Federal Funding for Activities That Reduce Diesel Emissions Is Fragmented across 14 Programs

Federal grant and loan funding for activities that reduce mobile source  diesel emissions is fragmented across 14 programs at DOE, DOT, and  EPA. Nevertheless, each of these programs allows or requires a portion of its  funding to support activities that have the effect of reducing mobile source  diesel emissions. Specifically, 13 of the programs provide funding through  competitive and formula grants, and 1 program—DOT’s State  Infrastructure Banks program—provides loans.gaps in the programs, such as mobile sources that are not eligible for  funding. We did not identify any  From fiscal years 2007 through 2011, these 14 programs obligated at  least $1.4 billion for activities that have the effect of reducing mobile  source diesel emissions. As table 2 shows, each of the 14 relevant programs overlaps with at least  one other program in the specific types of activities they fund, the  program goals, or the eligible recipients of funding. We also identified several instances of duplication where more than one  program provided funding to the same recipient for the same type of  activities. Even with duplication among the programs, several factors make it  difficult to precisely determine whether unnecessary duplication exists. The Effectiveness of Federal Funding for Diesel Emissions Reduction Activities Is Unknown

The effectiveness of federal funding for activities that reduce mobile  source diesel emissions is unknown because agencies vary in the extent  to which they have established performance measures. In addition, few  programs collect performance information on their diesel emissions  reduction activities because 13 of the 14 programs that fund these  activities have purposes other than reducing diesel emissions. This  incomplete performance information may limit the ability of agencies to  assess the effectiveness of their programs and activities that reduce  diesel emissions. DOE and EPA have established performance measures  for the strategic goals related to their programs that reduce mobile source  diesel emissions. DOT has established such performance measures for two of its  administrations—the Federal Aviation Administration and Federal  Highway Administration—but has not established such measures for the  Federal Transit Administration for two of the four strategic goals that link  to its programs that fund diesel emissions reduction activities. We have also reported that principles of good governance indicate that  agencies should establish quantifiable performance measures to  demonstrate how they intend to achieve their goals and measure the  extent to which they have done so. Agency officials said they generally collect  information on the current condition of the nation’s transit fleet, the use of  public transportation, and transit fleet compliance with the Americans with  Disabilities Act to measure the performance of the agency’s transit  programs. EPA. DOE. According to agency officials, this is due to the differing  purposes and goals of each program, which often do not directly relate to  reducing diesel emissions. However, we have previously reported that,  although federal programs have been designed for different purposes or  targeted for different population groups, coordination among programs  with related responsibilities is essential to efficiently and effectively meet  national concerns. We reported that uncoordinated program efforts can  waste scarce funds, confuse and frustrate program customers, and limit  the overall effectiveness of the federal effort. Conclusions

Over time, EPA has issued more stringent emissions regulations for new  diesel engines and vehicles, but existing diesel trucks, buses,  locomotives, ships, agriculture equipment, and construction equipment  continue to emit harmful pollution. This strategy should help the agencies identify agency roles and responsibilities for activities that reduce  diesel emissions, including how a collaborative effort will be led; identify and address any unnecessary duplication, as appropriate;  identify and leverage resources needed to support funding  activities that reduce diesel emissions; assess baseline levels of diesel pollution and the contributors to  mobile source diesel emissions to help agencies target, within  their discretion, investments and, as appropriate, inform efforts to  measure program effectiveness; and develop crosscutting performance measures, as appropriate, to  monitor the collective results of federal funding for activities that  reduce diesel emissions. DOT questioned several of this report’s key findings and its  recommendations. Instead, we recommended that (1) the Federal Transit  Administration develop performance measures for two of its agencywide  strategic goals and (2) DOE, DOT, and EPA establish a strategy for  collaboration on diesel emissions reduction activities that, among other  things, helps the agencies develop crosscutting performance measures,  as appropriate, to assess the collective results of federal funding for  activities that reduce diesel emissions. As our report states, DOE, DOT, and EPA  were generally unaware of other programs that fund activities that  decrease diesel emissions. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

This report examines the (1) extent to which duplication, overlap,  fragmentation, or gaps, if any, exist among federal grant, rebate, and loan  programs that address mobile source diesel emissions; (2) effectiveness  of federal funding for activities that reduce mobile source diesel  emissions; and (3) extent to which collaboration takes place among  agencies that fund activities that reduce mobile source diesel emissions. In addition, we obtained and analyzed funding data from the Department  of Energy (DOE), the Department of Transportation (DOT), and the  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to determine the total amount of  federal funding for diesel emissions reduction projects from fiscal years  2007 through 2011.
Why GAO Did This Study

Exhaust from diesel engines is a harmful form of air pollution. EPA has issued emissions standards for new diesel engines and vehicles, but older mobile sources of diesel emissionssuch as trucks and busescontinue to emit harmful pollution. Programs at DOE, DOT, and EPA provide funding for activities that reduce diesel emissions, such as retrofitting existing diesel engines and vehicles. The existence of these programs at multiple agencies has raised questions about the potential for unnecessary duplication. In response to a mandate in the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2010, GAO examined the (1) extent of duplication, overlap, fragmentation, or gaps, if any, among federal grant, rebate, and loan programs that address mobile source diesel emissions; (2) effectiveness of federal funding for activities that reduce mobile source diesel emissions; and (3) extent of collaboration among agencies that fund these activities. GAO analyzed program data, documents, and relevant laws and regulations and interviewed agency officials. GAO also reviewed three diesel-related tax expenditures.

What GAO Found

Federal grant and loan funding for activities that reduce mobile source diesel emissions is fragmented across 14 programs at the Department of Energy (DOE), the Department of Transportation (DOT), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). From fiscal years 2007 through 2011, the programs obligated at least $1.4 billion for activities that have the effect of reducing mobile source diesel emissions. The programs have varying goals and purposes; nevertheless, each program allows or requires a portion of its funding to support activities that reduce mobile source diesel emissions, such as replacing fleets of older diesel trucks or school buses with natural gas vehicles. In addition, each of the 14 programs overlaps with at least one other program in the specific activities they fund, the program goals, or the eligible recipients of funding. GAO also identified several instances of duplication where more than one program provided grant funding to the same recipient for the same type of activities. However, GAO was unable to determine whether unnecessary duplication exists because of limited information on program administrative costs, among other things. GAO did not find any gaps among the programs, such as mobile sources that are not eligible for funding.
The effectiveness of federal funding for activities that reduce mobile source diesel emissions is unknown because agencies vary in the extent to which they have established performance measures. DOE and EPA have established performance measures for the strategic goals related to their programs that reduce mobile source diesel emissions. DOT has established such measures for two of its administrationsthe Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administrationbut has not established such measures for the Federal Transit Administration for two of the four strategic goals that link to its programs that fund diesel emissions reduction activities. Instead, agency officials said they collect information on the current condition of the nations transit fleet, among other things, to measure the performance of its programs. As GAO has previously reported, principles of good governance indicate that agencies should establish quantifiable performance measures to demonstrate how they intend to achieve their goals and measure the extent to which they have done so. In addition, 13 of the 14 programs have purposes other than decreasing diesel emissions, and diesel reductions are a side benefit of efforts to achieve these other goals. As a result, few programs collect diesel-related performance information. Incomplete performance information may limit the ability of agencies to assess the effectiveness of their programs and activities that reduce diesel emissions.
The programs that fund activities that reduce diesel emissions generally do not collaborate because of the differing purposes and goals of each program, according to senior DOE, DOT, and EPA officials. The officials also were sometimes unaware of other programs that fund similar activities and said that any existing collaboration was on a case-by-case basis. GAOs previous work has shown that although federal programs have been designed for different purposes, coordination among programs with related responsibilities is essential to efficiently and effectively meet national concerns. Further, without a coordinated approach, programs can waste scarce funds, confuse and frustrate program customers, and limit the overall effectiveness of the federal effort.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOTs Federal Transit Administration develop performance measures for its two relevant strategic goals and that DOE, DOT, and EPA establish a strategy for collaboration among their programs that fund activities that reduce diesel emissions. DOE and EPA agreed with the relevant recommendation, and DOE questioned several findings. DOT questioned several findings and both recommendations and neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendations. GAO continues to believe in the need for the performance measures and collaboration.