First, many statutes contain provisions authorizing the  award of attorney fees from a losing party to a prevailing party; many of  these provisions apply to the federal government. Second, where there is  a fee-shifting statute that allows for the payment of attorney fees by a  losing party to a prevailing party but is not independently applicable to the  federal government, EAJA provides that the government is liable for  reasonable attorney fees to the same extent as a private party (i.e.,  claims paid under EAJA subsection (b)). Most USDA Agencies Did Not Have Readily Available Attorney Fee Information

In April 2012, we found that USDA did not report any aggregated data on  attorney fee claims and payments made under EAJA and other fee- shifting statutes for fiscal years 2000 through 2010, but USDA and other  key departments involved—Treasury and DOJ—maintained certain data  on individual cases or payments in several internal agency databases. However, collectively, these data did not capture all claims and payments. USDA officials stated at the time that given the decentralized nature of  the department and the absence of an external requirement to track or  report on attorney fee information, the information was not centrally  tracked and decisions about whether to track attorney fee data and the  manner in which to do so were best handled at the agency level. Accordingly, for our April 2012 report, we contacted 33 agencies within  USDA to obtain their available attorney fee information. In response,  officials from 29 of the 33 USDA agencies told us that they did not track  or could not readily provide us with this information. We reported that the remaining 4 USDA agencies we contacted either  had mechanisms to track information on attorney fees, or were able to  compile this information manually using hard copy files, or directed us to  publicly available sources where we could obtain the information. Further, in April 2012, we reported that given the differences in attorney  fee information available across the 4 USDA agencies and the limitations  identified below, it was difficult to comprehensively determine (1) the total  number of claims filed for attorney fees, (2) who received payments, (3) in  what amounts, and (4) under which statutes. In our April 2012 report, we found that the Forest Service was the only  program agency that was able to provide us with attorney fee data across  the 11-year period and gathered information on attorney fees and cost  awards associated with cases from three sources—Forest Service  regional officials, a Forest Service-commissioned university study, and  publicly available court documents. The data include only environmental cases. Not all of the attorney fees and costs included in the spreadsheet  were paid from Forest Service appropriations, as Treasury may have  paid some of the attorney fees and costs from its Judgment Fund. Using the Forest Service’s spreadsheet data, we reported that about  $16.3 million in attorney fees and costs in 241 environmental cases from  fiscal years 2000 through 2010 was awarded against or settled by the  Forest Service. In April 2012, we also reported on the amount and number of payments  Treasury made on behalf of USDA, by fiscal year, as shown in figure 3.
Why GAO Did This Study

In the United States, parties involved in federal litigation generally pay their own attorney fees. There are many exceptions to this general rule where “fee-shifting” statutes authorize the award of attorney fees to a successful, or prevailing, party. Some of these provisions also apply to the federal government when it loses a case. In 1980, Congress passed EAJA to allow parties that prevail in cases against federal agencies to seek reimbursement from the federal government for attorney fees, where doing so was not previously authorized. Although all federal agencies are generally subject to, and make payments under, attorney fee provisions, some in Congress have expressed concerns about the use of taxpayer funds to make attorney fee payments with agencies' limited funding. These concerns include that environmental organizations are using taxpayer dollars to fund lawsuits against the government, including against USDA.
This statement addresses the extent to which USDA had information available on attorney fee claims and payments made under EAJA and other fee-shifting statutes for fiscal years 2000 through 2010. This statement is based on GAO's April 2012 report on USDA and the Department of Interior attorney fee claims and payments and selected updates conducted in March 2014. To conduct the updates, among other things, GAO reviewed Forest Service budget documents for fiscal years 2014 and 2105 and interviewed Forest Service officials.

What GAO Found

In April 2012, GAO found that the Department of Agriculture (USDA) did not report any aggregated data on attorney fee claims and payments made under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) and other fee-shifting statutes for fiscal years 2000 through 2010, but USDA and other key departments involved—the Departments of the Treasury and Justice—maintained certain data on individual cases or payments in several internal agency databases. However, collectively, these data did not capture all claims and payments. USDA officials stated at the time that given the decentralized nature of the department and the absence of an external requirement to track or report on attorney fee information, the information was not centrally tracked and decisions about whether to track attorney fee data and the manner in which to do so were best handled at the agency level. Officials from 29 of the 33 USDA agencies GAO contacted for its April 2012 report stated that they did not track or could not readily provide GAO with this information. The remaining 4 USDA agencies had mechanisms to track information on attorney fees, were able to compile this information manually, or directed GAO to publicly available information sources. GAO found that the Forest Service was the only program agency within USDA that was able to provide certain attorney fee data across the 11-year period. GAO reported in April 2012 that about $16.3 million in attorney fees and costs in 241 environmental cases from fiscal years 2000 through 2010 was awarded against or settled by the Forest Service (see fig. below).
Note: Forest Service data may include attorney fees authorized by underlying statutes, EAJA subsection (b), and EAJA subsection (d); as such, some funds may have been paid by the Judgment Fund, as opposed to agency appropriations.
However, the extent to which the 4 USDA agencies had attorney fee information available for the 11-year period varied. Given this limitation as well as others, such as inconsistent availability of payment data, GAO concluded that it was difficult to comprehensively determine the total number of claims filed for attorney fees, who received payments, in what amounts, and under what statutes. GAO did not make any recommendations in its April 2012 report.