<mods xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.3" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-3.xsd" ID="P0b002ee18038dbd6">
<name type="corporate">
 <namePart>United States Government Publishing Office</namePart>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">publisher</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">pbl</roleTerm>
</role>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">distributor</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">dst</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="corporate">
 <namePart>United States</namePart>
 <namePart>Government Accountability Office</namePart>
 <namePart>Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division</namePart>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">aut</roleTerm>
</role>
 <description>Government Organization</description>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre authority="marcgt">government publication</genre>
<language>
 <languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</language>
<extension>
 <collectionCode>GAOREPORTS</collectionCode>
 <category>Legislative Agency Publications</category>
 <waisDatabaseName>gao</waisDatabaseName>
 <branch>legislative</branch>
 <dateIngested>2010-08-12</dateIngested>
</extension>
<originInfo>
 <publisher>U.S. Government Printing Office</publisher>
 <dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2000-09-06</dateIssued>
 <issuance>monographic</issuance>
</originInfo>
<physicalDescription>
 <note type="source content type">deposited</note>
 <digitalOrigin>born digital</digitalOrigin>
 <extent>22 p.</extent>
</physicalDescription>
<classification authority="sudocs">GA 1.13:RCED-00-110R</classification>
<identifier type="uri">https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-RCED-00-110R</identifier>
<identifier type="local">P0b002ee18038dbd6</identifier>
<identifier type="former package identifier">f:rc00110r</identifier>
<recordInfo>
 <recordContentSource authority="marcorg">DGPO</recordContentSource>
 <recordCreationDate encoding="w3cdtf">2010-08-12</recordCreationDate>
 <recordChangeDate encoding="w3cdtf">2011-03-24</recordChangeDate>
 <recordIdentifier source="DGPO">GAOREPORTS-RCED-00-110R</recordIdentifier>
 <recordOrigin>machine generated</recordOrigin>
 <languageOfCataloging>
  <languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</languageOfCataloging>
</recordInfo>
<accessCondition type="GPO scope determination">fdlp</accessCondition>
<extension>
 <docClass>REPORT</docClass>
 <accessId>GAOREPORTS-RCED-00-110R</accessId>
 <reportNumber>RCED-00-110R</reportNumber>
 <subject>Communication satellites</subject>
 <subject>Air traffic control systems</subject>
 <subject>Contract costs</subject>
 <subject>Computer services contracts</subject>
 <subject>Comparative analysis</subject>
 <subject>Cost control</subject>
 <identifier>FAA Alaska National Airspace System Interfacility</identifier>
 <identifier>Communications System</identifier>
 <type>Correspondence</type>
 <seriesAbbrev>RCED</seriesAbbrev>
 <congReport congress="105" number="825" type="H"></congReport>
</extension>
<titleInfo>
 <title>Aviation Infrastructure: Feasibility of Using Alternate</title>
</titleInfo>
<abstract>Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Federal Aviation
Administration&apos;s (FAA) report to Congress recommending that it award a
contract to an alternate contractor for the development of its Alaska
National Airspace System Interfacility Communications System, focusing
on whether the findings were properly supported. FAA&apos;s report compared
the alternate contractor&apos;s costs to the costs of two other commercial
telecommunications providers.&lt;p/&gt;GAO noted that: (1) given FAA&apos;s assumptions and the circumstances of the
study, the agency&apos;s findings and conclusions were supported by the
information available; (2) FAA&apos;s analysis were consistently applied to
each of the alternatives and performed in accordance with standard
economic and engineering methods of calculation; and (3) however, the
findings and conclusion of its study could have been strengthened if FAA
had held more-in-depth discussions with AT&amp;T and General Communication,
Inc., about the assumptions and the adjustments it made to the data the
vendors provided, since the results were influenced by these
assumptions.</abstract>
<location>
 <url displayLabel="HTML rendition" access="raw object">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-RCED-00-110R/html/GAOREPORTS-RCED-00-110R.htm</url>
 <url displayLabel="PDF rendition" access="raw object">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-RCED-00-110R/pdf/GAOREPORTS-RCED-00-110R.pdf</url>
</location>
<identifier type="preferred citation">GAO/RCED-00-110R</identifier>
<location>
 <url displayLabel="Content Detail" access="object in context">https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-RCED-00-110R</url>
</location>
<note>Correspondence</note>
<extension>
 <searchTitle>GAO/RCED-00-110R; Aviation Infrastructure: Feasibility of Using Alternate;
            </searchTitle>
</extension>
<subject>
 <topic>Communication satellites</topic>
 <topic>Air traffic control systems</topic>
 <topic>Contract costs</topic>
 <topic>Computer services contracts</topic>
 <topic>Comparative analysis</topic>
 <topic>Cost control</topic>
 <topic>FAA Alaska National Airspace System Interfacility</topic>
 <topic>Communications System</topic>
</subject>
<relatedItem type="isReferencedBy">
 <titleInfo>
  <title>United States House Report 825 (105th Congress)</title>
</titleInfo>
 <identifier type="congressional report citation">H. Rept. 105-825</identifier>
</relatedItem>
</mods>