The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

In response to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Zilwaukee Bridge Project to: (1) determine whether the testing program that the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) implemented confirmed that the bridge was structurally sound; (2) identify construction problems causing concerns about the bridge and determine whether they would affect its ability to perform as designed; and (3) assess the MDOT draft bridge maintenance manual. GAO found that: (1) the tests indicated that the Zilwaukee Bridge had performed as designed and that the concrete exceeded design requirements for strength and durability; (2) repairs made after a 1982 construction accident fully restored the damaged areas of the bridge; (3) concrete spalling and cracking did not affect the bridge's ability to perform as designed; (4) MDOT took corrective action to ensure proper bonding of all areas with a concrete overlay; and (5) although an independent panel's review of the maintenance manual concluded that the manual was generally well prepared, it recommended several changes that, if followed, would provide for more adequate future maintenance.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed investments in European aerospace vehicle research and technological development efforts. GAO found that: (1) France, Germany, and the United Kingdom are developing the required technologies to secure independent manned access to space, reduce the cost of launching payloads into orbit, and ensure a competitive role in high-speed commercial transport aircraft markets; (2) the United States was ahead of European countries in developing such critical technologies as air breathing engines and materials and advanced high-speed computer programs; (3) only the United States has tested major large-scale components of an air-breathing aerospace plane; (4) U.S. government and industry invested almost $1.8 billion in the National Aero-Space Plane Program (NASPP) between fiscal years (FY) 1986 and 1990 and the U.S. government anticipates spending about $2.7 million on NASPP between FY 1991 and 1997; (5) France, Germany, and the United Kingdom invested a total of about $125 million between 1982 and 1990 for various air-breathing aerospace plane studies and anticipate spending about $217 million between 1990 and 1992 on such programs; (6) although the United States was a leader in terms of facility size, productivity, and testing techniques, the Europeans' progress rate in renovating old facilities and building new facilities was significantly greater than that of the United States; (7) European governments and industries were developing vehicle concepts on a national basis first before seeking international partners; and (8) the convergence of national interests, expertise, approaches, and funding among the European countries, Japan, and the Soviet Union could prove to be competitive with NASPP.

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Earth Observing System (EOS) Data Information System (EOSDIS), focusing on EOSDIS estimated funding requirements. GAO found that: (1) EOS program costs will total $8.3 billion through fiscal year (FY) 2000; (2) the EOSDIS Core System contract is expected to cost $826 million through FY 2003; (3) about one-third of EOS costs will go to EOSDIS, which will operate EOS satellites and instruments, provide ground acquisition, processing, storage, management, and distribution of EOS data, and make the enormous quantity of data accessible to as many as 10,000 scientists and other users; and (4) NASA has developed an interim system to make current earth science data from disparate systems available to users.

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network's (FinCEN) products and services in support of law enforcement, focusing on: (1) trends in the types and quantities of products and services provided by FinCEN to the law enforcement community; (2) the extent to which FinCEN's products and services have been considered useful by the law enforcement community in identifying, developing, or prosecuting money laundering and other financial crime cases; (3) the extent to which FinCEN evaluates the states' compliance with applicable controls over access to and use of information when state law enforcement officials directly access FinCEN's resources; and (4) FinCEN's efforts to provide Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Form 8300 information to the law enforcement community.

Pursuant to a legislative requirement, GAO provided information on the Administration on Aging's (AOA) efforts to promote service coordination for the elderly. GAO found that: (1) consistent with the growth in the elderly population between 1980 and 1990, state and federal programs serving the elderly grew rapidly, but AOA did not keep pace with the growing coordination needs; (2) poor service integration in many states hindered the elderly and their families in obtaining services; (3) AOA substantially reduced information dissemination and technical assistance activities, leaving state and local governments on their own to develop ways to coordinate services; (4) AOA did not maintain its knowledge base about state and local advances in service coordination, resulting in a weakened capacity to provide assistance; and (5) between 1981 and 1989, AOA staff decreased from 252 to 162, travel funds decreased from $238,000 to $45,000, and research and demonstration funding dropped from $54 million to $26 million.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on the United States Information Agency's (USIA) Office of Cuba Broadcasting (OCB), focusing on the: (1) OCB reinvention plan; (2) role and use of OCB research analysts; (3) reasons behind a former OCB director's resignation; (4) extent to which Radio Marti is in compliance with Voice of America (VOA) broadcast standards; and (5) investigation into allegations of management reprisals at OCB. GAO found that: (1) the OCB plan to reduce costs and eliminate nonessential staff was consistent with overall executive branch goals and the recommendations of the Radio Marti/TV Marti advisory panel, but was not based on a comprehensive cost-benefit assessment of key OCB departments and support functions; (2) the former director of OCB resigned because of frustration stemming from his unsuccessful attempts to further streamline OCB or implement the reinvention plan; (3) in 1992, OCG removed research analysts from on-air programming, and questions began to surface about their policy compliance role; (4) current news and program officials believe that the analytical unit's services have diminished in importance; (5) the USIA Office of Inspector General (OIG) is investigating allegations of management reprisals in OCB, but the investigation has been controversial because of the release of partial information and affidavits during the investigation; and (6) USIA referred the conduct of the OIG investigation to the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency for investigation.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

The consensus of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the World Health Organization, and other major health agencies is that the research to date does not show radiofrequency energy emitted from mobile phones has harmful health effects, but there is not yet enough information to conclude that they pose no risk. Although most of the epidemiological and laboratory studies done on this issue have found no adverse health effects, the findings of some studies have raised questions about cancer and other health problems that require further study. The Cellular Telecommunication & Internet Association (CTIA) and FDA will jointly conduct research on mobile phone health affects. Although the initiative is funded solely by CTIA, FDA's active role in setting the research agenda and providing scientific oversight should help alleviate concerns about the objectivity of the report. The media has widely reported on the debate over whether mobile phones can cause health problems. Thus, the federal government's role in providing the public with clear information on this issue is particularly important. FDA has a consumer information update on mobile phone health issues but has not revised that data since October 1999. Consequently FDA does not discuss the significance of major, recently published research studies that have been reported in the press. FDA said that it has not revised the update because the scientific picture has not changed significantly.

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO determined the potential U.S. financial obligations to the Philippines when the United States closes two military facilities there, focusing on: (1) the costs of separation allowances and contract termination; (2) whether the United States can recover any equipment for reuse elsewhere; and (3) whether the United States has any obligation for environmental cleanup or restoration. GAO found that: (1) U.S. liabilities for separation allowances totalled approximately $71.3 million, as of March 31, 1991; (2) Air Force and Navy activities underfunded severance pay liabilities by $12.9 million; (3) with the exception of Navy industrial fund's $10.1-million liability, the Department of Defense (DOD) stated that it had sufficient resources available to cover the shortfall; (4) most activities had not set aside funds for the $15.5 million in sick and annual leave liabilities because, under DOD policy, those liabilities are not funded until they are ready to be paid; (5) U.S. liabilities for contract termination costs are estimated to be $3.7 million; (6) the United States has invested $2.199 billion in military facilities in the Philippines, and the Air Force plans to remove 75 percent of the removable property and declare the balance excess to U.S. requirements; and (7) the Air Force and Navy have identified significant environmental damage at the bases, basing agreement does not impose responsibility upon the United States.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

In response to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the National Endowment for Democracy's procedures for selecting, monitoring, and evaluating its grantee programs. GAO found that the Endowment: (1) relied on its grantees to select, monitor, and evaluate their own programs in 1984 and 1985; (2) did not implement a comprehensive planning process or develop an overall plan reflecting its priorities in terms of geographic areas or project types, thereby limiting its selection process to funding projects that its grantees developed and submitted; (3) did little independent verification of financial and other program information; and (4) evaluated only a few projects during the first 2 years of operation, since they were the only projects that were completed by then. GAO noted that in March 1986, the Endowment approved a policy statement clarifying its responsibilities for oversight of appropriated funds and defining its relationship with grantees.

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the status of the Department of Defense's (DOD) Small Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) Program. GAO found that: (1) although DOD anticipated deploying the Small ICBM weapon system in 1997, it is reconsidering that goal due to changes in the international environment, the reduced threat in a post-Strategic Arms Reduction Talks environment, and the high cost to procure and operate mobile ICBM; (2) although the DOD ICBM budget for fiscal years 1992 through 1997 will not support achievement of initial deployment in 1997, DOD stated that it is proceeding with ICBM development to provide a possible replacement for another missile, provide a survivable basing option for ICBM, and protect an option for basing ICBM; (3) until DOD provides updated direction, program funding needs are uncertain; (4) although DOD has made progress in developing ICBM, such unresolved issues remained as the missile's capability, viability of the missile's design, and availability of parts; (5) the Air Force failed to provide sufficient information to Congress in its ICBM selected acquisition report regarding information on the status of weapon system acquisitions to permit meaningful congressional oversight; and (6) DOD anticipates deploying ICBM with most of the design improvements in 1993.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

The status of the Appalachian Development Highway System in West Virginia is described, and factors preventing its timely completion are identified. The Highway System was authorized to overcome the region's isolation and to encourage economic growth. Estimated costs rose from $618 million in 1966 to $1,573 million by January 1976, and, although all West Virginia highway corridors were to be completed or under construction by June 30, 1976, only 57 percent of the State's participating miles were completed or under construction. More than 140 new plants were located in West Virginia between 1969 and 1975 and 83 plants were expanded from 1973 to 1975. Cost increases and delays are attributed to: (1) highway construction cost inflation; (2) changed highway design and safety standards; (3) revised relocation assistance requirements; (4) delays associated with environmental protection; (5) lack of matching funds in other states; and (6) federal funding limitations. Continued funding limitations appear inconsistent with the purpose of the Appalachian Regional Development Act.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO identified critical questions that state and local decisionmakers found useful when considering whether to privatize a government activity, focusing on lessons learned concerning: (1) political champion issues; (2) implementation structure; (3) legislative and resource changes; (4) reliable cost data; (5) strategies for workforce transition; and (6) monitoring and oversight. GAO noted that: (1) the six governments it visited tailored their approaches to privatization to their particular political, economic, and labor environments; (2) in the six governments, a political leader or, in one case, several leaders working in concert, played a crucial role in introducing privatization; (3) five of the six governments GAO reviewed established governmentwide commissions to identify privatization opportunities among government activities and to set policies to guide privatization initiatives; (4) the commissions were created either by the chief executive or by the state legislature; (5) the governments found that privatization can take various forms, such as contracting out and assets sales, and that implementation strategies and analyses need to be tailored to the project or situation and will likely vary depending on the form of privatization; (6) governments may need to enact legislative changes and reduce resources available to government agencies in order to encourage greater use of privatization; (7) most of the governments GAO surveyed used estimated cost data, because obtaining complete cost and performance data by activity from their accounting systems was difficult; (8) GAO found that governments needed to develop strategies to help their workforces make the transition to a private-sector environment; (9) for example, all six governments developed programs or policies to address employee concerns with possible job loss due to privatization; and (10) officials from all six governments worked to enhance their employees' skills so that they could undertake more sophisticated, complex activities, such as wastewater treatment or the medical care of prisoners.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent agency that works for Congress. The GAO watches over Congress, and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayers dollars. The Comptroller General of the United States is the leader of the GAO, and is appointed to a 15-year term by the U.S. President. The GAO wants to support Congress, while at the same time doing right by the citizens of the United States. They audit, investigate, perform analyses, issue legal decisions and report anything that the government is doing. This is one of their reports.

The U.S. Customs Service has requested $206.9 million for its Automated Commercial Environment (ACE)--a new import processing system. Customs' second expenditure plan provides for (1) meeting the Office of Management and Budget's capital planning and investment control review requirements; (2) complying with Customs' enterprise architecture; and (3) complying with federal acquisition rules, requirements, guidelines, and systems acquisition management practices. ACE will fundamentally change Customs' and many other organizations' business processes by introducing new system capabilities. ACE will be available around the clock to support important commercial and enforcement systems. Customs did not meet key commitments made in its first ACE expenditure plan because of underestimating funding requirements. Actual requirements were 90 percent higher than estimated. This history casts uncertainty on Customs' ability to reliably estimate costs and meet future commitments. GAO found that Customs lacks management controls in four areas: enterprise architecture, human capital, software acquisition management, and cost estimation. Because Customs has compressed its ACE acquisition plans from five to four years, the degree of overlap of program increments has increased. This may increase the risk that ACE capabilities will not be delivered on time and within budget.