The Comptroller General, in approving the Coast Guard's accounting system in 1951, made special mention of the lack of accounting control over personal property. A recently completed review of aspects

of the Coast Guard financial management and related reporting system disclosed that control over personal property still had not been established, although the Coast Guard has begun efforts to correct this deficiency and plans substantial completion by June 30, 1969. Our review also disclosed the need for substantive updating improvements and simplifications in the areas of budgeting, accounting, and reporting in order to bring the system into conformity with current concepts and requirements. Some progress was noted on improvements to the accounting system of the Coast Guard during 1968. Following our review, Coast Guard officials informed us that they plan to commence studies during fiscal year 1969 for implementing an improved operating costbased budgeting system for Coast Guard operating units and programs, scheduled for Installation as of July 1, 1970.

Pursuant to a working arrangement between officials of the General Accounting Office and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), individual segments of the system are first submitted to the GAO site audit staff for informal review and evaluation, including field testing, before formal approval is requested. Under this working arrangement, FAA has informally submitted for advance review many of the basic elements of its system, in one form or another. However, the FAA has yet to develop one of the most important and difficult aspects of its system; namely, the accounting for costs in the manner necessary to develop and use internal cost-based budgets and to provide support for its PPBS, as provided for in the overall design of the FAA financial management system. The FAA has not found it feasible to establish target dates at this time for submitting this and each of the other segments of its system.

The Federal Highway Administration has incorporated the accounting
for all its bureaus and offices into one integrated system through
expansion and adaptation of the system approved for the Bureau of Pub-
lic Roads (BPR). The modifications to the approved BPR system made
by the Administration to accomplish this expansion and adaptation will
be subject to review and approval in accordance with the Comptroller
General's letter of June 29, 1967, approving the BPR system. The Admin-
istration had established a target date of January 1969 for submitting
these modifications for review and approval by the Comptroller General.
However, this target date has not been met and no new target date has
been provided.

The Treasury Department has developed, at the suggestion of the General Accounting Office, a statement of principles and standards for administrative accounting systems of the Department and its constituent agencies. In November 1968, Treasury formally submitted the principles and standards for approval by the Comptroller General.

APPENDIX
Page 15

The Treasury Department informally furnished to the GAO site staff
in June 1968 a revised manual for the Office of the Secretary admin-
istrative accounting system. The Office of the Secretary is cur-
rently implementing the revisions to the system and contemplates the
completion of the implementation and testing in January 1969.

The revenue accounting principles and standards are being cleared
within the Treasury Department for submission to GAO.

The U. S. Savings Bonds Division proposes to use the manual developed
by the Bureau of the Public Debt for the administrative accounting
system as the basis for its accounting controls and for the develop-
ment of its accounting reports. The Division plans to introduce any
necessary modification in its procedures and practices to conform to
those set forth in the approved manual. In addition, it will develop
and issue instructions or controls of a supplemental nature as may be
necessary to provide internal reports essential to effective internal
management. However, because of staffing problems, the Division is
unable to furnish a target date for the submission of the system to
GAO.

The U. S. Secret Service has submitted a revised draft of its account-
ing manual to the Department for review. Department officials have
informed us that they do not consider the system to be developed to
the point where it could be submitted to GAO. They were unable to
furnish a target date for submission of the system.

Although the American Battle Monuments Commission has no plans for revising and resubmitting its accounting system, the General Accounting Office in May 1967 initiated a review of the system primarily to determine whether the system adequately serves the needs of management and otherwise meets currently prescribed requirements. This review disclosed the need for making certain operating changes to comply with ABMC's accounting manual. ABMC officials stated that they do not plan to make these changes because legislation pending in the Congress proposes to transfer all ABMC responsibilities to the Veterans Adminis

tration.

Farm Credit Administration, on February 26, 1968, informally submitted a proposed statement of accounting principles preparatory to formal submission. We returned the proposed statement on October 15, 1968, with our suggested changes. A target date for submission of the complete system will be set after the statement of principles and standards has been submitted formally and approved by the Comptroller General.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has amended the ac-
counting system and related documentation originally submitted on
April 14, 1966, to provide for accounting control over significant
amounts of Government-owned property and space hardware held by con-
tractors in response to the need disclosed during our review of the

system. The supplemental documentation was furnished to the GAO site staff on June 14, 1968. The GAO site staff review of the system, as supplemented, has been completed and the results of that review are being evaluated as a basis for approval consideration.

The statement of accounting concepts, principles, and standards which
was submitted for approval prior to the recent reorganization of the
District Government, has been reviewed, and needed revisions to the
statement have been discussed with District Government staff. However,
because of circumstances prevailing since the reorganization, efforts
to obtain clarification and agreement to needed revisions in the state-
ment, or to obtain target dates under a time-phased development plan,
have not been successful. Unresolved matters, including the need for
an organized time-phased development plan, were brought to the atten-
tion of the new management in the Comptroller General's letter to the
Commissioner of the District of Columbia, dated July 17, 1968, return
ing the statement unapproved. The establishment of target dates is
being deferred by the District pending top-level policy decisions re-
garding a plan of action for financial management improvement.

The District's payroll system was scheduled to be submitted for approval on July 1, 1967. However, the District's review of payroll procedures revealed that a comprehensive revision is required to make these procedures efficient, and therefore withheld submission pending revision of the system. No new target date for submission of the system has been established. (See also note 21.)

The General Accounting Office, in a letter dated February 27, 1964, advised the Corps of Engineers, which is responsible for the Washington Aqueduct accounting system, of the need for the system to provide for recognition in the accounts of depreciation on assets and interest on Investment as elements of cost of supplying water to the Washington district but, in its reply of March 24, 1964, the Corps of Engineers disagreed on the grounds that depreciation and interest costs are not to be considered in establishing water rates. As staff becomes available, the General Accounting Office plans consultation with Corps of Engineers officials to resolve these differences.

*Approval process involves legal and budget requirements which we have been unable to resolve with responsible officials of other organizations.

*Represents date of original submission for approval. Cooperative assistance and informal comments have led to periodic revisions. The directives and instructions are in the process of finalisation or approval.