Since 2001, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) has been working to develop the policies and plans to build the Electronic Records Archives (ERA), a major information system that is intended to preserve and provide access to massive volumes of all types and formats of electronic records. Senate Report 108-146 directed GAO to provide a progress report on NARA's development of the ERA system. Specifically, GAO's objective was to determine the agency's progress in implementing recommendations from previous assessments.

GAO discussed low-income housing tax credit utilization and syndication. GAO found that: (1) tax credits are intended to induce investors to supply equity for low-income housing; (2) tax credit use increased from 20 percent in 1987 to 98 percent in 1989; (3) by the end of 1989, about $565 million worth of initial-year credits were awarded for the development of 236,000 low-income housing units; (4) the credit program represents the federal government's primary subsidy for encouraging low-income housing production; (5) most tax credit syndications have been conducted as public offerings, with limited partnership interests in tax-credit-eligible projects being sold to individual investors; and (6) many syndications are being conducted as direct placement, usually to corporate investors.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers the contaminants in storm water runoff as a significant threat to water quality across the nation. Prompted by Congress, EPA has responded with various initiatives, including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Storm Water Program, which requires more than 1,000 local governments to undertake storm water management programs. Those municipalities in Phase I of the program have been trying to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff for several years, and it is time to begin evaluating their efforts. EPA however, has not established measurable goals for this program, nor has it attempted to evaluate the program's effectiveness in reducing storm water pollution or to determine its cost. EPA attributes its inaction to inconsistent data reporting from municipalities, insufficient staff resources, and other competing priorities within the Office of Wastewater Management. Although municipalities report monitoring and cost data to EPA or state regulatory agencies annually, these agencies have not reviewed this information to determine whether it can be useful in determining the program's overall effectiveness or cost. GAO found that the reported cost information will be difficult to analyze unless EPA and its state partners set guidelines to elicit more standardized reporting. Better data on costs and program effectiveness are needed--especially in light of the Phase II program that will involve thousands more municipalities in 2003. EPA's planned research grant to the University of Alabama and its pilot project to analyze data from annual reports and develop baseline indicators is a step in the right direction and could point the way for a more comprehensive approach.

Pursuant to congressional requests, GAO compared public housing authorities' (PHA) development of housing under the Public Housing Development Program and Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program, focusing on the: (1) characteristics of the tenants served; (2) characteristics of the projects developed; (3) costs of each program to the federal government; and (4) administrative experiences of PHA when developing housing through each program. GAO found that: (1) families with children were somewhat more likely to have serious housing problems than the elderly; (2) unlike the public housing program, the tax credit program did not provide PHA with an operating subsidy when tenants could not provide enough rent to cover operating costs; (3) the development of tax credit projects was not subject to Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulation and review; (4) HUD grants covered almost all of the public housing project development costs, while tax credits only generated enough cash to pay for more than half of the costs of developing the tax credit projects; (5) PHA had higher administrative costs when using the tax credit program; and (6) federal regulations and procedures for the public housing program greatly affected project development and completion.