Local TV Act: Progress Made, but Timeliness and Cost Accounting  
Issues Need to be Addressed (31-OCT-03, GAO-04-134).		 
                                                                 
The LOCAL TV Act required that GAO perform an annual audit of the
(1) administration of the provisions of the Act, and (2)	 
financial position of each applicant who receives a loan	 
guarantee under the Act, including the nature, amount, and	 
purpose of investments made by the applicant. In fiscal year	 
2002, the LOCAL TV Program was funded; however, because it was	 
not fully implemented in that year, there were no loan guarantee 
applicants for GAO to audit. Therefore, this report primarily	 
addresses whether program administration during fiscal year 2002 
satisfied the provisions of the Act.				 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-04-134 					        
    ACCNO:   A08805						        
  TITLE:     Local TV Act: Progress Made, but Timeliness and Cost     
Accounting Issues Need to be Addressed				 
     DATE:   10/31/2003 
  SUBJECT:   Accounting standards				 
	     Federal funds					 
	     Funds management					 
	     Loans						 
	     Television broadcasting				 
	     Audits						 
	     Noncompliance					 
	     Schedule slippages 				 
	     Program evaluation 				 
	     Interagency relations				 
	     LOCAL Television Loan Guarantee Program		 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-04-134

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

                       Report to Congressional Committees

October 2003

LOCAL TV ACT

 Progress Made, but Timeliness and Cost Accounting Issues Need to be Addressed

                                       a

GAO-04-134

Highlights of GAO-04-134, a report to the Committee on Banking, Housing
and Urban Affairs, United States Senate and the Committee on Financial
Services, House of Representatives

The LOCAL TV Act required that GAO perform an annual audit of the (1)
administration of the provisions of the Act, and (2) financial position of
each applicant who receives a loan guarantee under the Act, including the
nature, amount, and purpose of investments made by the applicant. In
fiscal year 2002, the LOCAL TV Program was funded; however, because it was
not fully implemented in that year, there were no loan guarantee
applicants for GAO to audit. Therefore, this report primarily addresses
whether program administration during fiscal year 2002 satisfied the
provisions of the Act.

GAO is making recommendations to the Board that it work with the
Administrator to help ensure that (1) program regulations and underwriting
criteria are issued expeditiously, and (2) loan application and
origination fees are sufficient to cover certain costs of administering
the Program and that these costs are accumulated, documented, and reported
in accordance with federal accounting standards. In response, the Board
stated that every effort is being made to ensure that the program
regulations and underwriting criteria are issued expeditiously and that as
applications are received, it will account for administrative expenses in
accordance with federal accounting standards.

October 2003

LOCAL TV ACT

Progress Made, but Timeliness and Cost Accounting Issues Need to be Addressed

In December 2000, the Congress passed the Launching Our Communities'
Access to Local Television Act of 2000 (LOCAL TV Act or Act). The Act
created the Local Television Loan Guarantee Program (Program or LOCAL TV
Program) and established the Local Television Loan Guarantee Board (Board)
to approve guaranteed loans, totaling no more than $1.25 billion, to
finance projects that will provide local television access to households
with limited over-the-air television broadcast signals or cable service.
The Board is comprised of the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman of
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Secretary of
Agriculture, and the Secretary of Commerce, or their designees. The
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Utilities Service serves as Program
Administrator (Administrator).

The LOCAL TV Program has not been established in an expeditious fashion as
specified by the Act. Given that funds were appropriated in November 2001,
thus starting the clock on the 120 days allowed for completing program
regulations and underwriting criteria, the Program should have been ready
for implementation by March 2002. According to the Board and
Administrator, three factors contributed to program delays: (1) initial
uncertainties over program funding, (2) inadequate dedicated staff
resources for program activities, and (3) the decision to issue a proposed
rule. As of the end of August 2003, neither of these key documents, which
provide the overall framework for the Program, was ready for
implementation, thus delaying lending activities and ultimately,
realization of improved television reception in target areas throughout
the United States.

Further, the full costs of administering the Program, including those
incurred by the respective agencies and departments providing support to
the Board, were not accumulated and charged to the program as called for
by federal accounting standards. Statement of Federal Financial Accounting
Standard No. 4, Managerial Cost Accounting Standards requires federal
agencies to capture the costs of federal programs to assist the Congress
in authorizing, modifying, and discontinuing programs and to provide
agencies with reliable cost data for making informed managerial decisions
and evaluating performance. Further, the capacity to capture these costs
going forward is key to fully recovering certain costs of administering
the Program through loan application and loan guarantee origination fees.

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-134.

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact McCoy Williams at (202)
512-6906 or [email protected].

Contents

     Letter                                                                 1 
                                          Results in Brief                  2 
                                             Background                     3 
                                        Scope and Methodology               5 
                            The LOCAL TV Program Has Not Been Implemented  
                                             in a Timely                   
                                               Manner                       6 
                            Policies and Procedures Needed as a Basis for  
                                        Collecting User Fees               
                                      Have Not Been Established             9 
                                             Conclusions                   11 
                                           Recommendations                 12 
                                 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation        12 
Appendixes                                                              
               Appendix I:        Comments from the LOCAL TV Board         14 
              Appendix II:     GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments      16 
                                            GAO Contacts                   16 
                                           Acknowledgments                 16 
                                 Table 1: Summary Estimate of Other        
     Table                          Administrative Costs Incurred          
                           by the Working Group During Fiscal Year 2002 to 
                                   Implement the LOCAL TV Program          
    Figures                Figure 1: Entities Involved in Implementing the    
                                          LOCAL TV Program                  5
                              Figure 2: Timeline for Key Activities to     
                                       Implement the LOCAL TV              
                                               Program                      7 

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.

A

United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20548

October 31, 2003

The Honorable Richard C. Shelby
Chairman
The Honorable Paul S. Sarbanes
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
United States Senate

The Honorable Michael G. Oxley
Chairman
The Honorable Barney Frank
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Financial Services
House of Representatives

Today, approximately 23.4 million households in the United States have
limited or no access to local television broadcast signals. To facilitate
access to local television stations for households located in nonserved
and
underserved1 areas, the Congress passed the Launching Our Communities'
Access to Local Television Act of 2000 (LOCAL TV Act or Act).2 The Act
created the LOCAL Television Loan Guarantee Program (Program or
LOCAL TV Program). The Program provides for loan guarantees of up to 80
percent of loans totaling no more than $1.25 billion to finance projects
to
enable local television access to communities where distance and
topography limit access to over-the-air television broadcast signals or
cable
service. The Act established the LOCAL Television Loan Guarantee Board
(Board), which is comprised of the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman
of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Secretary of
Agriculture, and the Secretary of Commerce, or their designees, primarily
to approve loan guarantees and the Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Rural Utilities Service (RUS) as Program Administrator (Administrator) to
issue and administer approved loan guarantees.

1The Act defines nonserved areas and underserved areas in terms of the
ability to receive local television broadcast signals serving a particular
designated market area. Nonserved areas do not have access to such signals
by any commercial, for-profit multichannel video provider. Underserved
areas have access to local television broadcast signals from not more than
one commercial, for-profit multichannel video provider.

2Pub. L. No. 106-553, Title X, Dec. 21, 2000.

This report addresses the Act's requirement that we perform an annual
audit of the (1) administration of the provisions of the Act and (2)
financial position of each applicant who receives a loan guarantee under
the Act, including the nature, amount, and purpose of investments made by
the applicant. Because the Program was not funded during fiscal year 2001,
we agreed with your offices that we would revisit the mandate in fiscal
year 2002. The Program was funded in fiscal year 2002; however, because it
was not fully implemented in that year, there were no loan guarantee
applicants for GAO to audit. Therefore, this report primarily addresses
whether program administration during fiscal year 2002 satisfied the
provisions of the Act.

Results in Brief	The LOCAL TV Program has not been established in an
expeditious fashion as specified by the Act. Given that funds were
appropriated in November 2001, thus starting the clock on the 120 days
allowed for completing program regulations and underwriting criteria, the
Program should have been ready for implementation by March 2002. According
to Board and RUS officials, three factors contributed to program delays:
(1) initial uncertainties over program funding, (2) inadequate dedicated
staff resources for program activities, and (3) the decision to issue a
proposed rule. As of the end of August 2003, neither of these key
documents, which provide the overall framework for the Program, was ready
for implementation, thus delaying lending activities and ultimately,
realization of improved television reception in target areas throughout
the United States.

Total costs of administering the Program, including those incurred by the
respective departments and agencies providing support to the Board, were
not accumulated and charged to the Program as called for by federal
accounting standards. Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standard
No. 4, Managerial Cost Accounting Standards requires federal agencies to
capture the cost of federal programs to assist the Congress in
authorizing, modifying, and discontinuing programs and to provide agencies
with reliable cost data for making informed managerial decisions and
evaluating performance. The capacity to capture these costs going forward
is key to satisfying federal accounting standards and fully recovering
certain costs of administering the Program through loan application and
loan guarantee origination fees.

We are making recommendations to the Board and the Administrator to help
ensure that (1) program regulations and underwriting criteria are issued
expeditiously, and (2) loan application and loan guarantee origination
fees are sufficient to cover, but not exceed, certain costs of
administering the Program.

In commenting on a draft of this report, the Board stated that every
effort is being made to ensure that program regulations and the
underwriting criteria are issued expeditiously. The Board further stated
that as it begins accepting applications, it will ensure that the
recording of administrative expenses adheres to managerial cost accounting
concepts in accordance with federal accounting standards and related
guidance. For additional information see the Agency Comments and Our
Evaluation section of this report and appendix I.

Background	The Launching Our Communities' Access to Local Television Act
of 2000 created a guaranteed loan program to facilitate access to signals
of local television stations for households located in nonserved and
underserved areas of the United States. The Act established the LOCAL
Television Loan Guarantee Board (Board) whose primary function is to
approve loan guarantees to finance projects to provide local television
access for communities in remote areas throughout the United States. The
Board is authorized to approve loan guarantees up to 80 percent of the
aggregate value of each loan. The Board may not approve loan guarantees
after December 31, 2006,3 and the aggregate of all loans guaranteed may
not be more than $1.25 billion. The repayment of the loan(s) is required
to be made with a term of the lesser of 25 years from the date of the
execution of the loan or the economically useful life of the primary
assets to be used in the delivery of the signal involved.

The Act set forth specific provisions and requirements for the Board to
implement this new program. Specifically, the Act required the Board to:
(1) direct the Administrator to prescribe regulations within 120 days
after the Congress appropriated funds, (2) develop underwriting criteria
in consultation with the Director, Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

3The Board may stop approving loan guarantees the earlier of (1) the date
the Secretary of Agriculture determines that at least 75 percent of the
designated market areas (DMAs) not in the top 40 DMAs have access to local
television broadcast signals (as determined by the Secretary) or (2)
December 31, 2006. (P.L. 107-171, S:6404, May 13, 2002).

and an independent public accounting firm (IPA) within 120 days after the
Congress appropriated funds, (3) establish and collect loan application
and loan guarantee origination fees4 to offset the cost of administering
the Program under the Act, including the costs of the Board and the
Administrator,5 and (4) consider other numerous specialized technical and
business requirements prior to approving a loan guarantee.

In addition to developing the regulations, the Act directed RUS, an agency
of the Department of Agriculture's Rural Development, to issue and
administer loan guarantees that have been approved by the Board. This is
consistent with RUS's mission of administering loan and grant programs,
including those to finance projects so rural areas can have, among other
things, more modern affordable electricity, telecommunications, public
water, and waste removal services.

Based on authority granted in the Act, the Board established a Working
Group, consisting of senior level officials from the various departments
and agencies that represent the Board, to assist it with activities to
implement the Program. The costs incurred by the Working Group members to
support the Board have been borne by the respective departments and
agencies from within their existing budgetary resources (i.e., salaries
and expense appropriations or accounts).

Although the Act was passed on December 21, 2000, which required the
establishment of program regulations and underwriting criteria, initial
funding for the Program was not provided until November 2001 through the
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002.6 The Act provided $258 million in loan
guarantee authority and $2 million for administrative expenses. Later in
the fiscal year, two additional pieces of legislation7 resulted in USDA
receiving approximately a combined $1.07 billion in loan guarantee

4The Board shall charge and the Administrator may collect the loan
guarantee origination fee with respect to the issuance of a loan guarantee
under this Act.

5The authority of the Board to charge and use the fees is effective only
to the extent provided in advance in appropriation acts.

6Pub. L. No. 107-76, Title III, Nov. 28, 2001.

7Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-171, May
13, 2002, and the 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further
Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States, Pub.
L. No. 107-206, Aug. 2, 2002.

authority available for providing access to local TV stations through
direct broadcast satellite (DBS) or some other means.

Figure 1 illustrates the relationships between the Congress, federal
entities involved in implementing the LOCAL TV Program, and the public.

Figure 1: Entities Involved in Implementing the LOCAL TV Program

To determine how the provisions of the Act were administered, we focused
primarily on program activities and related obligations and administrative
expenses that were incurred on behalf of the Program during fiscal year
2002. We analyzed the LOCAL TV Act to obtain an understanding of its
provisions and reviewed legislation concerning the Program's funding. We
obtained and evaluated information from the LOCAL TV Board including its
internal operating regulations, minutes from Board meetings, the IPA's
technical and price proposals, the solicitation to obtain information
related to the legal advisory services for the Board, and other budget and
cost information to obtain an understanding of the activities that
occurred to implement the Program during fiscal year 2002. We reviewed OMB
circulars and federal accounting standards, as applicable. We did not
independently verify or audit the cost data we obtained from the Board. We
did not review the proposed regulations or draft underwriting criteria

                             Source: GAO analysis.

  Scope and Methodology

because they were not made available to us while OMB was completing its
review. We conducted our work from February 2003 through August 2003 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Chairman of the
Board and the Department of Agriculture. The Department of Agriculture
chose to have the Board incorporate its views into the Board's overall
response. The Board's comments are discussed in the Agency Comments and
Our Evaluation section of this report and are reprinted in appendix I. The
Board also provided technical comments on our draft report, which we
incorporated as appropriate.

  The LOCAL TV Program Has Not Been Implemented in a Timely Manner

Under the requirements of the authorizing legislation and the timing of
the available appropriation, the Board was to have had the program
regulations and underwriting criteria completed and ready to implement
within 120 days after funding was available. Since funds were appropriated
in November 2001, the target time frame was March 2002. However, as of the
end of August 2003, neither of these key documents had been finalized.
Since these documents provide the overall framework for the Program,
including operating procedures and lending criteria, lending activities
cannot proceed.

Figure 2 provides a chronology of the key activities pertaining to the Act
and its implementation as discussed in the following paragraphs.

    Figure 2: Timeline for Key Activities to Implement the LOCAL TV Program

                             Source: GAO analysis.

The Act established the Board for the primary purpose of approving loan
guarantees. Further, the Act required, prior to the Board's approving loan
guarantees, that (1) the Board approve regulations prescribed by RUS that
provide the overall operating procedures for the Program, and (2) the
Board, in consultation with the Director, OMB, and an independent public
accounting firm, develop underwriting criteria relating to the guarantees,
including appropriate collateral and cash flow levels. Each of these key
documents was to be completed 120 days after program funding was provided,
which, given the timing of the appropriations, would have been over a year
ago.

According to Board and RUS officials, three factors contributed to program
delays: (1) initial uncertainties over program funding, (2) inadequate
dedicated staff resources for program activities, and (3) the decision to
issue a proposed rule. Each of these reasons is discussed in the following
paragraphs.

In the fiscal year 2002 appropriation approved in November 2001, the
Congress provided $258 million in initial loan guarantee authority for the
Program and $2 million for administrative costs.8 RUS officials told us
that they had deferred action on developing the Program at that time
because the $258 million in loan guarantee authority was insufficient to
fund the technology needed to implement the Program. In April 2002, RUS
issued a Notice of Inquiry in the Federal Register to obtain information
needed to assist in drafting the proposed regulations such as changes in
technology or new developments in the industry. In the notice, RUS
specifically requested comments on the proposed merger of two major DBS
providers that, if approved, could have noticeably affected the Program
and virtually fulfilled the Act's purpose. However, any substantial
movement on the Program was delayed until the Farm Bill was passed on May
13, 2002,9 when RUS believed that sufficient funding for the Program was
available.

The Board determined that it needed the $2 million in appropriated funds
to procure the statutorily required IPA as well as other outside
consultants and experts needed to implement and administer the Program.
Therefore, the Working Group members have been supporting the Board as a
collateral duty. Because the members have been unable to focus exclusively
on Board activities, this resulted in further program delays.

The Board held its first meeting on September 13, 2002, and on September
26, 2002, awarded a $677,000 contract to Ernst and Young, an independent
public accounting firm, to assist in drafting the underwriting criteria.
As of

8Pub. L. 107-76, Title III, Nov. 28, 2001.
9Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-171, May
13, 2002.

the end of fiscal year 2002, approximately $1.3 million of the $2 million
remained available for contracting with outside consultants.10

The third contributing factor to the delay of the Program was the Board's
September 2002 decision to issue a proposed rule11 to provide the public
an opportunity to comment on the proposed regulations to ensure that the
Program's objectives and mission were consistent with congressional
intent. Although the Act did not explicitly require formal rulemaking
procedures, the Board believed it necessary given the complex and
precedential issues raised in the statute. On February 7, 2003, the Board
submitted the underwriting criteria to OMB for consultation. The first
draft of the proposed operating regulations was submitted to OMB on May 5,
2003. OMB approved the draft regulations on August 8, 2003, and the Board
issued the proposed rule in the Federal Register on August 15, 2003, with
a closing date of September 15, 2003. The Board will issue a final rule
after considering and incorporating comments from the public and receiving
OMB's approval of any revisions to the proposed rule. The Board plans to
begin accepting loan guarantee applications once the final rule is issued.
The Board stated they believe this process will begin by February 2004.

  Policies and Procedures Needed as a Basis for Collecting User Fees Have Not
  Been Established

Total costs of administering the Program, including those incurred by the
respective departments and agencies providing support to the Board, were
not accumulated and charged to the Program. Statement of Federal Financial
Accounting Standard No. 4, Managerial Cost Accounting Standards (SFFAS No.
4) requires federal agencies to capture the costs of federal programs to
assist the Congress in authorizing, modifying, and discontinuing programs
and to provide agencies with reliable cost data for making informed
managerial decisions and evaluating performance. Also, if relevant costs
of administering the Program are not accumulated, the

10The Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003, Pub. L. No. 108-7,
Feb. 20, 2003, provided that any balances available from prior years for
the Rural Utilities, Rural Housing, and the Rural Business-Cooperative
Services salaries and expenses accounts be transferred and merged with the
fiscal year 2003 appropriation. Pursuant to this provision, the balance of
the $2 million appropriated in fiscal year 2002 was carried forward to
fiscal year 2003. The pending Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for 2004
contains similar language as that found in the 2003 appropriation.

11The purpose of the proposed rule was to establish eligibility and
guarantee requirements, the application and approval process, and the
administration of guarantees approved by the Board. Further, it proposed
the process under which the Board will consider applications.

Board will not be able to support the establishment of loan application
and loan guarantee origination fees that are sufficient to recover, but
not exceed, certain costs of administering the Program.

According to SFFAS No. 4, costs of federal resources required by programs
are an important factor in making policy decisions related to program
authorization, modification, and discontinuation.12 SFFAS No. 4 also
states that to fully account for the costs of the goods and services they
produce, reporting entities should include the cost of goods and services
received from other entities.13 Further, the standard states that,
"Ideally, all inter-entity costs should be recognized. This is especially
important when those costs constitute inputs to government goods or
services provided to non-federal entities for a fee or user charge. The
fees and user charges should recover the full costs of those goods and
services."14

During fiscal year 2002, the Board did not have a process in place to
fully accumulate and report costs, including those of the IPA, the Board,
and Working Group in conformance with SFFAS No. 4. As mentioned earlier,
in fiscal year 2002, the Congress appropriated $2 million for costs to
implement the Program, which the Board decided to use exclusively for an
IPA and other consulting services. During fiscal year 2002, the Working
Group participated in a number of organizational meetings, coordinated the
Board's initial meeting, and participated as technical evaluation staff on
the procurement for the IPA. The Working Group also worked with Ernst and
Young to develop the underwriting criteria and with the Board to assist in
the development of the program regulations and other procurement
activities. Because the Board did not request additional funding in fiscal
year 2002 to support Working Group activities, the respective departments
and agencies of the Working Group members absorbed these costs. We
requested that the Board estimate the costs that the Working Group
incurred during fiscal year 2002 in support of the Program's
administrative activities. The Board estimated that the Working Group
incurred $78,000 in administrative expenses. Table 1 provides a summary of
these cost estimates.

12SFFAS No. 4, para. 39. 13SFFAS No. 4, para. 105. 14SFFAS No. 4, para.
111.

Table 1: Summary Estimate of Other Administrative Costs Incurred by the
Working Group During Fiscal Year 2002 to Implement the LOCAL TV Program

Estimated costs incurred FY Entity representing the Board

                      USDA/Rural Utilities Service $53,586

                       Department of the Treasury 11,202

                          Department of Commerce 8,506

                          Federal Reserve Board 5,155

                         Total estimated costs $78,449

Source: GAO analysis based on data obtained from the Board. Information is
unaudited.

Without accumulating and reporting the costs of administering the Program,
the Board will not comply with SFFAS No. 4 or have the cost information
needed to make informed decisions about the Program. The Board
acknowledged that if the costs incurred by the Working Group were
accumulated and reported, it would more accurately reflect the total cost
of this program.

More importantly, the Act directed the Board to charge and the
Administrator to collect loan guarantee application and origination fees
to cover, but not exceed, certain costs of administering the Program such
as reviewing and approving applications. The Board has proposed in its
draft regulations an application fee of $10,000 to $40,000, depending on
the size of the loan, and a loan guarantee origination fee equal to the
lesser of 2 percent of the loan amount or $500,000. Without knowing the
costs of administering the Program, the Board cannot determine whether the
aggregate amount of fees collected is sufficient to recover, but not
exceed, certain costs of administering the Program. It is expected that
the Board will approve a small number of loans; therefore, it has a
limited opportunity to charge the appropriate fees.

Conclusions	The LOCAL TV Program has not been implemented within the time
frames specified in the LOCAL TV Act. Notwithstanding considerable delays
already incurred, it is important that the Board begin to put the Program
in operation in an expedient fashion. Further delays in completing
regulations and underwriting criteria will postpone lending activities
necessary to carry out the Program. Additionally, without instituting cost
accounting practices in conformance with federal accounting standards, the
Board will not have the information needed to manage and report on the
Program or

to support the full recovery of certain Program costs. If the Board does not set
     adequate fees, a government subsidy to program applicants may result.

Recommendations	To help ensure future timely implementation of the
Program, we recommend that the Board and the Administrator work
collaboratively to issue the Program regulations and underwriting criteria
in an expeditious manner.

To help ensure better program management and that loan application and
loan guarantee origination fees are sufficient to fully cover certain
costs of administering the Program, we recommend that the Board and the
Administrator develop a process to ensure that future costs of the Program
are accumulated, documented, and reported in accordance with federal
accounting standards and related guidance.

  Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

In written comments on a draft of this report, the Board described its
plans for implementing our recommendations. The Board stated that it
continues to work with the Administrator and every effort is being made to
ensure that the Program regulations and underwriting criteria are issued
expeditiously. Further, the Board informed us that as it begins accepting
applications, it will ensure that administrative expenses adhere to
managerial cost accounting concepts in accordance with federal accounting
standards and related guidance. The Board also provided technical comments
on our draft report, which we incorporated as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Agriculture,
Commerce, and Treasury, and the Chairman of Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, members of the Local Television Loan Guarantee
Board, and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. We will also
make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report will
be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.

Should you or your staff have any questions on matters discussed in this
report, please contact me at (202) 512-6906 or by email at
[email protected] or Alana Stanfield, Assistant Director, at

(202) 512-3197 or [email protected]. Major contributors to this report
are
acknowledged in appendix II.

McCoy Williams
Director
Financial Management and Assurance

                                   Appendix I

                        Comments from the LOCAL TV Board

Appendix I
Comments from the LOCAL TV Board

Appendix II

                     GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contacts	McCoy Williams, (202) 512-6906 Alana Stanfield, (202)
512-3197

Acknowledgments	In addition to those named above the following individuals
made important contributions to this report: Lisa Crye, Jeff Isaacs, Jeff
Jacobson, Jason Kelly, Hannah Laufe, and Christina Quattrociocchi.

GAO's Mission	The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.

  Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through the Internet. GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts
and full-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 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

To Report Fraud, 	Contact: Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

  Waste, and Abuse in E-mail: [email protected]

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

Public Affairs	Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4800 U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548

                               Presorted Standard
                              Postage & Fees Paid
                                      GAO
                                Permit No. GI00

United States
General Accounting Office
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Service Requested
*** End of document. ***