This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-12-74 
entitled 'Electronic Waste: Actions Needed to Provide Assurance That 
Used Federal Electronics Are Disposed of in an Environmentally 
Responsible Manner' which was released on March 19, 2012. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

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. 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. 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

Report to the Ranking Member, Committee on Oversight and Government 
Reform, House of Representatives: 

February 2012: 

Electronic Waste: 

Actions Needed to Provide Assurance That Used Federal Electronics Are 
Disposed of in an Environmentally Responsible Manner: 

GAO-12-74: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-12-74, a report to the Ranking Member, Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that across the 
federal government 10,000 computers are discarded each week. Once 
these used electronics reach the end of their original useful lives, 
federal agencies have several options for disposing of them. Agencies 
generally can donate their reusable electronics to schools; give them 
to a recycler; exchange them with other federal, state, or local 
agencies; or sell them through selected public auctions, including 
auctions sponsored by the General Services Administration (GSA). As 
the world’s largest purchaser of information technology, the U.S. 
government, through its disposition practices, has substantial 
leverage to influence domestic recycling and disposal practices. GAO 
was asked to examine (1) key initiatives aimed at improving the 
management of used federal electronics and (2) improvements resulting 
from these initiatives and challenges that impede progress, if any. To 
do this, GAO evaluated federal guidance and policy, as well as 
guidance and initiatives at five selected agencies. GAO selected 
agencies based on, among other things, the amount of electronics 
purchased. 

What GAO Found: 

Over the past decade, the executive branch has taken steps to improve 
the management of used federal electronics. Notably, in 2003, EPA 
helped to pilot the Federal Electronics Challenge (FEC)—a voluntary 
partnership program that encourages federal facilities and agencies to 
purchase environmentally friendly electronic products, reduce the 
impacts of these products during their use, and manage used 
electronics in an environmentally safe way. EPA also led an effort and 
provided initial funding to develop third-party certification so that 
electronics recyclers could show that they are voluntarily adhering to 
an adopted set of best practices for environmental protection, worker 
health and safety, and security practices. In 2006, GSA issued its 
Personal Property Disposal Guide to assist agencies in understanding 
the hierarchy for disposing of excess personal property, including 
used electronic products: reutilization, donation, sale, and 
abandonment or destruction. In 2007 and 2009, executive orders were 
issued that, among other things, established improvement goals and 
directed agencies to develop and implement improvement plans for the 
management of used electronics. The Office of Management and Budget, 
the Council on Environmental Quality, and the Office of the Federal 
Environmental Executive each play important roles in providing 
leadership, oversight, and guidance to assist federal agencies with 
implementing the requirements of these executive orders. To lay the 
groundwork for enhancing the federal government’s management of used 
electronic products, an interagency task force issued the July 2011 
National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship. The strategy, which 
describes goals, action items, and projects, assigns primary 
responsibility for overseeing or carrying out most of the projects to 
either EPA or GSA. 

Federal agencies have made some progress to improve their management 
of used electronic products, as measured by greater participation in 
the FEC and an increase in certified electronics recyclers, but 
opportunities exist to expand their efforts. For instance, agency 
participation in the FEC represents only about one-third of the 
federal workforce. GAO identified challenges with the tracking and 
reporting on the disposition of federal electronic equipment. For the 
five agencies GAO reviewed (Departments of Defense, Energy, Education, 
and Housing and Urban Development and the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration), data provided on the disposition of electronic 
products were inconsistent, which hampered GAO’s efforts to accurately 
assess the extent to which electronic products procured by federal 
agencies are disposed of in an environmentally sound manner. 
Challenges associated with clarifying agencies’ responsibility for 
used electronics sold through auctions also remain. Currently, neither 
the agency nor the auction entities are required to determine whether 
purchasers follow environmentally sound end-of-life practices. Not 
having controls over the ultimate disposition of electronics sold 
through these auctions creates opportunities for buyers to purchase 
federal electronics and export them to countries with less stringent 
environmental and health standards. Other challenges that may impede 
progress toward improving federal agencies’ management of used 
electronics include defining key terms such as “electronic product” 
and “environmentally sound practices,” as each agency uses its own 
definition of electronic products to report progress in implementing 
policies for electronics stewardship. 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO recommends, among other things, that the White House Council on 
Environmental Quality, the Office of Management and Budget, and GSA 
take actions to require consistent tracking and reporting of used 
electronics and ensure appropriate management of electronics sold at 
auction. Each agency concurred with GAO’s recommendations but, in some 
instances, proposed alternatives for executing the recommendations. 

View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-74]. For more 
information, contact Frank Rusco at (202) 512-3841 or ruscof@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Background: 

Key Initiatives to Improve Federal Agencies' Management of Used 
Electronic Products Have Been Launched over the Past 10 Years: 

The Management of Used Federal Electronics Has Improved and 
Opportunities Exist for Further Improvements, but Challenges Remain: 

Conclusions: 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology: 

Appendix II: Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency: 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Related GAO Products: 

Figure: 

Figure 1: Electronics Recycling Facilities Certified to the R2 or e-
Stewards Standard, as of September 30, 2011: 

Abbreviations: 

CEQ: Council on Environmental Quality: 

DLA: Defense Logistics Agency: 

DOD: Department of Defense: 

DOE: Department of Energy: 

Education: Department of Education: 

EPA: Environmental Protection Agency: 

FEC: Federal Electronics Challenge: 

FMR: Federal Management Regulation: 

GSA: General Services Administration: 

HUD: Department of Housing and Urban Development: 

NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration: 

OFEE: Office of the Federal Environmental Executive: 

OMB: Office of Management and Budget: 

R2: Responsible Recycling: 

[End of section] 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

February 17, 2012: 

The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform: 
House of Representatives: 

Dear Mr. Cummings: 

Rapid advances in technology have led to increasing sales of new 
electronic products, such as computers, computer monitors, 
televisions, and cell phones. These electronic products have created 
new business opportunities, new ways to communicate, and a new way of 
conducting business in both the private and public sectors. These 
advances, however, have also created new environmental challenges. As 
we have previously reported, electronic products may contain toxic 
substances--such as cadmium, lead, and mercury--that can leach into 
soil or groundwater if improperly managed.[Footnote 1] As the world's 
largest purchaser of information technology--spending about $80 
billion in fiscal year 2010--the U.S. government, through its 
disposition practices, has substantial leverage to influence domestic 
recycling, reuse, and disposal practices. However, if the federal 
government's used electronics are not appropriately managed, they 
could be disposed of in landfills domestically or exported to 
countries that have less strict environmental and safety protections. 
[Footnote 2] Studies have shown that used electronic products exported 
from the United States to some countries are often dismantled under 
unsafe health conditions, using methods like acid baths to extract 
precious metals or open-air incineration. For example, we reported in 
2008 that, while some exports of used electronic products can be 
handled responsibly in countries with effective regulatory regimes and 
by companies with advanced technologies, some used electronic products 
owned by federal agencies have been sent to developing countries where 
disposal practices are unsafe to workers and dangerous to the 
environment.[Footnote 3] 

Over the past decade, the executive branch has taken steps to improve 
the management of used federal electronics. For example, in 2007 and 
2009, executive orders were issued to strengthen federal agencies' 
overall environmental management practices, including environmentally 
sound management of federal electronic products, from procurement 
through disposal--often referred to as electronics 
stewardship.[Footnote 4] Recently, we issued two reports that 
discussed elements of electronics stewardship outlined in the 
executive orders related to the use of federal electronics, including 
requirements to manage federal data centers in a more energy-efficient 
manner and implement power management policies for computers.[Footnote 
5] 

You requested that we review the status of federal initiatives to 
appropriately manage the disposition of used electronic products--that 
is, selling, donating, recycling, and disposing of federal 
electronics. Our objectives were to examine (1) key initiatives aimed 
at improving the management of used federal electronics and (2) 
improvements resulting from these initiatives and challenges that 
impede progress, if any. 

To address the first objective, we reviewed guidance and documents 
regarding improvement initiatives led by the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA); analyzed the electronics stewardship requirements 
contained in the applicable executive orders and implementing 
instructions; the Federal Acquisition Regulation, which governs the 
process through which the federal government acquires goods and 
services; the Federal Management Regulation (FMR), which, among other 
things, regulates the disposal of federal personal property, including 
electronics;[Footnote 6] the General Services Administration's (GSA) 
Personal Property Disposal Guide, which serves as an index and quick-
reference guide to personal property management provisions in the FMR; 
and other relevant electronics stewardship guidance. 

To address the second objective, we selected a nonprobability sample 
of five federal agencies--the Departments of Defense (DOD), Energy 
(DOE), Education (Education), and Housing and Urban Development (HUD); 
and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)--to 
examine how the federal policy framework is carried out in those 
agencies. We selected DOD, DOE, and NASA because they each 
participated to some extent in EPA's Federal Electronics Challenge 
(FEC) program and purchased large amounts of electronic products--
ranking first, eighth, and tenth, respectively, in terms of overall 
federal agency information technology spending in fiscal year 2010. We 
selected Education because, according to the FEC program manager, the 
agency actively participates in the FEC and centrally manages its 
electronics procurement and disposal functions. We selected HUD 
because the agency was not participating in the FEC. Because we based 
the selection of agencies on a nonprobability sample, the information 
we obtained is not generalizable to all federal agencies. However, 
since the nonprobability sample consists of a cross-section of 
agencies of different sizes and levels of participation in the FEC, 
the evaluation of these five agencies provides examples of different 
procurement and disposition methods for electronics. We also obtained 
data on GSA's federal excess personal property utilization, donation, 
and sales programs for fiscal year 2010 to determine, for agencies 
using these programs, the extent to which they utilized each 
disposition method for their used electronics. We also designed and 
implemented a data collection instrument to collect data from the five 
selected agencies on how they disposed of electronic products for 
fiscal years 2009 and 2010. We attempted to resolve inconsistencies in 
the data provided through these efforts, but we determined that the 
data were not sufficiently reliable for the purpose of reporting on 
amounts of electronics disposed of by the five agencies or the extent 
to which agencies reutilize, donate, and sell used electronics through 
GSA's federal excess personal property programs. We discuss these data 
problems in our report. We also met with officials responsible for 
procuring and disposing of electronic products for the five federal 
agencies, and we conducted site visits to the Kennedy Space Center in 
Cape Canaveral, Florida, and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Aviation 
in Richmond, Virginia, to discuss the procurement and disposition of 
electronic products. We also visited three recycling facilities that 
have a role in electronics recycling at federal agencies and 
interviewed facility officials about recycling procedures. We examined 
key provisions of the July 2011 National Strategy for Electronics 
Stewardship and compared them with existing policies for electronics 
stewardship. We also obtained information from the FEC program's 
manager, officials within each of the five agencies, and seven 
champions for the FEC program regarding challenges that may affect 
agency participation in electronics stewardship initiatives. Details 
of our scope and methodology are in appendix I. 

We conducted this performance audit from October 2010 to January 2012 
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 
that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

Background: 

As we have reported previously, EPA estimates that across the federal 
government 10,000 computers are disposed of each week.[Footnote 7] 
Once these used electronics reach the end of their original useful 
lives, federal agencies have several options for disposing of them. 
Agencies generally are to donate their used electronics to schools or 
other nonprofit educational institutions; exchange them with other 
federal, state, or local agencies; sometimes trade them with vendors 
to offset the costs of new equipment; sell them--generally through the 
GSA's surplus property program, which sells surplus federal government 
equipment, including used federal electronics, at public auctions; or 
give them to a recycler. 

Federal agencies, however, are not required to track the ultimate 
destination of their donated or recycled used electronic products. 
Instead, agency officials generally consider this to be the recipient 
organization's responsibility. Consequently, federal agencies often 
have little assurance that their used electronics are ultimately 
disposed of in an environmentally responsible manner. In our prior 
work, we found that little information exists, for example, on whether 
obsolete electronic products are reused, stored, or disposed of in 
landfills.[Footnote 8] If discarded domestically with common trash, a 
number of adverse environmental impacts may result, including the 
potential for harmful substances such as cadmium, lead, and mercury to 
enter the environment. If donated or recycled, these products may 
eventually be irresponsibly exported to countries without modern 
landfills and with waste management systems that are less protective 
of human health and the environment than those in the United States. 
For example, in our prior work we found that some U.S. electronics 
recyclers--including ones that publicly tout their exemplary 
environmental practices--were apparently willing to circumvent U.S. 
hazardous waste export laws and export certain regulated used 
electronic products to developing countries.[Footnote 9] 

The federal government's approach to ensuring environmentally 
responsible management of used electronics has relied heavily on EPA's 
FEC initiative, which, among other things, encourages federal 
facilities and agencies to manage used electronics in an 
environmentally safe way. In addition, executive orders were issued to 
strengthen federal agencies' overall environmental management 
practices, including environmentally sound management of federal 
electronic products. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the 
White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), and the Office of 
the Federal Environmental Executive (OFEE) each play important roles 
in providing leadership, oversight, and guidance to assist federal 
agencies with implementing the requirements of these executive orders. 
[Footnote 10] More recently, an interagency task force issued the July 
2011 National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship,[Footnote 11] which 
is intended to lay the groundwork for enhancing the federal 
government's management of used electronics. 

Key Initiatives to Improve Federal Agencies' Management of Used 
Electronic Products Have Been Launched over the Past 10 Years: 

Over the past decade, the executive branch has undertaken several 
initiatives to improve federal agencies' management of used 
electronics. Specifically, (1) EPA has led or coordinated several 
improvement initiatives and issued guidance aimed at improving the 
management of used federal electronic products, (2) GSA has issued 
personal property disposal guidance and instituted new requirements 
for electronics recyclers it has contracted with to dispose of federal 
electronic products, (3) the President has issued executive orders 
that established goals for improving the management of used federal 
electronics, and (4) an interagency task force issued the July 2011 
National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship, which is intended to 
lay the groundwork for enhancing the federal government's management 
of used electronics. 

EPA Has Led Initiatives Aimed at Improving the Management of Used 
Federal Electronics: 

EPA has led or coordinated several key improvement initiatives to 
assist agencies with the management of used federal electronics, 
including the FEC, the Federal Electronics Stewardship Working Group, 
and the establishment of electronics recycler standards for use in 
certification programs. 

Federal Electronics Challenge. In 2003, EPA, along with several other 
agencies, piloted the FEC.[Footnote 12] The FEC is a voluntary 
partnership program that encourages federal facilities and agencies to 
purchase environmentally friendly electronic products, reduce the 
impacts of these products during their use, and manage used 
electronics in an environmentally safe way. To participate, executive 
branch agencies or their facilities must register and sign an agency 
pledge to become an agency or facility FEC partner, or both. In 
general, agency partners are responsible for supporting their 
facilities' efforts but do not have specific reporting requirements. 
Facility partners are required to submit a baseline survey of their 
electronics stewardship activities when they join the program. The 
survey is to include, among other things, a description of (1) what 
the entity does with electronic products that are no longer used; (2) 
which electronics recycling services it uses; and (3) what, if any, 
measures the entity has taken to ensure that the electronic products 
were recycled in an environmentally sound manner.[Footnote 13] 
Facility partners are also expected to report progress annually, and 
apply for recognition through FEC awards. 

FEC guidance directs participants to provide recipients of donated 
electronics with instructions on how to have the electronics recycled 
responsibly and how to verify that responsible recycling occurs--
procedures known as "downstream auditing." When donating used 
electronics, FEC instructs agencies and facilities to ensure that 
recipients contact local or state environmental or solid waste 
agencies to obtain a database of vendors who recycle used electronics 
once the equipment is no longer useful to the recipient organization. 
FEC also recommends that participating agencies and facilities 
instruct recipients to avoid arrangements with recyclers that are 
unable or unwilling to share references and cannot explain the final 
destination of the used electronics they collect. When recycling 
electronics, participants are to determine how much electronic 
equipment the recyclers actually recycle compared with the amount they 
sell to other parties. In addition, FEC instructs participants to 
physically inspect a potential recycler's facilities. Used electronics 
in trash containers, for example, may indicate that the facility is 
not recycling it, and the presence of shipping containers may indicate 
that the facility exports it. 

To assist FEC partners, "FEC champions" are available to help regional 
federal facilities with their electronics management programs. FEC 
champions are EPA representatives who are selected based on geographic 
representation. Champions help federal facilities become FEC facility 
partners; access resources for managing electronic products, including 
FEC program information, fact sheets, and limited technical 
assistance; and receive recognition for improving electronics 
management programs. 

The Federal Electronics Stewardship Working Group. This working group 
coordinates interagency efforts to promote federal electronics 
stewardship. It also acts as an advisory board for the FEC program. 
During the working group's monthly meetings, federal agencies have the 
opportunity to discuss best practices for implementing the FEC and 
other electronics stewardship initiatives within their respective 
agencies. The FEC Program Manager told us the working group meetings 
serve as a primary mechanism to facilitate communication with agency 
management regarding the FEC program. Most executive agencies have at 
least one representative serving with the working group. 

Standards for certification of recyclers. EPA has worked with the 
recycling industry and other entities to promote partnership programs 
that address the environmentally sound management of used electronic 
products. As we reported in July 2010, EPA convened electronics 
manufacturers, recyclers, and other stakeholders and provided funding 
to develop Responsible Recycling (R2) practices, so that electronics 
recyclers could obtain certification to show that they are voluntarily 
adhering to the adopted set of best practices for environmental 
protection, worker health and safety, and security practices.[Footnote 
14] Certification for R2 practices became available in late 2009. The 
R2 practices identify "focus materials" in used electronic products, 
such as cathode-ray tubes or items containing mercury, that warrant 
greater care owing to their toxicity and associated risk if managed 
without the appropriate safeguards. Specifically, the practices 
require that recyclers and each vendor in the recycling chain (1) 
export products and components containing certain materials only to 
countries that can legally accept them, (2) document the legality of 
such exports, and (3) ensure that the material is being safely handled 
throughout the recycling chain. R2 practices also establish a "reuse, 
recover, dispose" hierarchy along the chain of custody for material 
handling. These practices require recyclers to test electronics 
diverted for reuse, and confirm that key functions of the unit are 
working before it may be exported. Without such testing and 
confirmation, these used electronics must be treated as though they 
are going to recycling and may not be exported unless the R2 exporting 
provisions for recycling are satisfied. Recognizing that some clients 
would not want their used electronics remarketed or reused, R2 
practices also require recyclers to have systems in place to ensure 
that all such electronics processed can be recycled, rather than 
recovered for reuse. 

EPA encourages electronics recyclers to obtain certification to either 
R2 practices, or to e-Stewards, a separate voluntary certification 
program. e-Stewards was initiated by the Basel Action Network in 2008, 
and the first e-Stewards-certified facilities were announced in early 
2010.[Footnote 15] The length and cost of the e-Stewards certification 
process depends on a facility's size and whether it has a documented 
environmental management system in place.[Footnote 16] 

GSA Has Issued Personal Property Disposal Guidance and Instituted New 
Requirements for Electronics Recyclers Listed on GSA's Contract 
Schedule: 

In March 2006, to assist agencies in understanding the requirements 
associated with personal property disposal, GSA published the Personal 
Property Disposal Guide.[Footnote 17] Federal law requires that 
executive agencies, as much as possible, obtain needed goods, 
including electronic products, by using existing agency property or by 
obtaining excess property from other federal agencies in lieu of new 
purchases.[Footnote 18] According to the GSA guide, agencies should 
follow a hierarchy for disposing of excess personal property, 
including used electronic products: reutilization, donation, sale, and 
abandonment or destruction. 

* Reutilization. In general, all excess personal property,[Footnote 
19] including used electronic products, should be reported to GSA--
preferably through the GSAXcess website. Personal property registered 
on the site is then available to other federal agencies and eligible 
state and nonprofit recipients who are seeking such property. 

* Donation. If computers and other electronic products cannot be 
reused internally or by another federal entity, an agency can also 
donate these products directly to a school or other eligible nonprofit 
organization through the Computers for Learning program.[Footnote 
20],[Footnote 21] If a school declines the offer, the products must be 
reported to GSA for possible donation through the Federal Surplus 
Personal Property Donation Program.[Footnote 22] 

* Sales. If an agency's property is not transferred or donated, it can 
be sold through public auctions. For example, the GSA Auctions® 
website offers the general public the opportunity to bid 
electronically on a wide array of federal assets, including used 
federal electronic products. Registered participants may bid on a 
single item or multiple items (lots) within specified time frames. In 
addition, in some cases federal agencies can sell their used 
electronic products on other internet auction sites. 

* Abandonment or destruction. An agency is allowed to abandon or 
destroy property, including used electronics, if an agency official 
determines that (1) the property has no commercial value, either as an 
item or as scrap; or (2) the cost of care, handling, and preparation 
of the property for sale would be greater than the expected sales 
proceeds.[Footnote 23] 

More recently, GSA has instituted new requirements for electronics 
recyclers listed on the GSA Schedule.[Footnote 24] In February 2011, 
GSA began requiring proof of certification under either R2 or e-
Stewards for new vendors seeking to provide recycling or disposal 
services for used electronic products under GSA's environmental 
services schedule.[Footnote 25] According to GSA officials, they also 
identified 5 vendors, out of the 58 vendors on the schedule at that 
time, that were performing recycling or disposal services for used 
electronic products and provided these vendors with modified contract 
terms--making R2 or e-Stewards certification within 6 months a 
condition for performing these services under the GSA schedule. 

Executive Orders Issued in 2007 and 2009 Established Goals for 
Improving The Management of Used Federal Electronics: 

In January 2007, Executive Order 13423 established goals for federal 
agencies to improve the management of their used electronic products. 
Among other things, the executive order required that agency heads (1) 
establish and implement policies to extend the useful life of 
agencies' electronic equipment and (2) ensure the agency uses 
environmentally sound practices with respect to the disposition of the 
agency's electronic equipment that has reached the end of its useful 
life. Furthermore, the instructions for implementing the executive 
order, issued on March 28, 2007, called for each agency to develop and 
submit to OFEE by May 1, 2007, an electronics stewardship plan to 
implement electronics stewardship practices for all eligible owned or 
leased electronic products. Among other things, the plans were to 
address how agencies will ensure that all electronic products no 
longer needed by an agency are reused, donated, sold, or recycled 
using environmentally sound management practices at end of life. The 
implementing instructions called for agencies' plans to: 

* comply with GSA procedures for the transfer, donation, sale, and 
recycling of electronic products (discussed above), as well as any 
applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations; and: 

* use national standards, best management practices, or a national 
certification program for electronics recyclers. 

The implementing instructions for Executive Order 13423 also directed 
each agency and its facilities to participate in the FEC or to 
implement an equivalent electronics stewardship program that addresses 
the purchase, operation and maintenance, and end-of-life management 
strategies for electronic products consistent with the FEC's 
recommended practices and guidelines. 

In October 2009, Executive Order 13514 built on the previous executive 
order but included slightly different goals for electronics 
stewardship. Executive Order 13514 calls for agencies to develop, 
implement, and annually update strategic sustainability performance 
plans to specify how they intend to achieve the goals of the order. 
Agencies were required to submit fiscal year 2010 plans to CEQ and OMB 
by June 2010. Executive Order 13514, however, did not supersede or 
revoke the earlier executive order, and that order's goals and 
requirements remain in effect.[Footnote 26] 

The National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship Aims to Improve the 
Federal Government's Management of Used Electronics: 

In July 2011, an interagency task force,[Footnote 27] co-chaired by 
CEQ, EPA, and GSA, issued the National Strategy for Electronics 
Stewardship, which describes goals, action items, and projects that 
are intended to lay the groundwork for enhancing the federal 
government's management of used electronic products, among other 
things. The strategy assigns primary responsibility for overseeing or 
carrying out most of the projects to either EPA or GSA. Most of the 
projects are scheduled for completion from summer 2011 through spring 
2013. Among other things, the strategy directs GSA to issue: 

* through interagency collaboration and with public input, a 
comprehensive and governmentwide policy on used federal electronic 
products that maximizes reuse, clears data and information stored on 
used equipment, and ensures that all federal electronic products are 
processed by certified recyclers; and: 

* revised reporting guidance to improve federal agencies' tracking of 
used federal electronic products throughout their life cycle and to 
post comprehensive data on Data.gov and other publicly accessible 
websites.[Footnote 28] 

The strategy also recommends that the federal government: 

* require and enable recipients of used federal equipment that has 
been sold, transferred, or donated for reuse to use certified 
recyclers and follow other environmentally sound practices to the 
greatest extent possible; and: 

* encourage electronics manufacturers to expand their product take-
back programs, and use certified recyclers as a minimum standard in 
those programs by expanding the use of manufacturer take-back 
agreements in federal electronics purchase, rental, and service 
contracts.[Footnote 29] 

The Management of Used Federal Electronics Has Improved and 
Opportunities Exist for Further Improvements, but Challenges Remain: 

According to our review of agency documents and discussions with 
agency officials, federal agencies have made some progress to improve 
their management of used electronic products, as measured by greater 
participation in the FEC and an increase in certified electronics 
recyclers, but opportunities exist to expand their efforts. In 
addition, challenges remain that may impede agencies' progress toward 
further improving their management of used federal electronics, 
including in the tracking and reporting of data on the disposition of 
used federal electronics, in clarifying agencies' responsibility for 
used electronics sold through auctions, and in clarifying definitions 
for key terms and reconciling differences between the executive orders. 

FEC Participation Has Grown, and Opportunities Exist to Increase 
Participation: 

Since we first reported on the FEC in November 2005,[Footnote 30] 
participation has grown from 12 agencies and 61 individual facilities 
to 19 agencies and 253 individual facilities, as of September 2011. 
However, participation still represents only about one-third of the 
federal workforce and, in some cases, participation means that an 
agency has identified its current practices for managing electronic 
products and set goals to improve them but has not reported on 
progress toward achieving these goals as required. Specifically, only 
a little more than half of the agencies and facilities that were 
registered as FEC partners submitted an annual accomplishment report 
in 2010 to demonstrate the agency or facility's progress in 
electronics stewardship; these reports are a key component of actively 
participating as a partner. Because FEC participation is voluntary, 
EPA officials said EPA has no authority to require agencies to report 
on their progress. As a result, the extent to which agencies that do 
not report progress are reaching their goals is unknown. However, the 
FEC program manager told us that with a recent change in policy, FEC 
facility partners that do not submit their fiscal year 2011 annual 
reporting form by January 31, 2012, will be considered inactive. An 
FEC official stated that despite increased efforts to market the 
program, some agencies find the FEC's reporting requirements to be 
time-consuming. 

For the five agencies we reviewed, participation in FEC varied. 
Specifically: 

* DOD participates in the FEC as an agency partner, but the majority 
of its installations or facilities do not participate. According to 
EPA data, 16 of DOD's approximately 5,000 installations participate in 
the FEC. DOD officials told us that they are conducting outreach to 
encourage installations to participate but that some installations may 
not participate because officials believe that the registration 
process is too rigorous and burdensome. 

* NASA centers are allowed to participate in the FEC, but they are not 
required to do so because other agency initiatives accomplish the same 
goals, according to agency officials. Three of NASA's 10 centers 
participate in the FEC. 

* HUD does not participate in the FEC. We found that agency officials 
did not understand the FEC participation requirements. HUD's 
electronics stewardship plan states that HUD participates in the FEC, 
but an EPA official, who is responsible for the FEC program, told us 
that HUD never registered to become a partner--which involves 
submitting a baseline survey of the agency's electronics stewardship 
activities. In our discussions with HUD officials, we found that they 
were not aware of the FEC registration or reporting requirements and 
continued to believe that the agency was participating. 

* DOE officials promote FEC participation, submit annual 
accomplishment reports, and actively participate in the FEC awards 
program. According to agency officials, over a 6-year period, 23 DOE 
facilities have won FEC awards, with many winning multiple times. All 
but two DOE facilities participate. 

* Education participates in the FEC as an agency and facility partner. 
However, because it centrally manages the purchasing and disposition 
of electronics, Education submits annual accomplishment reports for 
the agency as a whole. 

For those agencies or facilities that actively participate in the FEC, 
participation can provide federal officials with the information and 
resources[Footnote 31] needed to provide greater assurance that their 
used electronics are disposed of in an environmentally responsible 
manner, according to EPA documents. For the five agencies we reviewed, 
officials at agencies or facilities that actively participated in the 
FEC said that the FEC provided invaluable support. For example, 
according to DOD officials at one installation, the information 
sharing that is facilitated through the FEC is one of the biggest 
benefits of participation--when faced with a problem, the FEC can 
provide information from other agencies that have faced comparable 
problems. Similarly, Education officials told us that membership in 
Federal Electronics Stewardship Working Group was very helpful. In 
addition, DOE officials said that they have had much success with the 
FEC program and that the FEC awards program has motivated many DOE 
facilities to participate in electronics recycling. 

The Number of Certified Recyclers Has Grown and Opportunities Exist 
for Agencies to Increase Their Use: 

Since the R2 and e-Stewards certification processes were made 
available in 2009 and 2010, respectively, the number of certified 
recyclers in the United States has grown greatly. From September 2010 
to September 2011, the number of electronics recycling facilities 
certified to the R2 standard increased from 15 to 122 and the number 
of facilities certified to the e-Stewards standard grew from 6 to 40. 
Figure 1 shows the locations of the electronics recycling facilities 
in the United States that have obtained third-party certification as 
of September 30, 2011. 

Figure 1: Electronics Recycling Facilities Certified to the R2 or e-
Stewards Standard, as of September 30, 2011: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustrated U.S. map] 

Map depicts the locations of E-Recyclers throughout the nation. 

Source: GAO analysis of e-Stewards and R2 data; Map resources (map). 

[End of figure] 

The increased number of certified recyclers should make it easier for 
agencies to locate recyclers that will, among other things, ensure 
that any harmful materials are being safely handled throughout the 
recycling chain. For the five agencies we reviewed, almost no 
certified recyclers were used, and in most cases agency officials 
either misidentified a recycler's certification status or indicated 
that they did not know the recycler's certification status. According 
to our analysis of the disposition information these agencies 
provided, of the 25 electronics recycling companies that the five 
agencies reported using in fiscal year 2010, only one was certified by 
either R2 or e-Stewards for all locations where the agency used it as 
of September 30, 2010, and agencies were correct in identifying 
whether or not their recyclers were certified in only four cases. 
[Footnote 32] 

The confusion regarding electronics recyclers' certification status 
could stem in part from the absence of clear guidance. The 
implementing instructions for Executive Order 13423 direct agencies to 
use national standards, best management practices, or a national 
certification program for recyclers. To date, however, none of the 
oversight agencies--OMB, CEQ, and OFEE--have provided agencies with 
clear guidance specifying whether R2 or e-Stewards, the two existing 
certification programs, qualify as "national certification programs 
for recyclers" under the implementing instructions.[Footnote 33] 

In an effort to address this issue, according to the National Strategy 
for Electronics Stewardship, EPA and GSA are to take steps to address 
the need for well-defined requirements for those certification 
programs that federal agencies will rely upon. Specifically, EPA, in 
consultation with GSA and other relevant agencies, is to develop a 
baseline set of electronics recycling criteria to ensure, among other 
things, that all downstream handlers of used electronics manage these 
materials in a way that protects the environment, public health, and 
worker safety. EPA is also to initiate a study of the current 
electronics certification programs to evaluate the strength of their 
audits of downstream facilities. According to the national strategy, 
as part of its effort to establish a comprehensive and governmentwide 
policy on used federal electronic products, GSA will consider the 
baseline set of criteria, the results of the study of current 
certification programs, and other requirements and considerations in 
determining which certification programs satisfy the governmentwide 
requirement to use certified recyclers. Although the strategy calls 
for GSA to, with public input, issue a revised policy and propose 
changes to the FMR, it is unclear if GSA is on track to do this by 
February 2012, given that it has not issued a public draft, nor 
conducted a public comment or other public input process. Similarly it 
is unclear when, if, or how GSA's revised policy component regarding 
certified recyclers will be incorporated into the FMR. Moreover, it is 
unclear what mechanism GSA will use to issue the revised policy prior 
to its inclusion in the FMR, as the policy may not be in conformance 
with the current FMR. In addition, the national strategy does not 
specify if or how EPA and GSA will routinely update other federal 
agencies on the status of their efforts to implement the national 
strategy's recommendations.[Footnote 34] 

The Tracking and Reporting of Data on the Disposition of Used 
Electronics Presents Challenges: 

Currently, due to challenges associated with the tracking and 
reporting of used federal electronics, the ultimate disposition of 
these electronics is unknown--making it difficult to measure the 
effectiveness of Executive Orders 13423 and 13514, which were aimed at 
improving the management of used federal electronics and ensuring the 
proper disposal of electronics that have reached the end of their 
useful life. The National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship 
acknowledges the challenges associated with tracking and reporting the 
disposition of used federal electronics and proposes some solutions 
for improving the data that agencies report to GSA. Under the national 
strategy, GSA is to streamline and standardize reporting through the 
annual Report of Non-Federal Recipients[Footnote 35] to gather data on 
the type, quantity, and intended use of electronic products leaving 
federal ownership, and the recipients of these products. It is 
unclear, however, what electronics the new reporting requirements will 
cover. The national strategy suggests that the annual Report of Non-
Federal Recipients will be expanded to include the reporting of the 
disposition of electronic products to all recipients. Currently, the 
report includes only property donated to such nonfederal recipients as 
schools and state and local governments, and therefore does not 
include the disposition of significant quantities of electronics. 

If GSA intends to use this report to capture agencies' data, it is 
unclear how the report will improve the quality of the limited data 
GSA currently receives. GSA officials told us that while the agency 
currently collects disposition data from agencies through its GSAXcess 
database, GSAXcess is not an accountable property system;[Footnote 36] 
therefore, data validation is limited.[Footnote 37] According to a GSA 
bulletin, a number of executive agencies have not submitted reports to 
GSA on exchange/sale transactions and property furnished to nonfederal 
recipients, as currently required, or have not included all of the 
required information--thus presenting data challenges as GSA seeks to 
carry out its oversight and management responsibilities. 

The data challenges are further complicated by the fact that 
individual agency procedures for tracking electronics are not 
consistent. Agencies typically record the acquisition of electronics 
as individual units, such as desktop or laptop computers, and continue 
to track these electronics as individual units while in use at the 
agency. However, when agencies dispose of these same electronics, they 
may use a different method for tracking them. For example, rather than 
tracking the disposition of used electronic products as individual 
units, agencies may aggregate a number of similar items into a single 
line item or they may report them by weight. In addition, a single 
agency may use different metrics for different types of disposition. 
For example, DLA, a DOD acquisition and disposition agency, tracks 
electronic products sent to recyclers in pounds and electronic 
products disposed of through other means--such as donated to schools 
or transferred to other agencies--by individual unit. Because some 
electronics are tracked and reported as line items and some are 
recorded in pounds, it is not possible to compare the extent to which 
the agency relies on one disposition method over another. For the five 
agencies we reviewed, data provided to us on the disposition of 
electronic products were similarly inconsistent, which hampered our 
efforts to accurately assess the extent to which electronic products 
procured by these federal agencies were disposed of in an 
environmentally sound manner. 

Challenges Remain in Clarifying Agencies' Responsibility for Used 
Electronics Sold through Auctions: 

GSA's personal property disposition procedures do not clarify agency 
responsibilities for tracking or placing contract conditions on the 
ultimate disposition of used electronics if they are sold through 
auctions. As we reported in August 2008, some electronics recyclers in 
the United States--including those that have purchased government 
electronics sold through auction--appeared willing to export regulated 
electronics illegally.[Footnote 38] 

We identified two auction disposal methods--those used by GSA and by 
DOD--that could result in used federal electronics being handled in an 
environmentally risky manner. Specifically, under the GSA auction 
process, registered participants can bid electronically on items 
within specific time frames. To participate, potential buyers register 
with GSA by providing information about themselves, such as name, 
address, and payment information, before they can bid on items, 
according to GSA officials. However, GSA officials told us that they 
do not evaluate the information obtained from buyers to determine 
whether they are brokers or resellers who might potentially export 
these used products to other countries where they may not be handled 
in an environmentally sound or safe manner. Moreover, GSA officials 
stated that the agency does not have enforcement authority after these 
items are sold to the general public. They told us that if GSA is made 
aware of any inappropriate activity or violations of the terms of the 
sale, it will refer the information to the GSA Inspector General for 
further investigation. According to agency documentation, GSA's online 
auction procedures include standard sales terms and conditions, 
special security notifications, and export control clauses. However, 
none of the terms, conditions, or clauses included in GSA's auction 
procedures are aimed at ensuring that (1) electronics containing 
certain materials[Footnote 39] are exported only to countries that can 
legally accept them,[Footnote 40] (2) recyclers document the legality 
of such exports, and (3) the material is being safely handled 
throughout the recycling chain. 

Unlike GSA, DOD is not directly involved in the auction process but 
instead sells its used electronics to a private company, which then 
resells the used electronics through its web-based auction process. 
According to DOD officials, DOD's responsibility for tracking its used 
electronics ends once it passes to the contractor--Government 
Liquidation. DOD officials said that Government Liquidation has its 
own terms and conditions that bidders must adhere to once they 
purchase the used electronics. As with GSA auctions, the terms and 
conditions included in the Government Liquidation auctions are not 
aimed at ensuring that used federal electronics are exported only to 
countries that can legally accept them.[Footnote 41] In our review of 
these auction websites, we found that the overwhelming majority of 
used electronic products are sold in bulk, which would indicate that 
they are being sold to brokers or resellers, not individual 
consumers.[Footnote 42] 

The National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship seeks to address the 
problems associated with used federal electronics sold through 
auction. According to the strategy, the electronics stewardship policy 
that GSA is to establish will prohibit the sale of nonfunctional 
electronics through public auction except to third-party certified 
recyclers and refurbishers. Functional electronics are to be directed 
through the existing hierarchy of transfer, donation, and sale. It is 
unclear, however, how this policy will work in practice. Currently, 
agencies sell electronics in mixed lots of potentially functional and 
nonfunctional equipment. For example, officials at one agency said 
that it was not cost effective to test items to ensure that they are 
functional; therefore, items are sold through GSA "as is" with no 
implied warranty. These agency officials said that they combine items 
in sales lots that will bring the most return to the federal 
government. In addition, we found that electronics listed on the 
Government Liquidation and GSA auction websites are frequently 
marketed as "tested to power-up only," or with disclaimers such as 
"condition of the property is not warranted." Under the national 
strategy, it is unclear whether electronics characterized in this way 
would qualify as "functional." In addition, the national strategy does 
not provide clear and detailed criteria to assist federal agencies in 
bundling functional and nonfunctional electronics for sale exclusively 
to certified recyclers or refurbishers, distinguishing between 
functional and nonfunctional electronics by conducting specific tests, 
and labeling electronic products. Moreover, if federal agencies sell 
used functional electronic products through auctions, neither the 
agency nor the auction entities are required to impose conditions or 
to perform due diligence by conducting auditing to determine whether 
all downstream reusers of such products follow environmentally sound 
end-of-life practices. 

In contrast, the European Union has detailed guidance for determining 
the functionality of electrical and electronic equipment, as part of 
distinguishing whether the equipment is considered waste in the 
context of import-export rules. The guidance states that the tests 
required to determine functionality depend on the type of electronics, 
but generally, completion of a visual inspection without testing 
functionality is unlikely to be sufficient for most types of 
electronics; it also states that a functionality test of the key 
functions is sufficient. The guidance also identifies defects that 
materially affect functionality and would therefore cause an item to 
be considered "waste" if, for example, the equipment did not turn on, 
perform internal set-up routines, or conduct self-checks.[Footnote 43] 
As discussed previously, R2 practices establish a similar "reuse, 
recover, dispose" hierarchy along the chain of custody for material 
handling and require recyclers to test electronics diverted for reuse, 
and confirm that key functions of the unit are working before it may 
be exported.[Footnote 44] 

Challenges Remain in Defining Key Terms and in Clarifying Differences 
Between the Executive Orders: 

We found that key terms concerning electronics have not been defined 
and that differences between the executive orders have not been 
clarified. In particular: 

* Key terms not defined. Key terms such as "electronic product" and 
"environmentally sound practices" are not explicitly defined in the 
executive orders, the guidance provided to agencies for implementing 
the executive orders, or the National Strategy for Electronics 
Stewardship. Consequently, each of the agencies we reviewed used its 
own definition of electronic products to report progress in 
implementing policies for electronics stewardship. For example, DOE 
defines electronic products as printers, desktop computers, notebook 
computers, and monitors; DOD, Education, HUD, and NASA use broader 
definitions that include servers, routers, and switches; cell phones 
and musical instruments; and refrigerators. Moreover, without a clear 
definition of what constitutes an environmentally sound practice, 
agencies are free to dispose of their used electronics through online 
auctions or other means that provide little assurance that (1) these 
electronics are exported only to countries that can legally accept 
them,[Footnote 45] (2) recyclers document the legality of such 
exports, and (3) the material is being safely handled throughout the 
recycling chain. 

* Differences between the executive orders have not been clarified. 
CEQ has not issued implementing instructions regarding electronics 
stewardship for Executive Order 13514, which was signed in 2009, and 
CEQ, OMB, and OFEE have not harmonized the electronics stewardship 
requirements contained in executive orders 13423 and 13514. For 
example, under Executive Order 13423, the requirement to use 
environmentally sound practices applies to electronic equipment that 
has "reached the end of its useful life," whereas Executive Order 
13514 includes "all agency excess or surplus electronic products," and 
the difference between these terms has not been clarified. In 
addition, the implementing instructions for Executive Order 13423 
direct agencies to ensure that contracts for leased electronic 
equipment incorporate language that requires that at the end of the 
lease period, the equipment is reused, donated, sold, or recycled 
using environmentally sound management practices. This directive is 
not included in Executive Order 13514 nor in the guidance provided to 
agencies for preparing their strategic sustainability performance plan 
that is to be used under Executive Order 13514. Officials from these 
oversight agencies told us that they have informed federal agencies 
that electronics stewardship plans under Executive Order 13423 can be 
incorporated by reference into their strategic sustainability 
performance plans to satisfy certain requirements for Executive Order 
13514. Or alternatively, strategic sustainability performance plans 
may be used in lieu of separate electronics stewardship plans. 
However, CEQ, OMB, and OFEE have not addressed differences or updated 
the implementing instructions for Executive Order 13423. 

Conclusions: 

Federal initiatives to improve the management of agencies' used 
electronics--including the FEC, certification for recyclers, personal 
property disposal guidance, the executive orders, and the National 
Strategy for Electronics Stewardship--have sought to assist federal 
agencies in the handling of used electronic products. And progress has 
been made. More agencies and facilities are participating in the FEC, 
and a growing number of recyclers have received third-party 
certification. However, opportunities exist to increase the breadth 
and depth of agencies' participation in the FEC and to expand the use 
of certified electronics recyclers. 

Federal agencies also face challenges that may impede their progress 
toward improving their management of used federal electronics. 
Specifically, 2 years have elapsed since Executive Order 13514 
required CEQ to issue implementing instructions. In the absence of 
such instructions, agencies do not have definitions for key terms such 
as "electronic products" and "environmentally sound practices," and 
the guidance for implementing the executive orders provides 
inconsistent information on what procedures an agency should follow 
when implementing environmentally sound practices. In addition, 
inconsistencies between Executive Orders 13514 and 13423 have yet to 
be addressed; without doing so, CEQ lacks assurance that agencies are 
meeting electronics stewardship requirements of both orders, given 
that CEQ and OMB permit agencies to comply using either an electronics 
stewardship plan under Executive Order 13423 or a strategic 
sustainability performance plan under Executive Order 13514. 
Furthermore, without consistent tracking and reporting of the 
disposition of used federal electronics, there is no mechanism to 
measure the effectiveness of federal policies aimed at ensuring the 
proper disposal of electronics that have reached the end of their 
useful life. 

The recently issued National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship 
seeks to advance federal agencies' efforts to manage used electronics. 
However, it is unclear whether it will fully address challenges that 
impede environmentally sound management of used federal electronics. 
Furthermore, it is doubtful whether the strategy will be effective 
without a mechanism for routinely keeping agencies and the public 
apprised of its progress toward establishing a governmentwide policy 
on used federal electronics--particularly with respect to use of third-
party national certification for electronics recyclers--so that 
agencies have a clear understanding of their responsibilities and 
other interested parties are apprised of agencies' progress toward 
completing actions identified in the strategy. Currently, the strategy 
does not state how agencies will be kept informed of implementation 
efforts. In addition, the strategy lays out an approach for ensuring 
that federal agencies dispose of nonfunctional electronics in a sound 
manner, but it does not provide clear and detailed criteria to assist 
federal agencies in bundling functional and nonfunctional equipment 
for sale exclusively to certified recyclers and refurbishers and 
distinguishing between functional and nonfunctional electronics by 
conducting specific tests and labeling electronic products. Finally, 
if federal agencies sell used functional electronic products through 
auctions, neither the agency nor the auction entities are required to 
perform due diligence by conducting auditing to determine whether all 
downstream reusers of such products follow environmentally sound end-
of-life practices. 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

To improve federal electronics stewardship, we are making the 
following four recommendations. 

To support federal agencies' efforts to improve electronics 
stewardship, we recommend that the Director of the White House Council 
on Environmental Quality, in collaboration with the Director of the 
Office of Management and Budget, and the Administrator of the General 
Services Administration collaborate on developing and issuing 
implementing instructions for Executive Order 13514 that: 

* define key terms such as "electronic products" and "environmentally 
sound practices;" address inconsistencies between this executive order 
and Executive Order 13423; and as appropriate, provide clear direction 
on required agency actions under the national strategy; and: 

* require consistent information tracking and reporting on the 
disposition of used electronics among agencies. 

To provide transparency on progress toward completing the actions 
identified in the National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship, we 
recommend that the Director of the White House Council on 
Environmental Quality, the Administrator of EPA, and the Administrator 
of GSA provide quarterly status updates on a publicly accessible 
website. 

To ensure that electronic products procured by federal agencies are 
appropriately managed, we recommend that GSA include measures in its 
policy to ensure that all electronics sold through auction are 
appropriately managed once they reach the end of their useful lives. 
Such measures could include: 

* bundling functional and nonfunctional equipment for sale exclusively 
to certified recyclers, who would be responsible for determining the 
best use of the equipment under the "reuse, recover, dispose" 
hierarchy of management; or: 

* if agencies or GSA are to be responsible for screening electronics 
for auction and distinguishing between functional and nonfunctional 
equipment, 

- providing clear and detailed criteria for doing so, such as specific 
testing and labeling; and: 

- ensuring that purchasers or recipients of functional electronic 
products sold through government auctions use certified recyclers or 
perform due diligence and conduct downstream auditing. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

We provided a draft of this report to OMB, CEQ, GSA, and EPA for 
review and comment. In addition, we provided DOD, DOE, Education, HUD, 
and NASA with excerpts of the draft report that pertained to each 
agency and incorporated technical comments received as appropriate. In 
written comments, which are reproduced in appendix II, EPA generally 
concurred with our recommendations. OMB, CEQ, and GSA did not provide 
written comments to include in our report. Instead, in e-mails 
received on February 1, January 19, and January 17, 2012, from the 
agencies' respective liaisons, OMB, CEQ, and GSA generally concurred 
with our recommendations. Even with their general concurrences, in 
some instances, the agencies proposed alternative approaches for 
executing the recommendations. In the e-mail from its liaison, OMB 
concurred with the comments in the e-mail from CEQ's liaison but did 
not provide additional comments of its own. 

In response to our recommendation that CEQ, in collaboration with OMB 
and GSA, issue implementing instructions for Executive Order 13514 
that define key terms; require consistent information tracking and 
reporting; and provide clear direction on required agency actions 
under the national strategy, CEQ stated that it would reserve its 
decision regarding our recommendation until after GSA issues its 
comprehensive governmentwide policy on electronic stewardship. 
Specifically, CEQ stated that GSA's policy would address the issues we 
identified with regard to unclear definitions and inconsistent 
tracking and reporting of electronics but was silent on how it would 
provide clear direction on required agency actions under the national 
strategy. GAO believes it is imperative for CEQ to issue implementing 
instructions along with GSA's issuance of its policy. Without such 
instructions, agencies will lack clarity on required agency actions 
under the national strategy and whether adhering to the GSA policy is 
necessary and/or sufficient for implementing the executive order. 
Moreover, it remains unclear what mechanism GSA will use to issue its 
revised policy prior to its inclusion in the FMR, to the extent the 
current FMR does not conform with the new policy. Concerning this 
issue, GSA stated that it will publish guidance documents concurrent 
with proposing changes to the FMR. However, as GSA intends to issue 
guidance documents, which are not legally binding on agencies, as well 
as regulations, which are, it will be important for CEQ to issue 
implementing instructions that indicate which actions in the guidance 
documents, as well as any other actions beyond those in the FMR, are 
necessary to comply with the executive order. 

In addition, as we recommended, CEQ, EPA, and GSA agreed that they 
would update a publicly accessible website on the status of progress 
toward completing the actions identified in the National Strategy for 
Electronics Stewardship. CEQ stated that progress reporting would be 
accomplished by GSA and GSA agreed to provide status updates at least 
quarterly. However, in its written comments, EPA requested that, 
instead of quarterly status updates, we revise our recommendation to 
require status updates as significant progress is made or key 
milestones are met. EPA stated that due to the nature of some of the 
work the agencies have committed to as part of the national strategy, 
it may not be appropriate to report to the general public on a routine 
basis. We did not revise the recommendation and are not recommending 
such disclosure. Instead, we are recommending that the agencies 
provide a quarterly status update that characterizes the progress made 
toward achieving each action item or project. For example, one action 
item in the national strategy directed the Federal Electronics 
Stewardship Working Group to recommend to CEQ by November 18, 2011, 
metrics and other reporting tools to measure agencies' progress in 
implementing the revised Federal Electronics Stewardship Policy. It 
would be helpful to have updated information on whether the working 
group has made its recommendation to CEQ and when CEQ will announce 
the new metrics and reporting tools. Currently, such information is 
not publicly available. In fact, as of February 8, 2012, more than 6 
months after the policy and benchmarks were issued, no updates have 
been provided on publicly accessible websites. 

With regard to our recommendation that GSA include measures in its 
electronic stewardship policy to ensure that all electronics sold 
through auction are appropriately managed once they reach the end of 
their useful lives, in the e-mail received from its liaison, GSA noted 
that the agency is working toward this goal. Specifically, GSA stated 
that it is working toward including measures to (1) bundle all 
equipment for sale to certified recyclers, who then determine proper 
reuse or recycling, or (2) provide agencies with clear, detailed 
criteria to distinguish between functional and nonfunctional 
electronics and ensure that purchasers or recipients of federal 
electronics use certified recyclers or perform downstream auditing, 
while also noting that GSA has limited authority to require recipients 
of used federal electronics to recycle them once ownership has 
transferred to those recipients. 

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents 
of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution for 30 days 
from the report date. At that time, we will send copies to the 
Secretaries of Defense, Education, Energy, and Housing and Urban 
Development; the Administrators of EPA, GSA, and NASA; the Director of 
OMB; the Chair of the White House CEQ; the Federal Environmental 
Executive; appropriate congressional committees; and other interested 
parties. The report also will be available at no charge on the GAO 
website at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-3841 or ruscof@gao.gov. Contact points for our 
Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 
the last page of the report. GAO staff who made major contributions to 
this report are listed in appendix III. 

Sincerely yours, 

Signed by: 

Frank Rusco: 
Director, Natural Resources and Environment: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology: 

The objectives for this report were to examine (1) key initiatives 
aimed at improving the management of used federal electronics and (2) 
improvements resulting from these initiatives and challenges that 
impede progress toward improving the management of used federal 
electronics, if any. 

To identify initiatives aimed at improving the management of used 
federal electronics, we reviewed guidance and other documents 
describing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) initiatives 
related to the Federal Electronics Challenge (FEC), the Federal 
Electronics Stewardship Working Group, and Responsible Recycling (R2) 
practices. We analyzed the requirements for electronic products 
contained in the applicable executive orders and implementing 
instructions that make up the federal policy framework; the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation, which governs the process through which the 
federal government acquires goods and services; the Federal Management 
Regulation (FMR), which, among other things, regulates the disposal of 
federal personal property, including electronics;[Footnote 46] and the 
General Services Administration's (GSA) Personal Property Disposal 
Guide, which serves as an index and quick-reference guide as it 
relates to personal property management provisions in the FMR; and 
other relevant electronics stewardship guidance. We also reviewed the 
July 2011 National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship. 

To identify improvements resulting from federal initiatives to improve 
management of used federal electronics and challenges that impede 
progress, we selected a nonprobability sample of five federal 
agencies--the departments of Defense (DOD), Energy (DOE), Education 
(Education), and Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)--to examine how the 
federal policy framework is carried out in those agencies. We selected 
DOD, DOE, and NASA because they each participated to some extent in 
the FEC program and purchased large amounts of electronic products--
ranking first, eighth, and tenth, respectively, in terms of overall 
federal agency information technology spending in fiscal year 2010. We 
selected Education because, according to the FEC program manager, the 
agency actively participates in the FEC and centrally manages its 
electronics procurement and disposal functions. We selected HUD 
because the agency was not participating in the FEC. We used FEC 
participation as a selection criterion because we hoped to include 
agencies with a range of experience with managing used electronics in 
an environmentally safe way. Because the selection of agencies was 
based on a nonprobability sample, the information we obtained is not 
generalizable to all federal agencies. However, because the 
nonprobability sample consists of a cross-section of agencies of 
different sizes and levels of participation in the FEC, the evaluation 
of these agencies provides relevant examples of different procurement 
and disposition methods for electronics. For these five agencies we 
also collected and reviewed fiscal year 2010 strategic sustainability 
performance plans. We also conducted semistructured interviews with 
officials from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the White 
House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), the Office of the 
Federal Environmental Executive (OFEE), and EPA to discuss their 
respective roles in assessing agency performance and managing the FEC 
and other federal initiatives for electronics stewardship. In some 
cases, we followed up the interviews with additional questions, and on 
two occasions, CEQ provided us with written responses to some of our 
questions on the roles of OMB, CEQ, and OFEE and other issues on 
federal electronics stewardship, such as how OMB and CEQ decide on 
whether an agency's program is equivalent to the FEC. In addition, at 
GSA, we conducted semistructured interviews with officials on the 
agency's policies and procedures for the transfer, donation, sale, and 
recycling of electronic products. 

To determine the extent to which agencies used various disposition 
methods (i.e., reuse, donation, and sale) we analyzed governmentwide 
GSA data from GSAXCess, Exchange Sale, and Non-Federal Recipients 
reports for fiscal year 2010. We designed and implemented a data 
collection instrument to collect agency-specific disposition data for 
fiscal years 2009 and 2010 from the five agencies selected for our 
nonprobability sample. We encountered a number of limitations in 
obtaining reliable data. For example, GSA officials acknowledged that 
GSA does not verify the data that it collects from other agencies. The 
five selected agencies that we collected data from also did not have 
consistent definitions of electronics and sometimes reported 
inconsistent information or used inconsistent methods of tracking the 
disposition of used electronics. For example, DOD tracks some items by 
weight and other items by line item. We attempted to resolve 
inconsistencies in the data provided through this effort through 
follow-up efforts with the five agencies in which we discussed how 
they attempted to collect the data we requested and related challenges 
and limitations. Based on these conversations, we determined that the 
data were not sufficiently reliable for the purposes of reporting on 
amounts of electronics disposed of by the five agencies and we did not 
use information collected in the data collection instrument on the 
extent to which agencies used various disposition methods. 

We also visited the Kennedy Space Center, in Cape Canaveral, Florida, 
and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Aviation in Richmond, Virginia, to 
discuss the procurement and disposition of electronic products. We 
selected Kennedy Space Center because it is designated as NASA's 
Principal Center for Recycling and Sustainable Acquisition. We 
selected DLA Aviation in Richmond, Virginia, because of its role in 
disposing of excess property received from the military services 
through DLA Disposition. We also visited a UNICOR recycling facility 
located in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, as well as two private electronics 
recycling facilities located in Tampa, Florida.[Footnote 47] We 
selected these facilities because of their role in electronics 
recycling at federal agencies. At these facilities, we interviewed 
officials about the procedures involved in recycling used federal 
electronic products and observed the electronics recycling process to 
learn how electronics are safely disassembled and, in some cases, 
processed for reuse. 

To assess the extent to which the July 2011 National Strategy for 
Electronics Stewardship addresses any challenges that may impede 
participation in electronics stewardship initiatives, we examined key 
provisions of the strategy, such as dividing functional and 
nonfunctional electronics, and compared these provisions with existing 
policies for electronics stewardship. In response to our request for 
information on electronics stewardship, FEC program's manager, 
officials within each of the five agencies, and seven champions for 
the FEC program provided information on the challenges that may affect 
agency participation in electronics stewardship initiatives.[Footnote 
48] In addition, we interviewed officials with the R2 and e-Stewards 
recycler certification programs,[Footnote 49],[Footnote 50] the 
Electronics TakeBack Coalition, and an electronics recycler to 
determine the extent to which recyclers in the United States have 
obtained certification and to discuss their views about the capacity 
of certified electronics recyclers located in the United States. 

We conducted this performance audit from October 2010 to January 2012 
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 
that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

[End of section] 

Appendix II: Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency: 

United States Environmental Protection Agency: 
Office Of Solid Waste And Emergency Response: 
Washington, D.C. 20460: 

January 12, 2012: 

Mr. Frank Rusco: 
Director, Natural Resources and Environment: 
Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Rusco: 

I am transmitting the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response's 
(OSWER) response to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) January 
2012 draft report entitled, "Electronic Stewardship: Progress Made 
Toward Improving Agencies' Management of Used Electronics but 
Challenges Remain (GAO-12-74)". 

This report, which outlines how the Federal Government manages its 
used electronics, reviews a number of programs EPA has been 
instrumental in developing and/or implementing: the Federal 
Electronics Challenge (FEC); the National Strategy for Electronics 
Stewardship; and Standards for Certification of Recyclers. EPA 
supports and will continue to push for further safe and protective 
recycling efforts and encourage improvements in best management 
practices for recyclers. There are existing recycling certification 
programs, such as Responsible Recycling (R2) Practices and e-Stewards 
that EPA believes advance environmentally safe practices and includes 
standards for use in third party certification of such efforts. We 
appreciate the chance to comment on this draft document. 

We generally agree with the recommendations in the document and are 
requesting only one slight revision to the following recommendation: 
"To provide transparency on progress toward completing the actions 
identified in the National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship, we 
recommend that the Director of CEQ, the Administrator of EPA, and the
Administrator of GSA provide quarterly status updates on a publicly 
accessible website." 

Each of the projects EPA has committed to implement under the National 
Strategy for Electronics Stewardship is important to ensuring that 
used electronics are managed in a sound and safe manner. We also 
believe that being transparent to the public on progress being made in 
implementing these projects is paramount. These beliefs were discussed 
between the three Agencies at length prior to the release of the 
document and the companion benchmark document, and resulted in the 
following language being included in the executive summary of the main 
document (page 3): 

"An on-line annex of benchmarks of projects, posted on the Web at 
[hyperlink, http://www.fedcenter.gov] lists each of the projects, the 
primary agency responsible for the project and any agencies supporting 
the primary agency effort, and the target date for completion of the 
project. As the National Strategy is developed in further detail by 
the departments and agencies and the Strategy is implemented, the 
annex will  be updated. As appropriate, action items and projects 
under them may be realigned as efficiencies and opportunities for 
further improvements are identified." (Also see the footnote on the 
benchmark document which also includes similar language which also 
includes "within financial and staffing limitations.") 
 
This language was carefully negotiated among the participating 
agencies to reflect that the goals were targets not deadlines due to 
resource considerations that confront each of the agencies and 
the need for continued public input on many of the action items.  

Due to the nature of some of the work we have committed to (i.e., 
planning, information gathering, and tool development) it may not be 
appropriate to report to the general public on a routine basis. In 
addition, each project will arrive at a key milestone or a public 
announcement at different points. Many projects require input from 
stakeholders to ensure that the finished project results in a 
completely informed and robust effort. Furthermore, we are planning 
public events for some projects.  

Based on these reasons, we would prefer that the recommendation 
suggest that the three Agencies update the publicly available website 
"as we make significant progress" and/or "as 
we meet key milestones" on the projects. This commits each Agency to 
updating the benchmark annex, but provides each Agency the necessary 
flexibility to determine the appropriate time to update the benchmark 
document.  

Thank you for your assistance in the coordination of this response 
with GAO. If you have any questions on this response, please do not 
hesitate to contact Suzanne Rudzinski, Director, Office of Resource 
Conservation and Recovery, at 703-308-8895.  

Sincerely,  

Signed by: 

Mathy Stanislaus: 
Assistant Administrator: 

cc: 
Lisa Feldt, OSWER: 
Barry Breen, OSWER: 
Johnsie Webster, OSWER: 
Suzanne Rudzinski, OSWER: 
Sandra Connors, OSWER: 
Grace Robiou, OSWER: 
Cheryl Coleman, OSWER:  

[End of section] 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Frank Rusco, (202) 512-3841 or ruscof@gao.gov: 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contact named above, Diane LoFaro, Assistant 
Director; Elizabeth Beardsley; Pamela Davidson; Stephanie Gaines; 
Deborah Ortega; Ilga Semeiks; Carol Herrnstadt Shulman; and Vasiliki 
Theodoropoulos contributed to this report. 

[End of section] 

Related GAO Products: 

Green Information Technology: Agencies Have Taken Steps to Implement 
Requirements, but Additional Guidance on Measuring Performance Needed. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-638]. Washington, D.C.: 
July 28, 2011. 

Data Center Consolidation: Agencies Need to Complete Inventories and 
Plans to Achieve Expected Savings. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-565]. Washington, D.C.: July 19, 
2011. 

Electronic Waste: Considerations for Promoting Environmentally Sound 
Reuse and Recycling. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-626]. Washington, D.C.: July 12, 
2010. 

Federal Electronics Management: Federal Agencies Could Improve 
Participation in EPA's Initiatives for Environmentally Preferable 
Electronic Products. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-196T]. Washington, D.C.: October 
27, 2009. 

Electronic Waste: EPA Needs to Better Control Harmful U.S. Exports 
through Stronger Enforcement and More Comprehensive Regulation. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-1044]. Washington, 
D.C.: August 28, 2008. 

Electronic Waste: Strengthening the Role of the Federal Government in 
Encouraging Recycling and Reuse. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-47]. Washington, D.C.: November 10, 
2005. 

Electronic Waste: Observations on the Role of the Federal Government 
in Encouraging Recycling and Reuse. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-937T]. Washington, D.C.: July 26, 
2005. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] GAO, Electronic Waste: EPA Needs to Better Control Harmful U.S. 
Exports through Stronger Enforcement and More Comprehensive 
Regulation, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-1044] 
(Washington, D.C.: Aug. 28, 2008). 

[2] For purposes of this report, we refer to all federal electronic 
products that may be reused, recycled, disposed of, or discarded as 
"used." Federal agencies also use other terms, such as excess or 
surplus. See FMR, Subchapter B-Personal Property, 41 C.F.R. §102-35.20 
(2011) 

[3] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-1044]. 

[4] Executive Order 13423, "Strengthening Federal Environmental, 
Energy, and Transportation Management." 72 Fed. Reg. 3,919 (Jan. 26, 
2007); and Executive Order 13514. "Federal Leadership in Environmental 
Energy, and Economic Performance," 74 Fed Reg. 52,117 (Oct. 8, 2009). 

[5] GAO, Data Center Consolidation: Agencies Need to Complete 
Inventories and Plans to Achieve Expected Savings, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-565] (Washington, D.C.: July 19, 
2011) and Green Information Technology: Agencies Have Taken Steps to 
Implement Requirements, but Additional Guidance on Measuring 
Performance Needed, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-638] (Washington D.C.: July 28, 
2011). 

[6] The Federal Management Regulation requires that executive agencies 
to the maximum extent practicable fill requirements for personal 
property by using existing agency property or by obtaining excess 
property from other federal agencies in lieu of new procurements. See 
FMR, Subchapter B-Personal Property, 41 C.F.R. Pt. 102-36, §102-36.65 
(2011). 

[7] GAO, Federal Electronics Management: Federal Agencies Could 
Improve Participation in EPA's Initiatives for Environmentally 
Preferable Electronic Products, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-196T] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 27, 
2009). 

[8] GAO, Electronic Waste: Strengthening the Role of the Federal 
Government in Encouraging Recycling and Reuse, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-47] (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 10, 
2005). 

[9] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-1044]. 

[10] OFEE is responsible for promoting sustainability and 
environmental stewardship throughout federal government operations. It 
was created by executive order in 1993, is housed at the President's 
Council on Environmental Quality, is administered by EPA, and leads 
the interagency Steering Committee on Federal Sustainability. 

[11] White House Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental 
Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Strategy 
For Electronics Stewardship (Washington, D.C.: July 20, 2011), 
[hyperlink, 
http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/admin/National_Strategy_Electronics_Stewards
hip_2011.pdf]. 

[12] A memorandum of understanding signed by the Executive Office of 
the President and 11 agencies in November 2004 formally committed the 
agencies to join the FEC as agency partners and to actively sponsor 
participation of all facilities within each agency. The 11 agencies 
were the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Health and Human 
Services, Homeland Security, the Interior, Justice, Transportation, 
and Veterans Affairs; and the Environmental Protection Agency and 
General Services Administration. 

[13] The FEC Baseline Survey and Annual Reporting Form was developed 
to measure partners' progress against the FEC national program goals. 
The information collected may be translated into the partner's and 
program's environmental benefits using the Electronics Environmental 
Benefits Calculator, an EPA-developed online tool that estimates the 
environmental benefits of improving the purchasing, use, and disposal 
of computer products and electronic equipment. 

[14] GAO, Electronic Waste: Considerations for Promoting 
Environmentally Sound Reuse and Recycling, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-626] (Washington, D.C.: July 12, 
2010). 

[15] The Basel Action Network was founded in 1997 and named after the 
Basel Convention, the treaty under which parties have agreed to 
restrict trade in hazardous wastes and, among other things, prohibit 
export of toxic waste to developing nations deemed unable to manage 
the wastes in an environmentally sound manner. 

[16] EPA recognizes both the R2 and e-Stewards programs, but does not 
audit or certify facilities for compliance with either of these 
certification programs. 

[17] This guide is available online at [hyperlink, 
http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/fas/5-06-00389_R2-yWC-w_0Z5RDZ-i34K-
pR.pdf]. 

[18] 40 U.S.C. § 524(b); FMR Subchapter B-Personal Property, 41 C.F.R. 
§ 102-36.65 (2011). 

[19] Excess personal property is property under the control of any 
federal agency that is no longer required for that agency's needs, as 
determined by the agency head or designee. 

[20] The authority for federal agencies to transfer research 
equipment, including computers, to educational institutions and 
nonprofit organizations was established in law in 1992. See 15 U.S.C. 
§ 3710(i) (2011). 

[21] The Computers for Learning program facilitates the transfer of 
excess federal computer equipment to schools and educational nonprofit 
organizations. The program implements Executive Order 12999, 
Educational Technology: Ensuring Opportunity for All Children in the 
Next Century, 61 Fed. Reg. 17,227 (Apr. 19, 1996). 

[22] The Federal Surplus Personal Property Donation Program enables 
certain nonfederal organizations, such as public agencies, nonprofit 
educational and public health activities, public airports, and 
educational activities of special interest to the Armed Forces, to 
obtain personal property that the federal government no longer needs. 

[23] According to the GSA guidance, agencies are not to abandon or 
destroy property in a manner that is detrimental or dangerous to 
public health or safety. Specific requirements for the utilization and 
disposal of hazardous material are found in 41 C.F.R. Pt. 101-42 
(2011). Hazardous material may include property that possesses special 
characteristics, which in the opinion of the holding agency could be 
hazardous to health, safety, or the environment if improperly handled, 
stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise improperly used. 

[24] Under the GSA Schedules program, GSA establishes long-term 
governmentwide contracts with commercial firms to provide access to 
millions of commercial supplies (products) and services at volume 
discount pricing. 

[25] The purpose of GSA's Environmental Services Schedule for 
Materials and Waste Recycling and Disposal Services (899-5) is to 
assist federal agencies in choosing recyclers that GSA has determined 
meet certain requirements for various services. 

[26] See Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-8 § 748, 
123 Stat. 693 (providing that Executive Order 13423 shall remain in 
effect hereafter except as otherwise provided by law). 

[27] The interagency task force is separate from the Federal 
Electronics Stewardship Working Group referenced earlier in the report. 

[28] Data.gov was launched in 2009 and its purpose is to increase 
public access to high-value, machine-readable datasets generated by 
the executive branch of the federal government. 

[29] Some electronics manufacturers have created product take-back 
programs; in these programs, consumers return used equipment to the 
manufacturers, and the manufacturers manage the equipment's reuse, 
recycling, or disposal. Take-back programs are common among large 
electronic products manufacturers, such as Apple, Dell, and Hewlett-
Packard. 

[30] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-47]. 

[31] Resources include instruction sheets, tips, and checklists, among 
other things, which participants can choose to use. 

[32] Of the 25 electronics recyclers used by the five agencies in 
fiscal year 2010, four had obtained either R2 or e-Stewards 
certification as of September 30, 2011 for all locations used by the 
agencies. 

[33] EPA has formally recognized these programs on its website. 

[34] The benchmark document issued along with the national strategy 
states "As the National Strategy is implemented, the project 
benchmarks will be updated." 

[35] Under 40 U.S.C. § 529, executive agencies must submit to GSA, 
following the close of each fiscal year, an annual report of personal 
property furnished to any nonfederal recipient during the previous 
fiscal year, known as the Report of Non-Federal Recipients. 

[36] Accountable property systems are "systems of record" or systems 
that contain an agency's official property records, according to GSA 
officials. 

[37] GSA has built edit checks into the system requiring agencies to 
confirm amounts that are over certain dollar amounts. 

[38] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-1044]. EPA has 
issued regulations specifically addressing management of cathode ray 
tubes, and imposing requirements on their handling and export. 

[39] For example, the R2 practices identify "focus materials," which 
include items such as cathode-ray tubes or items containing mercury 
that warrant greater care owing to their toxicity and associated risk 
if managed without the appropriate safeguards. 

[40] GSA's general sales terms and conditions contain general 
conditions requiring, among other things, that bidders comply with all 
applicable federal, state, local, and multi-jurisdictional laws, 
ordinances, and regulations, in the transportation, transfer, export, 
use, or disposal of the property, and that purchasers represent, 
warrant, and certify that they will use and ultimately dispose of any 
hazardous property purchased under GSAAuctions.gov site as stipulated 
under applicable federal, state, local, and international laws and 
regulations. As previously noted, however, most electronics are not 
considered "hazardous" under U.S. law. 

[41] Government Liquidation's terms and conditions contain the general 
requirement that the buyer agrees to comply with all applicable export 
laws and regulations. However, most electronics are not considered 
"hazardous" under U.S. law, thus are not subject to EPA's export rules 
for hazardous wastes. The terms also note that "any device which is 
damaged in transit or is found to be cracked, shattered or broken may 
subject the Buyer to regulations pertaining to the handling, storage, 
transportation, re-sale or disposal of electronic waste," and 
generally cautions--but does not require--buyers "to use and 
ultimately dispose of any hazardous components or constituents 
according to all applicable local, national or international laws and 
regulations in a manner safe for the public and the environment." 

[42] Moreover, information on the potential for reuse of such 
equipment is unclear. These auctions are typically labeled as "scrap," 
defined by Government Liquidation as "property sold for its material 
content value, and for which it is not intended that the property or 
any of its parts or components be used for its originally intended 
purpose." Government Liquidation's terms and conditions, however, 
state that it sells only usable electronic devices, including 
reparable devices, but that the company makes no warranties or 
representations regarding the electronic devices it sells. 

[43] Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 Revised Correspondents' Guidelines 
No. 1, Shipments of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) 
(June 2007). 

[44] Similarly, WRAP, a government-backed private nonprofit 
organization in the United Kingdom, recently issued a protocol 
establishing minimum recommended tests that computers and related 
equipment must pass to be considered functional and fit for reuse. 

[45] Under EPA regulations, used cathode-ray tubes are the only 
electronic device specifically regulated as hazardous waste and whose 
export is subject to controls. According to EPA statements, used 
electronic devices other than cathode-ray tubes do not generally 
qualify as hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act of 1976 as amended, which is the statute governing 
hazardous waste handling and disposal. However, foreign countries may 
restrict the import of a wider range of used electronics. 

[46] The FMR, Subchapter B-Personal Property. 41 C.F.R. Pt. 102-36, 
requires that executive agencies, to the maximum extent practicable, 
fill requirements for personal property by using existing agency 
property or by obtaining excess property from other federal agencies 
in lieu of new procurements. 

[47] UNICOR, Federal Prison Industries is a self-sustaining, self-
funded corporation established in 1934 by executive order to create a 
voluntary real-world work program to train federal inmates. 

[48] We obtained written information on the responsibilities, 
training, and challenges facing seven FEC champions. The FEC program 
manager currently serves as the champion for two of the EPA regions, 
and the FEC champion for one region did not respond to our request for 
information. 

[49] The Responsible Recycling (R2) Practices is a set of guidelines 
for accredited certification programs to assess electronics recyclers' 
environmental, worker health and safety, and security practices. 

[50] The e-Stewards Standard for Responsible Recycling and Reuse of 
Electronic Equipment was developed by the Basel Action Network and is 
the basis for electronics recycling companies to become certified e-
Stewards recyclers. 

[End of section] 

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. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO’s website [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, 
testimony, and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] and select “E-
mail Updates.” 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black 
and white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s 
website, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

Connect with GAO: 

Connect with GAO on facebook, flickr, twitter, and YouTube.
Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.
Visit GAO on the web at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 
Website: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]; 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov; 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470. 

Congressional Relations: 

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
Washington, DC 20548. 

Public Affairs: 
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 
Washington, DC 20548.