oversight

Securities Exchange Act: Review of Reporting Under Section 10A

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 2003-09-03.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

United States General Accounting Office
Washington, DC 20548




          September 3, 2003

          The Honorable John D. Dingell
          Ranking Minority Member
          Committee on Energy and Commerce
          House of Representatives

          Subject: Securities Exchange Act: Review of Reporting Under Section 10A

          Dear Mr. Dingell:

          This report responds to your request that we update our February 4, 2000, report1 on
          reporting under Section 10A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. As you know, Section
          10A requires reporting to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) when, during the
          course of a financial audit, an auditor detects likely illegal acts that have a material impact on
          the financial statements and appropriate remedial action is not being taken by management or
          the board of directors. In addition to reporting on the number of Section 10A reports
          submitted to the SEC and the status of SEC actions pertaining to Section 10A reports, we
          also agreed with your office to report on the current initiatives by the accounting profession
          pertaining to the auditor’s responsibility for detecting fraudulent financial reporting. On
          October 1, 2002, we briefed your office on the number of Section 10A reports submitted to
          the SEC since our last report. This report responds to your February 25, 2003, request that
          we update that work, which we have updated to reflect Section 10A reports submitted to the
          SEC through May 15, 2003.


          Results in Brief

          The Section 10A reporting requirements first became effective for fiscal years beginning on
          or after January 1, 1996. Since our February 2000 report, the SEC has received an additional
          23 10A letters, bringing the total received since the requirement was implemented through
          May 15, 2003, to 29. Of the 29 SEC registrants named in the reports, 10 are currently
          subjects of active SEC enforcement investigations, 8 have had actions brought against them
          by the SEC, and 11 of the Section 10A reports were closed without formal action being taken
          by the SEC. According to SEC officials, all Section 10A reports are investigated. In some
          instances, the SEC took no formal action. However, the registrants, as a result of discussions
          with the SEC, took remedial action that the SEC found satisfactory. Through May 15, 2003,
          the SEC had filed seven actions against auditors for alleged violations of Section 10A for
          1
           U.S. General Accounting Office, Securities Exchange Act: Review of Reporting Under Section 10A,
          GAO/AIMD-00-54R (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 4, 2000).

                                                                   GAO-03-982R Review of 10A Reporting
failing to report likely illegal acts materially impacting on a company’s financial statements.
Six of these cases have been settled with the majority of the auditors agreeing to suspensions
from practicing before the SEC for periods ranging from 1 to 10 years. The remaining case
was filed in January 2003 and is currently in litigation.

In 2002, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) issued a new audit
standard for detecting fraud, Statement on Auditing Standards (SAS) 99: Consideration of
Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. The AICPA believes SAS 99 will substantially
change auditor performance, thereby improving the likelihood that auditors will detect
material misstatements in financial statements due to fraud by placing an increased focus on
exercising professional skepticism throughout the audit. The new standard calls for auditors
in planning and performing the audit to identify and consider risks of material misstatement
due to fraud through brainstorming among audit team members, inquiring of management,
performing analytical procedures, considering inappropriate reporting of revenue and
management override of internal controls, evaluating internal controls that address the
identified risks of fraud, and assessing throughout the audit and at the completion of the audit
the risk of fraud based on the results of auditing procedures. The new standard also requires
auditors to communicate about fraud to management, the audit committee, and others, and to
document the auditors’ consideration of fraud. SAS 99 has been adopted on an interim basis
by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) for audits of public
companies registered with the PCAOB. However, upon completion of its review of SAS 99,
the PCAOB may modify, repeal, replace or adopt permanently the standard for audits of
registered public companies. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 also contains a number of
provisions aimed at improving the quality of audits of public companies including more audit
committee involvement with the auditor, a requirement for auditors to attest to management’s
assessment of internal controls over financial reporting, a requirement for audit partner
rotation, prohibition of certain nonaudit services to audit clients, prohibition of providing
audit services to a company that employs as a top official a previous member of the audit
engagement team, and greater penalties for failure to report fraud. We believe these new
provisions should enhance the auditor’s ability to comply with the requirements of the
auditing standard for detecting and reporting fraud.

We requested comments on a draft of this document from the SEC and the AICPA. The SEC
and the AICPA provided us with some technical suggestions which we incorporated as
appropriate.


Background

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104- 67) added Section
10A to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U. S. C. 78j- 1). The requirements of
Section 10A first became effective for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 1996.2

Section 10A requires a company's board of directors or its auditor to notify the SEC about
possible illegal acts under certain conditions. Specifically, if the auditor detects or otherwise
becomes aware that an illegal act has or may have occurred, the auditor is to inform the
2
  For registrants not required to file quarterly financial data with the SEC, the requirements apply to annual
reports for any fiscal year beginning on or after January 1, 1997.



Page 2                                                         GAO-03-982R Review of 10A Reporting
appropriate level of management as soon as possible and ensure that the board of directors or
the audit committee is adequately informed. Section 10A also requires that auditors report
conclusions directly to the board of directors or audit committee if they conclude the
following: (1) the likely illegal act has a material effect on the financial statements, (2) senior
management has not taken proper and timely remedial action, and (3) failure to take remedial
action is reasonably expected to result in a departure from a standard audit report or the
auditor's resignation.3 A board of directors or audit committee that receives such a report
shall inform the SEC within 1 business day of receiving the report and send the auditor a
copy of the notice provided to the SEC. If the auditor does not receive a copy of the notice
within the required 1 business day, the auditor is to furnish a copy of the report to the SEC
not later than 1 business day following the failure to receive a copy of the notice.

Rule 240. 10A-1 states that reports under Section 10A shall be submitted to the SEC's Office
of the Chief Accountant.4 The report must be in writing and identify the registrant and the
auditor and the date that the registrant received the Section 10A report from the auditor. In
addition, the report must include either a copy of the auditor's report or a summary of the
report including a description of the act that the auditor has identified as a likely illegal act
and the possible effect of that act on the financial statements. The rule is based on the
premise that the reports under Section 10A are to assist the SEC in performing its
enforcement responsibilities and therefore, the reports are nonpublic.

After receiving and logging the Section 10A reports, the Office of the Chief Accountant
forwards the reports to the Division of Enforcement, which conducts investigations into
possible violations of federal securities laws and prosecutes the SEC's cases. The reports are
also forwarded to other divisions within the SEC, including the Division of Corporation
Finance, which reviews the financial statements and other financial reports filed by SEC
registrant companies. The Office of the Chief Accountant and the Division of Enforcement
monitor the progress on any investigation initiated or facilitated by a Section 10A report. In
addition, the Division of Enforcement is developing a computer tracking system for referrals
of Section 10A reports, as well as complaints concerning possible financial reporting
violations.

The SEC has current, ongoing monitoring efforts to identify potential Section 10A reporting
situations where a report has not been submitted. The Office of the Chief Accountant
monitors letters received from the AICPA’s SEC Practice Section (SECPS)5 member
auditors when the client-auditor relationship is terminated6 and other correspondence, as
described later in this section, to identify potential Section 10A reporting situations. In

3
    If the auditor resigns, the requirements of Section 10A are still applicable.
4
  The Chief Accountant is the principal advisor within the SEC on accounting and auditing matters arising from
the administration of federal securities laws.
5
  The SECPS is a self-regulatory group whose objective is to improve the practice of certified public accounting
firms. The AICPA bylaws require that all members that engage in the practice of public accounting with a firm
auditing one or more SEC clients are required to join the SECPS.
6
  When a SECPS member firm has been the auditor for an SEC registrant and has resigned, has declined to
stand for reelection, or has been dismissed, SECPS requirements state that the firm shall report in writing the
fact that the client auditor relationship has ceased directly to the client with a simultaneous copy to the Office of
the Chief Accountant of the SEC within 5 business days.


Page 3                                                            GAO-03-982R Review of 10A Reporting
addition, officials from the Division of Corporation Finance explained that they look for
potential enforcement cases, including potential Section 10A reporting cases, when
reviewing information reported to the SEC on Form 8-K, Item 4, “Changes In Registrant’s
Certifying Accountants.”

An SEC registrant must submit a Form 8-K within 5 business days of the date that its auditor
resigns, declines to stand for reelection, or is dismissed. Item 304 of Regulation S-K, which
is incorporated into the Form 8-K, Item 4, requires registrants to state, among other things,
whether there were any disagreements between the auditor and the registrant on any matter of
accounting principles or practices, auditing scope or procedures, or financial statement
disclosures in connection with the audits of the financial statements for the 2 most recent
fiscal years, and any subsequent interim period. Item 4 also requires disclosure of any
instance within the applicable time period where the former auditor advised the registrant
that (1) the internal controls necessary for developing reliable financial statements did not
exist, (2) information had come to the auditor’s attention that led him to no longer rely on
management’s representations, (3) there was a need to expand significantly the scope of the
audit and the scope had not been expanded, and (4) information had come to the auditor’s
attention affecting the reliability of past audit reports or financial statements, or the financial
statements issued or to be issued covering the periods subsequent to the date of the last audit
report, and the issue had not been resolved to the auditor’s satisfaction.

According to the SEC, it received approximately 2,800 Forms 8K with Item 4 disclosures
during fiscal year 2002.7 The Division of Corporation Finance reviews all Item 4 Forms 8-K
and requests additional information from the registrant as needed to clarify matters reported.
When the Division of Corporation Finance identifies significant potential violations of SEC
laws and regulations, the matters are considered for forwarding to the Division of
Enforcement for further investigation.

The Division of Enforcement advised us that it processed approximately 600 enforcement
cases during its last fiscal year, of which approximately 23 percent involved accounting
and/or auditing issues. In addition to referrals from the Division of Corporation Finance, the
Division of Enforcement becomes aware of potential enforcement cases through various
means, including news articles, letters, and referrals from other agencies such as the
Department of Justice or the stock exchanges. When investigating cases, the Division of
Enforcement considers violations of any federal securities laws and regulations, including
Section 10A reporting requirements.


Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our objectives were to determine (1) the number of Section 10A submissions through 

May 15, 2003 and the status of the SEC actions on those reports, and (2) the current 

initiatives being taken by the accounting profession pertaining to the auditor’s responsibility 

for detecting fraudulent financial reporting. To meet the above objectives, we interviewed 

officials from the SEC's Office of the Chief Accountant, Division of Enforcement, and 

Division of Corporation Finance. We requested information from the SEC regarding the 


7
 According to SEC officials, approximately half of the item 4 disclosures were submitted because a change of
auditor was necessary when Arthur Andersen, LLP ceased practicing before the SEC in August 2002.


Page 4                                                      GAO-03-982R Review of 10A Reporting
number of Section 10A reports submitted through May 15, 2003, and the status of any related
enforcement issues associated with all Section 10A cases. In addition, we made inquiries of
the AICPA about the accounting profession's actions to address recommendations concerning
fraud related to the studies identified in our February 4, 2000, report.

We requested oral comments on a draft of this report from the AICPA’s Director of
Professional Standards and Services – Washington D.C. and from the principal
representatives we met with at the SEC. The Chief Counsel in the SEC’s Office of the Chief
Accountant provided us with oral comments that also incorporated the views of the Division
of Enforcement and Division of Corporation Finance. Their comments are discussed at the
end of this report. We conducted our work from February 2003 through May 2003 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.


Section 10A Reports Received by the SEC

Section 10A reporting requirements first became effective for fiscal years beginning on or
after January 1, 1996.8 In our February 2000 report, we stated that six Section 10A reports
had been submitted through December 14, 1999. Records from the SEC's Office of the Chief
Accountant show that during the period December 15, 1999, through May 15, 2003, an
additional 23 Section 10A reports were submitted. Therefore, since the inception of the 10A
reporting requirement through May 15, 2003, a total of 29 Section 10A reports have been
submitted to the SEC. The reports cover a variety of potential illegal acts, including
improper revenue recognition, unusual capital transactions relating to stock warrants,
inadequate financial statement disclosures, and failure to disclose expenses relating to stock
options. Although the AICPA has not specifically studied Section 10A reporting,
representatives from the AICPA continue to attribute the low level of 10A reporting to the
reasons they cited as stated in our previous report, the most likely being that in most cases,
management or the board of directors, often with the participation of internal or external
counsel, take timely and appropriate action to address a situation involving an illegal act
when it is brought to their attention.

According to SEC officials, all Section 10A reports are investigated. Of the 29 SEC
registrants named in the reports, 10 are currently subjects of active SEC enforcement
investigations, 8 have had actions brought against them by the SEC, and 11 were closed
without formal action being taken by the SEC. Injunctive actions and administrative
proceedings were filed in 8 cases alleging violations such as (1) failure to disclose
transactions in public statements to shareholders and the SEC, (2) inclusion of fraudulently-
valued assets on financial statements filed with the SEC, (3) underreporting the value of
inventory resulting in an understatement of expenses and liabilities and an overstatement of
income, and (4) improper revenue recognition and understatement of expenses. A violation
reported under Section 10A may be closed without formal action being taken by the SEC for
such reasons as the registrant is no longer publicly traded, has a very small dollar amount of
assets, or is no longer doing business. In certain instances, after discussions with the SEC,
the registrants took remedial action, which the SEC found satisfactory, such as obtaining a
review of the registrant’s quarterly financial statements filed with the SEC.


8
    See footnote 2.


Page 5                                              GAO-03-982R Review of 10A Reporting
On October 31, 2000, the SEC filed its first actions against auditors for violating Section 10A
reporting requirements, which call for auditors to report to the SEC when, during the course
of a financial audit, they detect likely illegal acts that have a material impact on the financial
statements and appropriate remedial action is not being taken by management or the board of
directors. As previously stated, through May 15, 2003, the SEC had filed seven actions
against auditors for alleged violations of Section 10A for failing to report likely illegal acts
materially impacting on a company’s financial statements. These actions were both civil
actions in federal court seeking, among other remedies, injunctive relief, and SEC
administrative proceedings against auditors seeking cease and desist orders and auditor
suspensions from practicing before the SEC. In addition to the auditor’s failure to submit a
10A notification, in some cases injunctive actions and administrative proceedings were filed
against auditors for other alleged violations such as engaging in fraud by falsely representing
to the public that the financial reporting was in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles or failure to comply with generally accepted auditing standards. Six of
these cases have been settled with five of the auditors agreeing to suspensions from
practicing before the SEC for periods ranging from 1 to 10 years. In the sixth case, monetary
penalties were assessed against the auditors. The remaining case, which was filed in January
2003, is still in litigation.


Current Initiatives by the Accounting Profession Related to Detection of Fraudulent
Financial Reporting

In October 2002, the AICPA issued a new auditing standard for detecting fraud, Statement on
Auditing Standards (SAS) 99: Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit,9
which became effective for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after
December 15, 2002. While the new fraud auditing standard does not change the auditor’s
responsibility to detect fraud, it does provide more guidance to the auditor on how to respond
to risks of material frauds and more specific fraud detection procedures. The changes to the
auditor’s consideration of fraud were largely in response to AICPA-sponsored academic
research projects which studied the effectiveness of SAS 82 and recommendations
concerning fraud from the Panel on Audit Effectiveness.10

The AICPA believes that the new standard will substantially change auditor performance,
thereby improving the likelihood that auditors will detect material misstatements in financial
statements due to fraud by placing an increased focus on exercising professional skepticism
throughout the audit. The new standard also stresses that auditors must ask the right
questions and question the answers, and obtain audit evidence that supports the answers.


9
  This new SAS supersedes the AICPA’s earlier fraud standard issued in 1997, SAS 82, which carried the same
title.
10
   In 1998, the Public Oversight Board (POB) appointed a Panel on Audit Effectiveness to examine the current
audit model, including the way independent audits are performed regarding the auditor’s consideration of fraud.
The Panel’s report, Report and Recommendations, issued August 31, 2000, contains recommendations
addressed to the AICPA’s Auditing Standards Board concerning fraud. The POB was an independent private
sector body that provided oversight of the self-regulatory programs of the AICPA’s SECPS. The POB was
terminated on May 1, 2002. See U.S. General Accounting Office, The Accounting Profession: Status of Panel
on Audit Effectiveness Recommendations to Enhance the Self-Regulatory System, GAO-02-411 (Washington,
D.C.: May 17, 2002).


Page 6                                                       GAO-03-982R Review of 10A Reporting
Moreover, auditors who identify fraud risks must know how to change audit procedures to
handle the situation. Key provisions of the new standard include the following.

• 	 As part of planning the audit, brainstorming among audit engagement personnel,
    including the person responsible for the audit, regarding the risks of material
    misstatement due to fraud. Audit team members are required to consider how and where
    the entity's financial statements might be susceptible to material misstatement due to
    fraud and reinforce the importance of adopting an appropriate mindset of professional
    skepticism.

• 	 Obtain the information needed to identify risks of material misstatement due to fraud
    through such activities as (1) inquiring of management and others within the entity about
    the risks of fraud, (2) considering the results of the analytical procedures performed in
    planning the audit, (3) considering fraud risk factors, and (4) considering certain other
    information.

• 	 Require specific consideration of the risks of fraud due to inappropriate reporting of
    revenue and management override of internal controls.

• 	 Use information gathered to identify risks that may result in a material misstatement due
    to fraud.

• 	 Assess the identified risks after taking into account an evaluation of the entity's programs
    and controls that address the identified risks of material misstatement due to fraud.

• 	 Respond to the results of the assessment of the risks of material misstatement due to
    fraud by applying professional skepticism when gathering and evaluating audit evidence.
    The auditor’s response to the risks identified relates to the performance of the audit by
    considering (1) the overall effect on how the audit is conducted, that is, a response
    involving more general considerations apart from the specific procedures otherwise
    planned, (2) identified risks that involve the nature, timing, and extent of the auditing
    procedures to be performed and (3) the performance of certain procedures to further
    address the risk of material misstatement due to fraud involving management override of
    controls, such as examining journal entries and other adjustments for evidence of possible
    material misstatement due to fraud, reviewing accounting estimates for biases that could
    result in material misstatement due to fraud, and evaluating the business rationale for
    significant unusual transactions.

• 	 Assess the risks of material misstatement due to fraud throughout the audit, evaluating at
    the completion of the audit whether the accumulated results of auditing procedures (audit
    evidence) and other observations affect the assessment and the need to perform
    additional or different audit procedures, and considering whether identified
    misstatements may be indicative of fraud and, if so, evaluating their implications.

•   Communicate about fraud to management, the audit committee, and others.

•   Document the auditor's consideration of fraud.




Page 7                                               GAO-03-982R Review of 10A Reporting
The new Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)11 has adopted on an
interim basis, auditing standards issued by the AICPA’s Auditing Standards Board (ASB), as
they existed on April 16, 2003, for use by public accounting firms registered with the
PCAOB in the preparation and issuance of audit reports of public companies. Upon
completion of its review of the standards, including SAS 99, the PCAOB may modify,
repeal, replace or adopt permanently the existing standards for audits of registered public
companies. Therefore, the PCAOB may determine that additional requirements and
guidance are needed for auditors to be more effective in detecting and reporting fraud.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the Act) also contains a number of provisions aimed at
improving the quality of audits of public companies. We believe these provisions should
enhance the effectiveness of the audit function, including the auditor’s ability to comply with
the requirements of the auditing standard for detecting and reporting fraud. For example, the
Act

• 	 requires auditors to report to and be overseen by a public company’s audit committee,12
    not management;

• 	 requires auditors to report to the audit committee information such as critical accounting
    policies and practices to be used, alternative treatments of financial information within
    generally accepted accounting principles that have been discussed with management,
    ramifications on the use of alternative treatment and the auditors’ preferred treatment,
    and other material written communications between the auditor and management;

• 	 requires auditors to attest to, and report on, the required assessment made by management
    on the company’s internal controls over financial reporting;

•    requires the lead audit partner and the audit review partner to rotate every 5 years;

• 	 prohibits an accounting firm from providing audit services to a public company if one of
    that company’s top officials was employed by the firm and worked on the company’s
    audit during the previous year;

• 	 prohibits the auditor of the public company’s financial statements from also providing
    certain nonaudit services;

• 	 requires the public company’s audit committee to pre-approve all audit, attest, and review
    services and nonaudit services that are not prohibited by the Act;

• 	 creates greater penalties for those who destroy records, commit securities fraud and fail to
    report fraud; and

11
   The PCAOB was established pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Act) to oversee the audits of
public companies that are subject to the U.S. Federal securities laws. As provided for by the Act, the PCAOB
will set professional standards (including auditing, attestation, quality control, ethics, and independence
standards) to be used by public accounting firms registered with the PCAOB in the preparation and issuance of
audit reports of public companies.
12
  An audit committee means a committee or equivalent body established by and amongst the public company’s
board of directors. If no such committee exists, then the entire board of directors shall be the audit committee.


Page 8                                                        GAO-03-982R Review of 10A Reporting
• 	 extends the statute of limitations for the discovery of fraud to the earlier of 2 years from
    the date of discovery of the facts constituting the violation or 5 years after the violation.



Agency Comments

We received oral comments on a draft of this report from the AICPA’s Director of
Professional Standards and Services – Washington D.C. and from the Chief Counsel in the
SEC’s Office of the Chief Accountant who provided us with oral comments that also
incorporated the views of the Division of Enforcement and Division of Corporation Finance.
The SEC and the AICPA provided us with some technical suggestions which we
incorporated in the report as appropriate.

We plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days after the date of this report. At
that time, we will send copies of this report to the Honorable William H. Donaldson,
Chairman of the SEC, and Mr. William F. Ezzell, Chairman of the AICPA. The report will
also be available at no charge on GAO’s home page at http://www.gao.gov. If you have any
questions, please call me at (202) 512- 9406 or Julia Duquette at (202) 512- 5131.


Sincerely yours, 





Jeanette M. Franzel 

Director

Financial Management and Assurance 





(194220) 



Page 9                                                GAO-03-982R Review of 10A Reporting
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the
United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further
permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or
other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to
reproduce this material separately.
                           The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of
GAO’s Mission 	            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.


                           The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is
Obtaining Copies of        through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and full-
GAO Reports and            text 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
Testimony                  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
                           e-mail alerts” under the “Order GAO Products” 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


                           Contact:
To Report Fraud,	
                           Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
Waste, and Abuse in        E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Federal Programs           Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470


                           Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800
Public Affairs 	           U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
                           Washington, D.C. 20548