GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Report to Congressional Requesters

July 2001 CANCELED DOD 

APPROPRIATIONS

$615 Million of Illegal 

or Otherwise 

Improper Adjustments

GAO-01-697

Page i GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 4

Contract Reconciliation 7

$615 Million of Adjustments Were Illegal or Otherwise Improper 9

Contract Reconciliation Process Lacks Certain Fundamental

Controls 13

Contract Modifications or Other Instructions Led to Improper

Adjustments 15

Factors Contributing to the Need to Correct Disbursement Errors 16

Conclusion 19

Recommendations for Executive Action 19

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 22

Appendix II Illegal or Otherwise Improper Adjustments 24

Appendix III GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 28

Tables

Table 1: Fiscal Year 2000 Illegal or Otherwise Improper

Adjustments 9

Figures

Figure 1: Sample of DOD’s “Long Line of Accounting” 17

Contents
Page ii GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations
Page 1 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

July 26, 2001

The Honorable Stephen Horn

Chairman, Subcommittee on Government

 Efficiency, Financial Management and

 Intergovernmental Relations

Committee on Government Reform

House of Representatives

The Honorable Jim Nussle

Chairman, Committee on the Budget

House of Representatives

In 1990, the Congress changed the law governing the use of appropriation

accounts because it determined that controls over them were not

working.1

 Committee reports and other statements relating to the

legislation show that members of the Congress were concerned that the

Congress had inadequate control over the expenditure of hundreds of

millions of dollars of expired appropriations, particularly in the

Department of Defense (DOD). Without adequate control, the Congress

was concerned that agencies could disburse money in amounts and for

purposes that it had not approved. The 1990 law was intended to improve

congressional control by providing that, 5 years after the expiration of the

period of availability of a fixed-term appropriation, the appropriation

account be closed and all remaining balances canceled. After closing, the

appropriation account could no longer be used for obligations or

expenditures for any purpose.

Because agencies need to keep accurate records, they may, in limited

circumstances, adjust accounting records pertaining to closed accounts to

correct unrecorded or improperly charged disbursements. To justify such

an adjustment, an agency must have sufficient documentation for each

proposed adjustment to show that the

• disbursement was made when the appropriation account to be charged

was available to cover the disbursement,

 1

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510, dated

November 1990).

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548
Page 2 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

• agency either did not record the disbursement when it was made or

charged it to the wrong appropriation account at that time, and

• proposed adjustment will result in the disbursement being charged to the

proper appropriation account.

From the enactment of the 1990 law through September 30, 1999, DOD

requested that Treasury make adjustments affecting 333 closed accounts

valued at $26 billion. By comparison, during the same period, all other

federal agencies combined requested that Treasury make adjustments

affecting only 21 closed accounts valued at $5 million.

Amid concerns over the magnitude of DOD adjustments affecting closed

appropriation accounts and whether they complied with the 1990 account

closing law, you asked that we review the adjustments. The objectives of

our review were to (1) assess the adequacy of DOD procedures for

adjusting closed appropriation accounts and (2) determine if adjustments

affecting closed appropriation accounts complied with the 1990 law.

According to DOD, adjustments affecting closed appropriation accounts

during fiscal year 2000 exceeded $2.7 billion. Our review focused primarily

on large dollar value adjustments made during fiscal year 2000. These

represented $2.2 billion (81 percent) of the $2.7 billion of DOD’s reported

closed appropriation account adjustments made during fiscal year 2000.

We selected fiscal year 2000 closed account adjustments because they

were for the most recent complete year available at the time of our review.

On May 25, 2001, we requested comments on a draft of this report from the

Secretary of Defense or his designee, but none had been provided at the

time we finalized our report on July 17, 2001. Appendix I contains more

detailed information on our scope and methodology.

DOD did not have adequate systems, controls, and managerial attention to

ensure that the $2.7 billion of adjustments affecting closed appropriation

accounts made during fiscal year 2000 were legal and otherwise proper.

Our review of $2.2 billion of these adjustments found about $615 million

(28 percent) of the adjustments should not have been made, including

about $146 million that violated specific provisions of appropriations law

and were thus illegal. For example, the stated purpose of one adjustment

was to charge a $79 million payment made in February 1999 to a fiscal year

1992 research and development appropriation account to correct previous

Results in Brief
Page 3 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

payment recording errors. However, the fiscal year 1992 research and

development appropriation account closed at the end of fiscal year 1998—

4 months before the $79 million payment was made.2 Therefore, the

adjustment had the same effect as using canceled funds from a closed

appropriation account to make the February 1999 expenditure, which is

prohibited by the 1990 law.

In addition to the $146 million of illegal adjustments, about $364 million of

the improper closed appropriation account adjustments should not have

been made because the actual payments had been charged to the correct

accounts. DOD made these adjustments as part of an effort to correct

other errors in recording disbursements made under the contracts.

Generally, these recording errors were discovered when DOD could not

pay an invoice because the balance for a contract funding line was already

used up. We considered another $105 million to be improper adjustments

because there was insufficient documentation to support the adjustments.

Agencies must be able to provide documentation to show that adjustments

are legal and that they corrected incorrect charges.

System deficiencies in DOD’s Contract Reconciliation System (CRS)

significantly contributed to many of the illegal closed account

adjustments.3

 Specifically, CRS did not compare the actual disbursement

date with the appropriation being adjusted to ensure that the adjustment

met certain appropriation law requirements. DOD had been aware of the

system deficiency since at least 1996, but took no action to upgrade CRS

until we brought this problem to its attention. Had CRS been upgraded to

make this comparison in 1996 when the programming defect was first

identified, the $146 million of illegal adjustments made during fiscal year

2000 may not have occurred.

We also noted that DOD contracting officers were using contract

modifications and other methods of communication to instruct the

 2

Research and development appropriation accounts are available for obligation for 2 years

after which they expire and remain available for an additional 5 years for obligation

adjustments and disbursements against existing obligations. At the end of the 5-year

period, the appropriation balance is canceled and the account is closed. Therefore, the 5-

year expired period for a fiscal year 1992 research and development appropriation account

began on October 1, 1993, and ended on September 30, 1998.

3

CRS is an automated reconciliation system that has been used since 1995 by DOD’s

Defense Finance and Accounting Service Columbus Center to perform contract

reconciliations and to correct errors.
Page 4 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) Columbus Center to

charge disbursements to older appropriation accounts without regard to

whether adjustments would result in charging disbursements to

appropriations that had been canceled. This practice, when combined with

the deficiencies in CRS, resulted in some adjustments that were improper.

Finally, the remaining $1.6 billion (72 percent) of the $2.2 billion of

adjustments we reviewed were adequately documented corrections of

errors that DOD had made over the years and, therefore, were not in

violation of appropriations law or otherwise improper. They do, however,

exemplify the broad-based, high-risk problems associated with the

accuracy of DOD’s payment and accounting process. As we have

previously reported, DOD has serious problems with its ability to

accurately account for and report on payments to contractors, which in

these cases resulted in $2.7 billion in adjustments to closed appropriation

accounts in fiscal year 2000 alone. DOD acknowledges that it has problems

with its accounting and reporting of disbursements and has various

ongoing initiatives aimed at resolving its problems.

We are making recommendations that address the need for DOD to

reverse and correct the $615 million of closed account adjustments we

identified as illegal or otherwise improper and to take action to strengthen

its policies, procedures, and controls over closed appropriation account

adjustments. To the extent that DOD is unable to make proper correcting

adjustments because insufficient balances remain in the correct accounts,

we are also recommending that DOD investigate and report on these

adjustments, as required by the Antideficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. 1351, and

implementing guidance.

The Congress generally provides budget authority to an agency for use

during a specific period, referred to as the period of availability.4

 During

this period of availability, the agency may incur new obligations, for

example, those for goods and services, and charge them against the

appropriation. At the end of the period of availability, the appropriation

expires, meaning that it may not be used to incur new obligations.

 4

In some instances, the Congress appropriates funds that remain available “until

expended.” These “no year” funds are not subject to the time limits that apply to other

appropriations.

Background
Page 5 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Prior to fiscal year 1991, an appropriation account maintained its fiscal

year identity for 2 years after its period of availability expired. After the 2-

year period, the remaining obligated balance and unobligated balance

were transferred and merged into “M” accounts and merged surplus

authority, respectively, with the obligated and unobligated balances of

previously expired appropriation accounts available for the same general

purpose. The M accounts and merged surplus authority were available to

pay and adjust valid obligations incurred prior to expiration. However,

because M accounts and merged surplus authority had no fiscal year

identity, upward adjustments were not limited to the balances from any

particular appropriation.

From 1956, when the Congress established the M accounts and merged

surplus authority, through December 1990, federal agencies’ reported that

M accounts and merged surplus authority had grown to over $70 billion,

with DOD reported to have about $50 billion, over 70 percent, of this total.

In addition, the use of the merged surplus authority to fund upward

adjustments to M accounts increased dramatically. For example, DOD’s

use of large amounts from the merged surplus authority to cover upward

adjustments to M accounts and other expired surplus accounts increased

each year over a 5-year period from about $57 million in fiscal year 1985 to

$560 million in fiscal year 1989. DOD’s use of large amounts from the

merged surplus authority to cover upward adjustments to obligations

prompted the Congress to pass legislation in 1990 to strengthen its

oversight and control over expired appropriations.

Among other things, the 1990 law eliminated the merged surplus authority

and M accounts. Instead, under the 1990 law, an expired appropriation

account remains available for 5 years, during which it may be used for

recording, adjusting, and making disbursements to liquidate obligations

that were properly chargeable to the account. At the end of the 5-year

period, the appropriation account closes, and any remaining obligated and

unobligated balances are canceled. The closed appropriation account may

not be used for obligation or expenditure for any purpose. After an

account closes, obligations and adjustments to obligations that would

have been properly chargeable to the account before closing may be
Page 6 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

charged to currently available appropriations subject to certain

limitations.5

Even in those cases in which current appropriations must be used to make

payments after appropriation accounts close, the closed appropriation

accounts are still subject to the provisions of the Antideficiency Act.

Among other things, the act prohibits officers or employees of the

government from making or authorizing obligations or expenditures that

exceed the amounts available in appropriations or funds. Therefore,

agencies must continue to maintain current and accurate records of

disbursements attributable to the canceled appropriations to ensure that

payments do not exceed the originally appropriated amounts.

If a violation of the Antideficiency Act occurs, section 1351 of title 31

requires the head of the agency to immediately report to the President and

the Congress all relevant facts and a statement of actions taken. Also,

under section 1349 of title 31, the officer or employee who violates the act

is subject to administrative discipline.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issues guidelines for budget

execution for executive branch agencies in OMB Circular A-34. Section 40

of that circular sets forth the requirements for reporting Antideficiency Act

violations. Section 40.6 requires that an agency head transmit a report to

the President, through OMB, providing information about the violation,

including the appropriation involved, the date and amount of the violation,

the identity of the person(s) responsible for the violation, a statement of

administrative discipline taken, a statement regarding the sufficiency of

the agency’s fund control regulations, and a statement of any actions taken

to prevent similar future violations. Section 40.6 also requires the agency

head to send an identical report to the Speaker of the House of

Representatives and the President of the Senate.

DOD implements the provisions of the Antideficiency Act and OMB’s

Circular A-34 guidance in Volume 14 of its Financial Management

Regulation. Chapters 4 through 7 of that volume contain detailed

instructions on investigating and reporting on possible Antideficiency Act

violations. Chapter 9 contains instructions on discipline for violations.

 5

Under 31 U.S.C. 1353(b), obligations or adjustments to obligations that would have been

chargeable to the closed account may be charged to a current account available for the

same purpose. The total amount of charges to a particular current account may not exceed

1 percent of the total appropriations for that account.
Page 7 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

As stated previously, because of the need to keep accurate records,

agencies may, in limited circumstances, adjust their records pertaining to

closed appropriation accounts. For example, if an agency determines that

the balances reflected in the records of a closed account are erroneous

because of reporting and clerical errors, it may adjust those records to

correct the errors. An agency may also adjust its records if it discovers

that a disbursement actually made before an appropriation account closed

and properly chargeable to an obligation incurred during the

appropriation’s period of availability was either not recorded at all or was

charged to the wrong appropriation. Neither of these types of adjustments

constitutes charging obligations against or disbursing funds from the

closed appropriation accounts. They represent corrections of the

accounting records. Since the appropriations, in effect, no longer exist,

these adjustments affect only the agency’s records. They have no effect on

the availability or use of obligated or unobligated balances formerly

contained in those appropriation accounts.

According to DFAS headquarters officials, DFAS Columbus makes about

99 percent of DOD’s annual closed appropriation account adjustments.

DFAS Columbus relies on the Mechanization of Contract Administration

Services (MOCAS) system to process DOD contract payment transactions

and CRS for performing and processing reconciliation transactions.

MOCAS and CRS transactions are recorded in various DFAS accounting

systems used for the military services and other DOD organizations that

maintain the official accounting records, including the status of canceled

funds. During fiscal years 1997 through 2000, DFAS Columbus’ records

showed that it made about $10 billion of adjustments affecting closed

appropriation accounts.6

DFAS Columbus conducts two types of contract reconciliations—limited

and full scope.7

 Limited scope reconciliations are usually performed to

resolve problems that require immediate action, such as when there are

insufficient funds on the cited accounting classification reference number

 6

Complete information on the numbers and dollar values of closed account adjustments

prior to January 1997 were not maintained by DFAS and were not readily available and,

thus, could not be verified.

7

Most requests for reconciliations come from the military services or DOD organizations

responsible for awarding the contracts. In some instances, DFAS Columbus initiates

reconciliation when problems occur with paying an invoice.

Contract

Reconciliation
Page 8 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

(ACRN) to pay a contractor’s invoice.8 These reconciliations generally

result in making only those adjustments necessary to resolve the problems

that are preventing payment of the invoice.

A full scope reconciliation is generally performed if a limited scope

reconciliation failed to adequately resolve a problem or a contract is being

prepared for final close-out due to contract completion. Depending on the

size of the contracts, these type of reconciliations can result in large

numbers of adjustments since they involve identifying and correcting all

errors made over the life of the contract.

DFAS Columbus uses CRS to help identify discrepancies between a

contract’s hard copy documentation and information recorded in MOCAS.

To complete this process, reconciliation staff re-enters into CRS all hard

copy documents pertaining to the contract. These include documentation

for obligations, invoices, disbursements, shipments, and modifications.

After all the hard copy information has been entered into CRS, it

reconstructs the payments in accordance with the payment instructions

input by the reconciliation staff. For example, if the contract payment

terms specified that certain payments were to be applied to specific

ACRNs in the contract and the reconciliation staff input these data into

CRS, it would apply the payments accordingly. However, if the staff failed

to instruct CRS to apply the payments as specified in the contract, CRS’

default program would redistribute the payments on an “oldest funds first”

basis. Either way, after redistributing the payments, CRS generates

accounting transactions to adjust MOCAS’ contract obligation and

payment history so that it will agree with CRS.

Before the adjustments to the closed appropriation account records can

be made, however, reconciliation staffs are required to request approval

from the appropriate fund holder.9

 Once DFAS Columbus has provided the

appropriate fund holder with the request for approval, the fund holder has

45 days to accept or reject the proposed adjustments. DOD procedures

provide that if DFAS Columbus does not receive a response to the request

for approval within 45 days of notification, the adjustment will be

considered approved and processed accordingly.

 8

An ACRN is a two-character code that DOD assigns to each appropriation accounting line

on the contract. As payments are made, they are allocated to the applicable ACRN.

9

In DOD, the fund holder’s accounting functions are usually performed and maintained by a

DFAS field location. In these instances, the DFAS location would be the approving activity.
Page 9 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Our review of $2.2 billion of the fiscal year 2000 closed appropriation

account adjustments found that $615 million (28 percent) were either

illegal ($146 million) or otherwise improper ($469 million). These

adjustments should not have been made because the initial disbursements

(1) occurred after the appropriation being charged had already canceled,

(2) occurred before the appropriation being charged was enacted, or

(3) were charged to the correct appropriation in the first place and no

adjustment was necessary. Also included in the $615 million were

$105 million of adjustments that were not sufficiently documented to

establish that they were proper. These were considered to be improper

because agencies must be able to provide documentation to show that

adjustments are legal and that they changed an incorrect charge to a

correct one. Table 1 provides additional details on the $615 million of

adjustments that should not have been made. See appendix II for a

detailed list of illegal or otherwise improper adjustments.

Table 1: Fiscal Year 2000 Illegal or Otherwise Improper Adjustments

Dollars in millions

Problem with adjustment

Adjustment

amount

Appropriation already canceled when disbursement was made $107.7

Appropriation not yet enacted when disbursement was made 38.2

No adjustment was necessary 364.0

Insufficient documentation 104.9

Total $614.8

The 1990 account closing law specifically provides that closed

appropriation accounts are not available for expenditures. We found that

about $108 million of the adjustments resulted in charging appropriation

accounts that had closed before the disbursements were made. These

adjustments produced the same result as if DOD had made expenditures

from and charged closed appropriation accounts at the time the

disbursements were made. Therefore, these adjustments violated the 1990

account closing law. Following are several examples in which the

adjustments had the effect of spending canceled funds from the closed

accounts.

In December 1999, DFAS Columbus recorded an adjustment that changed

$79 million of disbursements from charges against fiscal years 1993

through 1995 research and development appropriations to charges against

a fiscal year 1992 research and development appropriation. According to

$615 Million of

Adjustments Were

Illegal or Otherwise

Improper

Appropriation Already

Canceled When

Disbursement Was Made
Page 10 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

documentation in the contract files, the adjustment was to correct

previous disbursing errors by redistributing the payments in accordance

with the payment terms specified in the contract. The payment terms of

the contract specified that payments should be made using “oldest funds

first.” Under this instruction, payments should be charged to the oldest

appropriation cited on the contract until the obligated balance has been

exhausted for that appropriation. Subsequent payments are then charged

to the next oldest available appropriation, and so on, until all the funds are

used up or the contract is complete. Making the adjustment that charged

the $79 million of disbursements to the closed fiscal year 1992 research

and development account used up the unspent balances in that

appropriation account and freed up funds on still open 1993 through 1995

research and development appropriation accounts for other disbursement

charges.

We found that charging the $79 million of disbursements to the fiscal year

1992 research and development appropriation was illegal because the

disbursements were made in February 1999—4 months after the fiscal year

1992 research and development appropriation account had closed on

September 30, 1998. DFAS Columbus officials agreed that the adjustment

violated the 1990 law and should not have been made. According to the

officials, the adjustment was made by CRS, which lacked the necessary

controls to prevent this from occurring. (CRS weaknesses are discussed in

more detail later in this report.) After we pointed out this illegal

adjustment, DFAS Columbus personnel responsible for resolving this

problem told us that they would reverse the transaction and begin a

review of the contract to determine what they will need to do to properly

record the $79 million of disbursements, including using current-year

appropriations if necessary.

In another case, DOD was not able to pay an $832,907 invoice properly

chargeable to a fiscal year 1993 appropriation account because sufficient

funds were not available in the cited ACRN to pay the invoice. This

prompted a reconciliation of the contract to determine why sufficient

funds were not available to pay the invoice. Among other things, the

reconciliation identified $721,037 of overpayments made from August 1991

through February 1992 that were charged to a fiscal year 1989 aircraft

procurement appropriation—an appropriation account that was closed at

the time of the reconciliation. To recover this overpayment, DFAS

Columbus offset the amount against a current invoice. On September 28,

2000, DFAS Columbus paid the contractor $111,870, which DFAS

Columbus calculated as the net amount owed to the contractor after
Page 11 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

deducting the $721,037 of overpayments from the $832,907 invoice

amount.

The 1990 account closing law requires that collections related to closed

appropriation accounts be deposited in the Treasury as miscellaneous

receipts.10 However, we found that instead of forwarding the $721,037 of

overpayments, which it collected through payment offset, to Treasury,

DFAS Columbus processed adjustments to move the overpayments to a

fiscal year 1993 ACRN on the contract that was still open and available for

new disbursements. It then used the overpayments to offset the amount

owed to the contractor. In discussing this adjustment with DFAS

Columbus officials, they told us that it is standard practice to offset

collections against invoices when making payments, even if closed

accounts are involved. However, they agreed that, regarding collections of

disbursements made from accounts that closed before collection, the

proper procedure would be to forward those collections to the Treasury

and use other sources of funding to pay the invoice. Therefore, in this

case, the proper procedure would have been to (1) record the collection of

the overpayments as a deposit to Treasury’s miscellaneous receipts and

(2) use available appropriations to cover the $721,037 needed to replace

the funds returned to Treasury. While DFAS Columbus officials could not

tell us why they had not followed proper procedures in this case, they told

us they would review this transaction to determine how to correct the

error.

Under 31 U.S.C. 1502 (a), an appropriation may be used to pay only those

expenses properly incurred during the appropriation’s period of

availability. However, we found that over $38 million of the closed

appropriation account adjustments resulted in charging disbursements to

appropriation accounts that had not yet been enacted at the time the

disbursements were actually made. For example, in January 2000, a total

of $21 million of disbursements charged to fiscal years 1989 and 1990

appropriations were changed to charges against fiscal years 1998 and 1999

missile procurement appropriations. Since the actual disbursements were

for expenses that were incurred before the fiscal years 1998 and 1999

 1031 U.S.C. 1552(b) addresses collections that would ordinarily be credited to an

appropriation account. When a collection is not received until after the account closes, it

cannot be credited to that account. Therefore, the law provides that the collection shall be

deposited in the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.

Appropriation Not Yet

Enacted When

Disbursement Was Made
Page 12 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

appropriations were enacted, charging disbursements to these two

appropriations violated 31 U.S.C. 1502 (a).

Further, included in the $21 million were $9.9 million in overpayments,

which the contractor identified as a return of funds that were paid from

the fiscal years 1988 through 1990 appropriations. However, these

appropriations had been canceled before the overpayments were returned.

As discussed earlier in this report, the 1990 law requires that the collection

of canceled funds be deposited into the Treasury as miscellaneous

receipts. However, we found that instead of forwarding the overpayments

to the Treasury, DFAS Columbus redistributed the $9.9 million to current

and expired appropriations that were funding the still-open contract. In

discussing these errors with responsible DOD officials, they agreed that

the $21 million adjustment and the $9.9 million redistribution were

incorrect and should not have been made. According to the officials, they

plan to reverse the adjustments and determine what actions are required

to correct the accounting records, including returning the $9.9 million to

the Treasury.

Closed account adjustments totaling $364 million were not necessary

because the initial payments had been charged to the correct

appropriations and should not have been adjusted. DOD made these

adjustments during contract reconciliations to try to correct errors in

recording disbursements made under the contracts. Generally, these

reconciliations were initiated if DOD could not pay invoices because other

disbursements had been erroneously recorded against the wrong

appropriations funding contracts. For example, in November 1999, DFAS

Columbus received an invoice from a contractor for $685,000. DFAS

Columbus could not pay the contractor because there were not sufficient

funds available in the cited ACRN to pay the invoice. As a result, DFAS

Columbus reconciled the fiscal year 1988 contract, which resulted in over

$590 million of adjustments affecting closed appropriation accounts. Our

review of these found that $210 million of the adjustments should not have

been made because the actual disbursements—some of which were made

over 10 years earlier—were recorded correctly. As a result of this process

to free up sufficient funds to pay the $685,000 invoice, DFAS Columbus

made unnecessary adjustments affecting the closed accounts. Thus, the

reconciliation resulted in at least $210 million of accounting errors that did

not exist before the reconciliation took place.

No Adjustment Was

Necessary
Page 13 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

In order to adjust its records, an agency must have sufficient

documentation to show that the adjustment is legal and changed an

incorrect charge to a correct one. However, neither DOD nor we could

find sufficient documentation in DOD’s accounting and contract records to

support about $105 million of closed appropriation account adjustments.

For example, in June 2000, DFAS Columbus made an adjustment that

changed over $2.4 million of disbursements from charges against a fiscal

year 1993 appropriation that had not yet canceled to a fiscal year 1992

appropriation that had canceled. According to the contract files, the

adjustment was to correct a previous disbursing error. However, in

reviewing the contract files for this adjustment, neither DOD nor we could

identify the original invoice or other supporting documentation to show

which appropriation should have been charged for the goods or service.

We considered these types of unsupported adjustments improper because

DOD must be able to provide documentation to show that the adjustments

are legal and that they changed incorrect charges to correct ones. DOD is

researching these transactions further to determine if additional

documentation can be located to support the adjustments.

The contract reconciliation process lacks the controls necessary to ensure

that adjustments to closed appropriation accounts are proper. Our review

disclosed that CRS routinely processed billions of dollars of closed

appropriation account adjustments without regard to the requirements of

the 1990 account closing law, which prohibits making disbursements or

obligations from closed accounts. Further compounding this shortfall was

the lack of oversight on how contract modifications were written and

processed, which, when combined with the deficiencies in CRS, changed

the payment terms of some contracts to free up current and expired funds.

As noted earlier, these deficiencies contributed to at least $615 million in

illegal or otherwise improper closed account adjustments during fiscal

year 2000.

CRS does not contain a control to determine if an appropriation was

available at the time the disbursement was made. Specifically, CRS does

not compare the actual disbursement date with the appropriation involved

in the adjustment to ensure that the adjustment does not result in charging

disbursements (1) back to an appropriation that had canceled before the

actual disbursement was made or (2) forward to an appropriation that had

not yet been enacted at the time the actual disbursement was made.

Furthermore, unless reconciliation staff input specific payment terms into

CRS, it will redistribute disbursement charges on an “oldest funds first”

Insufficient

Documentation

Contract

Reconciliation

Process Lacks Certain

Fundamental Controls

Contract Reconciliation

System Weaknesses
Page 14 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

basis. As a result, it will change disbursements charged to current and

expired appropriation accounts to charges against older appropriation

accounts, even if they are closed, to use up any unspent balances in the

closed appropriation accounts. This is a violation of the 1990 act.

DOD officials responsible for contract reconciliations told us that they

have been using CRS to perform reconciliations since 1995 and that

redistribution of disbursement charges to the closed appropriation

accounts was a routine practice. They also acknowledged that, in 1996,

they identified the CRS control weakness that allowed them to make

adjustments that charged disbursements to closed accounts. However,

they could not tell us why they had not taken action to correct the

problem—a problem (1) they estimated would have cost $24,460 to fix in

1996 and (2) that resulted in illegal and otherwise improper adjustments.

After we identified the problem during our review and brought it to their

attention, DOD officials implemented the control in May 2001.

In regard to the other needed control that would prevent making

adjustments that charge disbursements against appropriation accounts

that had not yet been enacted when the disbursement was actually made,

DOD officials told us that they were not aware of this problem until we

brought it to their attention during our audit. They told us they were

reviewing the process to determine how to include this control in CRS and

planned to have it implemented by September 2001.

In an effort to address some of the control weaknesses we identified,

DFAS Columbus required all reconciliation staff to attend a 3-day

refresher course on the adjustment process. According to DFAS Columbus

officials, all of the 235 DFAS Columbus employees involved in performing

contract reconciliations had completed this course as of March 2001.

DFAS Columbus also issued interim guidance in January 2001 in response

to our audit findings on the weaknesses in CRS. The implementing

memorandum noted that the current process using CRS was flawed

because it did not require that disbursements be compared with dates

relevant to the use of appropriations before the adjustments were

processed. It specifically noted that the current process allowed for the

processing of an adjustment even if the date of the disbursement occurred

after the date the funds canceled. To address these problems, the interim

guidance provides detailed steps for staff to follow to ensure that the

person preparing the adjustments performs the manual comparison of

dates and that documentation is prepared to support the comparison

process.
Page 15 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

DFAS Columbus’ efforts are a step in the right direction. However,

addressing adjustments that involve moving disbursement charges

forward to appropriations that were not enacted at the time the

disbursement occurred could enhance the interim guidance. DFAS

Columbus officials agreed that the interim guidance should also address

this issue and were in the process of determining what needs to be done.

They did not provide us an estimated date for completing this guidance

update.

During our review of transactions, we noticed that DFAS Columbus

personnel were relying on contract modifications or other contracting

officers’ informal instructions to justify adjustments that changed

disbursements from charges against current or expired appropriations to

charges against closed appropriation accounts. The modifications or

informal guidance either instructed that payments be made using “oldest

funds first” or specifically instructed that disbursements be moved from

one ACRN to another.

According to DFAS Columbus officials, when contracting officers modify

contracts or issue informal instructions to make adjustments that charge

disbursements against older appropriations, DFAS Columbus will usually

comply with the modifications without regard to the 1990 closed account

law. We found several instances in which DFAS Columbus followed either

a contract modification or informal instructions and made adjustments

that resulted in improperly charging closed appropriation accounts.

We met with DOD accounting and acquisition officials to discuss the use

of contract modifications to change payment terms to move

disbursements back to closed appropriation accounts. According to the

officials, there was no DOD policy that prohibited changing the payment

terms of the contract. In fact, DFAS Columbus personnel responsible for

reconciliations told us that when they receive a contract modification

from a contracting officer to change payment terms, they take it for

granted that the contracting officer wants DFAS Columbus to apply the

modification retroactively on an “oldest funds first” basis in order to use

up the unspent canceled funds. Air Force contracting officials also

acknowledged that they intended for DFAS Columbus to apply the

modification retroactively. They told us that the use of modifications was

intended to redistribute the disbursements to the unspent canceled

appropriations in order to avoid having to request current-year funds to

replace the canceled appropriations. After pointing out this practice to

DOD accounting and acquisition managers, they agreed that contract

Contract

Modifications or

Other Instructions

Led to Improper

Adjustments
Page 16 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

modifications should not be written with the purpose of using up the

unspent balances in closed appropriation accounts. They told us that they

would review this issue and would revise their policy to prevent this type

of contract modification.

The $1.6 billion of closed account adjustments to which we do not take

exception are part of a bigger problem facing DOD. While these

adjustments were adequately documented corrections of prior errors, the

fact that this large amount of transactions required adjustment in the first

place is a result of a long-standing and well documented problem DOD has

with correctly accounting for and recording obligations and the

corresponding disbursements. For example, for fiscal year 1999, DFAS

data showed that almost $1 of every $3 in contract payment transactions

was for adjustments to previously recorded payments—$51 billion of

adjustments out of $157 billion in transactions.

Over the years we have issued numerous reports discussing DOD’s

financial management problems, and we have designated DOD financial

management as a high-risk area since 1995. In July 2000, we testified that

DOD’s inadequate process and control problems contribute to billions of

dollars in improper payments.11 For example, we noted that for fiscal years

1994 through 1999, DFAS records showed that defense contractors

returned over $5.3 billion of overpayments and erroneous payments due to

contract administration actions and payment-processing errors. In 1997,

we reported several key factors contributed significantly to problems in

DOD’s payment process that, for the most part, still exist today.12 Among

these is the “long line of accounting” DOD uses to allocate payment

information among numerous accounting categories. The following

discussion from our 1997 report describes this complex and convoluted

process, which, we found, also contributed to DOD’s $2.7 billion closed

account adjustments for fiscal year 2000.

DOD uses what it refers to as a “long line of accounting” to accumulate

appropriations, budget, and management information for contract

payments. This long line of accounting can contain over 50 alphabetical

and numerical symbols that identify such things as the military service,

 11Department of Defense: Implications of Financial Management Issues

(GAO/T-AIMD/NSIAD-00-264, July 20, 2000).

12Contract Management: Fixing DOD’s Payment Problems Is Imperative

(GAO/NSIAD-97-37, April 10, 1997).

Factors Contributing

to the Need to Correct

Disbursement Errors
Page 17 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

appropriation, beginning and ending fiscal years, and appropriation

suballotment. The buying activities (generally military services that are

responsible for administering these funding segments) assign a twocharacter ACRN to each accounting line containing unique information.

DFAS Columbus allocates the payments to the ACRNS. Compounding the

problem is that the type, quantity, and format of information vary among

the services since there is not standardization of account transactions.

Figure 1 is a sample of an accounting line.

Figure 1: Sample of DOD’s “Long Line of Accounting”

Source: DOD.

Contracts can be assigned anywhere from 1 to over 1,000 ACRNs. A

contract with numerous ACRNs involves extensive data entry, increasing

the chance for errors, and manual payment processing. When buying

activities assign numerous ACRNs to a complex contract, payment

allocations to the ACRNs can be time-consuming. For example, as we

noted in our 1997 report, a single payment on a contract with many ACRNs

took DFAS Columbus 6 to 8 hours to process. The contractor, required to

bill by ACRN, took 487 pages to assign $2.1 million in costs and fees to 267

ACRNs. Ten of the ACRNs cited by the contractor had insufficient

obligation balances to cover the payment, according to DFAS Columbus’

records. The remaining 257 ACRNs corresponded to eight annual

appropriations covering from 1 to 5 fiscal years and included Army, Air

Appropriation

Command

Budget Activity

Weapons System

Suballotment

Appropriation

Accounting Station

Transaction Type

Project Directive

Line Item and Suffix

for Management

Oversight

(e.g., engine

accessory)

ACRN

Service

Beginning

Fiscal 

Year

Ending

Fiscal

Year

Office of

Management

and Budget

Cost Code

Participating

Manager

Requiring

Financial

Manager

Receiving Activity

Project Unit

(e.g., engine)

Contractor

Support

Cost Code

AA 17 9395 1506 4 1 AV 031 BZ 276 0 068342 2B 000000 01030 MAS 0020
Page 18 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Force, and general defense funds. Of the 257 transactions processed, 38

were for less than $10, and some involved debits or credits for pennies.

Unresolved discrepancies, such as insufficient funds on some ACRNs, had

persisted for about 3 years.

Our 1997 report pointed out that even a simple purchase could cause

extensive and costly rework if assigned numerous ACRNs. We noted that a

$1,209 Navy contract for children’s toys, candy, and holiday decorations

for a child care center was written with most line items (e.g., bubble gum,

tootsie rolls, and balloons) assigned separate ACRNs. A separate

requisition number was generated for each item ordered, and a separate

ACRN was assigned for each requisition. In total, the contract was

assigned 46 ACRNs to account for contract obligations against a single

appropriation. To record this payment against the one appropriation,

DFAS Columbus had to manually allocate the payment to all 46 ACRNs.

In addition, the contract was modified three times—twice to correct

funding data and once to delete (deobligate) the funding on the contract

for out-of-stock items. The modification deleting funding did not cite all

the affected ACRNs. DFAS Columbus made errors in both entering and

allocating payment data, compounding errors made in the modification.

Consequently, DFAS Columbus allocated payment for the toy jewelry line

item to fruit chew, jump rope, and jack set ACRNs—all of which should

have been deleted by modification. Contract delivery was completed in

March 1995, but payment was delayed until October 1995. DFAS Columbus

officials acknowledged that this payment consumed an excessive amount

of time and effort when compared to the time to process a payment

charged to only one ACRN. A single ACRN would also have significantly

reduced the amount of data entered into the system and the opportunities

for errors.

Our 1997 report also noted that sometimes contracts do not require

contractors to provide the accounting detail on the invoices necessary to

allocate the payments. In these instances, DFAS Columbus prorates

payments among ACRNs. How the payments are prorated may have little

relationship to which activities received what goods and services, which

may cause funds to be initially paid from the wrong appropriations. These

errors will require correction at some later date. We found that this

problem still exists.

DFAS Columbus officials agreed that they are still experiencing many of

the same problems today that we identified in our 1997 report. They told

us that when contracts do not include detailed payment terms, they would
Page 19 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

generally pay a contractor’s invoice by prorating the payment across all

the applicable ACRNs on the contract. When this happens, sufficient funds

may not be available at some later date because unspent balances in the

older appropriations cancel. This can lead to contract reconciliations that

redistribute the payments using some other form of payment allocation.

Because DOD had not established the requisite systems, controls, and

managerial attention required to properly account for its disbursements

consistent with the 1990 account closing law, DOD made at least

$615 million of illegal or otherwise improper adjustments during fiscal

year 2000 alone. DOD was aware of the limitations the account closing law

placed on the availability of canceled appropriations and that the law was

enacted because of previous abuses by DOD’s use of old appropriations.

The department also knew that a major system used to control its use of

appropriations allowed for disbursements to be charged in a way that was

inconsistent with that law. However, it did nothing to fix the system,

although it estimated the cost to do so to be minimal.

The $615 million of adjustments we identified in this report as illegal or

otherwise improper must be immediately reversed. Furthermore, at a

minimum, DOD will need to effect changes to its systems, policies,

procedures, and the overall weak control environment that fostered these

practices and served to perpetuate this problem. Top management must

clearly demonstrate its commitment to adhering to the account closing law

and eliminating the abuses of appropriations law. In the short term, this

will require that DOD immediately fix the system, contract modification

problems, and inadequate policies and procedures identified in this report.

In the long term, DOD will need to resolve its overall financial

management problems, including the lack of leadership and accountability

that have been the subject of numerous reports and recommended

corrective actions over the years.

We recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under Secretary

of Defense (Comptroller) to direct the Director of the Defense Finance

and Accounting Service to

• immediately reverse adjustments to closed accounts identified in this

report as illegal or otherwise improper;

• determine the correct accounting for these adjustments after they have

been reversed;

• ensure that the requisite controls are properly included and operating

effectively in CRS so that it will prohibit charging disbursements against

Conclusion

Recommendations for

Executive Action
Page 20 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

appropriation accounts that (1) are closed or (2) have not yet been

enacted at the time the disbursements are actually made;

• revise current policies and procedures pertaining to closed account

adjustments to include specific detailed guidance to require that future

adjustments to closed appropriation accounts satisfy the criteria discussed

in this report; and

• establish a monitoring program for future adjustments to closed

appropriation accounts and make clear to managers that they will be held

accountable if abuses are identified.

To the extent that DFAS Columbus is unable to make correcting

adjustments because insufficient balances remain in the correct accounts,

we also recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under

Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to investigate and report on these

adjustments as required by the Antideficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. 1351, and

implementing guidance.

We also recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under

Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to issue a

policy that prohibits the writing of contract modifications to change the

payment terms of a contract if the change would result in illegal or

otherwise improper adjustments, as defined in this report, affecting closed

appropriation accounts.

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional

committees. We are also sending copies of this report to the Secretary of

Defense; the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,

Technology, and Logistics; the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air

Force; the Director of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service; and

the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. We will make copies

available to others upon request.
Page 21 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact me at (202)

512-9505. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix III.

Gregory D. Kutz

Director, Financial Management and Assurance
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

Page 22 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

To meet our first objective of assessing the adequacy of DOD procedures

for adjusting closed appropriation accounts, we reviewed applicable laws,

regulations, administrative guidelines, policies, and procedures. These

included title 31 U.S.C. “Money and Finance,” Chapter 13,

“Appropriations,” and Chapter 15, “Appropriation Accounting;” OMB

Circular A-34; Volume 3, Chapter 10 of DOD’s Financial Management

Regulation, “Accounting Requirements for Expired and Canceled

Accounts;” and DFAS Columbus’ Responsible Contract Reconciliation

Agency Guide, which defines the responsible contract reconciliation

agent’s missions and responsibilities in conducting reconciliations in

accordance with Office of the Secretary of Defense policy and DFAS

procedures. We also reviewed DFAS Columbus’ Desk Procedure 808,

“Coding of Adjustments,” that DFAS Columbus employees are to follow

when using CRS to perform contract reconciliations and to correct errors.

This review included the process used by DFAS Columbus to code, report,

and record obligation, disbursement, and appropriation adjustments to

closed accounts. We met with DFAS Columbus officials responsible for

performing contract reconciliations to discuss and obtain an

understanding of the process for reconciling closed account adjustments,

including the roles and responsibilities of the military services in the

overall process to make and approve adjustments to closed appropriation

accounts. We also met with responsible DFAS Columbus officials that had

responsibility for CRS to obtain an understanding of how the system

processed and reported on closed account adjustments.

To meet our second objective to determine if closed appropriation

account adjustments complied with the 1990 account closing law, we

selected 268 such adjustments valued at over $2.2 billion from a

population of 4,470 adjustments valued at over $2.7 billion. The 268

adjustments were selected based on their large dollar value—generally at

least $1.7 million each.1

 The 268 adjustments were limited to closed

appropriation account adjustments made during fiscal year 2000 as

recorded in the DFAS Columbus CRS database. We selected the

adjustments from fiscal year 2000 data because they were the most

complete fiscal year data available at the time. The reviewed adjustments

represented 81 percent of the closed appropriation account adjustment

dollars recorded in CRS during fiscal year 2000.

 1

Included in the 268 adjustments were 62 adjustments that did not have a value of at least

$1.7 million. These adjustments were selected for other reasons.

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

Page 23 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

To assess if DFAS Columbus had adequate documentation to support the

propriety of the adjustments, we analyzed financial information from

DFAS Columbus’ records and reports, including contracts, contract

modifications, shipping notices, invoices, payment vouchers, and

schedules of adjustments. We identified and met with the DFAS Columbus

officials knowledgeable about each adjustment and obtained their views

on the results of our analysis. We also identified the responsible DFAS or

military service locations that maintained the official account records and

obtained documentation to show how each adjustment was recorded in

the accounting records. We compared these documents with the DFAS

Columbus adjustments and resolved any differences.

We performed our work primarily at the Defense Finance and Accounting

Service Center in Columbus, Ohio. We also obtained documentation from

the following DFAS locations that were responsible for maintaining

official accounting records: Cleveland, and Dayton, Ohio; Limestone,

Maine; Omaha, Nebraska; San Bernardino, California; and St Louis,

Missouri. Our review was conducted from May 2000 through March 2001 in

accordance with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards,

except that we did not validate the accuracy of the number of closed

account adjustments and their related dollar values in the CRS database,

which was provided to us by DFAS Columbus.

On May 25, 2001, we requested comments on a draft of this report from the

Secretary of Defense or his designee, but none had been provided at the

time we finalized our report on July 17, 2001.
Appendix II: Illegal or Otherwise Improper

Adjustments

Page 24 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Contract Number

Voucher

number

Appropriation was

canceled at time

disbursement was

made

Appropriation was

not enacted at time

disbursement was

made

Adjustment was not

necessary

Insufficient

documentation

N6226986C0217 W9480 $ 1,998,358.00

W9476 $ 3,394,924.00

N6133990C0060 N6779 2,677,997.70

N6133989C0098 932771 1,776,895.62

N0016387C0180 S4654 2,386,896.53

N0003991C0103 W5561 2,444,620.26

W5553 3,427,571.00

N0002490C6044 S9238 2,166,058.00

S9027 2,165,752.48

S8892 2,165,752.48

S8472 4,666,393.64 15,831.36

N0002489C6006 S0405 $ 2,096,307.00 25,829.00

N0002488C6067 N7812 151,710.00

N7800 4,269,136.00

N7795 2,354,093.00

N7789 2,267,414.13

N7786 2,713,316.00

N7782 $ 21,349.00 27,815.00

N7776 18,036,414.00

N7775 1,934,449.50

N7772 1,889,754.00

N7765 1,889,754.00

N7763 3,779,508.00

N7756 1,891,872.00

N7741 21,592.00

N7739 468,149.00

N7716 1,889,754.00

N7714 1,287,627.54

N7712 148,364.00

N7710 1,909,026.00

N7689 310,219.20

N7686 100,171.70

N7684 103,719.98

N7682 103,717.00

N7676 113,661.55

N7670 325,668.72

N7668 52,069,213.98

N7667 26,239,843.37

N7659 505,586.34

N7657 176,588.00 94,261.50

N7624 90,291.50 210,333.75

N7571 15,135.00

Appendix II: Illegal or Otherwise Improper

Adjustments
Appendix II: Illegal or Otherwise Improper

Adjustments

Page 25 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Contract Number

Voucher

number

Appropriation was

canceled at time

disbursement was

made

Appropriation was

not enacted at time

disbursement was

made

Adjustment was not

necessary

Insufficient

documentation

N7552 14,532.01

N7517 983,954.46

N7499 67,357.33

N7463 8,700.00

N7397 2,984,130.00 82,028,430.40

N0002487C4581 N3134 2,770,000.00

N3133 2,770,000.00

N0002487C4168 N5519 4,554,153.23

N5518 2,079,581.91

N0001986C0326 DD0625 7,191,144.00

DC0719 3,381,621.50

N0001986C0236 W7517 3,194,403.34

N0001985C0034 N5092 2,102,341.02

N0001984C0256 W8380 13,496,286.90

F4160893C0064 WO4063 2,458,044.38

WC4062 1,730,215.00

F3460187C3142 WO8548 355,408.00

WO8790 721,037.00

F3365792C0003 WO7851 1,857,252.00

WO7845 5,132,911.42

F3365789C0087 SC3875 2,651,107.00

F3365788C0037 WC2669 19,355,150.81

F3365786C0012 WO8334 43,051,906.24

F3365781C2108 WO8782 21,174,721.57

WO3179 79,777,518.18

WC3184 3,645,255.00

WC3181 2,745,542.00

WC3178 10,555,736.00

WC3176 9,092,777.00

WC1723 2,000,000.00

F3365778C0645 WO0138 1,875,276.69

F1962892C0120 NO4684 4,294,186.00

NO4681 3,407,738.00

F1962892C0049 NO3851 4,999,792.00

F1962886C0131 SO5580 1,815,352.44

SO5525 92,572.96

SO5475 1,980,175.00

SO5465 2,195,495.93

SO5393 3,132,740.00

SO5392 2,410,310.00

SO5391 2,067,218.00

SO5388 4,528,346.00
Appendix II: Illegal or Otherwise Improper

Adjustments

Page 26 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Contract Number

Voucher

number

Appropriation was

canceled at time

disbursement was

made

Appropriation was

not enacted at time

disbursement was

made

Adjustment was not

necessary

Insufficient

documentation

SO5383 2,499,656.00

SO5381 7,250,454.00

SO5379 170,565.70

SO5376 4,058,223.72

F0960393C0322 WO5376 134,639.00

F0960392C0002 NO4355 1,833,397.40

NO4354 1,910,253.40

NO4353 2,734,630.60

F0862693C0008 GC259 2,469,617.54

F0470186C0022 WO5661 7,980,582.03

WO5548 1,763,491.04

WC5562 2,531,407.62

WC5551 2,136,241.90

F0470183C0031 WO7947 1,958,790.85

F0460688D00670261 SC0610 7,765,922.00

DASG6092C0217 961061 3,271,794.85

961052 3,906,502.46

961048 2,182,311.18

DAAJ0989CA086 906563 2,826,196.94

DAAB1088C0001 907417 1,988,499.52

DAAE0783EA007 931057 33,235.00

F0470189C0081 SC0424 23,000.00

SC0425 33,497.64

SC0426 45,115.59

SC0427 45,986.57

SC0428 78,401.71

SC0429 127,317.42

SC0430 201,600.45

SC0431 120,665.62

F0863592C0050 SC0686 23,918.48

SO0690 8,892.67

SO0691 16,398.29

F1962892C0035 SO0810 23,501.00

SO0812 185,314.00

SO0818 185,314.00

SC0839 340,555.05

MDA90890C0022 S0089 248,549.68 135,000.00

N0014089CTB58 S5841 8,351.62

N0042188C0081 S1214 272,717.64 1,194.65

N0003090C0012 N0201 1,395.00

N0017 4,521.58

N0003092C0092 W5053 1,183,706.57
Appendix II: Illegal or Otherwise Improper

Adjustments

Page 27 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Contract Number

Voucher

number

Appropriation was

canceled at time

disbursement was

made

Appropriation was

not enacted at time

disbursement was

made

Adjustment was not

necessary

Insufficient

documentation

W5054 419,339.07

W4966 4,661.29

W5055 5,015.55

W5056 12,453.69

W5057 167,306.01

W5058 3,941.41

W5059 3,591.60

W5060 24.00

W0003 3,164.36

N0012383C0333 EC469 8,956.08

EC606 22,837.99

DAAK0185CB312 S0405 168,950.88

 F0470186C0022 WO8808 975,038.83

WO5522 560,510.91

WO5523 595,915.76

WO5536 1,217,836.82

WO5544 1,257,500.00

WO5638 6,379,406.38

WO5650 468,305.00

WO5651 5,606,294.71

WO5656 311,682.00

WO5658 3,355,725.29

WO5664 210,736.82

WO6242 1,455,157.15

F3365772L0647 WO7317 172,680.97

F3365787C0051 GD706 149,859.64

F2960189C0014 CD4229 168,076.00

N0002490C6093 N2215 815,519.20

Totals $107,696,969.35 $38,159,572.83 $364,023,650.75 $104,910,739.01
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff

Acknowledgments

Page 28 GAO-01-697 Canceled DOD Appropriations

Larry W. Logsdon, (703) 695-7510

In addition to the contact named above, Bertram J. Berlin, Dennis B.

Fauber, Jeffrey A. Jacobson, Mary Jo Lewnard, Keith E. McDaniel,

Michael S. Peacock, and Harold P. Santarelli made key contributions to

this report.

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff

Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Acknowledgments

(918986)
The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of reports are

$2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the

Superintendent of Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are also

accepted.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are

discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100

700 4th St., NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by phone:

(202) 512-6000

fax: (202) 512-6061

TDD (202) 512-2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To

receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30 days,

please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu will

provide information on how to obtain these lists.

Orders by Internet

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet, send an email message with “info” in the body to:

Info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web home page at:

http://www.gao.gov

Contact one:

• Web site: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

• E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

• 1-800-424-5454 (automated answering system)

Ordering Information

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in

Federal Programs

United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Presorted Standard

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00