This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-08-307R 
entitled 'Bureau of Reclamation: Reimbursement of California's Central 
Valley Project Capital Construction Costs by San Luis Unit Irrigation 
Water Districts' which was released on January 17, 2008.

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: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

December 18, 2007: 

The Honorable Nick J. Rahall, II:
Chairman:
Committee on Natural Resources:
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable Grace F. Napolitano:
Chairwoman:
Subcommittee on Water and Power:
Committee on Natural Resources:
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable George Miller:
House of Representatives: 

Subject: Bureau of Reclamation: Reimbursement of California's Central 
Valley Project Capital Construction Costs by San Luis Unit Irrigation 
Water Districts: 

In 1960, Congress authorized the construction of the San Luis Unit of 
the Central Valley Project (CVP) in California. The CVP is a network of 
dams, canals, pumps, and other facilities providing water for multiple 
uses. Located south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the San Luis 
Unit is a component of the CVP and was built jointly by the Department 
of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and the state of 
California. The San Luis Unit stores and delivers water that is used 
for various purposes, including agriculture, municipal and industrial 
uses, and fish and wildlife needs. Four irrigation water districts in 
the San Luis Unit currently receive water from the CVP. Westlands is 
the largest of these districts, covering about three-quarters of the 
land in the San Luis Unit. The three smaller districts are Pacheco, 
Panoche, and San Luis. Reclamation has a water service contract with 
each irrigation water district to deliver CVP water to the district's 
farmers and other water users at a set rate per acre-foot. Existing 
water service contracts may be renewed for a period of no more than 25 
years. 

The San Luis Unit includes water storage and delivery facilities, such 
as dams, canals, and pumps, as well as the San Luis Drain. This drain 
was designed to return used irrigation water to the delta, but it was 
never completed. Drainage is needed for about 400,000 acres of the San 
Luis Unit's approximately 700,000 acres because a layer of clay 
prevents natural drainage, trapping salt and water in the root zone of 
crops and reducing the land's agricultural productivity. Construction 
of the San Luis Drain was halted in the mid-1970s, in part because of 
environmental concerns, including harmful effects on wildlife, caused 
by the drainage water. It was later determined that selenium was being 
leached out of the soil by the drainage water and accumulating in the 
Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge, where it was linked to deaths and 
deformities in waterfowl. In response to litigation by Westlands 
farmers, a federal court held in 2000 that Reclamation, while not 
necessarily required to complete the San Luis Drain, must provide a 
drainage solution for the San Luis Unit. 

Reclamation is considering two options to provide drainage for the San 
Luis Unit. The first option, which would be implemented by Reclamation, 
would include land retirement, evaporation ponds, and treatment methods 
to remove salt and selenium from the water. Reclamation has completed 
its preliminary planning for this option, including an environmental 
impact statement and a record of decision.[Footnote 1] Reclamation's 
preliminary estimate of the cost of implementing this option is 
$2.7 billion. The second option would transfer responsibility for 
providing a drainage solution to the four San Luis Unit irrigation 
water districts. In exchange for assuming this responsibility, the 
irrigation water districts have proposed that they receive, among other 
things, (1) forgiveness of their obligation to repay their portion of 
total CVP capital construction costs (2) transfer of title to certain 
federally owned irrigation facilities in the San Luis Unit to the 
irrigation water districts, and (3) approval of 60-year water service 
contracts.[Footnote 2] 

To assist you in evaluating the proposed drainage solutions, you asked 
us to determine (1) how much the federal government has spent to 
construct the CVP, including the San Luis Unit irrigation and drainage 
facilities, and what amount is reimbursable by water users, and (2) how 
much of the reimbursable CVP construction cost has been allocated to 
San Luis Unit irrigation water districts and how much they have repaid. 

On November 7, 2007, we briefed your staff on the results of our work. 
This report summarizes the information presented in that briefing and 
officially transmits the slides used during the briefing. This report 
also provides additional information that your staff requested during 
the briefing on (1) the extent to which the San Luis Unit irrigation 
water districts have received "ability-to-pay" financial assistance, 
(2) the extent to which the districts have repaid the cost of the 
Kesterson Cleanup Program, and (3) how the districts are paying for 
drainage service and how Reclamation is handling the payments. 

Summary: 

Reclamation's total capital cost to construct the CVP as of September 
30, 2006, is about $3.4 billion. Construction of the San Luis Unit 
portion of the CVP, including land, land rights, and buildings, cost 
$778 million--about $722.5 million for construction of 28 storage, 
conveyance, and pumping facilities and $55.5 million for the San Luis 
Drain. Reclamation has determined that about $2.9 billion of the total 
CVP capital construction cost, or 84 percent, is reimbursable. The 
reimbursable amount is distributed to various water users, including 
irrigation water districts, which benefit from one or more of the 
project's purposes, such as water supply and power generation. 
Reclamation has determined that, according to the various benefits they 
receive from the CVP, irrigation water districts are responsible for 
repaying about $1.6 billion, or 55 percent, of the reimbursable CVP 
construction costs. Reimbursement of the remaining $1.3 billion is 
provided by other users, such as municipal and industrial water users. 

Of the $1.6 billion CVP-wide capital construction costs reimbursable by 
irrigation water districts, as of September 30, 2005, $523 million had 
been allocated to five San Luis Unit districts: Broadview, Pacheco, 
Panoche, San Luis, and Westlands, for repayment based on the terms of 
their water service contracts.[Footnote 3] As of that date, the San 
Luis Unit irrigation water districts had paid about $74 million of 
their portion of CVP-wide capital construction costs, leaving about 
$449 million to be repaid by 2030. (See enclosure, briefing slide 13, 
for a detailed breakout of the amounts owed, repaid, and remaining for 
each irrigation water district.) In general, CVP water users are not 
responsible for reimbursing the capital costs of constructing specific 
facilities within their unit. Instead, water users are responsible for 
reimbursing a portion of total CVP costs. Most of the San Luis Unit 
capital construction costs--with certain exceptions--are pooled for 
reimbursement with the costs of constructing the rest of the CVP. In 
addition to their share of the CVP capital costs that are pooled, 
irrigation water districts reimburse the federal government for certain 
specific project costs they benefit from. For example, the cost of the 
San Luis Drain is being reimbursed solely by the Panoche, San Luis, and 
Westlands irrigation water districts; the costs of specific pumps are 
also paid solely by the irrigation water districts that benefit from 
them. In addition, according to Reclamation, Westlands alone is 
responsible for repaying the cost of the district's water distribution 
system--about $179 million--under a separate repayment contract. As of 
September 30, 2006, Westlands had paid $131 million, leaving 
$48 million to be repaid. Thus, the combined total CVP capital 
construction costs remaining to be repaid by San Luis Unit irrigation 
water districts under water service contracts and repayment contracts 
amount to about $497 million. 

In addition, we determined that: 

* According to Reclamation officials, San Luis Unit irrigation water 
districts have never received ability-to-pay irrigation assistance to 
reduce their capital repayment obligations. Such assistance can be 
provided to irrigation water districts when Reclamation determines that 
they do not have the ability to repay their share of capital costs. 

* The total capital cost of the Kesterson Cleanup Program was about 
$26.6 
million, according to Reclamation. The reimbursable capital cost of 
about $19.8 million was allocated entirely to the Westlands water 
district and is included in the total CVP capital costs of about $437.6 
million allocated to Westlands for reimbursement. 

* A specific amount of the water rates paid by the Panoche, San Luis, 
and Westlands irrigation water districts--depending on the terms of 
their water service contracts--is for drainage. According to 
Reclamation officials, the original water service contracts for all 
three districts required a fixed rate of 50 cents per acre-foot for 
drainage. These contracts have been amended over the years so that the 
districts pay either (1) an annually adjusted rate for all of their 
water, which in 2007 included a rate of $1.30 per acre-foot for 
drainage, or (2) the fixed rate for part of their water and the 
adjustable rate for the remainder. Although the water rates paid by the 
three irrigation water districts include an amount for drainage, 
Reclamation does not credit these payments specifically toward paying 
back the capital costs of the San Luis Drain. Rather, as mentioned 
above, Reclamation applies the payments to the portion of the total CVP 
costs that each irrigation water district is responsible for. 

Agency Comments: 

We obtained comments from Reclamation on our draft briefing slides and 
on the additional information provided in this report. Reclamation 
officials concurred with our findings and provided us with technical 
comments, which we have incorporated as appropriate. 

Scope and Methodology: 

To determine the CVP capital construction costs and the amount 
allocated to and reimbursed by irrigation water districts in the San 
Luis Unit, we analyzed Reclamation's CVP financial statements and cost 
allocation tables. We relied on the independent audit report issued by 
the public accounting firm KPMG for Reclamation's fiscal year 2006 
financial statements for assurance of data reliability. We interviewed 
and collected documentation from management and financial staff in 
Reclamation's Mid-Pacific region and Fresno area offices, and we 
visited the San Luis Unit facilities. To obtain stakeholder views on 
Reclamation's cost and allocation information, we interviewed and, when 
applicable, collected documentation from entities such as the 
California Department of Water Resources, State Water Resources Control 
Board, Westlands Water District, and the Natural Resources Defense 
Council. The dollar amounts provided are the actual costs of 
construction, unadjusted for inflation. We conducted our audit work 
from June through October 2007, in accordance with generally accepted 
government auditing standards. 

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents 
of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days 
from the report date. At that time, we will send copies of this report 
to the Secretary of the Interior and appropriate congressional 
committees. We will also make copies available to others upon request. 
In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web 
site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-3841 or mittala@gao.gov. Contact points for our 
Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 
the last page of this report. Major contributors to this report were 
Stephen D. Secrist, Assistant Director; Ellen W. Chu; Brad Dobbins; 
Cindy Gilbert; Wyatt R. Hundrup; Richard Johnson; and Mehrzad Nadji. 

Signed by: 

Anu K. Mittal:
Director, Natural Resources and Environment: 

Enclosure: 

[End of correspondence] 

Enclosure: 

California’s Central Valley Project: 

Reimbursement of Capital Construction Costs for the San Luis Unit: 

November 7, 2007: 

Background: 

The Central Valley Project (CVP) in California is a network of dams, 
canals, pumps, and other facilities providing water for agriculture and 
other uses. 

The CVP includes the San Luis Unit, a primarily agricultural area 
approximately 700,000 acres in size south of the Sacramento–San Joaquin 
Delta (see attachment 1 for map). 

Authorized by Congress in 1960, the San Luis Unit was constructed by 
the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and the state of California to 
include water storage, conveyance, and pumping facilities, as well as 
the San Luis Drain, which was designed to return used irrigation water 
to the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. 

Drainage of used irrigation water is needed for about 400,000 acres in 
the San Luis Unit because a layer of clay prevents natural drainage, 
trapping salt and water in the root zone of crops and making these 
lands less productive. 

Begun in 1968, construction of the San Luis Drain was halted in the mid-
1970s before completion, in part because of environmental concerns, 
including harmful effects on wildlife, caused by the drainage water. 

In 2000, a federal court held that Reclamation was not necessarily 
required to construct a drain—i.e., to complete the San Luis Drain—but 
was obligated to provide a solution for draining the irrigated lands in 
the San Luis Unit. 

Four irrigation water districts in the San Luis Unit currently receive 
water from the CVP. Westlands is the largest, covering over three-
quarters of the land in the San Luis Unit. The three smaller districts 
are Pacheco, Panoche, and San Luis. 

Each irrigation water district contracts with Reclamation to deliver 
CVP water to the district’s farmers at a district-specific cost per 
acre-foot. Contracts are generally for a 25-year term. Farmers who 
receive CVP water pay their water district. 

In addition to irrigation water districts, CVP water is also used by 
others such as municipal and industrial entities, commercial power 
generators, and the state of California. 

Reclamation is considering two options to provide drainage for the San 
Luis Unit: 

* an option to be implemented by Reclamation, which includes land 
retirement, evaporation ponds, and other methods; and; 

* an option that would transfer drainage responsibility to the four San 
Luis Unit irrigation water districts, which would provide drainage in 
exchange for Reclamation’s: 
- forgiving the irrigation water districts’ obligations to repay their 
portion of total CVP capital construction costs; 
- transferring title to certain facilities in the San Luis Unit to the 
irrigation water districts, and; 
- approving 60-year water supply contracts. 

Objectives: 

1. How much has the federal government spent to construct the CVP, 
including the San Luis Unit irrigation and drainage facilities, and 
what amount is reimbursable by water users? 

2. How much of the reimbursable CVP construction cost has been 
allocated to San Luis Unit irrigation water districts, and how much 
have they repaid? 

Scope and Methodology: 

To determine the CVP capital construction costs and the amount 
allocated to and reimbursed by irrigation water districts in the San 
Luis Unit, we analyzed Reclamation’s CVP financial statements and cost 
allocation tables. 

We visited the San Luis Unit, met with Reclamation’s Mid-Pacific region 
and Fresno area office management and financial staff, and we 
interviewed state and local stakeholders. 

We relied on the independent audit report issued by the public 
accounting firm KPMG for Reclamation’s fiscal year 2006 financial 
statements for assurance of data reliability. 

The dollar amounts provided are the actual costs of construction, 
unadjusted for inflation. 

Objective 1: CVP Capital Construction Costs and Reimbursable Amounts: 

The total capital cost to construct the CVP as of September 30, 2006, 
is about $3.4 billion. 

Reclamation calculates how much of the capital construction cost is 
reimbursable under law. The costs assigned to the purposes of flood 
control, navigation, and water quality, and the majority of those 
assigned to fish and wildlife needs and recreation are not considered 
reimbursable. 

Reclamation then divides the total reimbursable construction costs 
among the various purposes of the CVP, such as supplying water to 
agriculture and cities and generating power. 

Overall, Reclamation has determined that about $2.9 billion, or 84 
percent of the $3.4 billion total CVP capital construction cost, is 
reimbursable. 

The reimbursable amount is distributed to various water users, such as 
irrigation water districts, which benefit from one or more of the 
purposes of the project. For example, irrigation water districts 
benefit primarily from water supply and power generation. 

Reclamation has determined that, according to the various benefits they 
receive from CVP, irrigation water districts are responsible for 
repaying about $1.6 billion, or 55 percent, of the reimbursable 
construction costs. Reimbursement of the remaining $1.3 billion is 
provided by others, such as municipal and industrial water users. 

Objective 1: San Luis Unit Capital Construction Costs: 

The total capital cost of constructing the San Luis Unit portion of the 
CVP, including land, land rights, and buildings, is $778 million, of 
which $722.5 million is for the unit’s 28 storage, conveyance, and 
pumping facilities, and $55.5 million is for the San Luis Drain. 

Attachment 2 lists the San Luis Unit facilities and their individual 
costs. 

Objective 2: San Luis Unit Construction Costs Are Pooled With CVP 
Construction Costs: 

CVP water users are not specifically responsible for reimbursing the 
costs of constructing the facilities in their unit. Instead, water 
users are responsible for reimbursing a portion of the overall CVP 
costs through the water rates they pay. 

Therefore, most of the San Luis Unit construction costs—with certain 
exceptions—are pooled for reimbursement with the costs of constructing 
the rest of the CVP. 

Certain construction costs are not pooled, such as the cost of the San 
Luis Drain, which is reimbursed solely by the Panoche, San Luis, and 
Westlands irrigation water districts; the costs of certain pumps are 
also paid solely by the districts they benefit. 

Objective 2: CVP Capital Construction Costs Allocated to San Luis Unit 
Irrigators: 

Of the $1.6 billion CVP-wide construction costs reimbursable by all CVP 
irrigation water districts, as of September 30, 2005, $523 million had 
been allocated to five San Luis Unit irrigation water districts: 
Broadview, Pacheco, Panoche, San Luis, and Westlands. 

As of September 30, 2005, the San Luis Unit irrigation water districts 
had paid about $74 million for their portion of CVP-wide capital 
construction costs, leaving about $449 million to be repaid by 2030. 

In addition, Westlands is solely responsible for repaying the cost of 
the district’s water distribution system—$179 million of the $1.6 
billion CVP-wide costs. As of September 30, 2006, Westlands had paid 
$131 million, leaving $48 million to be repaid. 

Objective 2: Allocated Costs Repaid and Remaining for San Luis Unit 
Water Districts: 

Water districts: Broadview[A]; 
Total CVP cost allocated: $6,320,674; 
Amount repaid: $1,383,979; 
Remaining reimbursement: $4,936,695. 

Water districts: Pacheco; 
Total CVP cost allocated: $2,705,562; 
Amount repaid: $1,298,282; 
Remaining reimbursement: $1,407,280. 

Water districts: Panoche; 
Total CVP cost allocated: $27,876,409; 
Amount repaid: $4,065,084; 
Remaining reimbursement: $23,811,325. 

Water districts: San Luis; 
Total CVP cost allocated: $48,792,775; 
Amount repaid: $2,212,196; 
Remaining reimbursement: $46,580,579. 

Water districts: Westlands; 
Total CVP cost allocated: $437,589,835; 
Amount repaid: $65,512,869; 
Remaining reimbursement: $372,076,966. 

Water districts: Total; 
Total CVP cost allocated: $523, 285,255; 
Amount repaid: $74,472,410; 
Remaining reimbursement: $448,812,845. 

Source: GAO analysis of Reclamation information. 

Note: Data in the table are as of September 30, 2005, which is the most 
current available data from Reclamation. 

[A] Effective March 1, 2007, Broadview was annexed by Westlands and has 
assigned all of its CVP water to Westlands. 

[End of table] 

Drainage Option Costs: 

Drainage option to be implemented by Reclamation: 

* According to Reclamation’s preliminary estimate, the cost of 
providing drainage would total approximately $2.7 billion. 

Drainage option to be implemented by the San Luis Unit water 
districts—costs to the federal government may include: 

* forgiveness of the irrigation water districts’ responsibilities to 
repay their share of CVP capital construction costs: about $449 
million; 

* forgiveness of certain loan, interest, and operations and maintenance 
obligations: $48 million for Westlands’ distribution system, and other 
costs unknown; and; 

* transferring title to certain facilities: value unknown. 

Attachment 1: Map of the San Luis Unit and Drainage-Impaired Lands: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure is a map of the San Luis Unit and drainage-impaired lands. 
Included is an inset map of the central California coastal region. The 
map of the San Luis Unit and drainage-impaired lands includes the 
following legend of depicted areas: 

Wetlands Drainage-Impaired Lands; 
Northerly Area Drainage-Impaired Lands; 
Non-Impacted Lands; 
San Luis Unit Boundary; 
Grassland Drainage Area; 
Existing San Luis Drain. 

Source: Bureau of Reclamation. 

[End of attachment] 

Attachment 2: San Luis Unit Facility Plant, Land, and Building Costs as 
of September 30, 2006: 

Plant: Westlands Water District Distribution System; 
Cost: $174,913,748. 

Plant: San Luis Canal; 
Cost: $174,240,391. 

Plant: San Luis (Sisk) Dam and Reservoir; 
Cost: $92,625,645 

Plant: W.R. Gianelli Pump-Generating Plant; 
Cost: $69,192,444. 

Plant: San Luis Drain; 
Cost: $55,522,650. 

Plant: San Luis Relift Pumping Plant (Westlands Water District); 
Cost: $36,813,152. 

Plant: Dos Amigos Pumping Plant; 
Cost: $28,401,287. 

Plant: San Luis Canal Turnout; 
Cost: $18,237,587. 

Plant: O'Neill Dam, Forebay and Wasteway; 
Cost: $17,229,108. 

Plant: O'Neill Pumping Plant; 
Cost: $11,045,732. 

Plant: Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant; 
Cost: $9,605,828. 

Plant: Permanent Operating Facilities; 
Cost: $8,693,160. 

Plant: Coalinga Canal; 
Cost: $7,887,618. 

Plant: Los Banos Creek Detention Dam and Reservoir; 
Cost: $4,704,733. 

Plant: O'Neill Forebay and Wasteway—Recreation; 
Cost: $3,621,984. 

Plant: San Luis Reservoir—Recreation; 
Cost: $3,469,879. 

Plant: Little Panoche Creek Detention Dam and Reservoir; 
Cost: $3,279,302. 

Plant: O'Neill Pumping Plant Intake Channel; 
Cost: $1,457,253. 

Plant: San Luis Relift Pumping Plant (Pleasant Valley Water District); 
Cost: $1,362,467. 

Plant: Lemoore Naval Air Station—Municipal and Industrial; 
Cost: $1,139,037. 

Plant: San Luis Switchyard; 
Cost: $1,056,316. 

Plant: Dos Amigos Switchyard; 
Cost: $594,700. 

Plant: Los Banos Substation—70kv Breaker; 
Cost: $447,408. 

Plant: Permanent Operating Facilities—San Luis; 
Cost: $230,708. 

Plant: O'Neill Pumping Plant Switchyard; 
Cost: $212,474. 

Plant: City of Huron Distribution System—Municipal and Industrial; 
Cost: $77,560. 

Plant: Fish and Wildlife Facility; 
Cost: $48,900. 

Plant: Los Banos Reservoir—Recreation; 
Cost: $17,074. 

Plant: San Luis Canal—Recreation; 
Cost: $561. 

Total facility plant cost: $726,128,705. 

Land and rights: 
Cost: $51,567,636. 

Buildings: 
Costs: $337,365. 

Total costs: $778,033,707. 

Source: GAO analysis of Bureau of Reclamation data. 

Notes: Construction in progress on the San Luis Canal and the O'Neill 
Pumping Plant totals $1,052,745. The dollar amounts provided are the 
actual costs of construction, unadjusted for inflation. Totals may not 
add due to rounding. The facility plant costs presented do not include 
the associated land and land rights costs. Therefore, the total cost of 
Westlands' distribution system to be repaid by the district is $179 
million; $175 million for plant, and $4 million for land and land 
rights. 

[End of attachment] 

[End of enclosure] 

Footnotes: 

[1] San Luis Drainage Feature Re-evaluation: Final Environmental Impact 
Statement, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, May 
2006, and San Luis Drainage Feature Re-evaluation: Record of Decision, 
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, March 2007. The 
record of decision identifies the alternative plans considered by 
Reclamation, the plan selected for implementation, and the basis for 
the selection. 

[2] Negotiations are ongoing, and this proposal may not represent the 
water districts' final position. 

[3] Data as of September 30, 2005, is the most current available from 
Reclamation. Effective March 1, 2007, Broadview was annexed by 
Westlands and has assigned all of its CVP water to Westlands. 

[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 Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "Subscribe to Updates." 

Order by Mail or Phone: 

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

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

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

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

Contact: 

Web site: [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: 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 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, D.C. 20548: