaissance and attack missions and move troops and equipment to and around the battlefield. In its 2019 modernization strategy, the Army identified developing its Future Vertical Lift portfolio as a priority. This portfolio included two crewed and one uncrewed aircraft.
* Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA)-intended to provide reconnaissance, attack, and aerial security capabilities, and estimated to cost $5.3 billion for development and procurement.
* Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA)-a medium-sized assault and utility aircraft that would deliver speed, range, agility, endurance, and sustainability improvements compared to current Black Hawk helicopters.
* Future Tactical Unmanned Aircraft System (FTUAS)-intended to execute reconnaissance operations as a rapidly deployable uncrewed aircraft with vertical take-off and landing capabilities.
The portfolio also included a variety of aircraft to be deployed from larger aircraft and development of an improved turbine engine.
Aircraft in the Future Vertical Lift Portfolio prior to February 2024
In February 2024, the Army made significant changes to this portfolio. According to Army officials, Army leadership collaborated with officials from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to restructure the portfolio. This restructuring ended the development of FARA, continued investment in FLRAA, and increased investment in FTUAS. In addition, the restructuring increased investment in uncrewed aircraft while delaying production of the improved turbine engine.
Army budget officials stated that these changes were due to concerns about the long-term affordability of developing and acquiring FARA and FLRAA simultaneously. Army officials stated that the restructuring decision shifted about $7.3 billion in planned spending to other priorities. These priorities included other programs with vertical lift capabilities as well as improvements to Army barracks.
Planned Spending from Fiscal Years 2025 through 2029 as a Result of Future Vertical Lift Portfolio Restructuring
Because of its decision to end development of FARA, the Army reduced planned capabilities for crewed reconnaissance and attack missions. The Army plans to rely on future uncrewed systems for some reconnaissance and attack missions and existing helicopters for attack.
The Army is currently considering further changes to its vertical lift capabilities. In April 2025, the Secretary of Defense announced the Army Transformation Initiative. This Initiative directs the Army to consider changes to both its acquisitions and force structure. As a result, the Army has proposed a number of other changes to its aviation portfolio, including:
* accelerating FLRAA development and fielding,
* accelerating fielding of launched uncrewed aircraft,
* distributing existing vertical lift capabilities across the Army, and
* ending development of FTUAS.
In GAO's discussions with Army officials, the officials stated that none of these decisions have been finalized and will depend on the outcome of the fiscal year 2026 budget.
Why GAO Did This Study
In 2019, the Army identified six modernization priority areas - including capabilities for Future Vertical Lift - to improve its ability to operate in the modern battlefield. In 2024, the Army made significant changes to the portfolio of vertical lift systems it had been developing.
A Senate Report contains a provision for GAO to review and assess the capabilities affected by the Army's restructuring decisions and the analyses that informed them. GAO's report describes the revisions resulting from the restructuring, the reasons for the changes, how the changes impacted programs and vertical lift capabilities, and Army plans to address potential capability gaps.
To identify why the restructuring decision was made, who made it, what analyses may have been used, and potential effects on capabilities, GAO assessed and compared requirements documents preceding and subsequent to the Army's 2024 restructuring decision, traced funding by analyzing budget documents, and interviewed numerous Army officials. These officials included the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, officials from the office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisitions, Logistics, and Technology; the Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Programs, which is the office responsible for aligning funding to the Army's acquisition plans; and the Future Vertical Lift Cross-Functional Team, as well as officials from individual vertical lift-related programs.
For more information, contact Alex Winograd at winograda@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108025
Flood Risk Mitigation: Reducing Fiscal Exposure and Improving Affordability
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Flood Risk Mitigation: Reducing Fiscal Exposure and Improving Affordability
*
Fast Facts
We testified on flood risk mitigation before the House Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.
Our testimony is based primarily on the following reports:
Flood Insurance: FEMA's New Rate-Setting Methodology Improves Actuarial Soundness but Highlights Need for Broader Program Reform
Flood Mitigation: Actions Needed to Improve Use of FEMA Property Acquisitions
National
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Flood Risk Mitigation: Reducing Fiscal Exposure and Improving Affordability
*
Fast Facts
We testified on flood risk mitigation before the House Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.
Our testimony is based primarily on the following reports:
Flood Insurance: FEMA's New Rate-Setting Methodology Improves Actuarial Soundness but Highlights Need for Broader Program Reform
Flood Mitigation: Actions Needed to Improve Use of FEMA Property Acquisitions
NationalFlood Insurance Program: Fiscal Exposure Persists Despite Property Acquisitions
Additionally, it updates some data and figures we reported in our prior work.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has addressed some of our recommendations but still needs to address others. We have also made recommendations for congressional consideration and offered policy options related to these issues.
Picture of the U.S. Capitol Building
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers three primary programs that mitigate flood risk for properties insured by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). A small number of these properties-known as repetitive loss properties, which have flooded and received claim payments multiple times-contribute to the program's fiscal challenges. According to FEMA, unmitigated repetitive loss properties make up about 2.5 percent of NFIP policies, but 48 percent of NFIP claims by dollar value have been paid to properties with two or more losses.
From 1989 through 2025, 77 percent of the properties FEMA mitigated were funded by the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. FEMA supports four mitigation strategies-acquisition, elevation, relocation, and floodproofing. FEMA has mitigated flood risk primarily through acquisitions, which accounted for 69,415 (about 72.5 percent) of the properties mitigated from 1989 through 2025.
FEMA Hazard Mitigation, by Grant Program and Method, Fiscal Years 1989-2025
While acquisitions offer benefits, the process faces significant challenges that can discourage communities and homeowners from participating. These challenges include a lengthy and complex process, limited state and community capacity, and financial constraints.
NFIP represents a fiscal exposure to the federal government because FEMA is statutorily required to charge premium rates that do not fully reflect flood risk. Although mitigation reduces flood losses, it also requires substantial investment. Without addressing mitigation challenges, the number of repetitive loss properties will continue to grow, increasing costs to NFIP policyholders and federal taxpayers. One way to address the program's fiscal exposure is to target mitigation efforts to those properties contributing most to the premium shortfall. These may disproportionately include repetitive loss properties, which face greater flood risk and higher full-risk premiums. By reducing risk, mitigation could also address affordability in the long term.
Why GAO Did This Study
Flooding is the most expensive natural disaster in the U.S., and in 2024, it caused over $8 billion in damages, according to FEMA. Congress created NFIP in 1968 to protect homeowners from flood losses, minimize property exposure to flood damage, and limit taxpayers' fiscal exposure to flood losses. However, the program faces multiple serious and longstanding challenges, primarily because it has two competing goals: keeping flood insurance affordable while maintaining the program's fiscal solvency.
This statement discusses (1) the role of mitigation in addressing NFIP's fiscal exposure from repetitive loss properties and (2) how targeting mitigation efforts could reduce NFIP's exposure and address affordability.
This statement is based on GAO work issued in 2017-2023, including GAO-17-425, GAO-20-508, GAO-22-106037, and GAO-23-105977. Detailed information on the objectives, scope, and methodology can be found within each report.
Recommendations
GAO has made nine recommendations to FEMA and eight to Congress related to improving the mitigation process, addressing challenges in property acquisitions, and reducing NFIP's fiscal exposure while addressing affordability for policyholders. As of March 2026, FEMA has implemented four of these recommendations.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-109045
Debt Limit: Prolonged Negotiations Increase Taxpayer Costs and Disrupt Financial Markets
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Debt Limit: Prolonged Negotiations Increase Taxpayer Costs and Disrupt Financial Markets
*
Fast Facts
Congress sets a limit on federal borrowing, known as the debt limit. When the debt reaches the limit, and Congress doesn't act quickly to raise or suspend it, there's an impasse. These have become more frequent.
Impasses have disrupted financial markets and increased the nation's borrowing costs-which could be avoided. As debt approaches the limit, investors often demand higher interest
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Debt Limit: Prolonged Negotiations Increase Taxpayer Costs and Disrupt Financial Markets
*
Fast Facts
Congress sets a limit on federal borrowing, known as the debt limit. When the debt reaches the limit, and Congress doesn't act quickly to raise or suspend it, there's an impasse. These have become more frequent.
Impasses have disrupted financial markets and increased the nation's borrowing costs-which could be avoided. As debt approaches the limit, investors often demand higher interestrates on new U.S. debt to compensate for the risk of not being repaid on time.
These unnecessary costs reinforce our prior recommendation of replacing the current debt limit process with one that aligns decisions on debt with decisions on spending and revenue.
A smartphone showing a web page on the debt limit from the U.S. Department of the Treasury's website, on top of a few $100 bills.
Highlights
What GAO Found
Debt limit impasses impose avoidable costs. As a projected date nears when the U.S. will be unable to meet all its financial obligations-the X date-investors often demand higher yields on new Treasury securities maturing near that date to compensate for the added risk. This increases the government's borrowing costs. GAO estimates that Treasury securities issued during periods of acute market concern over impasses between 2011 and 2023-the most recent impasses with complete data available at the time of GAO's analysis-incurred a total of roughly $107 million to $161 million in increased immediate borrowing costs (in 2024 dollars), depending on the measure used to estimate market concern. Impasses also impose additional, hard-to-quantify costs, including long-term costs from reduced investor confidence in the Treasury market.
Estimated Immediate Treasury Borrowing Costs Associated with Debt Limit Impasses
Note: For each impasse, GAO used two distinct measures of market concern to estimate increased borrowing costs. For more details, see fig. 2 in GAO-26-107872.
Debt limit impasses have also reduced the market value of outstanding Treasury securities. Market participants avoided securities maturing near a projected X-date, as those maturing after this date would be the first to default if the impasse were not resolved in time. GAO's analysis found that these securities lost value relative to comparable ones maturing just before the X-date.
Impasse disruptions to Treasury markets can spread to short-term funding markets and funds closely tied to Treasury securities. In 2011 and 2013, such disruptions included higher borrowing rates and money market fund outflows. These disruptions prompted market participant actions to limit risk and manage future impasse effects. However, other disruptions can occur after impasses are resolved, as fluctuations in the Department of the Treasury's cash balance create volatility in some markets.
GAO's prior work has identified longstanding concerns about the debt limit ( GAO-25-107089 ). The current debt limit process creates an unnecessary risk of U.S. default, with potentially devastating consequences for individuals, financial institutions, and the broader economy. The costs and market disruptions documented in this report further underscore the need for debt limit reform.
Why GAO Did This Study
Congress imposes a legal limit on federal borrowing, known as the debt limit. Under the current process, Congress can approve spending increases or tax cuts without also ensuring that Treasury has sufficient borrowing authority to finance these decisions. In recent years, when the federal government has approached the debt limit, prolonged congressional negotiations on increasing or suspending the limit have repeatedly brought it close to being unable to continue paying obligations stemming from past spending and revenue decisions. If Treasury exhausts its borrowing authority and runs out of cash, a default will occur.
In this report, GAO examines how debt limit impasses-where outstanding debt reached the limit and Congress did not immediately raise or suspend it-between 2011 and 2023 affected Treasury's borrowing costs and U.S. financial markets more broadly.
GAO analyzed financial market data and developed a suite of econometric models to estimate increased borrowing costs attributable to these impasses. GAO also reviewed relevant research, documentation, and laws. In addition, GAO interviewed agency officials and 17 financial market participants, selected to reflect a range of institution types and sizes.
Recommendations
GAO previously outlined alternatives to the current debt limit process and recommended that Congress replace it with an approach that links debt decisions to spending and revenue decisions at the time they are made ( GAO-15-476 and GAO-25-107089 ). GAO maintains that it is imperative that Congress take this action to prevent the recurring adverse effects of debt limit impasses.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107872
Consumer Protection: Government-wide Strategy Expeditiously Needed to Counter Scams
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Consumer Protection: Government-wide Strategy Expeditiously Needed to Counter Scams
*
Fast Facts
We testified on federal efforts to counter scams before the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee.
The statement is based primarily on the following report:
CONSUMER PROTECTION: Actions Needed to Improve Complaint Reporting, Consumer Education, and Federal Coordination to Counter Scams
Additionally, the statement discusses responses to recommendations we previously made to the Consumer
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Consumer Protection: Government-wide Strategy Expeditiously Needed to Counter Scams
*
Fast Facts
We testified on federal efforts to counter scams before the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee.
The statement is based primarily on the following report:
CONSUMER PROTECTION: Actions Needed to Improve Complaint Reporting, Consumer Education, and Federal Coordination to Counter Scams
Additionally, the statement discusses responses to recommendations we previously made to the ConsumerFinancial Protection Bureau, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Federal Trade Commission. We are monitoring their implementation.
The U.S. Capitol Building with the text GAO Testimony to Congress.
Highlights
What GAO Found
Scams occur in a variety of forms and are a growing risk to consumers.
Examples of a Scam Execution Process
Note: Other types of contact methods, scams, and payment methods exist.
At least 13 federal agencies engage in a range of activities related to countering scams. The agency activities cover a spectrum of roles intended to prevent, detect, and respond to scams. However, each agency largely carries out these activities independently. None of the 13 federal agencies that GAO spoke with were aware of a government-wide strategy to guide efforts to combat scams, nor did GAO independently identify such a strategy. In its April 2025 report, GAO recommended that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) lead a federal effort, in collaboration with other agencies, to develop and implement a government-wide strategy to counter scams and coordinate related activities. The FBI recently outlined actions to address this recommendation.
The Consumer Protection Financial Bureau (CFPB), FBI, and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) collect and report on consumer complaints both directly and from other agencies. Data limitations prevent agencies from determining a total number of scam complaints and financial losses. Accordingly, there is no single, government-wide estimate of the total number of scams and financial losses. Similarly, federal agencies have not produced a common, government-wide definition of scams. A government-wide estimate would capture the scale of scams, and a common definition is necessary for producing such an estimate and for developing a government-wide strategy.
In its April 2025 report, GAO made separate recommendations to CFPB, FBI, and FTC to (1) develop a common definition of scams, (2) harmonize data collection, (3) report an estimate of the number of scam complaints each receives and (4) produce a single, government-wide estimate of the number of consumers affected by scams. In a recent update, the FBI and FTC outlined various concerns with these recommendations, such as differing authorities and mandates among agencies. However, GAO maintains that these recommendations remain valid. In October 2025, CFPB stated that it will monitor FBI and FTC actions before determining if any actions of its own are warranted.
Why GAO Did This Study
Scams, a method of committing fraud, involve the use of deception or manipulation intended to achieve financial gain. Scams often cause individual victims to lose large sums-in some cases their entire life savings. Federal agencies such as the FBI and FTC have responsibilities that include preventing and responding to scams against Americans.
This statement discusses (1) federal agencies' activities to prevent and respond to scams and the need for a comprehensive, government-wide strategy to guide their efforts and (2) federal agencies' activities to compile scam-related consumer-complaint data and estimate the total number of scams and related financial losses. It also provides updates on the status of 3 agencies' actions to address applicable recommendations.
This statement is based on GAO's April 2025 report on federal efforts to combat scams ( GAO-25-107088 ). For that report, GAO analyzed publicly available information (including prior GAO reports) and relevant agency documents. GAO also interviewed officials from 13 different federal agencies involved in countering scams.
Recommendations
In April 2025 GAO made 16 total recommendations to CFPB, FBI, and FTC. The FBI disagreed with three recommendations, including those related to the development of a government-wide estimate and a definition of scams. FTC neither agreed nor disagreed with the five recommendations made to it. CFPB did not respond with comments. The agencies' responses to certain recommendations are discussed in this statement.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-109023
Veterans Affairs: Further Actions Needed to Address Software License Management Challenges
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Veterans Affairs: Further Actions Needed to Address Software License Management Challenges
*
Fast Facts
We issued a statement for the Congressional Record on the Department of Veterans Affairs' software licensing practices to the House of Representatives, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
It is based primarily on the following reports:
Federal Software Licenses: Agencies Need to Take Action to Achieve Additional Savings
Cloud Computing:
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Veterans Affairs: Further Actions Needed to Address Software License Management Challenges
*
Fast Facts
We issued a statement for the Congressional Record on the Department of Veterans Affairs' software licensing practices to the House of Representatives, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
It is based primarily on the following reports:
Federal Software Licenses: Agencies Need to Take Action to Achieve Additional Savings
Cloud Computing:Selected Agencies Need to Implement Updated Guidance for Managing Restrictive Licenses
VA is working to address our previous recommendations. We are monitoring its progress.
The U.S. Capitol dome and the words GAO Statement for the Congressional Record
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) spends billions of dollars annually for IT and cyber-related investments, including commercial software licenses. In a January 2024 government-wide report, GAO noted that while VA identified its five most widely used software vendors with the highest quantity of licenses installed, it faced challenges in determining whether it was purchasing too many or too few of these software licenses. Specifically, VA was not tracking the appropriate number of licenses for each item of software currently in use. Additionally, the department did not compare inventories of software licenses that were currently in use to purchase records on a regular basis (see table).
GAO January 2024 Report Assessing the Department of Veterans Affairs' Management of Widely Used Software Licenses
Key activity
Assessment
Track software licenses that are currently in use
Not met
Regularly compare the inventories of software licenses that are currently in use to purchase records
Not met
Source: GAO analysis of agency data. I GAO-26-109060
Until VA adequately assesses the appropriate number of licenses, it cannot determine whether it is purchasing too many licenses or too few. In January 2024, GAO recommended that the department track licenses in use within its inventories and compare them with purchase records. VA concurred with the recommendations and is taking preliminary actions to track software license usage. In early March 2026, VA officials reported that the department plans to implement initial functionality for a centralized software license inventory in late March 2026. If successful, this could be a critical first step in improving the department's ability to track and analyze licenses across the department. Implementation of these recommendations would allow VA to identify opportunities to reduce costs on duplicate or unnecessary licenses.
In a November 2024 report, GAO found that restrictive software licensing practices (e.g., certain vendors' processes) adversely impacted federal agencies' cloud computing efforts, including those of VA. These practices either increased costs of cloud software or services or limited the department's options when selecting cloud service providers. VA had not established guidance for effectively managing impacts from restrictive practices for cloud computing or determined who is responsible for managing these impacts.
Until VA establishes guidance and assigns responsibility for mitigating the impacts of restrictive software licensing practices, it will likely miss opportunities to avoid or minimize these impacts. GAO made two recommendations to VA to mitigate the impacts of restrictive software licensing practices. The department concurred with the recommendations. In May 2025, VA officials reported that the department planned to stand up a working group composed of IT and acquisition subject matter experts to identify, analyze, and mitigate the impacts of restrictive software licensing practices on cloud computing efforts by September 2026. However, it has not provided an update on the status of the working group. GAO will continue to monitor VA's actions to fully implement these recommendations.
Why GAO Did This Study
VA depends on critical underlying IT systems to manage benefits and provide care to millions of veterans and their families. For fiscal year 2025, the department planned to spend about $985 million on software, including commercial software licenses.
In 2015, GAO identified the management of software licenses as a focus area in its High-Risk report. GAO has also previously reported on the need for federal agencies-including VA-to ensure better management of software licenses.
This statement summarizes two 2024 GAO reports on VA software license management, including VA's efforts to track software license usage and manage restrictive licensing practices. The statement also addresses the status of VA's actions in response to recommendations from those reports. GAO reviewed its prior work, VA documentation related to the status of efforts to implement the recommendations, and information provided by VA in March 2026 as part of GAO's ongoing work.
Recommendations
GAO made four recommendations in its two recent 2024 reports for VA to improve its management of software licenses and mitigate the effects of restrictive software licensing practices. The department concurred with the recommendations; however, it has not yet implemented them. It is essential that VA implements the recommendations to minimize costs and mitigate restrictive licensing impacts.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-109060
Nuclear Waste Cleanup: Clarifying Definition of High-Level Radioactive Waste Could Help DOE Save Tens of Billions of Dollars
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Nuclear Waste Cleanup: Clarifying Definition of High-Level Radioactive Waste Could Help DOE Save Tens of Billions of Dollars
*
Fast Facts
The Department of Energy is responsible for cleaning up millions of gallons of radioactive waste from nuclear weapons production. To do this, DOE must rely on a statutory definition of "high-level radioactive waste" that is unclear and hinders its mission. For example, the definition doesn't define the phrase "highly radioactive."
There have been
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Nuclear Waste Cleanup: Clarifying Definition of High-Level Radioactive Waste Could Help DOE Save Tens of Billions of Dollars
*
Fast Facts
The Department of Energy is responsible for cleaning up millions of gallons of radioactive waste from nuclear weapons production. To do this, DOE must rely on a statutory definition of "high-level radioactive waste" that is unclear and hinders its mission. For example, the definition doesn't define the phrase "highly radioactive."
There have beenconcerns about this definition for decades. And, DOE hasn't fully evaluated or pursued opportunities to save tens of billions of dollars in how it treats and disposes of this waste. Our recommendations address these issues.
Underground Storage Tank with Radioactive Waste
Inside an underground radioactive waste storage tank.
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) is responsible for cleaning up waste resulting from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, a process used to produce plutonium. Generally, EM manages this waste associated with reprocessing as if it is high-level radioactive waste (HLW) unless the waste can be classified as low-level radioactive waste (LLW) or transuranic (TRU) waste. LLW and TRU waste are expected to be less expensive to treat and dispose of compared with HLW. To classify its waste, EM relies in part on the statutory definition of HLW in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended. However, GAO, DOE, and others have raised concerns that ambiguities in this definition have impeded EM's cleanup progress.
Examples of Waste Associated with Reprocessing
EM has three processes-known as waste classification tools-it can use to determine that certain waste associated with reprocessing can be treated and disposed of as LLW or TRU waste, rather than HLW. While these tools help EM address ambiguities in the HLW definition, they have shortcomings that hinder EM's progress. For example, one tool cannot be used at the Hanford Site, EM's most complex and expensive site. EM also faces the risk of litigation due to the lack of clarity in the HLW definition, which could affect EM's ability to successfully use the tools. Until the HLW definition is clarified, EM will continue to face significant barriers to completing its cleanup mission. Given the complexity of this issue, any efforts to revise the HLW definition would benefit from input and ideas from experts across government, industry, and academia.
While EM has applied the three tools to treat and dispose of some waste associated with reprocessing as non-HLW, EM has not pursued additional opportunities that GAO and others have identified. Many studies over the last 2 decades-including analyses conducted by EM-have shown that opportunities exist for EM to expedite its cleanup efforts and realize significant cost savings while ensuring safe disposal. For example, in a 2020 report, EM estimated that classifying a portion of tank waste as LLW at its Hanford Site could potentially generate a cost savings of $73 to $210 billion. By systematically evaluating these opportunities and pursuing them to the maximum extent possible, EM could accelerate its cleanup mission and save at least tens of billions of dollars.
Why GAO Did This Study
Since 1989, EM has been responsible for cleaning up waste resulting from plutonium production for the nation's nuclear arsenal. EM has faced many challenges in determining how best to treat and dispose of this waste, and the estimated future cost for addressing this and other waste is more than half a trillion dollars.
Senate Report 118-188 includes a provision for GAO to review DOE's implementation of certain tools to treat and dispose of waste associated with reprocessing as something other than HLW. GAO's report examines (1) EM's efforts to treat and dispose of such waste and the barriers it faces in doing so and (2) potential opportunities to realize cost savings by treating certain waste as something other than HLW.
GAO analyzed laws, EM policies and documentation, and prior GAO and independent entities' studies. GAO interviewed EM officials regarding EM's plans to treat and dispose of waste associated with reprocessing. GAO also visited two EM sites and evaluated documentation to identify opportunities for EM to treat and dispose of certain waste as LLW or TRU waste.
Recommendations
GAO recommends that Congress consider convening a panel of experts to recommend specific revisions to the statutory definition of HLW to address ambiguities in the definition.
GAO also recommends that EM systematically evaluate opportunities to treat and dispose of certain waste associated with reprocessing as something other than HLW and communicate to Congress regarding its efforts to implement these opportunities as well as actions Congress can take to minimize or eliminate any barriers impeding EM's ability to pursue them. DOE agreed with the recommendation.
Matter for Congressional Consideration
Matter Status Comments
Congress should consider convening a multidisciplinary panel, such as a Blue Ribbon Commission, comprising a group of relevant experts-for example, from key agencies, industry, and academia-to develop and recommend specific revisions to address ambiguities in the definition of HLW in the AEA and NWPA and to report these recommendations to Congress within 12 months. (Matter for Consideration 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected Recommendation Status
Office of Environmental Management The Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management should systematically evaluate the full range of opportunities to treat and dispose of legacy waste associated with reprocessing as something other than HLW and communicate to Congress on (1) EM's plans to implement identified opportunities-or its rationale for not doing so-and (2) actions Congress can take to minimize or eliminate barriers that impede EM's ability to proceed with these plans. (Recommendation 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108018
Artificial Intelligence: IRS Actions Needed to Address Skills Gaps, Information Quality, and Strategic Management
WASHINGTON, March 24 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Artificial Intelligence: IRS Actions Needed to Address Skills Gaps, Information Quality, and Strategic Management
*
Fast Facts
The IRS has been using AI to help with its operations, including audit selection and answering taxpayer questions. It plans to use AI more in the future, but it may not be ready to do so.
We found that staffing reductions resulted in IRS not having enough skilled employees to support or develop new AI tools. IRS doesn't have a workforce plan to identify and
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 24 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:
* * *
Artificial Intelligence: IRS Actions Needed to Address Skills Gaps, Information Quality, and Strategic Management
*
Fast Facts
The IRS has been using AI to help with its operations, including audit selection and answering taxpayer questions. It plans to use AI more in the future, but it may not be ready to do so.
We found that staffing reductions resulted in IRS not having enough skilled employees to support or develop new AI tools. IRS doesn't have a workforce plan to identify andaddress the skills its AI workforce needs.
Also, IRS's inventory of AI applications was incomplete. For example, it didn't include all the ways AI was being used or identify how the tools would benefit the agency.
Our recommendations address these issues and more.
The letters A and I spelled out on a circuit board in blue lights
Highlights
What GAO Found
IRS had 126 active artificial intelligence (AI) use cases-applications of AI for a particular business need-in its inventory as of June 2025. These 126 use cases included 65 that were either too sensitive for public reporting or were research and development efforts exempt from public reporting. Although IRS has been using AI for several years, its inventory has grown rapidly since reporting 10 use cases in August 2022. IRS categorized most use cases in the June 2025 inventory as either improving (1) operational efficiency or (2) tax compliance and fraud detection. IRS listed 61 percent (77 of 126) of use cases as in development in June 2025 (see figure).
Major staffing reductions at IRS in 2025 could greatly affect its ability to use AI. For example, officials in the Research, Applied Analytics and Statistics group said they lost 63 employees who had been working full- or part-time on AI. Other IRS units also reported reductions in staff that support AI efforts, in addition to organizational and contractual changes. Still, IRS officials stated that the agency plans to use more AI in the future. However, IRS officials said they had not identified skills needed to support AI or developed a plan to address the skills gaps. The recent staff reductions, the intent to pursue additional AI initiatives, and the absence of a plan to address AI skills gaps increase the risk that IRS AI efforts will not succeed.
In addition, IRS's inventory did not always include quality information. For example, GAO determined that over 25 percent of use cases did not include information on how the use case was to benefit the agency. GAO also identified use case inventory omissions. For example, GAO identified several AI-enabled tools IRS officials said were contracted to help build criminal cases. These tools were not included in the inventory. Improved IRS processes and internal communications can address these shortcomings.
IRS's AI governance process had several entities with oversight of individual AI use cases. However, none were responsible for managing AI investments across the agency. Further, IRS does not have a process to ensure its AI investments are contributing to agency-wide goals. Given the risks facing IRS, a more strategic approach is warranted that enables IRS to identify high-value AI initiatives that contribute to agency-wide goals.
Why GAO Did This Study
IRS has used AI for many years. It has numerous AI initiatives under development and in operation, including in areas such as taxpayer service and audit selection. However, future IRS funding, strategy, and staffing levels are uncertain. This dynamic environment highlights the importance of understanding how AI can deliver results for IRS.
GAO was asked to review IRS's use of AI. This report assesses (1) how IRS uses AI and how resource changes at IRS could affect AI efforts; (2) the quality of information in IRS's AI inventory; and (3) how IRS strategically manages its AI investments.
GAO reviewed IRS's internal and public AI inventories, and relevant Department of the Treasury and IRS documents. GAO compared information in and processes for managing IRS's AI inventory to IRS policy and guidance, law, government-wide guidance, and leading practices. In addition, GAO compared IRS's efforts to manage its AI investments against federal guidance and leading practices. GAO also interviewed Treasury and IRS officials.
Recommendations
GAO is making eight recommendations to IRS, including to (1) identify skills gaps and develop an AI workforce plan; (2) implement a comprehensive quality assurance process for AI inventory entries; (3) clarify internal communications to ensure all AI use cases are included in the inventory; and (4) require reporting on use case alignment to strategic goals.
IRS agreed with all eight of GAO's recommendations and described steps it plans to take, or has started taking, in response to each recommendation. IRS also provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected Recommendation Status
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should identify the skills the agency needs to support its use of AI and develop a plan to address any related skills gaps. (Recommendation 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure IRS has a comprehensive quality assurance process for AI inventory entries, including mechanisms for documenting complete and quality information. (Recommendation 2)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure IRS's internal guidance related to the AI inventory is comprehensive, including the job aids for AI use case owners and checklist the AI governance office uses to verify inventory entries. (Recommendation 3)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure internal communications about AI governance clarify that all AI unclassified use cases, including contracted and sensitive law enforcement AI, are subject to AI inventory requirements, with limited exceptions. (Recommendation 4)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should take steps to identify all existing contracts involving AI and notify those responsible for the contracts of IRS's AI governance requirements. (Recommendation 5)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop and implement policies to increase coordination and collaboration among business units using AI, including assessing opportunities to leverage existing resources, and avoid potential unnecessary overlap or duplication when new use cases are initiated. (Recommendation 6)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should require AI use case owners to report how each use case aligns with IRS strategic goals. (Recommendation 7)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should establish performance metrics and require AI use case owners to report on outcomes for IRS to use to inform its strategic decision-making on the use of AI. (Recommendation 8)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
See All 8 Recommendations
Additional Data
Supplemental Material
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107522
