Federal Communications Commission: Federal Advisory Committees	 
Follow Requirements, but FCC Should Improve Its Process for	 
Appointing Committee Members (10-DEC-04, GAO-05-36).		 
                                                                 
FCC has regulatory authority over many complex telecommunications
issues. To obtain expert advice on these issues, FCC often calls 
upon its federal advisory committees, comprised mostly of members
from industry, private consulting, advocacy groups, and 	 
government. These committees must follow the Federal Advisory	 
Committee Act (FACA), which sets requirements on the formation	 
and operation of such committees. Because of Congressional	 
interest in how FCC receives advice from outside experts, this	 
report provides information on (1) FCC's current advisory	 
committees, (2) the extent to which the committees follow	 
applicable laws, (3) how FCC makes use of the committees' advice,
and (4) the non-FACA advisory groups that FCC has established.	 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-05-36						        
    ACCNO:   A14316						        
  TITLE:     Federal Communications Commission: Federal Advisory      
Committees Follow Requirements, but FCC Should Improve Its	 
Process for Appointing Committee Members			 
     DATE:   12/10/2004 
  SUBJECT:   Advisory committees				 
	     Committee evaluation				 
	     Evaluation criteria				 
	     Evaluation methods 				 
	     Federal advisory bodies				 
	     Policy evaluation					 
	     Regulatory agencies				 
	     Telecommunication industry 			 
	     Telecommunication					 
	     Transparency					 
	     Stakeholder consultations				 
	     Policies and procedures				 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-05-36

     

     * Report to the Chairman, Committee on Government Reform, House of
       Representatives
          * December 2004
     * FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
          * Federal Advisory Committees Follow Requirements, but FCC Should
            Improve Its Process for Appointing Committee Members
     * Contents
          * Results in Brief
          * Background
          * FCC's Federal Advisory Committees Address a Variety of Technical
            and Operational Issues, and Stakeholders View the Committees as
            Functioning Effectively
               * FCC's Seven Current Discretionary Advisory Committees
                 Examine Technical and Operational Telecommunications Issues
               * Committee Members, FCC Officials, and Interest Group
                 Representatives Generally Believe That Advisory Committees
                 Function Effectively
               * Subcommittees Perform the Majority of FCC's Federal Advisory
                 Committees' Work
          * FCC and Its Advisory Committees Adhere to FACA and Related
            Regulations, but Committee Members Are Not Always Clear About the
            Role FCC Expects Them to Provide When They Are Appointed to
            Committees
               * Agencies Must Have Certain Organizational Procedures in
                 Place to Support the Establishment of Federal Advisory
                 Committees
               * FACA and Regulations Impose Several Requirements on the
                 Formation of Federal Advisory Committees
               * Requirements Guide Many Aspects of Advisory Committee
                 Operations
               * Federal Advisory Committees Are Required to Produce
                 Independent Advice to Federal Agencies
          * FCC Has Taken Action on Advisory Committee Recommendations, but
            Stakeholders' Views on FCC's Use of Committee Work Varied
          * FCC Has Five Advisory Groups That It Considers Exempt from FACA;
            These Groups Function Differently from Federal Advisory
            Committees
               * FCC's Mandated Joint Boards Are Exempt from FACA and
                 Function Differently from Federal Advisory Committees
               * FCC's Joint Conferences Are Exempt from FACA and Function
                 Differently from Federal Advisory Committees
               * FCC's Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Is Exempt from
                 FACA, but It Has Some Similarities in Function to Federal
                 Advisory Committees
          * Conclusions
          * Recommendation for Executive Action
          * Agency Comments
     * Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
     * Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
       Exempt from FACA
          * Advisory Committee for the 2007 World Radiocommunication
            Conference
          * Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital
            Age
          * Consumer Advisory Committee
          * Media Security and Reliability Council
          * Network Reliability and Interoperability Council
          * North American Numbering Council
          * Technological Advisory Council
          * Joint Board on Jurisdictional Separations
          * Joint Board on Universal Service
          * Joint Conference on Accounting Issues
          * Joint Conference on Advanced Telecommunications Services
          * Intergovernmental Advisory Committee
     * GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members
     * Comments from the Federal Communications Commission
     * Comments from the Office of Government Ethics

                 United States Government Accountability Office

Report to the Chairman, Committee on Government Reform, House of
Representatives

December 2004

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

  Federal Advisory Committees Follow Requirements, but FCC Should Improve Its
                    Process for Appointing Committee Members

                                       a

GAO-05-36

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Federal Advisory Committees Follow Requirements, but FCC Should Improve Its
Process for Appointing Committee Members

  What GAO Found

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has seven federal advisory
committees established at its discretion that address various
telecommunications issues. FCC officials, committee members, and other
stakeholders we contacted generally believed FCC's advisory committees
operated effectively.

In forming and operating advisory committees, FCC must follow FACA and
related regulations, which require, among other things, that committee
membership is balanced in terms of points of view represented and that
committee activities are transparent to the public. While FCC follows
applicable requirements, GAO found that committee members are not always
clear about their expected role on the committees-that is, the type of
advice that FCC expects them to provide. FCC designates all of its
committee members as "representatives," meaning they are appointed with an
expectation that they will provide advice reflecting the views of a
company, organization, or other group. However, approximately 22 percent
of responding committee members did not say they provided representative
advice. Further, some committee members are affiliated with universities
or consulting firms that may not have an obvious telecommunications
viewpoint. If committee members are expected to primarily provide their
own expert opinion, they are expected to be impartial and may be more
appropriately appointed as special government employees. Such members are
subject to ethics rules administered by the Office of Government Ethics,
including conflict-of-interest reviews.

While FCC is not required to implement the advice or recommendations of
its advisory committees, FCC has taken actions based on these committees'
recommendations. Overall, GAO found FCC officials tended to be more
satisfied with how FCC implements the committees' recommendations than
other stakeholders, including committee members themselves. For example,
of the committee members who responded to a GAO survey, only 54 percent
were satisfied with the extent to which FCC takes the committees' advice
into account when developing policy. Further, three trade groups we
contacted said that the advisory committees' advice and recommendations
have little influence on FCC actions.

In addition to its seven federal advisory committees, FCC considers five
advisory groups as exempt from FACA requirements, including two "joint
boards," two "joint conferences," and the Intergovernmental Advisory
Committee. FCC was mandated to establish the joint boards and created the
joint conferences at its discretion. Since the joint boards and joint
conferences are considered exempt from FACA, they function differently
from FCC's federal advisory committees. FCC created the Intergovernmental
Advisory Committee, which it also considers exempt from FACA, to address
telecommunications issues affecting state, local, and tribal governments.

                 United States Government Accountability Office

                                    Contents

Letter                                                                   1 
                           Results in Brief                                 2 
                           Background                                       5 
                           FCC's Federal Advisory Committees Address a     
                           Variety of Technical                            
                             and Operational Issues, and Stakeholders View 
                                                         the Committees as 
                           Functioning Effectively                          7 
                           FCC and Its Advisory Committees Adhere to FACA  
                           and Related                                     
                           Regulations, but Committee Members Are Not      
                           Always Clear                                    
                           About the Role FCC Expects Them to Provide When 
                           They Are                                        
                           Appointed to Committees                         14 
                           FCC Has Taken Action on Advisory Committee      
                           Recommendations,                                
                           but Stakeholders' Views on FCC's Use of         
                           Committee Work                                  
                           Varied                                          22 
                           FCC Has Five Advisory Groups That It Considers  
                           Exempt from                                     
                              FACA; These Groups Function Differently from 
                                                          Federal Advisory 
                           Committees                                      25 
                           Conclusions                                     29 
                           Recommendation for Executive Action             29 
                           Agency Comments                                 30 
Appendixes                                                              
               Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology              32 
              Appendix II: Information on FCC's Federal Advisory           
                           Committees and                                  
                           Advisory Groups Exempt from FACA                36 
                           Advisory Committee for the 2007 World           
                           Radiocommunication                              
                           Conference                                      36 
                           Advisory Committee on Diversity for             
                           Communications in the Digital                   
                           Age                                             38 
                           Consumer Advisory Committee                     40 
                           Media Security and Reliability Council          42 
                           Network Reliability and Interoperability        44 
                           Council                                         
                           North American Numbering Council                46 
                           Technological Advisory Council                  48 
                           Joint Board on Jurisdictional Separations       50 
                           Joint Board on Universal Service                50 
                           Joint Conference on Accounting Issues           51 
                           Joint Conference on Advanced Telecommunications 52 
                           Services                                        
                           Intergovernmental Advisory Committee            52 

                                    Contents

Appendix III: Appendix IV: GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory              
          Appendix V:         Committee Members Comments from the       54 67 
                              Federal Communications Commission         69
                              Comments from the Office of Government    
                              Ethics                                    
Table                      Table 1:  Committee Members' Satisfaction       
                                        with Aspects of FCC's              21
                                        Management of Advisory          
                                        Committees                      
Figures                    Figure 1: FCC Federal Advisory Committee        
                              Figure 2: Survey Respondents' Reported          
                              Figure 3: Employment Sector Committee           
                              Figure 4: Member Views on the Extent to         
                              Figure 5: Which Full Committees                 
                              Figure 6: Deliberate the Proposals of     
                              Figure 7: Their Subcommittees by          
                              Figure 8: Committee Survey Respondents'   
                              Figure 9: Representation by Employment    
                                        Sector for the Advisory         
                                        Committee for the 2007 World    
                                        Radiocommunication Conference   
                                        Survey Respondents'             
                                        Representation by Employment    
                                        Sector for the Advisory         
                                        Committee on Diversity for      
                                        Communications in the Digital   
                                        Age Survey Respondents'         
                                        Representation by Employment    
                                        Sector for the Consumer         
                                        Advisory Committee Survey       
                                        Respondents' Representation by  
                                        Employment Sector for the Media 
                                        Security and Reliability        
                                        Council Survey Respondents'     
                                        Representation by Employment    
                                        Sector for Network Reliability  
                                        and Interoperability Council    
                                        Survey Respondents'             
                                        Representation by Employment    
                                        Sector for the North American   9 13
                                        Numbering Council Survey        37 39
                                        Respondents' Representation by  41 43
                                        Employment Sector for the       45 47
                                        Technological Advisory Council  49

Contents

Abbreviations               
FACA                        Federal Advisory Committee Act                 
FCC                         Federal Communications Commission              
GSA                         General Services Administration                
OMB                         Office of Management and Budget                

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

A

United States Government Accountability Office Washington, D.C. 20548

December 10, 2004

The Honorable Tom Davis Chairman, Committee on Government Reform House of
Representatives

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has regulatory and oversight
authority over an array of issues and industries including telephone,
broadcasting, wireless devices, and international telecommunication and
satellite services. FCC deliberates most policy issues within the
rulemaking process, but many of the issues before FCC involve complex
technical issues or require compromise among varied industry
segments-factors that can make resolution of issues difficult within the
standard rulemaking process. To augment that process, the Commission often
calls upon experts and stakeholders for advice through federal advisory
committees. For example, FCC's federal advisory committees have provided
advice and recommendations on emerging technologies, consumer interests,
and other industry challenges.

The Federal Advisory Committee Act1 (FACA) sets requirements regarding how
agencies establish federal advisory committees and how the activities of
the committees are conducted. Because of your interest in how FCC receives
advice from experts and stakeholders, you asked us to provide information
about FCC's current federal advisory committees and other FCC advisory
groups that do not operate under FACA. Specifically, this report provides
information on (1) FCC's current federal advisory committees and how they
operate, (2) the extent to which FCC's federal advisory committees follow
applicable laws and regulations, (3) how FCC uses federal advisory
committee advice and recommendations, and (4) what advisory groups FCC has
established that are not characterized as FACA committees and how such
groups operate.

To address these objectives, we reviewed FACA and related regulations. We
also interviewed federal officials from FCC, the General Services
Administration (GSA), and the Office of Government Ethics. We obtained
views on the operations and effectiveness of federal advisory committees
from FCC officials, including all five commissioners, several bureau
chiefs,

1Pub. L. 92-463, codified at 5 U.S.C. app. 2.

                                Results in Brief

the deputy committee management officer, the designated agency ethics
official, and the designated federal officers for each of the federal
advisory committees. To obtain the perspectives of stakeholders outside of
federal government, we asked 12 trade and interest group representatives
for their views about the quality and usefulness of the advisory
committees' work. We also interviewed the committee chairmen for FCC's
current seven advisory committees and collected information from current
committee members in March through June 2004 using a Web-based survey. We
designed the survey to obtain committee members' views on various aspects
of committee operations and effectiveness. We obtained completed
questionnaires from 200 committee members for a response rate of 71
percent.2 To determine if committee operations had changed over time, we
also interviewed a small sample of committee members who served on FCC
advisory committees chartered in 1998 or 1999 and asked them questions
very similar to those we asked in our survey of current members. Finally,
we interviewed non-FACA advisory committee members and obtained
documentation and legislation relating to the formation of FCC's joint
boards, joint conferences, and the Intergovernmental Advisory Committee.
We conducted our work between November 2003 and September 2004 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. See
appendix I for a more detailed discussion of our scope and methodology.

FCC currently has seven federal advisory committees that address various
technical, operational, and consumer telecommunications issues. For
example, one advisory committee focuses on the reliability and
interoperability of communications networks, while another committee
strives to increase consumer participation in proceedings before the
Commission. All of FCC's federal advisory committees are discretionary,
meaning the committees were not required to be established by law but
rather were established by FCC. In fiscal year 2004, FCC's advisory
committees had a combined budget of $1.2 million. FCC officials, committee
members, and other stakeholders with whom we communicated generally
believed FCC's advisory committees operated effectively. We also found
that most advisory committees formed subcommittees to facilitate committee
operations and that a substantial

2In reporting survey results in this report, we collapsed data together
from some categories, such as "very satisfied" and "satisfied." The
detailed survey questions and results can be found in appendix III.

Page 2 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

amount of the advisory committees' work was completed at the subcommittee
level. Often the subcommittees utilized telephone and videoconferencing,
as well as e-mail exchanges, to conduct committee work.

Like other federal advisory committees, FCC's advisory committees must
follow FACA and related regulations prescribed by GSA. Under FACA and GSA
regulations, agency heads are responsible for many aspects of advisory
committee management, such as ensuring that committee membership is
balanced in terms of points of view and interests represented, and for
ensuring that committee operations are transparent to the public. In
general, we found that FCC follows the requirements prescribed by FACA and
related regulations. However, we found that committee members are not
always clear about their expected role on the committees-that is, the type
of advice that FCC expects them to provide. In particular, FCC has
designated all federal advisory committee members as representative
members, meaning that FCC appointed them with the expectation that they
would provide advice reflecting the views of the organization, company, or
institution they represent. However, 22 percent of committee members who
responded to our survey did not say they were providing representative
advice; and, in the majority of these cases, members reported that they
contribute their own expert opinion. Moreover, some members of FCC's
federal advisory committees do not work for companies within the
telecommunications sector, and thus may not have an obvious interest that
they would be representing on FCC's advisory committees. The Office of
Government Ethics distinguishes between "special government employees" and
representative members of advisory committees: committee members
designated as special government employees are expected to be impartial
and are subject to ethics rules-including conflict-of-interest
reviews-administered by the Office of Government Ethics, while committee
members designated as representatives are viewed by the Office of
Government Ethics as having been appointed to represent a particular and
known viewpoint, and thus not subject to ethics review. It appears that
certain members of FCC's advisory committees do not fully understand their
roles. Some members who FCC has designated as representatives do not
believe they are providing advice that represents the position of a
particular group. If FCC intends for certain members to provide primarily
their own expert advice, such members may be more appropriately appointed
as special government employees rather than as representative committee
members. If members are so designated, they would be subject to the Office
of Government Ethics rules that apply to special government employees,
which would include conflict-of-interest reviews.

According to FCC officials, the Commission has taken action on its federal
advisory committees' recommendations. FCC's Chairman stated that the
advisory committee recommendations could be implemented in various ways,
such as incorporating recommendations into regulations or less formally by
publicizing committee work at trade shows or other public events. However,
the stakeholders we contacted had varied views on FCC's efforts to
implement recommendations. FCC officials, including the bureau chiefs and
designated federal officers who have responsibility for the advisory
committees, tended to be more satisfied with how FCC implements the
committees' recommendations than committee members. In fact, only 54
percent of committee members who responded to our survey were satisfied
with the extent to which FCC takes the committees' advice into account
when developing policy. Another 27 percent were neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied, and more than 8 percent were dissatisfied or very
dissatisfied with the extent to which FCC takes committees' advice into
account when developing policy. Further, representatives from three trade
and interest groups we contacted said that the advisory committees' advice
has little influence on FCC actions.

In addition to its seven federal advisory committees, FCC has five
advisory groups that it considers exempt from FACA requirements. FCC was
mandated to establish two of the advisory groups, known as "joint boards,"
as a result of the Communications Act of 1934 and Telecommunications Act
of 1996, as amended. FCC also created two "joint conferences" at its
discretion to advise the agency on issues over which FCC has regulatory
jurisdiction. Both the joint boards and conferences function rather
differently from FCC's federal advisory committees in part due to their
exemption from FACA requirements-in particular, they do not have a charter
guiding their operations, and their meetings are not open to the public.
Additionally, FCC created the Intergovernmental Advisory Committee, which
it also considers exempt from FACA, to address issues affecting state,
local, and tribal governments that are within the jurisdiction of FCC.
Unlike the joint boards and conferences, the Intergovernmental Advisory
Committee functions similarly to federal advisory committees in some
respects, although it does not hold open meetings.

To better ensure FCC's federal advisory committee members are fully
informed about the advice they are being asked to provide, we recommend
that FCC establish a process for determining and documenting the type of

                                   Background

advice federal advisory committee members are expected to contribute. FCC
should appoint advisory committee members as representatives only after
making a clear determination of what interests those members are expected
to represent on the committee, and members without a clear representative
role may be more appropriately appointed as special government employees.
For representative members, FCC should specifically state what particular
interest those members are appointed to represent.

We provided a draft of this report to FCC, GSA, and the Office of
Government Ethics for review and comment. All of the agencies agreed with
our recommendation. Written comments from FCC and the Office of Government
Ethics are provided in appendixes IV and V, respectively.

Enacted by Congress in 1972, FACA responded to concerns that federal
advisory committees were proliferating without adequate review, oversight,
or accountability. Congress included measures in FACA intended to ensure
that advisory committees responded to valid needs, that the committees'
proceedings were as open as feasible to the public, and that Congress was
kept informed of the committees' activities. FACA articulates certain
principles regarding advisory committees, including broad requirements for
balance, transparency, and independence.3 For example, regarding the
requirement for balance, FACA requires advisory committees to have
membership fairly representing an array of viewpoints and interests. FACA
also requires agencies to announce committee meetings in advance and in
general, to hold open meetings.4 FACA also sets forth other requirements
for advisory committee formation, their operations, and how they provide
advice and recommendations to the federal government. For example, FACA
stipulates that Congress, the President, or federal agencies

3We previously issued a report that examined the guidance provided by GSA
and the Office of Government Ethics to all agencies that use federal
advisory committees. The report includes a variety of recommendations
regarding that guidance intended to help ensure that the committee member
selection and designation process is fully transparent and appropriate.
GAO, Federal Advisory Committees: Additional Guidance Could Help Agencies
Better Ensure Independence and Balance, GAO-04-328 (Washington, D.C.:
April 16, 2004).

4The President or head of an agency may determine that a meeting be closed
if, for example, the meeting will include discussions of classified
information, reviews of proprietary data submitted in support of federal
grant applications, or deliberations involving considerations of personal
privacy.

are authorized to establish federal advisory committees. Some federal
advisory committees are created by an agency at the direction of a
statute, but all other agency-created advisory committees are commonly
referred to as "discretionary" federal advisory committees. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has established a maximum number of
discretionary federal advisory committees that each agency could
establish, which varies by agency.5 Additionally, the subcommittees of a
federal advisory committee are generally exempt from following FACA
requirements if they report to a parent advisory committee. Alternatively,
if a subcommittee provides advice and recommendations directly to a
federal agency, it is required to comply with FACA requirements.

FACA does not require agencies to implement the advice or recommendations
of their federal advisory committees; advisory committees are by design
advisory. For regulatory agencies governed by the Administrative
Procedures Act, such as FCC, the relationship between consideration and
implementation of a federal advisory committee's advice and
recommendations is complicated because those agencies must follow certain
rules and processes in their rulemaking efforts. Consequently, while an
advisory committee's advice and recommendations may form the basis for a
regulatory agency's notice of proposed rulemaking, factors beyond the
advisory committee's advice may play a role in determining what action an
agency ultimately takes.

GSA, through its Committee Management Secretariat, is responsible for
prescribing administrative guidelines and management controls applicable
to federal advisory committees governmentwide. While GSA does not approve
or deny agency decisions about creating or managing advisory committees,
GSA has developed regulations, guidance, and training to help agencies
implement FACA requirements. GSA also created and maintains an online FACA
database (available to the public at w ww.fido.gov/facadatabase ), which
contains information about each federal advisory committee, including
committee charters, membership rosters, budgets, and, in many cases, links
to committee meeting schedules, minutes, and reports.

5OMB took this action in response to Executive Order 12838, issued by the
President in February 1993. The order directed agencies to reduce by, at
least, one-third the number of discretionary advisory committees by the
end of fiscal year 1993.

Page 6 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

Not every advisory committee or group that provides advice or
recommendations to an agency is subject to the requirements prescribed in
FACA. To be subject to FACA, a discretionary committee or group must have
been created to provide advice or recommendations for the President or one
or more agencies or officers of the federal government. Groups assembled
only to exchange facts or information with federal officials are not
federal advisory committees, nor are certain groups made up of only state
or local officials. FACA explicitly exempts some committees from its
requirements,6 and certain other groups are exempt under other statutes.
For example, in some instances the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 19957
exempts advisory committees that are composed wholly of federal, state,
local, or tribal government officials. Groups that are exempt from FACA
are not required to comply with the procedural and transparency provisions
of the act.

FCC established seven discretionary federal advisory committees to examine
a range of technical and operational telecommunications issues. The
stakeholders we contacted-including committee members, FCC officials, and
trade and interest group representatives-viewed the operations of the
committees as effective. Almost all of the advisory committees established
subcommittees to address specific topics, and we found that the majority
of the advisory committees' work is completed at the subcommittee level.

FCC's Federal Advisory Committees Address a Variety of Technical and
Operational Issues, and Stakeholders View the Committees as Functioning
Effectively

FCC's Seven Current Discretionary Advisory Committees Examine Technical
and Operational Telecommunications Issues

FCC currently has seven advisory committees that provide advice and
recommendations to the agency on numerous technical and operational
telecommunications issues. These issues range from interoperability and
security of communications networks to consumer and diversity concerns
regarding telecommunications markets. All of FCC's federal advisory
committees are "discretionary"-that is, they were established by FCC under
its own authority to create such committees. In fiscal year 2004,

6Excluded groups include groups consisting entirely of federal government
employees as well as groups created by the National Academy of Sciences,
National Academy of Public Administration, the Central Intelligence
Agency, and the Federal Reserve System.

7

Pub. L. 104-4, codified at 2 U.S.C. S: 1534(b).

Page 7 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

FCC's advisory committees had a combined budget of $1.2 million. Following
is a brief description of the objective of each of FCC's seven federal
advisory committees. See appendix II for additional information on each of
the advisory committees.

     o Advisory Committee for the 2007 World Radiocommunication Conference:
       Provides advice and technical support to FCC, and recommends proposals
       for the 2007 World Radiocommunication Conference.
     o Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital Age:
       Makes recommendations to FCC about policies and practices that will
       further enhance the ability of minorities and women to participate in
       telecommunications.
     o Consumer Advisory Committee: Makes recommendations to FCC regarding
       consumer issues in telecommunications and strives to increase consumer
       participation in proceedings before FCC.
     o Media Security and Reliability Council: Provides recommendations to
       FCC and industry on how to implement a comprehensive national strategy
       for broadcast and media sustainability in the event of terrorist
       attacks, natural disasters, and all other threats or attacks
       nationwide.
     o Network Reliability and Interoperability Council: Provides
       recommendations to FCC and to the communications industry that will
       help to ensure the reliability and interoperability of wireless,
       wireline, satellite, cable, and public data networks, including
       emergency communications networks.
     o North American Numbering Council: Provides advice and recommendations
       to FCC that foster efficient and impartial administration of the North
       American Numbering Plan.8

8AT&T developed the North American Numbering Plan in 1947 to simplify and
facilitate direct dialing of long-distance calls. Implementation of the
plan began in 1951 with the use of a 10-digit telephone number format,
consisting of a 3-digit numbering plan area code, commonly called an area
code, followed by a 7-digit local number.

Page 8 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

o  Technological Advisory Council: Provides technical advice to FCC and
makes recommendations on technological and technical issues related to
innovation in the communications industry.

At the time we conducted our study, FCC's federal advisory committees had
over 280 members. These members represent numerous sectors across
telecommunications including industry, academia, advocacy groups, private
consulting, and government. As shown in figure 1, our survey data indicate
the majority of members come from private businesses.

Figure 1: FCC Federal Advisory Committee Survey Respondents' Reported
Employment Sectors

1.5%

Other

3%

College or university

5.5%

Trade association

Federal government

State or local government

Advocacy or nonprofit organization

Private consulting

Private business

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC advisory committee members.

Note: Trade unions/labor organizations and "no response" accounted for 1
percent of survey responses.

According to FCC's Chairman, the Commission creates federal advisory
committees at its discretion to advise the agency on operational or
technical issues associated with FCC's statutory responsibilities. All of
FCC's advisory committees are chartered for a 2-year period.
Recommendations for forming federal advisory committees at FCC can come
from a variety of sources. For example, two designated federal

Committee Members, FCC Officials, and Interest Group Representatives
Generally Believe That Advisory Committees Function Effectively

officers said that problems in the telecommunications industry, such as
widespread telecommunications outages and telephone numbering shortages,
were the impetus behind the creation of two committees. When considering
which advisory committees to establish, FCC said that the Commission's
committee management officer-the agency official responsible for managing
and overseeing the advisory committees- evaluates the usefulness and
mission of a potential committee to ensure the benefits of establishing
the committee are clear. While the committee management officer determines
which advisory committees are to be established, the opinions of FCC's
Chairman are taken into consideration. As prescribed by OMB, FCC is
limited to eight discretionary federal advisory committees, but FCC
officials we interviewed said that this limit does not pose a problem, and
there are no plans to create additional committees at this time.

Advisory committee members who responded to our survey, as well as the FCC
officials and trade and interest groups we contacted, said the committees
generally operate and function effectively. For example, 87 percent of
responding committee members were satisfied with the clarity of their
committees' operating rules and procedures. Regarding committee
operations, 73 percent of the responding members said they were satisfied
with how the committees use technology to facilitate meetings.
Furthermore, an overwhelming majority of members agreed that fellow
members represent parties that have an interest in the mission and agenda
of the committee, and that committee members have sufficient knowledge and
experience to provide input on the issues addressed by the committee.
Overall, 82 percent of responding committee members were satisfied with
their experience of serving on the committee, and almost 90 percent
responded that they would be interested in serving on the committee again.
Moreover, most of the advisory committee members who served previously
also told us that they were satisfied with their committee experience.

Most of the committee chairmen we interviewed believed the advisory
committee process works well. For example, one chairman said the process
facilitates communication, input, and openness. Another committee chairman
told us that the advisory committee process is an effective venue for both
FCC and industry to participate in the agency's rulemaking process. He
further stated that FCC receives a lot of talented advice at little cost,
which is important because, in his view, FCC lacks adequate technical
expertise. Another committee chairman said that FCC staff do not have the
level of expertise that exists on the advisory committee and could not
afford to hire such experts.

FCC officials we contacted, including bureau chiefs and designated federal
officers, also told us that the advisory committee process generally
functions well. For example, one bureau chief told us that the advisory
committee structure gives FCC access to industry expertise at a minimal
cost to taxpayers. Further, he commented that FACA requirements help FCC
ensure that committee operations remain transparent and accessible to the
public. According to another bureau chief, advisory committees provide a
unique opportunity for the top experts in important technical fields to
provide FCC with the benefits of their knowledge in a nonadversarial
context. One FCC designated federal officer said his committee works
tremendously well, with a lot of talented people working to achieve the
committee's objectives. FCC's Chairman and one commissioner, as well as
all the bureau chiefs that we contacted, agreed that effective committee
operations enhanced the ability of their advisory committees to reach
consensus and subsequently produce useful recommendations for FCC.

Several of the trade and interest group representatives that we
interviewed also told us that FCC advisory committees function
effectively. For example, several representatives remarked that the
advisory committee process is an effective forum for bringing people
together from various industry sectors to collaborate on advisory
committee issues. Further, the trade group representatives generally
believe FCC's advisory committees address current and important
telecommunication issues and that members have sufficient knowledge to
address committee issues. However, three trade group representatives told
us that the advisory committee process was ineffective because FCC does
not always implement the committees' advice. To increase the effectiveness
of advisory committee functions, several trade groups provided suggestions
for possible improvements. For example, one representative said that FCC
could increase the use of subcommittees while another told us that FCC
should provide funding for travel and develop other methods to improve
committee participation among underserved groups.

Subcommittees Perform the Most of FCC's federal advisory committees have
subcommittees that collect information and develop draft recommendations
for the full

Majority of FCC's Federal Advisory Committees' Work committee, with only
one committee-the Technological Advisory

Council-having no subcommittees. The committee chairmen and

Page 11 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

designated federal officers told us that a substantial amount of committee
work is completed at the subcommittee level because, generally, the full
committees meet less frequently than the subcommittees. In fact,
subcommittees often conduct their work in informal ways, such as via
telephone and videoconferencing, e-mail exchanges, and additional inperson
meetings. The committee members who responded to our survey agreed, with
79 percent responding that more work is completed at the subcommittee
level than at the full committee. About 76 percent of the survey
respondents also reported that they have served as subcommittee members.
Committee members generally volunteer to serve as subcommittee members,
but they can also be selected for service by the committee or subcommittee
chairman, an FCC official, or other committee members. Our survey results
also showed that approximately 80 percent of responding members were
satisfied with subcommittee operations. We heard from committee chairmen
that most subcommittees set their own agenda and have strong participation
by their members. Further, two committee chairmen said the meetings for
their subcommittees are open to the public.9

An advisory committee's subcommittees are not subject to FACA requirements
if they report to a parent advisory committee and the parent advisory
committee deliberates the subcommittee's recommendations before adopting
and passing them on to the agency. According to our survey, approximately
68 percent of the responding committee members said their committees
deliberate the proposals of their subcommittees from a moderate to very
great extent. As shown in figure 2, the extent to which full committees
deliberated the proposals of their subcommittees varied by committee.

9As mentioned previously, only subcommittees that make recommendations
directly to a federal agency must have meetings conducted in accordance
with FACA's openness requirements.

Page 12 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

Figure 2: Committee Members' Views on the Extent to Which Full Committees
Deliberate the Proposals of Their Subcommittees by Committee Percentage of
committee members

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Consumer Advisory Media
Advisory Committee on Security and

Committee Diversity for Reliability
Communications Council
in the Digital Age

North Network Advisory Committee American Reliability and for the 2007
World Numbering Interoperability Radiocommunication Council Council
Conference

               Very great to great extent Moderate to some extent

Little to no extent Do not know/no response

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC advisory committee members.

Note: The Technological Advisory Council does not have any subcommittees,
so it is not included in this figure.

FCC and Its Advisory Committees Adhere to FACA and Related Regulations,
but Committee Members Are Not Always Clear About the Role FCC Expects Them
to Provide When They Are Appointed to Committees

FACA governs the establishment, operation, and termination of federal
advisory committees. Under FACA and GSA regulations, agency heads are
responsible for the administration of their advisory committees, including
establishing key administrative functions for the advisory committees,
forming the committees, ensuring committee operations are transparent, and
ensuring that the products advisory committees produce are fully
independent of the agency that established the committee.

Agencies Must Have Certain Organizational Procedures in Place to Support
the Establishment of Federal Advisory Committees

To establish the framework in which the federal advisory committees can
function, FACA requires that agencies, among other things, have (1) a
"committee management officer," (2) operating guidelines for the agency's
federal advisory committees, and (3) a process in place to report key data
about each committee to GSA.

Committee management officer: Agencies must designate a committee
management officer to assist with the management of their advisory
committees and to oversee the agency's compliance with FACA requirements.
FCC has delegated this responsibility to the Managing Director of FCC. In
addition to advisory committee oversight, the Office of the Managing
Director is generally responsible for activities involving the
administration and management of FCC, such as developing and managing the
agency's budget and financial programs, and overseeing the agency's
personnel management process and policy. We found that the committee
management officer delegated many of his advisory committee oversight
responsibilities to an advisory committee liaison.

Administrative guidelines: The act also requires agency heads to issue
administrative guidelines and management controls applicable to their
agency's advisory committees. When we asked FCC if the Commission had
administrative guidelines, as required by FACA, an FCC official provided
us with guidelines that had expired in August 1998. In May 2004, the
deputy committee management officer told us that FCC continued to use the

FACA and Regulations Impose Several Requirements on the Formation of
Federal Advisory Committees

expired guidelines on an informal basis and that the Commission was
planning to reinstate the guidance in the near future, as a result of our
review. On September 9, 2004, FCC reinstated their administrative
guidelines with no revisions.

Reporting committee information to GSA: Agencies are required to report
information electronically on each advisory committee using a
governmentwide shared Internet-based system that GSA maintains. The
information contained in this Internet-based system (or database) can be
used by the Congress to perform oversight of related executive branch
programs and by the public, the media, and others, to stay abreast of
important developments resulting from advisory committee activities. FCC
has been submitting committee information to GSA as required.

The act has various requirements that relate to the formation of advisory
committees. In particular, committees must (1) be in the public interest
and related to the agency's area of responsibility, (2) have a charter,
(3) have a designated federal officer, and (4) have balanced membership.

Public interest: FACA requires the agency establishing an advisory
committee to find that the committee is in the public interest and related
to the agency's area of responsibility. According to GSA, agencies must
provide a statement that their advisory committees are in the public
interest and essential to agency business in their justifications
submitted to GSA for establishing an advisory committee. FCC provided such
a statement to GSA for all of its advisory committees.

Charter: FACA requires all committees to have a charter that contains
specific information, including the committee's scope and objectives, a
description of duties, the period of time necessary to carry out its
purposes, the estimated operating costs, and the number and frequency of
meetings. All of FCC's advisory committees are operating under charters
that met the specific requirements.

Designated federal officer: The act requires agency heads to appoint a
designated federal officer for each committee to oversee the committee's
activities, call the meetings of the committee, approve the agendas, and
attend the meetings. Each of FCC's advisory committees has a designated
federal officer who abides by these requirements.

Balanced membership: FACA also requires that the membership of committees
be fairly balanced in terms of points of view represented. Our survey of
committee members as well as discussions with FCC officials indicated that
most stakeholders believed the committees had balanced membership. For
example, all of the FCC bureau chiefs and designated federal officers we
contacted, as well as the committee chairmen, said they believe committee
membership is balanced. Further, 88 percent of the committee members who
responded to our survey agreed that members represent divergent points of
views. FCC commissioners were more split on this issue. FCC's Chairman and
one commissioner stated that the committees are adequately balanced while
two others stated the committees are not always inclusive of varied
interests.10 Of the trade and interest groups we contacted, five said they
believed the advisory committees had balanced membership. For example, one
trade group representative said FCC tries to be very inclusive with the
committees' membership, and another said FCC goes out of its way to ensure
the committees are balanced. However, six of the trade group
representatives we contacted did not believe the advisory committees were
balanced. Of those with this view, four said that the committees had too
many industry representatives, one said the committees did not have enough
consumer representation, and one said the committees lacked geographical
and ethnic diversity.

According to FCC's Chairman, the Commission has gone to great lengths to
ensure advisory committee membership is fairly balanced regarding the
points of view represented and the functions performed. He stated that the
advisory committees' members represent a broad array of service and
equipment providers of all sizes, as well as trade organizations and
members of the academic community. Information regarding committee
membership contained in the FACA database and that we collected from FCC's
designated federal officers indicates that FCC attempted to draw committee
membership from many facets of the telecommunications industry. For
example, FCC reported that members for one advisory committee represent
large and small telecommunications consumers, local and interstate
carriers, state regulators, equipment and software manufacturers,
satellite companies, cable companies, Internet service providers, wireless
companies, and research organizations. According to FCC, members for
another advisory committee were selected to represent a broad and balanced
viewpoint, with members from nonprofit consumer

10One commissioner did not respond to us on the issue of balanced
membership.

and disability advocacy organizations, industry, underserved populations,
Native Americans, and private citizens. Membership for another advisory
committee is completely open-meaning any interested party can participate
in committee activities.11

Membership designation: While membership must be balanced, federal
agencies generally have a reasonable amount of discretion to appoint
members to serve on committees. Agencies also have discretion to determine
what type of advice the advisory committee members are to provide. Members
of advisory committees may be appointed as "representatives," which means
they are providing "stakeholder advice" or advice reflecting the views of
the entity or interest group they are representing (such as industry,
labor, or consumers). Committee members may also be appointed as "special
government employees," which means the agency appoints them with the
expectation that they will provide advice on the basis of their best
judgment. The Office of Government Ethics distinguishes between special
government employees and representative members. Committee members
appointed as special government employees who are not representative
members are expected to be impartial and are subject to
conflict-of-interest rules administered by the Office of Government
Ethics. Committee members designated merely as representative are viewed
by the Office of Government Ethics as having been appointed to represent a
particular and known viewpoint, and thus are not subject to the same
ethics review. Consistent with guidance provided by the Office of
Government Ethics,12 GSA officials told us that GSA cannot control how
agencies designate their members, but they generally said that if an
agency is looking for a committee member to provide his or her expert
advice, the member should be designated as a special government employee;
if the member is to provide the views of an outside entity, the member
should be designated as representative.

11In our recent report on federal advisory committees, GAO-04-328, p. 53,
we recommended that GSA provide guidance to agencies regarding steps that
could be taken that might help to ensure that advisory committees have
balanced membership. Such guidance is intended to help promote a
consistent process for ensuring that all federal agencies take steps to
ensure balanced membership on their advisory committees. At this time, it
appears that consideration of balance was a major factor in determining
committee membership for FCC's current federal advisory committees.

12Office of Government Ethics Memorandum to Heads of Departments and
Agencies of the Executive Branch, July 9, 1982 (82 x 22), and Memorandum
to Designated Agency Ethics Officials, General Counsels and Inspectors
General, February 15, 2000 (00 x 1).

FCC has designated all current members of its federal advisory committees
as representatives. The FCC official who is responsible for determining if
proper designations are made-the designated agency ethics official-told us
he discusses member designations with the committees' designated federal
officers, but he generally does not review any documents to determine what
type of advice the member is expected to provide. The ethics official said
that it is a long-standing tradition at the Commission to appoint all
members as representative. The ethics official also told us there is an
emphasis at FCC for members to provide the representative positions of
groups, given the nature of the industry, which makes the representative
designation more appropriate.

FCC's designation of all committee members as representatives suggests an
expectation that all of the members would contribute the opinion of the
organization, company, or institution that they represent. However, we
found that for some members it is unclear what interests they should be
representing on the advisory committees because they do not directly work
within the telecommunications industry. Rather these members-who comprised
almost 13 percent of our survey respondents-are affiliated with
universities or private consulting companies.13 Of the six survey
respondents who work for universities, five reported that they only
provide their own expert advice and not advice that represents the
position of a particular group.14 Similarly, nearly half of those who work
in private consulting reported that they only provide their own expert
advice. Additionally, we found that-even for those members who do work for
entities within the telecommunications industry-there might be confusion
for some of them about the type of advice they were expected to provide to
the committee. About 13 percent of the respondents who work for private
businesses reported that they do not view themselves as providing
representative advice, despite being designated by FCC as representative
members. All told, only 78 percent of the survey respondents said they
provide the opinion of the organization, company, or institution that they
represent. A majority of the 22 percent of respondents who did not view
their advice as representative said that they provided advice based on
their own expert opinion.

13See appendix II for the employment sectors of committee members who
responded to our survey for each of FCC's advisory committees.

14Survey respondents were allowed to check that they provide either or
both types of advice.

Page 18 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

These results suggest two points regarding the designation of members and
their understanding of their advisory roles. First, if certain
members-such as those affiliated with universities or who work in private
consulting- were appointed to provide their best professional judgment
rather than the representative position of a particular group, they might
be more appropriately appointed as special government employees. If
members are so designated, they would be subject to the Office of
Government Ethics rules for special government employees. Second, some
members who FCC has designated as representatives do not believe they are
contributing the advice of the organization, company, or institution that
they were selected to represent. As such, these members may not fully
understand what role they were appointed to play on the advisory
committee.

In our recent report on federal advisory committees,15 we recommended that
GSA issue guidance stating that agencies should specify in the appointment
letters to committee members whether they are appointed as special
government employees or as representatives. We further recommended that
for those appointed as representative members, the entity or group that
they are to represent should be noted in the letter. GSA and the Office of
Government Ethics provided formal statements to us that outline actions
they have taken and plans they are developing to address our report
recommendations. For example, the Office of Government Ethics issued
additional guidance, dated July 19, 2004, which discusses the distinction
between representative committee members and special government
employees.16 GSA officials told us that they consulted with the Office of
Government Ethics and modified their training on the matter of
representative versus special government employee designations.

We found that for its advisory committees, FCC was already generally
telling members that they were to provide representative advice on behalf
of their employer in their appointment letters. However, for those members
affiliated with universities, law firms, or consulting firms who are told
to provide advice on behalf of such entities, the underlying viewpoint on
telecommunications issues that the member is expected to represent is not
clear because such institutions generally do not have an obvious viewpoint

15GAO-04-328, p. 54.

16Office of Government Ethics Memorandum to Designated Agency Ethics
Officials, July 19, 2004 (DO-04-022).

Page 19 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

Requirements Guide Many Aspects of Advisory Committee Operations

on telecommunications issues.17 While FCC may have selected these
individuals to represent particular telecommunications viewpoints, those
viewpoints are not specifically stated in the appointment letter. That is,
naming the institution to be represented might not always make clear the
viewpoint to be represented.

Regarding advisory committee operations, FACA generally requires committee
meetings to be open to the public. Also, GSA regulations provide
principles that agencies should apply to their management of advisory
committees, including (1) supplying support services for their committees,
(2) seeking feedback from advisory committee members on the effectiveness
of committee activities, and (3) communicating to the committee members
how their advice has affected agency programs and decision making.

Openness: FACA requires agencies to announce committee meetings ahead of
time and give notice to interested parties about such meetings. With some
exceptions, the meetings are to be open to the public, and agencies are to
prepare meeting minutes and make them available to interested parties.
During our review, we found that FCC provided adequate notice of meetings,
held open meetings and prepared minutes in accordance with the act for all
of its advisory committees.

Support services: FACA and GSA regulations specify that agencies should
provide support services for their committees. According to the designated
federal officers, FCC typically provides meeting facilities and
administrative and logistical support for the committees. At the time of
our review, most of the designated federal officers, as well as the deputy
committee management officer, said the committees had sufficient resources
to effectively conduct committee operations. While each advisory committee
has a budget, we found the funds were allocated for FCC staff, both
professional and administrative. FCC does not pay any travel-related costs
for committee members to attend meetings. As shown

17For example, in reviewing the appointment letter for a committee member
who is employed by a law firm, we found FCC only stated that the member is
expected to represent the law firm-without saying what telecommunications
viewpoints would be represented. Further, when we asked what specific
telecommunications interest this member was representing, she said the
clients of her law firm, but noted that at present time the firm was not
representing any clients that were involved with the issues of her
advisory committee.

Page 20 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

in table 1, the majority of committee members surveyed were satisfied with
the support provided by FCC.

Communications: GSA regulations also state that agencies should (1) seek
feedback from advisory committee members on the effectiveness of committee
activities and (2) communicate to committee members on a regular basis how
their advice has affected agency programs. We found FCC does not have a
formal process whereby it requests feedback from committee members about
the committees' activities, nor does FCC formally track how the
committees' advice and recommendations have been considered and provide
this information to committee members. However, most of the designated
federal officers said they periodically discuss committee issues with
members. One designated federal officer told us he believes the
communication with his committee members is sufficient because the members
are willing to serve on the committee again. Nonetheless, according to our
survey, adequate communications between FCC and committee members was one
of the few areas related to the operations of FCC's committees that
committee members expressed some concern. As shown in table 1, less than
47 percent of survey respondents were satisfied with how FCC communicated
to members how the Commission would use their advice. In response to our
survey of committee members, we received 10 comments indicating there is
limited communication between FCC and the advisory committees. For
example, one committee member said FCC should provide a clear disposition
for each recommendation presented to it. Another member said he presumes
his respective committee's advice is helpful to the Commission, but would
like more feedback on whether the advice is actually used.

  Table 1: Committee Members' Satisfaction with Aspects of FCC's Management of
                              Advisory Committees

                                          Percent                     Percent 
                            Percent neither            Percent do not know or 
                                    satisfied                              no 
                          satisfied nor           dissatisfied       response 
                                    dissatisfied               
Amount and quality of         78          11.5          4.5              6 
support provided by FCC                                     
Amount of feedback FCC                                      
officials seek from                                         
committee                                                   
members                     56.5          23.5         11.5            8.5 
Communication from FCC                                      
officials regarding how                                     
committee's advice has                                      
affected FCC programs or                                    
decision making             46.5            24           19           10.5 

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC federal advisory committee members.

Federal Advisory Committees Are Required to Produce Independent Advice to
Federal Agencies

The advice and recommendations of federal advisory committees must be
independent of influence by the entity that created the advisory
committee, or in this case, FCC. We found that the advice and
recommendations provided by FCC's committees are generally considered by
stakeholders to reflect the independent judgment of committee members. The
majority of FCC's commissioners believe that the federal advisory
committees provide independent advice and recommendations. However, one
commissioner suggested that committee independence could be improved while
another stated that independence varies by committee. In addition, all of
the designated federal officers and bureau chiefs who have responsibility
for FCC's federal advisory committees agree that the advisory committees
provide advice and recommendations that are independent of agency
influence. Among committee members who responded to our survey, 89 percent
stated that they believed their committee is at least moderately
independent of FCC, while approximately 7 percent stated that they
believed their committee is only a little or not at all independent of
FCC. Of the trade and interest groups we contacted, six believed that
committees' advice and recommendations are independent of FCC, and four
others stated that independence varies based on the committee or the
issues being addressed. Only 1 of the 12 trade groups responded that the
committees' advice or recommendations are not independent.

FCC Has Taken Action on Advisory Committee Recommendations, but
Stakeholders' Views on FCC's Use of Committee Work Varied

While most of the stakeholders we contacted agreed that the advisory
committees produce quality work, views on FCC's implementation of the
committees' advice and recommendations varied. While FCC is not required
to implement the advice and recommendations of its advisory committees, in
general, the FCC bureau chiefs and designated federal officers were more
satisfied with how FCC uses the committees' work than other stakeholders.
FCC's Chairman stated that the Commission implements the advisory
committees' recommendations in various ways, such as incorporating
recommendations into regulations or less formally by publicizing committee
work at trade shows or other public events. One commissioner agreed with
this view, further stating that FCC always takes the committees' advice
and recommendations seriously. However, another commissioner said FCC
should establish a more formal process for the entire Commission to
consider committee recommendations; and still another commissioner said
FCC should give "due attention" to each committee submission, regardless
of the subject matter. We found FCC does not have a formal process for
tracking advisory committee recommendations. While the deputy committee
management officer told us that as a result of our review, FCC plans to
improve the accountability of the advisory committee process by requiring
that committee recommendations be tracked; as of September 2004, FCC had
not taken any action on developing such a tracking system.

In our survey, 83 percent of respondents believed FCC was receptive to
their advice from a moderate to very great extent. However, only 54
percent of responding members were satisfied with the extent to which FCC
takes the committees' advice into account when developing policy. Another
27 percent were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, and more than 8
percent were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the extent to which
FCC takes the committees' advice into account when developing policy. As
part of our survey, we received comments from 19 out of 200 survey
respondents who were dissatisfied with FCC's use of their committees'
advice. In general, the members who provided comments were dissatisfied
because they believed that FCC (1) does not provide feedback about how the
committee's recommendations are used, (2) does not take action on the
committee's recommendations, (3) has a predetermined agenda, or (4) uses
the advisory committees as "window dressing." Further, only 5 of the 12
trade and interest groups we contacted believed FCC actually uses the
committees' advice and recommendations. Three others stated that the
committees' advice and recommendations have little influence on FCC
actions.

The FCC bureau chiefs and designated federal officers we contacted were
more satisfied than were committee members with how FCC uses the
committees' advice. For example, one bureau chief said FCC always
considers the recommendations received from his advisory committee, and
the designated federal officers for five of the advisory committees said
they believe FCC would implement their committees' recommendations. To
demonstrate how the Commission implements the advice and recommendations
of the advisory committees, FCC officials provided the following examples:

        * An FCC bureau chief said that FCC adopted, as rules, many of the
          recommendations made by the North American Numbering Council. For
          example, the committee provided advice and recommendations on
          implementation issues associated with local number portability,
          which allows consumers to keep their telephone numbers when
          switching from one telecommunications carrier to another. This
          process has been in place for wireline consumers since 1997, and it
          is now available for wireless consumers. An FCC commissioner
          agreed, stating the North American Numbering Council has provided
          invaluable expertise in
        * support of FCC's policies relating to telephone numbering,
          including local number portability.
        * The designated federal officer for the Advisory Committee for the
          2003 World Radiocommunication Conference said the committee
          recommended a total of 41 draft preliminary views, of which 35
          became
        * U.S. preliminary views, and a total of 41 draft proposals of which
          28 became U.S. proposals.
     o The designated federal officer for the Media Security and Reliability
       Council said the committee produced over 100 best practices
       recommendations oriented toward the media industries. To support
       industry adoption of those best practices recommendations aimed at
       media, FCC said it developed an outreach brochure describing the best
       practices and arranged for 13,000 copies to be distributed directly by
       FCC field offices and at conventions held by the National Association
       of Broadcasters and the National Cable and Telecommunications
       Association. Also as a result of the Media Security and Reliability
       Council's work, the deputy designated federal officer told us FCC
       issued a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding the Emergency Alert
       System.
     o According to an office chief, the Technological Advisory Council
       generated several of the ideas that led to the Spectrum Policy Task
       Force Report, which formed the basis for several of the Commission's
       most important forward-looking initiatives.18

18In June 2002, FCC's Chairman announced the formation of the Spectrum
Policy Task Force to assist FCC in identifying and evaluating changes in
spectrum policy to increase the public benefits derived from the use of
radio spectrum.

Page 24 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

FCC Has Five Advisory Groups That It Considers Exempt from FACA; These
Groups Function Differently from Federal Advisory Committees

FCC has five advisory groups that it considers exempt from FACA. Two of
these advisory groups are "joint boards" that FCC is statutorily mandated
to create. FCC also established two groups referred to as "joint
conferences" that are designed to advise the agency on certain issues over
which FCC has regulatory jurisdiction. Both the joint boards and
conferences function differently from FCC's federal advisory committees in
large part because they are not considered to be subject to FACA
requirements. FCC also created an additional committee, the
Intergovernmental Advisory Committee, which, although exempt from FACA,
functions similarly to federal advisory committees in some respects.19

FCC's Mandated Joint Boards Are Exempt from FACA and Function Differently
from Federal Advisory Committees

FCC is mandated to support two joint boards: one addresses "jurisdictional
separations"20 and the other examines "universal service requirements."21
FCC told us it considers these joint boards to be exempt from FACA because
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 exempts groups that are composed
wholly of federal, state, local, or tribal government officials.22 FCC
established one board, called the Joint Board on Jurisdictional
Separations, in 1980 to make recommendations regarding cost allocations
that are part of the determination of telephone rates. FCC created the
other board, called the Joint Board on Universal Service, in 1996 to
implement the Telecommunication Act's universal service provisions. The
joint boards convene three times per year at the National Association for
Regulatory Utility Commissioners meetings, which are held in different
locations across the country. Because the meetings of the

19We contacted 10 trade and interest groups to determine if they had any
issues or concerns with the operations or effectiveness of FCC's joint
boards, joint conferences, and the Intergovernmental Advisory Committee.
Only one of the trade group representatives expressed concern, stating
that funding for one of the joint boards was inadequate.

2047 U.S.C. S: 0.91(g), 410(c).

2147 U.S.C. S: 0.91(g), 254.

22The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 exempts such groups for the
purpose of exchanging views, information, or advice relating to the
management or implementation of federal programs. See guidelines issued by
OMB on section 204(b) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2
U.S.C. 1534(b), OMB Memorandum M-95-20, dated September 21, 1995.

boards are held in varied locations and the members come from dispersed
areas, each board receives a small budget from FCC to cover travel
costs.23

The establishment and operations of the joint boards differ greatly from
federal advisory committees that are subject to FACA requirements. Some of
these differences are driven by requirements in the statute for the joint
boards, and some of the differences are due to the fact that the joint
boards are not subject to FACA requirements. For example:

     o The type of membership for the joint boards is specified in statute.
       Section 410(c) of the Communications Act requires the boards to have
       three FCC commissioners and four state commissioners serve as members.
       The Joint Board on Universal Service is also required to have one
       state consumer public advocate member. FCC nominates the FCC
       commissioners. The National Association for Regulatory Utility
       Commissioners nominates the state officials and the National
       Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates nominates the state
       consumer public advocate. FCC makes the final selections of joint
       board members. Conversely, federal advisory committees following the
       requirements of FACA must have balanced membership but the mission of
       each committee determines who will be selected to serve as members.
     o The meetings of the joint boards are closed to the public. However,
       the boards also hold public hearings once or twice per year to collect
       information. In contrast, as we noted earlier, meetings of federal
       advisory committees must generally be open to the public.
     o The joint boards have no charter or bylaws guiding their operations.
       Federal advisory committees, on the other hand, operate with a charter
       for a 2-year term, and must operate according to a set of specific
       procedural requirements.
     o FCC must respond to the recommendations of the Joint Board on
       Universal Service. In contrast, FCC is not required to respond to the
       advice or recommendations of a federal advisory committee. The

23Two state public service commissioners' staff and a representative from
the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners told us that
travel funds are not always sufficient and have expressed concern that
board activities are compromised from lack of funding.

Page 26 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

FCC's Joint Conferences Are Exempt from FACA and Function Differently from
Federal Advisory Committees

Commission can implement a recommendation of a federal advisory committee
or reject it without comment.

FCC also established two joint conferences that it considers exempt from
FACA. Under the Communications Act,24 FCC is authorized to confer with
state regulatory commissions on telecommunications accounting issues, as
well as other issues, over which it has regulatory jurisdiction. As a
result, FCC established the Joint Conference on Accounting Issues in 2002
to review the possible need for changes to FCC's regulatory accounting
rules. The Joint Conference on Advanced Telecommunications Services,
created in 1999 was established to assist in the deployment of advanced
telecommunications capability, such as high-speed Internet, to all
Americans. Similar to the joint boards, the joint conferences convene in
different locations across the country at the National Association for
Regulatory Utility Commissioners meetings, and the Joint Conference on
Accounting Issues receives a small budget from FCC to cover travel costs.

As with the joint boards, the establishment and operations of the joint
conferences are different from federal advisory committees that operate
under FACA requirements. However, many of the operations of the joint
conferences are similar to those of the joint boards. For example, as with
joint boards, the meetings of the joint conferences are closed to the
public, and there is no charter or bylaws guiding their operations.

Several aspects distinguish the joint conferences from the joint boards.
For example:

o  FCC said that unlike the joint boards, there are no statutory
guidelines determining nominations for joint conferences: FCC entirely
chooses the membership. At this time, the Joint Conference on Accounting
Issues has two federal regulatory commissioners and five state regulatory
commissioners who serve as members. For the Joint Conference on Advanced
Telecommunications Services, membership currently includes all five FCC
commissioners and six state commissioners.

24

Pub. L. 34-416, codified at 47 U.S.C. S: 410(b).

FCC's Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Is Exempt from FACA, but It Has
Some Similarities in Function to Federal Advisory Committees

        * FCC does not believe it is required to respond to or implement the
          recommendations of the joint conferences; rather it can implement
          the recommendation or reject without comment. This is similar to
          FCC's use of federal advisory committee advice or recommendations,
          but contrasts FCC's responsibilities regarding the advice and
          recommendations of the Joint Board on Universal Service.
        * FCC formed the Intergovernmental Advisory Committee in 1997 to
          advise the agency on issues of concern to state, local, and tribal
          governments.25 This committee provides ongoing advice and
          information to FCC on a broad range of telecommunications issues
          including, but not limited to, rural issues, homeland security,
          facilities siting, broadband access, barriers to competitive entry,
          and public safety communications for which FCC explicitly or
          inherently shares responsibility or administration with local,
          county, state, or tribal governments. The Intergovernmental
          Advisory Committee holds meetings in Washington, D.C., four times
          per year; but unlike the federal advisory committees, its meetings
          are closed to the public. In addition, FCC allocates no funds to
          the Intergovernmental Advisory Committee in support of its
          activities. Despite these differences in the Intergovernmental
          Advisory Committee's operations relative to federal advisory
          committees, other aspects of its establishment and operations
          closely mirror those of federal advisory committees, even though it
          is not considered to be subject to FACA requirements. For example:
     o The committee has a charter guiding its objectives and operations for
       each 2-year term.
     o Its membership is determined at the discretion of FCC. FCC solicits
       members through a public notice for nominations and then selects
       members. As specified in its charter, the committee has 15 members: 5
       state government representatives, 7 local representatives, and 3
       representatives from tribal governments.

25The Intergovernmental Advisory Committee changed its name from the Local
and State Government Advisory Committee in 2003 when FCC fine-tuned the
committee's membership to include more state and tribal government
representation, fewer local government representatives, and more
geographic diversity.

Page 28 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees

                                  Conclusions

o  FCC is not required to respond to or implement the advice or
recommendations of the committee. FCC can implement the recommendation or
reject without comment.

FCC's federal advisory committees address important telecommunications
issues, and stakeholders generally view the committees' work as beneficial
and useful to the Commission. The advisory committees generally follow the
rules and requirements prescribed by FACA, which ensures the committees'
activities are transparent and accessible to the public. However, because
FCC does not have a formal process for determining and documenting
committee member designations, it appears that some of FCC's advisory
committee members are not clear about the type of advice the Commission
expects them to contribute to their committees. Despite being designated
as representatives, some members responded to our survey that they do not
contribute the opinions of the organization, company, or institution they
represent, but rather contribute their own expert advice-a role that
appears closer to that which the Office of Government Ethics and GSA
describe as the role of a member who would typically be appointed as a
special government employee. The confusion about the role of committee
members may be particularly at issue for members who do not directly work
within the telecommunications industry, such as those affiliated with a
university, a law firm, or in private consulting. When members are
designated as special government employees, they are subject to the Office
of Government Ethics rules that apply to special government employees,
which include conflict-of-interest reviews.

To better ensure that FCC's federal advisory committee members are fully

Recommendation for

informed about the advice they are being asked to provide, we recommend
that FCC establish a process for determining and documenting the type of

                                Agency Comments

advice federal advisory committee members are expected to contribute.26
FCC should appoint advisory committee members to serve as representatives
only after making a clear determination of what interests those members
are expected to represent on the committee. Committee members who are not
representing a specific interest or viewpoint may be more appropriately
appointed as special government employees. For representative members, FCC
should specifically state in their appointment letters what particular
interest those members are appointed to represent. This statement will be
especially important for the committee members affiliated with
universities, law firms, or private consulting firms, since it is not
always clear or transparent what interests FCC would like them to
represent.

We provided a draft of this report to FCC, GSA, and the Office of
Government Ethics for their review and comment. In its response, FCC
agreed with our recommendation and noted that future appointment letters
for representative committee members would make clear the specific
underlying viewpoint, interest group, or segment of the community that the
member is expected to represent. FCC also provided technical comments that
we incorporated into the report as appropriate. GSA did not provide
written comments but agency officials told us they agree with our
recommendation, saying it would be helpful to the federal advisory
committee designation process for agencies to clearly identify for
representative members who, organizationally for example, they are
expected to represent on the committee. In its comments to us, the Office
of Government Ethics agreed with our findings and recommendation. Written
comments from FCC and the Office of Government Ethics are provided in
appendixes IV and V, respectively.

26As we previously noted, our recent report, GAO-04-328, recommended that
GSA issue guidance stating that agencies should specify in the appointment
letters to committee members whether they are appointed as special
government employees or as representatives and, for those appointed as
representative members, the entity or group that they are to represent
should be noted in the letter. The recommendation we are making to FCC
goes one step beyond that because we found that, despite FCC's statements
in appointment letters that members are representing their employers, some
of the stated entities did not have a clear telecommunications viewpoint.
As such, the letter should make clear for these members what underlying
viewpoint the member is expected to represent.

We will provide copies of this report to interested congressional
committees; the Chairman, FCC; and other interested parties. We will also
make copies available to others upon request. This report will be
available at no charge on the GAO Web site at h ttp://www.gao.gov. If you
have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-2834
or g [email protected] or Amy Abramowitz at (202) 512-2834.

Major contributors to this report include Bert Japikse, Jean McSween,
Erica Miles, Sally Moino, and Tina Sherman.

Mark L. Goldstein Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues Appendix I

                       Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

As requested by the House of Representatives Committee on Government
Reform, the objectives of this report are to provide information on (1)
the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) current federal advisory
committees and how they operate, (2) the extent to which FCC's advisory
committees follow applicable laws and regulations, (3) how FCC makes use
of the advisory committees' advice or recommendations, and (4) other
advisory groups established at FCC that are not characterized as Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA) committees and how they operate.

To respond to the first objective on FCC's current federal advisory
committees and how they operate, we obtained the charters and other
documents on FCC's active advisory committees to determine the committees'
missions, charter dates, frequency of meetings and estimated operating
costs. We gathered additional information from the FACA database
maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA), such as committee
member lists and FCC statements regarding how the committees achieved
balance. Based on audit work completed for a prior GAO report, we
determined that the data from the FACA database were sufficiently reliable
for our purposes.1 We reviewed information on FCC's Web site relating to
the advisory committees, as well as the Web sites established by the
advisory committees. We discussed committee operations with FCC officials,
including the committees' designated federal officers and the advisory
committee liaison, as well as with the current committee chairmen. To
further document how advisory committees operate, we attended one
committee meeting in person and viewed another meeting via the Internet.

To obtain committee members' perspectives regarding advisory committee
operations and effectiveness, we developed and administered a Web-based
survey. From January 20, 2004, through February 6, 2004, we conducted a
series of pretests with FCC's advisory committee chairmen and members to
help further refine our questions, clarify any ambiguous portions of the
survey, and identify any potentially biased questions. Upon completion of
the pretests and development of the final survey questions and format, we
sent an announcement of the upcoming survey to 282 FCC advisory committee
members, including the committee chairmen on March 17, 2004. They were
notified that the survey was available online on March 24, 2004. We sent
follow up e-mail messages to nonrespondents as of April 15, 2004, and then
attempted to contact those who had not completed the survey.

1 GAO-04-328 .

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The survey was available online until June 11, 2004. Of the population of
282 members who were asked to complete the survey, we received 200
completed surveys for an overall response rate of 71 percent. The
practical difficulties of conducting surveys may introduce errors commonly
referred to as "nonsampling error." For example, questions may be
misinterpreted and the respondents' answers may differ from committee
members who did not respond to the survey. To minimize nonsampling error,
we pretested the survey and conducted numerous follow-up contacts with
nonrespondents. In addition, steps were taken during data analysis to
further minimize error, such as performing computer analyses to identify
inconsistencies and completing a review of data analysis by an independent
reviewer. The survey and its results can be found in appendix III.

In addition to the survey, we interviewed 13 members from FCC's federal
advisory committees that operated under the preceding presidential
administration to obtain their perspectives on the advisory committee
process and to determine if operations had changed over time. We asked
them to respond to a set of questions very similar to those asked of
current members on the Web-based survey. The members that we interviewed
had participated on the following FCC advisory committees: two members
from the National Advisory Committee; two members from the North American
Numbering Council; two members from the Public Safety National
Coordination Committee; four members from the Technological Advisory
Council; one member from the Advisory Committee for the 1999/2000 World
Radiocommunication Conference; and two members from the Network
Reliability and Interoperability Council.

To respond to the second objective on whether FCC's advisory committees
are following applicable laws and regulations, we reviewed the FACA
legislation as well as GSA's regulations regarding federal advisory
committee management and identified the key requirements that FCC must
follow. To determine if FCC complied with these requirements, we reviewed
relevant documentation relating to FCC's efforts to meet the requirements,
such as Federal Register notices announcing the committee meetings,
information reported to GSA, and the committee charters. Through our
survey, we also obtained committee member views on aspects of FCC's
implementation of FACA and GSA requirements. To determine what management
controls FCC established over the advisory committee process, we
interviewed the deputy committee management officer and obtained a copy of
FCC's advisory committee guidelines. We interviewed FCC's designated
agency ethics official to determine FCC's process for designating its
committee members as representatives. We also

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

interviewed officials with the Office of Government Ethics and GSA to
understand their role in the oversight of advisory committees at FCC,
especially regarding membership designation.

To respond to the third objective on how FCC makes use of the advisory
committees' advice and recommendations, we analyzed survey responses from
current committee members and responses from FCC officials to obtain their
views on FCC's use of committees' advice and recommendations. We requested
that FCC's designated federal officers verify information found on the
FACA database relating to committee recommendations in fiscal year 2003.
Specifically, we asked them to verify that the data found on the database
were correct and to describe in general terms the reasons why the
recommendations were or were not implemented by FCC. We asked FCC's five
commissioners and the bureau and office chiefs who have responsibility
over the advisory committees to comment in writing about (1) the quality
and usefulness of advisory committee advice or recommendations, (2) the
extent to which the committees' advice or recommendations are independent
of FCC, and (3) their views on how FCC implements the advice or
recommendations from the advisory committees. We received responses from
the five FCC commissioners and the chiefs of the following FCC bureaus and
office: Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, which is responsible for
the Consumer Advisory Committee; International Bureau, responsible for the
Advisory Committee for the World Radiocommunication Conference; Wireline
Competition Bureau, responsible for the North American Numbering Council;
Media Bureau, responsible for the Media Security and Reliability Council;
and Office of Engineering and Technology, responsible for the Network
Reliability and Interoperability Council and the Technological Advisory
Council.2

Also in response to the third objective, we interviewed 12 trade and
interest group representatives to obtain the perspectives of stakeholders
outside of federal government regarding the quality and usefulness of the
advisory committees' work. The following groups responded to our questions
about FCC's federal advisory committees: (1) the Cellular
Telecommunications and Internet Association, (2) the National Association
of Broadcasters, (3) Consumer Federation of America, (4) Consumers Union,
(5) American

2FCC's Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital
Age reports directly to the FCC chairman, and consequently does not come
under the jurisdiction of a bureau or office.

Page 34 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees Appendix I Objectives,
Scope, and Methodology

Council for the Blind, (6) Media Access Project, (7) the National
Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, (8) the National
Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors, (9) the National
Cable and Telecommunications Association, (10) the National Indian
Telecommunications Institute, (11) the Satellite Broadcasting and
Communications Association, and (12) the Telecommunications Industry
Association.

To respond to the fourth objective on other advisory groups established by
FCC that are exempt from FACA, we interviewed five FCC officials assigned
to the non-FACA advisory groups as well as two state public service
commissioners' staff that are affiliated with the joint boards. We
obtained documentation from FCC's Office of General Counsel concerning the
formation of the joint boards, joint conferences, and the
Intergovernmental Advisory Committee, and for their exemption from FACA
requirements. We also contacted the following 10 trade and interest group
representatives to determine if they had any issues or concerns with the
operations of FCC's non-FACA advisory groups: (1) the Cellular
Telecommunications and Internet Association, (2) the National Association
of Broadcasters, (3) Consumers Union, (4) Media Access Project, (5) the
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, (6) the National
Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors, (7) the National
Cable and Telecommunications Association, (8) the National Indian
Telecommunications Institute, (9) the Satellite Broadcasting and
Communications Association, and (10) the Telecommunications Industry
Association.

We conducted our review from November 2003 through September 2004 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Appendix II

Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups Exempt from
FACA

Advisory Committee for the 2007 World Radiocommunication Conference

This appendix provides information on FCC's seven federal advisory
committees and on FCC's five advisory groups that FCC considers exempt
from FACA, including two joint boards, two joint conferences, and the
Intergovernmental Advisory Committee.

Purpose of the committee: To provide the FCC with advice, technical
support, and recommended proposals for the 2007 World Radiocommunication
Conference.

Effective date of charter: May 31, 2004 (2-year charter).

Committee meetings: Held in Washington D.C., at least 4 times per year,
open to the public.

Number of members: 69 (all representing members).

Steps taken to select members for the committee: According to the
committee's designated federal officer, membership is open on the
committee, and FCC issues a public notice asking all interested parties to
be a part of the committee. The designated federal officer also stated
that FCC's Chairman makes the final determination on committee chairman
and leadership of the subcommittees.

How the committee achieves balanced membership: According to FCC, the
committee has an open membership and includes representatives of competing
industry sectors as well as government agencies and scientific and
technical organizations. See figure 3 for the primary employment sectors
of committee members who responded to our survey.

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory
Groups Exempt from FACA

Figure 3: Survey Respondents' Representation by Employment Sector for the
Advisory Committee for the 2007 World Radiocommunication Conference

3%

Advocacy or nonprofit organization

3%

No response

Private consulting

Federal government

Private business

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC advisory committee members.

Note: For this committee, we received 32 completed surveys out of 45
survey recipients. Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

Type of output: According to the designated federal officer, the committee
develops preliminary views and proposals to assist in drafting the U.S.
position for the World Radiocommunication Conference. The FCC bureaus
review the preliminary views to determine if they agree or disagree with
the position.

Fiscal year 2004 estimated annual operating costs for staff and overhead:
$105,500.

Current subcommittees: The committee has five informal working groups
addressing (1) issues related the terrestrial and space science services;
(2) issues involving the satellite services, including those related to
high altitude platform stations; (3) international mobile telephone and

2.5 gigahertz sharing issues; (4) issues concerning the broadcasting and
amateur services; and (5) regulatory issues.

Committee Web site: h ttp://www.fcc.gov/ib/wrc-07/

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
                                Exempt from FACA

Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital Age

Purpose of the committee: To make recommendations to FCC regarding
policies and practices that will further enhance the ability of minorities
and women to participate in the telecommunications and related industries.

Effective date of charter: September 2, 2003 (2-year charter).

Committee meetings: Held in Washington, D.C., a minimum of 2 times per
year, open to the public.

Number of members: 26 (all representing members).

Steps taken to select members for the committee: According to the
designated federal officer, when FCC's Chairman announced the formation of
the committee, interested individuals volunteered to serve on the
committee. The designated federal officer said that FCC had an idea of
people it wanted to serve on the committee and also contacted
congressional staff to obtain their input on people who were qualified to
serve. The designated federal officer said that FCC had a large list of
potential members, but decided to limit the number of members to around

25.

How the committee achieves balanced membership: According to FCC,
membership is solicited from all facets of the telecommunications
industry, including representation from the industry's financial and
technical sectors. See figure 4 for the primary employment sectors of
committee members who responded to our survey.

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory
Groups Exempt from FACA

Figure 4: Survey Respondents' Representation by Employment Sector for the
Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital Age

Private consulting Trade association

Advocacy or nonprofit organization

Private business

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC advisory committee members.

Note: For this committee, we received 19 completed surveys out of 26
survey recipients. Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

Type of output: The committee will make recommendations to the Commission.
For example, on June 14, 2004, the committee made recommendations on the
use of tax policy to promote opportunity and on the expansion of FCC's
rule-based incentives to promote opportunity for socially disadvantaged
persons.

Fiscal year 2004 estimated annual operating costs for staff and overhead:
$10,000; according to the designated federal officer, this amount does not
cover FCC staff's cost and will be adjusted in the future to include those
costs.

Current subcommittees: (1) Career Advancement, (2) Financial Issues,

(3) New Technologies, and (4) Transactional Transparency and Related
Outreach.

Committee Web site: h ttp://www.fcc.gov/DiversityFAC

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
                                Exempt from FACA

Consumer Advisory Committee

Purpose of the committee: To make recommendations to FCC regarding
consumer issues within the jurisdiction of the Commission and to
facilitate the participation of consumers (including people with
disabilities and underserved populations, such as Native Americans and
persons living in rural areas) in proceedings before the Commission. This
committee was formerly called the Consumer/Disability Telecommunications
Advisory Committee.

Effective date of charter: November 20, 2002 (2-year charter).

Committee meetings: Held in Washington, D.C., a minimum of 2 times per
year, open to the public.

Number of members: 35 (all representing members).

Steps taken to select members for the committee: According to the
committee's designated federal officer, FCC released a public notice
soliciting nominations and received over 100 responses to the public
notice. To determine the representation of the nominations received, the
designated federal officer stated that FCC prepared a spreadsheet showing
all nominations. Also, FCC legal staff, the chief of the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, the committee chairman, and the designated
federal officer reviewed all the nominations and forwarded names to the
FCC chairman, who made the final decisions about membership.

How the committee achieves balanced membership: According to FCC, the
committee is comprised of members from both the private and public
sectors, including nonprofit consumer and disability advocacy
organizations, industry, underserved populations, Native Americans, and
private citizens serving in a representative capacity. Members were
selected to represent a broad and balanced viewpoint so that the many
voices of the Commission's many constituencies can be heard. See figure 5
for the primary employment sectors of committee members who responded to
our survey.

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory
Groups Exempt from FACA

Figure 5: Survey Respondents' Representation by Employment Sector for the
Consumer Advisory Committee

  Private business

4%

Trade association

4%

College or university

State or local government

Private consulting

Advocacy or nonprofit organization

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC advisory committee members.

Note: For this committee, we received 27 completed surveys out of 35
survey recipients. Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

Type of output: The committee will make recommendations to the Commission.
For example, the Consumer Advisory Committee made recommendations in
fiscal year 2003 (1) supporting the creation of a national "do not call"
list, which is easily accessible to consumers; (2) urging the Commission
to promote consistency and uniformity in federal and state regulations of
telemarketing practices and; (3) urging the Commission to increase
enforcement actions against deceptive practices in telemarketing.

Fiscal year 2004 estimated annual operating costs for staff and overhead:
$307,775.

Current subcommittees: (1) Consumer Education, Outreach, and Complaints;
(2) Broadband; (3) Ancillary Services, and (4) Telecommunications Relay
Services.

Committee Web site: h ttp://www.fcc.gov/cgb/cac

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
                                Exempt from FACA

                               Media Security and
                              Reliability Council

Purpose of the committee: To provide members of the broadcast and
multichannel video programming distribution industries the opportunity to
make recommendations to FCC and their industries that, when implemented,
will ensure optimal reliability, robustness and security of broadcast and
multichannel video programming distribution industries facilities. These
recommendations will be based on, among other things, homeland defense and
security considerations and will take into account all reasonably
foreseeable circumstances. This will encompass ensuring the security and
sustainability of broadcast and multichannel video programming distributor
facilities throughout the United States; ensuring the availability of
adequate transmission capability during events or periods of exceptional
stress due to natural disaster, man-made attacks or similar occurrences;
and facilitating the rapid restoration of broadcast and multichannel video
programming distributor services in the event of disruptions.

Effective date of charter: March 26, 2004 (2-year charter).

Committee meetings: Held in Washington, D.C., a minimum of 2 times per
year (estimated total meetings - 4), open to the public.

Number of members: 40 (all representing members).

Steps taken to select members for the committee: According to the
committee's designated federal officer, FCC approached all major players
of broad-based media, such as satellite providers, cable companies, and
television networks, as well as smaller companies and public interest
groups to serve as committee members. The designated federal officer told
us that to be effective, the committee's membership needed to reflect a
public-private partnership. This FCC official further stated that the FCC
chairman's office and FCC's Media Bureau were part of the selection
process.

How the committee achieves balanced membership: According to FCC,
committee membership includes senior representatives from mass media
companies, cable television and satellite service providers, trade
associations, public safety representatives, manufacturers, and other
related entities. The members were selected for their different areas of
expertise and to represent a balanced viewpoint. See figure 6 for the
primary employment sectors of committee members who responded to our
survey.

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory
Groups Exempt from FACA

Figure 6: Survey Respondents' Representation by Employment Sector for the
Media Security and Reliability Council

Advocacy or nonprofit organization

Trade association

Other

Private business

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC advisory committee members.

Note: For this committee, we received 25 completed surveys out of 40
survey recipients. Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

Type of output: The committee will have the opportunity to make
recommendations to FCC and to the broadcast and multichannel video
programming distribution industries. According to FCC, the committee
developed best practices recommendations for media companies that help to
ensure the continued operation of service in times of crisis and the
effective communication of emergency information to the public.

Fiscal year 2004 estimated annual operating costs for staff and overhead:
$152,000.

Current subcommittees: (1) Communications Infrastructure Security, Access
and Restoration; and (2) Public Communications and Safety.

Committee Web site: h ttp://www.mediasecurity.org/index.html

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
                                Exempt from FACA

Network Reliability and Interoperability Council

Purpose of the committee: To partner with FCC, the communications
industry, and public safety to facilitate enhancement of emergency
communications networks, homeland security, and best practices across the
burgeoning telecommunications industry.

Effective date of charter: December 29, 2003 (2-year charter).

Committee meetings: Held in Washington, D.C., a minimum of 3 times per
year, open to the public.

Number of members: 55 (all representing members).

Steps taken to select members for the committee: According to the
designated federal officer, FCC solicited certain firms and wanted
participation from chief executive officers. The designated federal
officer stated that a list of potential members is sent to the FCC
chairman for approval.

How the committee achieves balanced membership: According to FCC the
committee includes representatives of all segments of the
telecommunications industry. Its members represent large and small
telecommunications consumers, local and interstate carriers, state
regulators, equipment and software manufacturers, satellite companies,
cable companies, Internet service providers, wireless companies and
research organizations, among others. See figure 7 for the primary
employment sectors of committee members who responded to our survey.

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory
Groups Exempt from FACA

Figure 7: Survey Respondents' Representation by Employment Sector for
Network Reliability and Interoperability Council

3%

Trade union or labor organization

3%

State or local government

3%

Trade association

Federal government

Private business

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC advisory committee members.

Note: For this committee, we received 37 completed surveys out of 54
survey recipients. Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

Type of output: The committee will make recommendations to FCC and to the
communications industry intended to improve telecommunications network
robustness and reliability.

Fiscal year 2004 estimated annual operating costs for staff and overhead:
$202,000.

Current subcommittees: (1) Enhanced 911, (2) Homeland security, (3)
Network best practices, and (4) Broadband.

    Committee Web site: h ttp://www.nric.org

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
                                Exempt from FACA

North American Numbering Council

Purpose of the committee: To advise FCC and to make recommendations that
foster efficient and impartial administration of the North American
Numbering Plan. The Council advises the Commission on numbering policy and
technical issues, initially resolve disputes as directed by the
Commission, and provides guidance to the North American Numbering Plan
Administrator, the Local Number Portability Administrator, the Pooling
Administrator as directed by the Commission.

Effective date of charter: October 4, 2003 (2-year charter).

Committee meetings: Held in Washington D.C., approximately six meetings
per year, open to the public.

Number of members: 28 voting members, 27 alternate members (all
representing).

Steps taken to select members for the committee: According to the
designated federal officer, members are invited from each sector of the
telecommunications market, including wireless, trade, state
representatives, carriers, incumbent local exchange carriers and
competitive local exchange carriers. The designated federal officer said
that members are asked to respond regarding their expertise and experience
in the telecommunications world. Also, according to the official, members
serving on the council from the previous charter were asked if they wanted
to continue serving.

How the committee achieves balanced membership: According to FCC, the
committee balances membership by including representatives from every
sector of the telecommunications industry, as well as members representing
the North American Numbering Plan member countries, state regulators, and
consumers. See figure 8 for the primary employment sectors of committee
members who responded to our survey.

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory
Groups Exempt from FACA

Figure 8: Survey Respondents' Representation by Employment Sector for the
North American Numbering Council

3%

College or university

Advocacy or nonprofit organiztion

Trade association

State or local government

Private business

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC advisory committee members.

Note: For this committee, we received 36 completed surveys out of 49
survey recipients. Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

Type of output: The committee will make recommendations to FCC that foster
efficient and impartial administration of the North American Numbering
Plan, and advise FCC on numbering policy and technical issues.

Fiscal year 2004 estimated annual operating costs for staff and overhead:
$234,000.

Current subcommittees: (1) steering group, (2) number oversight working
group, (3) legal expertise working group, (4) local number portability
working group, (5) cost recovery working group, (6) industry numbering
committee, (7) North American Numbering Plan expansion/numbering
optimization, (8) abbreviated dialing for one call notification issues
management group, (9) North American Portability Management limited
liability corporation, (10) intermediate numbering/soft dial tone issue
management group, (11) contamination threshold issues management group,
and (12) universal service fund issues management group.

Committee Web site: h ttp://www.fcc.gov/wcb/tapd/Nanc

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
                                Exempt from FACA

Technological Advisory Council

Purpose of the committee: To provide technical advice to FCC and address
questions referred to it by the FCC chairman, the chief of the Office of
Engineering and Technology or by the committee's designated federal
officer.

Effective date of charter: November 25, 2002 (2-year charter).

Committee meetings: Held in Washington, D.C., 3 to 5 times per year, open
to the public.

Number of members: 33 (all representing members).

Steps taken to select members for the committee: According to the
committee's designated federal officer, FCC sought individuals with
expertise but also accepted outside nominations. With the selection
process narrowly focused, the designated federal officer and the committee
chairman made the membership decisions.

How the committee achieves balanced membership: According to FCC, members
have been selected to balance the expertise and viewpoints that are
necessary to effectively address the new technology issues that will be
directed to the committee. Members are recognized experts in their fields
and, for private sector companies, individuals who hold technical
executive positions such as Chief Technical Officer or Senior Technical
Manager. See figure 9 for the primary employment sectors of committee
members who responded to our survey.

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory
Groups Exempt from FACA

Figure 9: Survey Respondents' Representation by Employment Sector for the
Technological Advisory Council

Advocacy or nonprofit organiztion

College or university

Private consulting

Private business

Source: GAO survey responses of FCC advisory committee members.

Note: For this committee, we received 24 completed surveys out of 33
survey recipients. Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

Type of output: According to the committee's designated federal officer,
the committee does not make formal recommendations. Rather, their
deliverables are in the form of presentations on emerging technologies
that the chairman of FCC hears during the committee's meetings.

Fiscal year 2004 estimated annual operating costs for staff and overhead:
$201,000.

Current subcommittees: None.

Committee Web site: h ttp://www.fcc.gov/oet/tac

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
                                Exempt from FACA

Joint Board on Jurisdictional Separations

Purpose of the joint board: To make recommendations on apportioning
regulated costs between the interstate and intrastate jurisdictions.

    Year of establishment: 1980.

Meetings: Held at the National Association for Regulatory Utility
Commissioners meetings in varying locations 3 times per year, closed to
the public; occasional en banc meetings are held.

Number of members: 7 (three federal commissioners and four state
commissioners).

Steps taken to select members for the joint board: FCC nominates the
federal commissioners and the National Association for Regulatory Utility
Commissioners nominates the state commissioners. FCC makes the final
selections of joint board members.

Type of output: The joint board makes recommendations to the Commission.
One recommendation resulted in FCC establishing an interim "freeze" on the
jurisdictional separations process.

Budget for fiscal year 2003: FCC allocated $25,000 that is applied towards
travel and other meetings costs.

Joint board Web site: h ttp://www.fcc.gov/wcb/tapd/sep

Joint Board on Universal Service

Purpose of the joint board: To make recommendations to implement the
universal service provisions of the Telecommunications Act.

    Year of establishment: 1996.

Meetings: Held at the National Association for Regulatory Utility
Commissioners meetings in varying locations 3 times per year, closed to
the public; occasional en banc meetings are held.

Number of members: 8 (three federal commissioners, four state
commissioners, and one state consumer public advocate).

Steps taken to select members for the joint board: FCC nominates the
federal commissioners, the National Association for Regulatory Utility

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
                                Exempt from FACA

Joint Conference on Accounting Issues

Commissioners nominates the state commissioners, and the National
Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates nominates a state consumer
public advocate. FCC makes the final selections of joint board members.

Type of output: The joint board makes recommendations to the Commission.
For example, a recommendation to FCC proposed modifications to the
Lifeline/Link-Up program.

Budget for fiscal year 2003: FCC allocated $50,000 that is applied toward
travel and other meetings costs.

    Joint board Web site:

h ttp://www.fcc.gov/wcb/universal_service/JointBoard/welcome.html

Purpose of the joint conference: to review the possible need for changes
to FCC's regulatory accounting rules.

    Year of establishment: 2002.

Meetings: Held at the National Association for Regulatory Utility
Commissioners meetings in varying locations 3 times per year, closed to
the public.

Number of members: 7 (two federal commissioners and five state
commissioners).

Steps taken to select members for the joint conference: FCC nominates the
federal commissioners and the National Association for Regulatory Utility
Commissioners nominates the state commissioners. FCC makes the final
selections of joint board members.

Type of output: The joint conference makes recommendations to the
Commission. For example, a recommendation to FCC proposed revisions to
Part 32 rules to include the reinstatement of certain accounts and the
addition of several new accounts.

Budget for fiscal year 2003: FCC allocated funds from joint board
allocations for this conference. A total of $4,881 applied toward travel
and other meetings costs.

Appendix II Information on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups
                                Exempt from FACA

Joint Conference on Advanced Telecommunications Services

             Joint conference Web site: h ttp://www.fcc.gov/FSJCRAI

Purpose of the joint conference: To fulfill the promise of Section 706 of
the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The joint conference shares ideas,
gathers real-life stories from across the country, and assists the FCC in
its reports to Congress on the deployment of advanced telecommunications
services.

    Year of establishment: 1999.

Meetings: Held at the National Association for Regulatory Utility
Commissioners meetings in varying locations 3 times per year, closed to
the public.

Number of members: 11 (five federal commissioners and six state
commissioners).

Steps taken to select members for the joint conference: FCC nominates the
federal commissioners and the National Association for Regulatory Utility
Commissioners nominates the state commissioners. FCC makes the final
selections of joint board members.

Type of output: The joint conference provides a forum for ongoing
dialogue. The conference has held field hearings across the country to
learn about the deployment of advanced telecommunications services. It
also developed a report on broadband deployment in cooperation with the
Florida Public Service Commission.

Budget for fiscal year 2003: No FCC funds were specifically allocated to
this joint conference.

Joint conference Web site: http:/ /www.fcc.gov/jointconference

Intergovernmental Advisory Committee

Purpose of the committee: To provide guidance to the Commission on issues
of importance to state, local, and tribal governments, as well as to the
Commission. The Committee provides ongoing advice and information to the
Commission on a broad range of telecommunications issues of interest to
state, local, and tribal governments, including cable and local
franchising, public rights-of-way, facilities siting, universal service,

Page 52 GAO-05-36 FCC Federal Advisory Committees Appendix II Information
on FCC's Federal Advisory Committees and Advisory Groups Exempt from FACA

broadband access, barriers to competitive entry, and public safety
communications, for which the Commission explicitly or inherently shares
responsibility or administration with local, county, state, or tribal
governments.

Year of establishment: 1997 (the committee's original name was the Local
State and Government Advisory Committee).

Meetings: Held in Washington, D.C., 4 times per year, closed to the
public.

Number of members: 15 (five state government representatives, seven local
representatives, and three representatives from tribal governments).

Steps taken to select members for the committee: FCC released a public
notice soliciting nominations and selected committee members from among
the nominations.

Type of Output: Recommendations to the Commission. Comments recently filed
as part of an FCC proceeding on Voice Over Internet Protocol.

Budget for fiscal year 2003: No FCC funds were allocated.

Committee Web site: h ttp://www.fcc.gov/statelocal

Appendix III

GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

Q1. How long have you been a member of the committee?
Less than    6 months 1 year to  1  3/4     2 years                        
6                to 1 1  3/4     years to     or                    Number
                                    2                             
months           year      years     years      more No                 of 
                                                        response  
(percent)   (percent)  (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
13.0             21.0       15.5      11.0      38.5       1.0         200 

 Q2. To the best of your knowledge, did you attain membership to the committee
                  through any of the following circumstances?

                                                                       Number
                         Yes         No Don't know  No response            of 
                   (percent) (percent)    (percent)    (percent)  respondents 
a. Personally                                                 
contacted FCC                                                 
about membership     20.0       40.0         1.5         38.5          200 
b. My employer                                                
contacted FCC                                                 
about membership     14.5       42.0         2.0         41.5          200 
c. Solicited for                                              
membership by an                                              
FCC official         40.5       24.0         3.0         32.5          200 
d. Recommended                                                
for membership by                                             
a colleague,                                                  
company, or                                                   
organization         42.5       18.5         9.5         29.5          200 
e. Recommended                                                
for membership by                                             
a member of                                                   
Congress or their                                             
staff                 1.5       43.5         5.5         49.5          200 
f. Other              8.0       14.5         1.0         76.5          200 

          Q3. In which of the following sectors do you primarily work?

                                                                        Total
                                                       Number          number 
                                                           of              of 
                                    Percent respondents           respondents 
a. Private business                 56.0               112             200 
b. A trade                                                 
association                          5.5                11             200 
c. Federal                                                 
government                           6.5                13             200 
d. State or local                                          
government                           8.5                17             200 
e. A college or                                            
university                           3.0                 6             200 

Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

                                                                        Total
                                                       Number          number 
                                                           of              of 
                                     Percent respondents          respondents 
f. Trade union or                                          
labor organization                    0.5                1             200 
g. An advocacy or                                          
nonprofit                                                  
organization                          8.5               17             200 
h. Private consulting                 9.5               19             200 
i. Other ( Please                                          
specify below. )                      1.5                3             200 
j. No response                        0.5                1             200 

Q4. In which of the following industry sectors does your employer work or
                                   represent?

                                                                        Total
                                                                       number
                                                       Number              of 
                                    Percent of respondents        respondents 
a. Wireline local                                          
telephone                           39.8                49             123 
b. Long distance                                           
telephone                           33.3                41             123 
c. Wireless                                                
telephone                           34.1                42             123 
d. Radio                            15.4                19             123 
e. Broadcast                                               
television                          18.7                23             123 
f. Cable or satellite                                      
television                          26.0                32             123 
g. Internet service                 40.7                50             123 
h. Satellite service                15.4                19             123 
i. Equipment                                               
manufacturing                       17.1                21             123 
j. Computer/                                               
software                             7.3                 9             123 
k. Other (Please                                           
specify below.)                     16.3                20             123 

Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

Q5. Approximately how many people does your company employ?
                                                                    Number of 
                                    Mean  Median Minimum Maximum  respondents 
Q5. Approximately how many                                                 
people does your company                                      
employ?                         38,669 13,200       1 230,000          116

Q5no. Check below if you don't know

                                                Number of Percent respondents

4.1 123

Q6. Since your appointment, approximately how many committee meetings have
you attended?

                   Most About half     A few                           Number 
                        the                                       
All         meetings  meetings  meetings  No         No                 of 
meetings                                  meetings   response  
(percent)  (percent) (percent)  (percent)  (percent) (percent) respondents 
43.0            43.0        7.0       5.5        1.0       0.5         200 

 Q7. How important are the following factors in your decision to attend or not
                       attend your committee's meetings?

                  Very Somewhat   Not very                             Number 
             important important important Not         No                  of 
                                           applicable  response   
             (percent) (percent) (percent)   (percent)  (percent) respondents 
a. Amount of                                                   
notice provided                                                
for the                                                        
meetings       42.1      37.1      17.3         1.0        2.5         197 
b. Your                                                        
interest                                                       
in the agenda                                                  
items          41.6      26.4      25.9         3.6        2.5         197 
c. Your other                                                  
commitments    46.2      40.6       8.6         1.0        3.6         197 

       Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

                  Very Somewhat   Not very                             Number 
             important important important Not         No                  of 
                                           applicable  response   
             (percent) (percent) (percent)   (percent)  (percent) respondents 
d. Your costs of                                               
attending                                                      
meetings       10.7      14.7      58.9        11.2        4.6         197 
e. Your                                                        
perception of                                                  
the degree to                                                  
which FCC                                                      
considers your                                                 
committee's                                                    
advice         44.7      30.5      17.3         3.6        4.1         197 
f. Other                                                       
(Please                                                        
specify         5.6       1.0       0.5         2.0       90.9         197 
below.)                                                        

Q8. How much time on a yearly basis do you devote to committee membership
activities (including research and preparation for meetings, travel, and
attending meetings)?

Less than 1                             4 weeks or                  Number 
week          1 to 2 weeks 2 to 3 weeks       more No response          of 
(percent)        (percent)  (percent)    (percent)   (percent) respondents 
12.5                  37.5         23.0       25.0         2.0         200 

    Q9. As a member, what type of advice do you contribute to the committee?

                                                    Number of Total number of 
                                         Percent  respondents     respondents 
a. I contribute my own expert opinion    70.0          140             200 
b. I contribute the opinion of the                                         
organization, company, or institution                      
that I represent                         77.5          155             200
c. Other (Please specify below.)         11.0           22             200 

       Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

Q10. Would you agree or disagree with the following statements as they apply to
                       the composition of your committee?

           Neither agree Strongly No basis to Number Strongly agree Agree nor
          disagree Disagree disagree judge No response of (percent) (percent)
                (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents

a.
           Members represent parties that have an interest in the mission and
           outcome of the committee. 60.5 35.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 200

b.
           Members represent divergent points of view on issues addressed by
           the committee. 53.5 34.0 6.5 4.5 0.0 1.0 0.5 200

c.
           Members have sufficient knowledge and experience to provide input
           on the issues addressed by the committee. 55.5 37.5 4.5 1.5 0.0
           0.5 0.5 200

            Q11. Who sets the agenda for your committee's meetings?

                                                                        Total
                                                      Number           number 
                                                          of               of 
                                   Percent respondents            respondents 
a. Committee                                              
chairperson                        79.5               159              200 
b. FCC                                                    
official(s)                        46.0                92              200 
c. Committee                                              
as a whole                         39.0                78              200 
d. Don't know                       6.0                12              200 
e. Other                                                  
(Please specify                                           
below.)                             5.5                11              200 

       Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

Q12. Do you believe the appropriate party or parties sets the committee's
                                    agenda?

Number Yes No Don't know No response of (percent) (percent) (percent)
(percent) respondents

4.0 5.0 5.0 200

Q13. As a committee member, do you generally have access to the information you
                 need to make an informed decision on an issue?

                                                                       Number
In all        In most In some      In no     Don't   No                 of 
cases           cases cases        cases     know    response  
(percent)   (percent)  (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
29.0             60.5        7.0       0.0       1.5       2.0         200 

 Q14. Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the following aspects
              of the operations and procedures of your committee?

                                              Neither
                            satisfied nor                  Strongly                          Number 
    Very satisfied Satisfied dissatisfied Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't     No                 of 
                                                                    know      response  
         (percent) (percent)    (percent)    (percent)    (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
a. The clarity of                                                                       
your                                                                                    
committee's                                                                             
mission       44.5      41.5          6.5          5.5          0.5       0.5       1.0         200 
b. The                                                                                  
clarity of                                                                              
your                                                                                    
committee's                                                                             
operating                                                                               
rules                                                                                   
and           38.0      49.0          7.5          4.0          0.5       0.0       1.0         200 
procedures                                                                              
c. The                                                                                  
opportunity                                                                             
for                                                                                     
all members                                                                             
to                                                                                      
provide input                                                                           
throughout                                                                              
the                                                                                     
committee                                                                               
process       52.5      35.5          7.0          3.5          0.5       0.0       1.0         200 
d. The use of                                                                           
technology to                                                                           
facilitate                                                                              
meeting                                                                                 
participation 26.5      46.0         17.5          7.5          0.5       1.0       1.0         200 
e. The topics                                                                           
on which your                                                                           
committee is                                                                            
briefed by                                                                              
FCC                                                                                     
officials     24.0      43.0         19.0          6.0          1.0       2.5       4.5         200 

Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

                                              Neither
                            satisfied nor                  Strongly                          Number 
    Very satisfied Satisfied dissatisfied Dissatisfied dissatisfied Don't     No                 of 
                                                                    know      response  
         (percent) (percent)    (percent)    (percent)    (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
f. The                                                                                  
knowledge of                                                                            
FCC officials                                                                           
who brief and                                                                           
support your                                                                            
committee     38.5      41.0         13.5          3.5          0.5       0.5       2.5         200 
g. The amount                                                                           
and quality                                                                             
of                                                                                      
support                                                                                 
provided by                                                                             
FCC (such as                                                                            
staff                                                                                   
support,                                                                                
space,                                                                                  
supplies, and                                                                           
equipment)    39.5      38.5         11.5          4.0          0.5       2.5       3.5         200 
h. The amount                                                                           
of feedback                                                                             
FCC officials                                                                           
seek from                                                                               
committee                                                                               
members                                                                                 
regarding the                                                                           
effectiveness                                                                           
of                                                                                      
the                                                                                     
committee's                                                                             
activities    20.5      36.0         23.5         10.5          1.0       6.0       2.5         200 
i. The                                                                                  
communication                                                                           
from FCC                                                                                
officials                                                                               
regarding how                                                                           
your                                                                                    
committee's                                                                             
advice has                                                                              
affected FCC                                                                            
programs or                                                                             
decision                                                                                
making        17.0      29.5         24.0         16.5          2.5       6.5       4.0         200 
j. The extent                                                                           
to                                                                                      
which your                                                                              
committee                                                                               
fairly                                                                                  
considers                                                                               
both majority                                                                           
and minority                                                                            
opinions      31.0      44.0         15.5          5.5          0.5       2.0       1.5         200 

       Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

     Q15. In terms of formulating committee advice or recommendations, how
              independent do you believe the committee is of FCC?

A little or not Very Moderately at all Number independent independent
independent Don't know No response of (percent) (percent) (percent)
(percent) (percent) respondents

42.0 6.5 2.0 2.5 200

Q16. In terms of formulating committee advice or recommendations, to what
extent do you believe the committee maintains a balance of influence among
various interest groups (such as industry, trade or consumer groups)?

Very                Moderate            Little or                          Number 
great                                      no                         
extent      Great      extent   Some       extent   Don't   No                 of 
           extent              extent               know    response  
(percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
16.5           43.5      21.5       8.5       4.0       3.0       3.0         200 

Q17. Which of the following methods does your committee use to convey its advice
                           or recommendations to FCC?

                                                                       Number
                      Yes          No  Don't know  No response             of 
                (percent)  (percent)     (percent)     (percent)  respondents 
a. Written                                                    
reports           87.0         5.0          4.0           4.0          200 
b.                                                            
Memorandums                                                   
or letters        54.5        13.5          9.5          22.5          200 
c. Oral                                                       
briefings,                                                    
presentations,                                                
or testimonies    74.0         7.0         10.0           9.0          200 
d. Other                                                      
(Please specify                                               
below.)            8.0         2.0          3.0          87.0          200 

Q18. In your opinion, to what extent is the public provided opportunity to
                      express its views to your committee?

Very                Moderate            Little or                          Number 
great                                      no                         
extent      Great      extent   Some       extent   Don't   No                 of 
           extent              extent               know    response  
(percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
20.5           32.0      15.5      10.5      12.0       7.0       2.5         200 

 Q19. To your knowledge, have members of the public (excluding FCC staff) ever
                    expressed their views to the committee?

                                                                       Number
Yes                          No  Don't know   No response               of 
(percent)             (percent)     (percent)      (percent)   respondents 
56.5                       19.0          22.0            2.5           200 

Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

Q20. Does your committee have any subcommittees?
                                                                       Number
Yes                          No   Don't know   No response              of 
(percent)             (percent)   (percent)        (percent)   respondents 
78.5                       15.5            3.5           2.5           200 

 Q21. Were members selected to serve on your committee's subcommittees through
                         any of the following methods?

                                                                       Number
                      Yes          No Don't know   No Response             of 
                (percent)  (percent)     (percent)     (percent)  respondents 
a. Self-selected                                              
(i.e.,                                                        
volunteered)      87.3         2.5          4.5           5.7          157 
b. Committee                                                  
or                                                            
subcommittee                                                  
chairman          53.5        14.0         12.1          20.4          157 
c. FCC                                                        
official(s)       19.1        29.9         22.3          28.7          157 
d. Full                                                       
committee         15.9        36.3         14.6          33.1          157 
e. Other                                                      
(Please specify                                               
below.)            3.8         7.0          1.9          87.3          157 

    Q22. What was the basis for selecting members to serve on subcommittees?

                                                    Number             Total 
                                                        of            number 
                                 Percent respondents          of respondents 
a. Technical                                            
expertise                        74.5               117               157 
b. Industry                                             
representation                   66.9               105               157 
c. Creating fair                                        
balance of                                              
points of views                  55.4                87               157 
d. Don't know                     9.6                15               157 
e. Other                                                
(Please specify                                         
below.)                          14.6                23               157 

               Q23. Have you been a member of any subcommittees?

Yes                                No No response                   Number 
(percent)                   (percent)         (percent)     of respondents 
75.8                             22.9               1.3                157 

       Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

              Q24. How is the work of the subcommittees completed?

                    Number Total of number Percent respondents of respondents

a.
           In-person meetings 80.7 96 119

b.
           Video or audio conferences 86.6 103 119

c.
           E-mail exchanges 92.4 110 119

d.
           Other (Please specify below.) 0.0 0 119

 Q25. In your opinion, to what extent is the public provided an opportunity to
                    express its views to your subcommittees?

Very                Moderate            Little or                          Number 
great                                      no                         
extent      Great      extent   Some       extent   Don't   No                 of 
           extent              extent               know    response  
(percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
9.2            17.6      18.5      11.8      33.6       7.6       1.7         119 

Q26. To your knowledge, have members of the public ever expressed their views to
                               the subcommittees?

                                                                       Number
Yes                          No  Don't know   No response               of 
(percent)             (percent)     (percent)      (percent)   respondents 
39.5                       37.8          17.6            5.0           119 

Q27. Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied have you been with the operation of
                              your subcommittees?

                                    Neither
                   satisfied nor                      Very                Number 
Very      Satisfied dissatisfied Dissatisfied dissatisfied No                 of 
satisfied                                                  response  
(percent) (percent)    (percent)    (percent)    (percent) (percent) respondents 
37.0           42.9         14.3          2.5          0.8       2.5         119 

Q28. In your experience-given the understanding that the full committee
approves all subcommittee advice and recommendations- what is the balance
of work between the full committee and subcommittees with regard to
output?

                                       More work by Entirely work of
           More work by Equal balance           the subcommittees
Entirely       the full  between full subcommittees with approval
work                                                
of full       committee committee and     than full  from the     Don't                Number 
                   than                                  full                     
committee subcommittees subcommittees     committee committee      know No                 of 
                                                                        response  
(percent)     (percent)     (percent)     (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
0.6                 3.2          10.8          46.5      32.5       3.2       3.2         157 

       Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

     Q29. To what extent does the committee deliberate the proposals of the
                   subcommittees before they are voted upon?

Very great Moderate extent Great extent extent Some extent (percent)
(percent) (percent) (percent)

     Little or no Number extent Don't know No response of (percent) (percent)
                                                        (percent) respondents

                      11.5 31.8 24.8 13.4 7.0 8.3 3.2 157

 Q30. Does your committee's work influence FCC policy or operations through any
                          of the following mechanisms?

                                                                       Number
                       Yes          No  Don't know  No response            of 
                 (percent)  (percent)     (percent)    (percent)  respondents 
a. Committee                                                  
briefs FCC                                                    
commissioners      41.0        28.0         24.0          7.0          200 
b. Committee                                                  
briefs FCC                                                    
senior staff       64.5        11.5         17.5          6.5          200 
c. Committee                                                  
testifies before                                              
the FCC at                                                    
hearings            7.5        47.5         31.0         14.0          200 
d. Committee                                                  
work results in                                               
an issuance of                                                
a Notice of                                                   
Inquiry            22.0        29.0         30.0         19.0          200 
e. Committee                                                  
work results in                                               
an issuance of                                                
a Notice of                                                   
Proposed                                                      
Rulemaking         24.5        29.0         29.5         17.0          200 
f. Committee                                                  
submits                                                       
comments in                                                   
an ongoing                                                    
FCC                                                           
proceeding         26.5        31.0         25.5         17.0          200 
g. Other                                                      
(Please specify                                               
below.)            13.0         1.5          1.5         84.0          200 

       Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

Q31. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the extent to which FCC
takes your committee's advice and recommendations into account when
developing policy or making changes in operations?

  Neither

satisfied nor Very Very satisfied Satisfied dissatisfied Dissatisfied
dissatisfied (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)

             Number Don't know No response of (percent) (percent) respondents

                       12.5 41.5 27.0 6.5 2.0 8.0 2.5 200

Q33. Are setting or changing voluntary industry standards an output of
your committee? (Voluntary industry standards are those not mandated by
FCC.)

                                                                       Number
Yes                          No  Don't know   No response               of 
(percent)             (percent)     (percent)      (percent)   respondents 
54.0                       35.0           7.0            4.0           200 

Q34. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the effectiveness and
impact of your committee to set or change voluntary industry standards?

                                         Neither
                   satisfied nor                      Very                          Number 
Very      Satisfied dissatisfied Dissatisfied dissatisfied   Don't   No                 of 
satisfied                                                    know    response  
(percent) (percent)    (percent)    (percent)  (percent)   (percent) (percent) respondents 
15.7           45.4         22.2          9.3          0.9       3.7       2.8         108 

Q36. Thinking over your entire tenure on the committee, to what extent
would you characterize FCC as receptive to the advice and recommendations
of your committee?

Very                Moderate            Little or                          Number 
great                                      no                         
extent      Great      extent   Some       extent   Don't   No                 of 
           extent              extent               know    response  
(percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
18.5           43.0      21.0       8.0       2.0       6.0       1.5         200 

Q37. Thinking over your entire tenure on the committee, to what extent
would you characterize industry as receptive to the advice and
recommendations of your committee?

Very                Moderate            Little or                          Number 
great                                      no                         
extent      Great      extent   Some       extent   Don't   No                 of 
           extent              extent               know    response  
(percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
11.0           35.5      27.5      10.5       2.5      10.0       3.0         200 

Q38. Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your experience serving
                               on the committee?

                                         Neither
                   satisfied nor                      Very                          Number 
Very      Satisfied dissatisfied Dissatisfied dissatisfied   Don't   No                 of 
satisfied                                                    know    response  
(percent) (percent)    (percent)    (percent)    (percent) (percent) (percent) respondents 
32.5           49.5         10.5          6.5          0.0       0.5       0.5         200 

       Appendix III GAO Survey of FCC Federal Advisory Committee Members

  Q39. If invited, would you be interested in serving on this committee again?

Number Yes No Don't know No response of (percent) (percent) (percent)
(percent) respondents

2.0 8.5 0.0 200

Note: Questions 32, 35, and 40 of the survey were comment boxes for
written narrative so the results are not displayed.

Appendix IV

Comments from the Federal Communications Commission

Appendix IV Comments from the Federal Communications Commission

Appendix V

Comments from the Office of Government Ethics

Appendix V Comments from the Office of Government Ethics

GAO's Mission

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts GAO
Reports and newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its
Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

                             Order by Mail or Phone

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061

Contact:

To Report Fraud, Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: [email protected]

Federal Programs Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202)
512-7470

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Relations
Washington, D.C. 20548

Susan Becker, Acting Manager, [email protected] (202) 512-4800

Public Affairs

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
*** End of document. ***