a

GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Report to Congressional Committees

June 2002 FEDERAL PENSIONS

Judicial Survivors’ 

Annuities System 

Costs

GAO-02-763
Page i GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 3

History of JSAS 3

Defining Cost for JSAS 5

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 5

Portion of JSAS Costs Covered by Judges’ Contributions Varied 6

Adjustment That Would Be Needed in Judges’ Contribution Rates 8

Agency Comments 9

Appendixes

Appendix I: Retirement Plans Available to Federal Judges 11

Appendix II: Formulas Used to Determine Judges’ and the Government’s 

Contributions and Lump Sum Payments 13

Tables Table 1: Percentage Share of JSAS Normal Costs Borne by 

Participating Judges and the Government, Plan Years 

1999-2001 7

Table 2: Average Percentage Share of Contribution for Judges and 

the Government 9

Abbreviations

AOUSC Administrative Office of the United States Courts 

COLA cost-of-living adjustment

CSRS Civil Service Retirement System

FERS Federal Employees’ Retirement System

JSAS Judicial Survivors’ Annuities System

NC normal cost

PVFB present value of future benefits

PVFNC present value of future normal costs

PVFS present value of future salaries
Page ii GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs
Page 1 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

June 26, 2002 Letr

The Honorable Patrick J. Leahy

Chairman

The Honorable Orrin G. Hatch 

Ranking Minority Member

Committee on the Judiciary

United States Senate

The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.

Chairman

The Honorable John Conyers, Jr.

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on the Judiciary

House of Representatives

This report was prepared in response to the requirements of the Federal 

Courts Administration Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-572) specifying that we 

review certain aspects of the Judicial Survivors’ Annuities System (JSAS), 

which is one of several survivor benefit plans applicable to particular 

groups of federal employees. JSAS provides annuities to surviving spouses 

and dependent children of deceased Supreme Court Justices, judges of the 

United States, and other judicial officials1

 who participate in JSAS. 

The 1992 act enhanced the benefits available from JSAS and reduced the 

amounts that participating judges and other judicial officials were required 

to contribute toward the plan’s costs. The act requires us to review JSAS 

costs every 3 years and to determine whether the judges’ contributions 

represent 50 percent of the plan’s costs. If the contributions represent less 

than 50 percent of these costs, we are to determine what adjustments to the 

contribution rates would be needed to achieve the 50 percent figure. For 

the purpose of the review, we have examined the “normal cost” of the plan. 

The plan’s actuary using the plan’s funding method, in this case, the 

aggregate cost method, determines the plan’s normal cost. Under the 

aggregate cost method, the normal cost is the level percentage of future 

salaries, which will be sufficient, along with investment earnings and the

1

For simplicity, we will refer to the collective group of judicial participants as “judges”

throughout this report.
Page 2 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

plan’s assets, to pay the plan’s benefits. This is our third report since the 

passage of the 1992 act.2

 

Results in Brief For the 3 years covered by our review, the judges’ contributions 

represented more than the 50 percent of the JSAS normal costs for fiscal 

year 1999, but less than 50 percent for fiscal years 2000 and 2001. The 

participating judges paid 61 percent of JSAS normal costs during fiscal year 

1999 and approximately 48 percent of JSAS normal costs during fiscal years 

2000 and 2001. On the basis of data from plan years 1999, 2000, and 2001, 

the participating judges contributed, on an average, approximately 52 

percent of JSAS normal costs; the government’s share amounted to, on an 

average, approximately 48 percent. While the judges’ contribution rate 

remained fixed at 2.2 percent and 3.5 percent of salaries for active and 

retired judges, respectively, the government’s contribution rate increased 

from 1.5 percent of salaries in fiscal year 1999 to 2.6 percent of salaries in 

fiscal years 2000 and 2001. The increase in the government’s contribution 

was a result of an increase in normal costs resulting from a decline in the 

market value of assets held in JSAS, as well as an increase in plan benefits 

being paid over the period. 

To cover 50 percent of JSAS estimated future normal costs, the judges’

contributions would need to increase by 0.1 percentage point above the 2.2 

percent of salaries currently paid by active and senior judges and the 3.5 

percent of retirement salaries paid by retired judges. This would result in 

adjusted contribution rates of 2.3 and 3.6 percent, respectively. However, 

increasing required contributions could reduce the judges’ rate of 

participation, while increasing participation was one of the major reasons 

for enhancing JSAS benefits and reducing the judges’ contributions in 1992. 

In part, because of the small number of participants, short-term variability 

can be expected in normal costs and therefore a long-term view is 

important when evaluating the portion of normal costs covered by judges. 

Since enactment of the 1992 Federal Courts Administration Act, the annual 

share of normal costs covered by judges’ contributions has been 

approximately 47 percent on average. 

2

U.S. General Accounting Office, Federal Pensions: Judicial Survivors’ Annuities System 

Costs, GAO/GGD-00-125 (Washington, D.C.: May 25, 2000), and Federal Pensions: Judicial 

Survivors’ Annuities System Costs and Benefit Levels, GAO/GGD-97-87 (Washington, D.C.: 

June 27, 1997).
Page 3 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

Background Most federal civilian employees are covered by the Civil Service Retirement 

System (CSRS) or the Federal Employees’ Retirement System (FERS). 

Both of these retirement plans include survivor benefit provisions. Three 

separate retirement plans apply to various groups of judges in the federal 

judiciary, with JSAS being available to participants in all three retirement 

plans to provide annuities to their surviving spouses and children. 

Appendix I provides additional information regarding retirement plans that 

are available to federal judges.

History of JSAS JSAS was created in 1956 to provide financial security for the families of 

deceased federal judges. It provides benefits to eligible spouses and 

dependent children of judges who elect coverage within either 6 months of 

taking office, 6 months after getting married, or during an open season 

authorized by statute. Active and senior judges currently contribute 2.2 

percent of their salaries, and retired judges generally contribute 3.5 percent 

of their retirement salaries to JSAS. Upon a judge’s death, the surviving 

spouse is to receive an annual annuity that is equal to 1.5 percent of the 

judge’s average annual salary during the 3 highest consecutive paid years 

(commonly known as the “high 3”) times the judge’s years of creditable 

service. The annuity may not exceed 50 percent of the high 3 and is 

guaranteed to be no less than 25 percent. Separately, an unmarried 

dependent child under age 18, or 22 if a full-time student, receives a 

survivor annuity that is equal to a maximum of 10 percent of the judge’s 3 

highest paid years or 20 percent of the judge’s 3 highest paid years divided 

by the number of children, whichever is smaller. JSAS annuitants receive 

an annual adjustment in their annuities at the same time, and by the same 

percentage, as any cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) received by CSRS 

annuitants. Spouses and children are also eligible for Social Security 

survivor benefits. 

Since its inception in 1956, JSAS has changed several times. Because of 

concern that too few judges were participating in the plan (74 percent of 

federal judges participated in 1985, which was down from 90 percent in 

1976), Congress made broad reforms effective in 1986 with the Judicial 

Improvements Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-336). The 1985 Judicial 

Improvement Act (1) increased the annuity formula for surviving spouses 

from 1.25 percent to the current 1.5 percent of the high 3 for each year of 

creditable service and (2) changed the provisions for surviving children’s 

benefits to relate benefit amounts to judges’ high 3 rather than the specific 

dollar amounts provided by the Judicial Survivors’ Annuities Reform Act of 
Page 4 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

1976 (Public Law 94-554). In recognition of the significant benefit 

improvements that were made, the 1985 Judicial Improvements Act 

increased the amounts that judges were required to contribute from 4.5 

percent to 5 percent of their salaries, including retirement salaries.

The 1985 Judicial Improvements Act also changed the requirements for 

government contributions to the plan by specifying that the government 

would contribute whatever amounts were necessary (up to a maximum of 9 

percent of participating judges’ salaries or retirement salaries) to keep the 

plan fully funded. Under the 1976 Judicial Survivors’ Annuities Reform Act, 

the government matched the judges’ contributions of 4.5 percent of salaries 

and retirement salaries. Despite the benefit improvements in the 1985 

Judicial Improvements Act, the rate of participation in JSAS continued to 

decline. In 1991, the rate of participation was about 40 percent overall and 

25 percent for newly appointed judges.

In response to concerns that required contributions of 5 percent may have 

created a disincentive to participate, Congress enacted the 1992 Federal 

Courts Administration Act. Under this act, participants’ contribution 

requirements were reduced to 2.2 percent of salaries for active and senior 

judges and 3.5 percent of retirement salaries for retired judges. Another 

significant change was an increase in benefits for survivors of retired 

judges. This increase was accomplished by including years spent in 

retirement in the calculation of creditable service and the high 3 salary 

averages.3

The 1992 Federal Courts Administration Act also allowed the judges to stop 

contributing to the plan if they ceased to be married and granted benefits to 

survivors of any judge who died in the interim between leaving office and 

the commencement of a deferred annuity.4

 As of September 30, 2001, there 

were 1,256 active and senior judges, 203 retired judges, and 260 survivor 

annuitants covered under JSAS compared to 1,284 active and senior judges, 

136 retired judges, and 241 survivor annuitants as of September 30, 1998. 

3

The 1992 act changes include senior judges and judges who resign from their offices.

4

A judge who is not entitled to receive an immediate annuity upon leaving office, but is 

eligible to receive a deferred annuity at a later date, may remain in JSAS by contributing 3.5 

percent of the deferred annuity that he or she would be entitled to receive.
Page 5 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

Defining Cost for JSAS JSAS is financed by judges’ contributions and direct appropriations in an 

amount estimated to be sufficient to fund the future benefits to current 

participants.5

 The government’s contribution is approved through an 

annual appropriation and is not based on a rate or percentage of judges’

salaries. An enrolled actuary engaged by the Administrative Office of the 

United States Courts (AOUSC) calculates the annual amount of funding 

needed based on the difference between the present value of the expected 

future benefit payments to participants and the present value of net assets 

in the plan. Appendix II provides more details on the formulas used to 

determine the participants’ and the government’s contributions and lump 

sum payments. 

The cost of a retirement or survivor benefit plan is typically not measured 

by annual expenditures for benefits. Such expenditures are not an 

indicator of the overall long-term cost of a plan. The more complete and 

acceptable calculation of a plan’s cost is the projected future outlays to 

retirees or survivors, based on the current pool of participants, with such 

costs allocated annually. This annual cost allocation is referred to as the 

normal cost. Normal cost calculations, prepared by an enrolled actuary, 

are estimates and require that many actuarial assumptions be made about 

the future, including mortality rates, turnover rates, return on investments, 

salary increases, and COLA increases over the life spans of current and 

future participants. The plan’s actuary using the plan’s funding method, in 

this case, the aggregate cost method, determines the plan’s normal cost. 

Under the aggregate cost method, the normal cost is the level percentage of 

future salaries, which will be sufficient, along with investment earnings and 

the plan’s assets, to pay the plan’s benefits. There are many acceptable 

actuarial methods for calculating normal cost. Regardless of which cost 

method is chosen, the expected total long-term cost of the plan should be 

the same; however, year-to-year costs may differ, depending on the cost 

method used. 

Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Our objectives were to determine whether participating judges’

contributions for the 3 years ending in fiscal year 2001 accounted for 50 

percent of the JSAS costs and, if not, what adjustments in the contribution 

rates would be needed to achieve the 50 percent figure. 

5

JSAS investments are made only in U.S. Treasury securities.
Page 6 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

To satisfy our objectives, we examined the normal costs reported in the 

JSAS annual report submitted by AOUSC to the Comptroller General for 

plan years6

 1999 through 2001. We also examined participants’

contributions and other relevant information in the annual report. An 

independent accounting firm hired by AOUSC audited the JSAS financial 

and actuarial information, included in the JSAS annual report, with input 

from an enrolled actuary regarding relevant data such as actuarial present 

value of accumulated plan benefits. An enrolled actuary7

 certified those 

amounts that are included in the JSAS annual report. We also discussed the 

contents of the JSAS reports with officials from AOUSC for the 3 fiscal 

years (1999 through 2001). We did not independently audit the JSAS annual 

report or the actuarially calculated cost figures.

We performed our review in Washington, D.C., from August 2001 through 

May 2002,8

 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. We requested comments on a draft of this report from the 

Director of AOUSC or his designee. On June 10, 2002, the Deputy Associate 

Director of AOUSC provided technical comments, which we incorporated 

into the report where appropriate. 

Portion of JSAS Costs 

Covered by Judges’

Contributions Varied 

For JSAS plan years 1999 through 2001 under the Federal Courts 

Administration Act of 1992, the participating judges paid more than 50 

percent of the JSAS normal costs in the first year and less than 50 percent 

in the remaining 2 years. In fiscal year 1999, the participating judges 

contributed approximately 61 percent of JSAS normal costs, and in fiscal 

years 2000 and 2001, the participating judges contributed approximately 48 

percent of the JSAS normal costs. 

On the basis of data from plan years 1999, 2000, and 2001, the participating 

judges contributed, on an average, approximately 52 percent of JSAS 

normal costs; the government’s share amounted to, on an average, 

approximately 48 percent. Table 1 shows the judges’ and government’s 

6

Plan years are the same as fiscal years.

7

An enrolled actuary is an individual who has been licensed by the joint board for the 

enrollment of actuaries to perform a variety of actuarial tasks that the Employment 

Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 mandates for private defined benefit pension plans 

in the United States.

8

Final numbers needed from the fiscal year 2001 JSAS report were provided in May 2002.
Page 7 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

contribution rates and shares of JSAS normal costs (using the aggregate 

cost method, which is discussed in appendix II) for the period covered in 

our study.

Table 1: Percentage Share of JSAS Normal Costs Borne by Participating Judges and the Government, Plan Years 1999-2001

a

Normal cost expressed as a percentage of salaries.

b

Percentage of total normal cost.

c

This represents the average of the annual share of JSAS normal costs.

Source: JSAS actuarial reports, 1999-2001.

The judges’ and the government’s contribution rates for each of the 3 years, 

shown in table 1, were based on the actuarial valuation that occurred at the 

end of the prior year. For example, the judges’ contribution of 2.36 percent 

and the government’s contribution of 2.60 percent in fiscal year 2001 were 

based on the September 30, 2000, valuation contained in the fiscal year 

2001 JSAS report.

The judges’ share of JSAS normal costs in the above table decreased from 

approximately 61 percent in fiscal year 1999 to approximately 48 percent in 

fiscal years 2000 and 2001, while the government’s share of JSAS normal 

costs increased from approximately 39 percent to approximately 52 

percent. During those same years, the judges’ contribution rates remained 

constant, while the government’s contribution rate increased from 1.5 

percent of salaries in fiscal year 1999, based on the September 30, 1998, 

valuation, to 2.6 percent of salaries in 2000 and 2001. The increase in the 

government’s contribution was primarily a result of the increase in total 

normal costs determined by the actuary from 3.86 percent of salaries in 

fiscal year 1999, based on the September 30, 1998, valuation, to 4.97 percent 

of salaries in fiscal year 2000. The increase in normal costs resulted from a 

decline in the market value of assets held in JSAS, as well as an increase in 

plan benefits being paid out over the period. 

Source of contributions

JSAS normal cost rates and shares

1999 2000 2001 1999-2001

Average sharec Ratea Shareb Ratea Shareb Ratea Shareb

Judges 2.36 61.1 2.37 47.7 2.36 47.6 52.1

Government 1.50 38.9 2.60 52.3 2.60 52.4 47.9

Total normal costs 3.86 100.0 4.97 100.0 4.96 100.0 100.0
Page 8 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

Specifically, the total plan assets decreased from $366.7 million in fiscal 

year 1998 to $363.6 million in fiscal year 1999. At the same time, the 

accumulated plan benefit obligations increased from $311.9 million in fiscal 

year 1998 to $329.3 million in fiscal year 1999. The increase in the JSAS 

normal costs reflects the combined effect of the decrease in the value of 

plan assets and increase in the estimates of plan benefit obligations. 

Although the judges’ contribution rate remained fairly constant, the judges’

share of normal costs decreased to approximately 48 percent in fiscal years 

2000 and 2001 because the total normal costs increased. In fiscal year 

2001, the normal costs covered by the judges’ and government’s 

contributions remained constant because the percentage change in asset 

value was approximately 6.5 percent, which was in line with the 7.0 percent 

rate of return on investments that was assumed by the plan actuary. 

Adjustment That 

Would Be Needed in 

Judges’ Contribution 

Rates

On the basis of the information contained in the JSAS actuarial report as of 

September 30, 2001, we determined that the participating judges’ future 

contributions would have to increase a total of 0.1 percentage point above 

the current 2.2 percent of salaries for active and senior judges and 3.5 

percent of retirement salaries for retired judges in order to cover 50 

percent of JSAS costs. If the increase were distributed equally among the 

judges, those contributing 2.2 percent would have to increase to 2.3 

percent, and those contributing 3.5 percent would have to increase to 3.6 

percent. 

A potential effect of increasing the contribution rates could be a decline in 

the participation rate for JSAS, which would run counter to the goal of 

increasing participation—a major reason for the changes made to JSAS in 

1992. However, this potential impact appears to be less likely as compared 

with our findings from 3 years ago, when we reported that an increase of 

0.3 percentage points would have been needed to achieve the 50 percent 

contribution goal. Since fiscal year 1998, the participating judges increased 

from 1,420 to 1,459 as of September 30, 2001. However, increasing the 

contribution rates now could affect the judges’ decision to participate in 

JSAS.9

 

9

Because current statutory provisions governing participant contribution rates do not give 

AOUSC the authority to modify the contribution rate of participants, new legislation would 

be required. No new legislation governing participant contribution rates has been enacted 

since the 1992 Federal Courts Administration Act.
Page 9 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

Even if contribution rates are adjusted to the levels currently estimated to 

cover 50 percent of future normal costs, the future normal costs are 

estimates that could change in any given plan year. During the course of 

any year, certain events, such as the number of survivors or judges who 

have died, the number of new judges electing to participate, or the number 

of judges who decide to retire, as well as the value of and the rates of return 

on assets in the plan could create normal statistical variances that would 

affect the annual normal costs of the plan. Since the plan only has 1,459 

participants—both active and retired judges—and 260 survivor annuitants, 

such variances can have a significant effect on the expected normal costs 

and lead to short-term variability. 

Therefore, the long-term view is important when evaluating the expected 

judges’ contributions of 50 percent of the normal costs. As shown in table 

2, the average of the annual share of judges’ contributions since enactment 

of the 1992 Federal Courts Administration Act has been approximately

47 percent.

Table 2: Average Percentage Share of Contribution for Judges and the Government 

a

Normal cost expressed as a percentage of salaries.

b

Percentage of total normal cost.

c

This represents the average of the annual share of JSAS normal costs.

Source: JSAS actuarial reports, 1999-2001.

Agency Comments We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Director of 

AOUSC or his designee. On June 10, 2002, the Deputy Associate Director of 

AOUSC provided technical comments, which we incorporated into the 

report as appropriate. 

Plan year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Average

sharec

Aggregate normal costsa 3.15 5.94 6.53 6.26 5.77 5.07 3.86 4.97 4.96 100.0

Government's 

contribution ratea 

0.80 3.70 4.30 4.00 3.50 2.80 1.50 2.60 2.60 --

Judges' contribution ratea 2.35 2.24 2.23 2.26 2.27 2.27 2.36 2.37 2.36 --

Judges' shareb 74.6 37.7 34.2 36.1 39.3 44.8 61.1 47.7 47.6 47.0

Government's shareb

 25.4 62.3 65.8 63.9 60.7 55.2 38.9 52.3 52.4 53.0
Page 10 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

We are sending copies of this report to AOUSC. Copies of this report will 

be made available to others upon request. This report will also be available 

at no charge on the GAO Web site @www.gao.gov. Should you or your 

staffs have any questions concerning our review, please contact me at (202) 

512-9406 or Hodge Herry, Assistant Director, at (202) 512-9469. You can 

also reach us by e-mail at franzelj@gao.gov or herryh@gao.gov. Key 

contributors to this report were Joseph Applebaum, Jacquelyn Hamilton, 

Meg Mills, Charles Ego, and Deborah Silk.

Jeanette M. Franzel

Acting Director

Financial Management and Assurance
Page 11 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

Appendix I

Retirement Plans Available to Federal Judges ApApenednxidexiIs

AOUSC administers three retirement plans for judges in the federal 

judiciary.

• The Judicial Retirement System automatically covers United States 

Supreme Court Justices, federal circuit and district court judges, and 

territorial district court judges and is available, at their option, to the 

Administrative Assistant to the Chief Justice, the Director of AOUSC, 

and the Director of the Federal Judicial Center.

• The Judicial Officers’ Retirement Fund is available to bankruptcy and 

full-time magistrate judges. 

• The United States Court of Federal Claims Judges’ Retirement System is 

available to the United States Court of Federal Claims judges. 

Also, except for judges who are automatically covered under the Judicial 

Retirement System, judges and judicial officials may opt to participate in 

FERS10 or elect to participate in the Judicial Retirement System for 

Bankruptcy Judges, Magistrate Judges, or United States Court of Federal 

Claims Judges.

Judges who retire under any of the three judicial retirement plans generally 

continue to receive the full salary amounts that were paid immediately 

before retirement, assuming the judges met the age and service 

requirements.11 Retired territorial district court judges generally receive 

the same COLA that CSRS retirees receive, except that their annuities 

cannot exceed 95 percent of an active district court judge’s salary. United 

States Court of Federal Claims judge retirees continue to receive the same 

salary payable to active United States Court of Federal Claims judges.

Those in the Judicial Retirement System and the United States Court of 

Federal Claims Judges’ Retirement System are eligible to retire when the 

10FERS is open and available to new federal employees. CSRS has been closed to new 

employees since December 31, 1983. However, a newly appointed judge who had prior 

federal service (at least 5 years of service before January 1, 1987) may still elect CSRS.

11There is a distinction between retired judges who resign their offices and those who retire 

to a status designated as “senior.” Judges who retire by resignation are entitled for life to 

the salary of the office at the time of resignation and may engage in private law practice. 

Judges who retire to senior status receive the current salary of the office–that is, they 

receive salary increases that are approved for active judges and generally may perform 

reduced judicial duties. Senior judges may not engage in private law practice.
Appendix I

Retirement Plans Available to Federal Judges

Page 12 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

number of years of service and the judge’s age total at least 80, with a 

minimum retirement age of 65, and service ranging from 10 to 15 years. 

Those in the Judicial Officers’ Retirement Fund are eligible to retire at age 

65 with at least 14 years of service or may retire at age 65 with 8 years of 

service, on a less than full salary retirement. Participants in all three 

judicial retirement plans are required to contribute to and receive Social 

Security benefits. 
Page 13 GAO-02-763 Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs

Appendix II

Formulas Used to Determine Judges’ and the 

Government’s Contributions and Lump Sum 

Payments ApendxiI

Aggregate Funding Method. This method, as used by the JSAS plan, 

defines the normal cost as that level percentage of future salaries, which 

will be sufficient, along with investment earnings and the plan’s assets, to 

pay the plan’s benefits. The formula is as follows: 

• The present value of future normal costs (PVFNC) equals present value 

of future benefits (PVFB) less net asset value.

The present value of future normal costs is the amount that remains to be 

financed by the judges and the government. 

Normal cost percentage (NC percent) equals PVFNC divided by present 

value of future salaries (PVFS).12

Government Contribution. The following formula is used to determine 

the government’s contribution amount: 

• The government contribution represents the portion of NC not covered 

by participants’ contributions.

Lump Sum Pay Out. This may occur upon the dissolution of marriage 

either through divorce or death of spouse. Payroll contributions cease, but 

previous contributions remain in JSAS. Also, if there is no eligible 

surviving spouse or child upon the death of the judicial official, the lump 

sum pay out to the judicial official’s designated beneficiaries is computed 

as follows: 

• Lump sum pay out equals total amount paid into the plan by the judge 

plus 3 percent annual interest accrued less 2.2 percent of salaries for 

each participating year (forfeited amount). 

In effect, the interest plus any amount contributed in excess of 2.2 percent 

of judges’ salaries will be refunded.

12The JSAS plan’s present value of future salaries includes annuitant information. 

(194054)
GAO’s Mission The General Accounting Office, the 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 the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail this 

list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily

E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading.

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. General Accounting 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: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Public Affairs Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Service Requested

Presorted Standard

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00