United States General Accounting Office
GAO Testimony
Before the Subcommittee on Government Management,
Information, and Technology Committee on Government
Reform and Oversight House of Representatives
For Release on Delivery
Expected at
2:00 p.m., EST
FEDERAL ADVISORY
Wednesday
Nov. 5, 1997 COMMITTEE ACT
Overview of Advisory
Committees Since 1993
Statement of L. Nye Stevens
Director, Federal Management and Workforce Issues
General Government Division
GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement
Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview
of Advisory Committees Since 1993
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
I am pleased to be here today to discuss our work on federal advisory
committees. Congress has recognized that when properly organized and
managed, advisory committees can provide a useful source of expertise
and advice. However, in 1972, because of its concern about the
proliferation and lack of effective management of advisory committees,
Congress enacted the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). FACA is
intended to keep the number of advisory committees to the minimum
necessary by ensuring that (1) valid needs exist for establishing and
continuing advisory committees, (2) the committees are properly managed
and their proceedings are open to the public, and (3) Congress is kept
informed of their activities. FACA directs the General Services
Administration (GSA) to establish and maintain a Committee Management
Secretariat to oversee advisory committee activities. In 1993, the President
issued an executive order that directed agencies to reduce by at least
one-third the number of discretionary advisory committees that they
sponsored (those not mandated by Congress or established by the
President) by the end of fiscal year 1993. FACA committees are either
established under agency authority, authorized by Congress, mandated by
Congress, or established by the President.
As agreed, we will focus our testimony today on (1) an assessment of
whether Executive Order 12838, signed by the President on February 10,
1993, achieved its goal of reducing the number of discretionary advisory
committees by at least one-third by the end of fiscal year 1993 and the
extent to which the costs and number of committee members changed
during the same period; and (2) an overview of GSA’s oversight
responsibilities under FACA. Also as agreed, we will continue our work on
GSA’s oversight of advisory committee activities and additional issues that
you and Senator John Glenn asked us to review—advisory committee
management, committee members’ independence, and participation of
outside parties. We will report on this work at a later date.
To assess whether the administration achieved its goal of reducing the
number of discretionary advisory committees and the extent to which
committees’ costs and membership had changed, we analyzed the annual
reports of the President on federal advisory committees from fiscal years
1993 through 1996 and reviewed GSA historical data. To identify GSA’s
Committee Management Secretariat oversight responsibilities under FACA,
we reviewed applicable laws, regulations, and GSA guidance to agencies
Page 1 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement
Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview
of Advisory Committees Since 1993
regarding advisory committee activities and interviewed GSA’s Committee
Management Secretariat officials.
According to the President’s annual reports on advisory committees, the
Number of Advisory total number of advisory committees decreased from a high of 1,305
Committees Has during 1993 to a low of 1,000 during 1996, the most recent year for which
Declined, but the complete data were available. Nearly all of this reduction, 303 of the 305
drop, was due to cuts in the number of discretionary advisory committees.
Costs and Number of The reduction in the number of advisory committees since 1993 follows
Members Per the President’s 1993 executive order, which called for at least a one-third
reduction in discretionary advisory committees. Discretionary committees
Committee Have do not include advisory committees mandated by Congress and those
Risen created by the President. Appendix I shows the number of advisory
committees by the four establishment authorities during fiscal years 1993
through 1996.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in providing guidance to
agencies on the 1993 executive order, established a maximum ceiling
number of discretionary advisory committees for each agency and a
monitoring plan. Under the guidance, agencies were to report their
committee levels annually to OMB and request its approval before creating
any new discretionary committees. Later, OMB dropped the requirement for
prior approval of new committees as long as agencies were beneath their
approved ceilings. In a June 1994 memorandum to agency heads, the Vice
President called for each agency to reduce advisory committee costs by at
least another 5 percent beyond the savings achieved by the one-third
reduction that resulted from implementation of the executive order.
According to GSA officials, and as reported in the President’s annual
reports, the overall number of advisory committees was on the rise before
1993, but in response to the 1993 executive order the number started to
drop in 1994. (See app. II.) Almost all of the reduction in advisory
committees (303 of 305) from fiscal year 1993 to 1996 was attributable to
the cut in discretionary committees. Although the President’s goal of
reducing the number of discretionary committees by one-third was not
achieved governmentwide by the end of fiscal year 1993,1 the number of
discretionary committees dropped from 833 to 530 (36 percent) during the
4-year period; and the total number of advisory committees dropped from
1,305 to 1,000 (23 percent). The 530 discretionary committees that existed
1
The fiscal year 1993 Annual Report of the President on Federal Advisory Committees shows that 28 of
64 (44 percent) executive departments, independent agencies, and other organizations either met or
exceeded the one-third reduction.
Page 2 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement
Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview
of Advisory Committees Since 1993
during fiscal year 1996 were 4 less than the governmentwide OMB ceiling of
534 committees. According to GSA, the number of discretionary
committees has continued to decline; and, as of mid-September 1997, the
number was 479, 55 below the ceiling.
Although the overall number of advisory committees declined during the
4-year period, their costs and the number of committee members
increased. The number of members serving on the committees increased
from 28,317 to 29,511 (4 percent), and the costs of committees increased in
nominal dollars from $143.9 to $148.5 million (3 percent). However, in
constant 1993 dollars, the costs decreased from $143.9 to $138.3 million
(4 percent) for the 4-year period.
On average, the number of members per committee rose from 22 to 30,
and the costs per committee rose from $110,276 to $148,519 from fiscal
year 1993 to 1996. In constant 1993 dollars, the average costs per
committee rose from $110,276 to $138,314 for the 4-year period. One
possible explanation for part of the increase in per committee costs and
members is mergers. According to a GSA report on the implementation of
the 1993 executive order, agencies recommended 196 discretionary
advisory committees for merger. Mergers would include moving some of
the functions and members to existing or new committees, according to
GSA Committee Management Secretariat officials.
Another possible explanation for some of the increase in costs is the
increase in the number of advisory committee meetings. During the same
4-year period, the number of advisory committee meetings increased from
4,387 to 5,008 (14 percent).
Although the number of meetings has risen, the percentage of open
meetings compared to the percentage that were closed and partially closed
has declined—49 percent of meetings were open in 1993 compared to
44 percent in 1996. Advisory committee meetings can be closed to the
public if specific administrative procedures and specific provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b) are followed. These
provisions provide for closed meetings to protect, for example, matters
that need to be kept secret in the interest of national security or foreign
policy, trade secrets, and information of a personal nature, the disclosure
of which would constitute an invasion of privacy. We did not examine the
appropriateness of the decisions to close or partially close the FACA
meetings. Appendix III shows a breakdown of the number of open, closed,
and partially closed meetings from fiscal year 1993 to 1996.
Page 3 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement
Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview
of Advisory Committees Since 1993
Under FACA and GSA regulations implementing FACA, GSA’s Committee
GSA’s Committee Management Secretariat is responsible for
Management
Secretariat Oversight • consulting with agencies on new and reauthorized advisory committees to
ensure that FACA requirements are met;
Role • making comprehensive annual reviews of each advisory committee and
making recommendations to the President and to the agency head or
Congress on any action the Secretariat deems necessary, including
abolishing the committee or merging it with another committee;
• preparing the President’s annual report to Congress on the activities,
status, and changes in the composition of advisory committees; and
• ensuring that follow-up reports are prepared on the status of
recommendations made by presidential advisory committees.
For fiscal year 1997, GSA’s Committee Management Secretariat had a
budget of $645,000 and 8 employees.
Consultation on Advisory FACA and GSA regulations require that agencies consult with GSA before
Committees establishing new and reauthorized advisory committees. As part of this
consultation, agencies are required to submit charters and justification
letters, which must contain specific information. FACA outlines that
agencies are to include 10 specific items in the charter, including the
committee’s objectives and scope of activities, the time period necessary
to carry out its purpose, and the estimated annual staff years and costs.
GSA regulations state that agencies must address three items in the
justification letter, including why the committee is essential to conduct the
agency’s business, why the committee’s functions cannot be performed by
the agency or other means, and how the agency plans to attain balanced
membership. GSA’s role is to review agency proposals to establish advisory
committees and determine whether FACA requirements are met. The
regulations say that GSA is to review the proposals and notify the agency of
its views within 15 days, if possible. However, GSA does not have the
authority to stop the formation of an advisory committee.
GSA regulations also require that agencies publish a notice in the Federal
Register when either new or reauthorized discretionary advisory
committees are established. Committees mandated by Congress or
established by the President are not required to issue such notices. New
discretionary committee notices are required to address three of the
specific items that must be contained in the charter and justification letter.
These items include a description of the nature and purpose of the
Page 4 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement
Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview
of Advisory Committees Since 1993
committee, a discussion of the agency’s plan to attain a fairly balanced
membership, and a statement that the committee is necessary and in the
public interest. Notices for reauthorized committees do not need to
include these three items.
Comprehensive Annual FACA requires GSA to make an annual comprehensive review of each
Reviews advisory committee to determine whether it is carrying out its purpose,
whether its responsibilities should be revised, and whether it should be
abolished or merged with another committee. After completing the
reviews, GSA is required to recommend to the President and to the agency
head or Congress any actions GSA deems should be taken.
GSA regulations require that agencies prepare an annual report for each
committee, including the agencies’ recommendations for continuing,
merging, or terminating committees. For continuing committees (not new
or terminated), agencies are required to describe such things as how the
committee accomplishes its purpose, the frequency of meetings and the
reason for continuing the committee, and why it was necessary to have
closed committee meetings if such meetings were held. The committee’s
annual reports also are to include the committee costs.
GSA procedures call for it to use the data it receives in the agencies’ annual
reports, including the agencies’ recommendations to continue or terminate
the committees, in conducting the comprehensive annual review and in
preparing the President’s annual report.
President’s Annual Reports The President is required to report annually to Congress on the activities,
to Congress status, and changes in the composition of advisory committees. The
annual reports are due to Congress by December 31 for each preceding
fiscal year. GSA prepares the annual reports for the President with
information provided in agencies’ annual reports on each advisory
committee that existed during the fiscal year.
Follow-Up Reports to FACA requires the President, or his delegate, to report to Congress within 1
Congress on Presidential year on his proposals for action or reasons for inaction on
Advisory Committee recommendations made by a presidential advisory committee to the
President. According to FACA’s legislative history, these follow-up reports
Recommendations would help justify the investments in the advisory committees and provide
Page 5 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement
Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview
of Advisory Committees Since 1993
accountability to the public and Congress that the recommendations are
being addressed.
According to GSA regulations, the agency providing support to the advisory
committee is responsible for preparing and transmitting the follow-up
report to Congress. However, the regulations also state that the Secretariat
is responsible for ensuring that the follow-up reports are prepared by the
agency supporting the presidential committee and may solicit OMB and
other appropriate organizations for help, if needed to ensure compliance.
A focus of today’s hearing is the proposal to amend FACA to specify that the
Recent Proposal to act does not apply to committees that are created by an entity other than
Amend FACA an agency or federal official and are not subject to actual management and
control by federal officials. This proposal is in response to a recent
decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that
FACA applied to panels of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).
This development has not been the focus of our work and we have not
assessed the merits of the issue. I would like to make two observations,
however. First, the extent to which these entities are included under FACA
will likely have an impact on GSA in its oversight capacity. Under the Court
of Appeals decision, according to OMB, more than 450 NAS panels could
potentially become subject to FACA and therefore fall under GSA purview.
The inclusion of NAS panels, and perhaps other similarly situated entities
used by other organizations, could pose resource implications for GSA
whose staff of 8 employees is currently responsible for overseeing about
1,000 advisory committees.
Second, the inclusion of additional entities under FACA in accordance with
the Court of Appeals decision might also affect the federal agencies that
sponsor the panels (albeit somewhat indirectly in the instance of the NAS.)
FACA requires that advisory committees be managed and controlled by a
federal agency. This has not been the case for those committees that were
made subject to FACA pursuant to the Court of Appeals decision.
Management and control generally means that meetings are to be chaired
or attended by an agency employee and that certain meeting-related
decisions—such as whether a particular meeting should be open or closed
to the public—are to be made by the agency. Agencies also provide
administrative support to their committees. It is unclear whether agencies
would be required to provide the same active participation in the activities
of NAS-type panels. If they did, certain costs would have be incurred. While
Page 6 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Statement
Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview
of Advisory Committees Since 1993
we do not know what those costs might be, we know from our analysis of
GSA records that the average annual cost for federal staff involved in the
1,000 advisory committees in existence during fiscal year 1996 was about
$75,000 per committee. We are not suggesting that the possibility of
additional costs is a reason for deciding whether or not to include certain
entities under FACA. But, we do believe it is important for the Congress to
be aware of such costs as it deliberates on the matter.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I will be pleased to answer
any questions you or any Members of the Subcommittee may have.
Page 7 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Appendix I
Distribution of Federal Advisory
Committees by Establishment Authority
During Fiscal Years 1993-1996
Establishment authority
Discretionary committees Nondiscretionary committees
Agency Authorized by Mandated by Presidential
Fiscal Year authority Congress Congress directive
1993 401 432 444 28
1994 316 423 429 27
1995 325 318 438 29
1996 286 244 438 32
Source: Annual Reports of the President on Federal Advisory Committees.
Page 8 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Appendix II
Federal Advisory Committee Statistics
During Fiscal Years 1993-1996
Number of Total costs
Total number discretionary in millions Number of
Fiscal year of committees committees (nominal dollars) members
1993 1,305 833 $143.9 28,317
1994 1,195 739 133.4 30,446
1995 1,110 643 157.0 29,766
1996 1,000 530 148.5 29,511
Source: Annual Reports of the President on Federal Advisory Committees.
Page 9 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Appendix III
Types of Federal Advisory Committee
Meetings During Fiscal Years 1993-1996
Type of meetings
Partially
Fiscal year Open Closed closed Total
1993 2,162 1,210 1,015 4,387
1994 1,826 1,502 781 4,109
1995 2,443 2,233 503 5,179
1996 2,208 2,379 421 5,008
Source: Annual Reports of the President on Federal Advisory Committees.
(410155) Page 10 GAO/T-GGD-98-24
Ordering Information
The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the
following address, accompanied by a check or money order
made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when
necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.
Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address
are discounted 25 percent.
Orders by mail:
U.S. General Accounting Office
P.O. Box 37050
Washington, DC 20013
or visit:
Room 1100
700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)
U.S. General Accounting Office
Washington, DC
Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000
or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and
testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any
list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a
touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on
how to obtain these lists.
For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,
send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:
info@www.gao.gov
or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:
http://www.gao.gov
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States Bulk Rate
General Accounting Office Postage & Fees Paid
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001 GAO
Permit No. G100
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
Address Correction Requested
Federal Advisory Committee Act: Overview of Advisory Committees Since 1993
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1997-11-05.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)