Reauthorization of the Paperwork Reduction Act

Gao ID: 121236 April 27, 1983

Testimony was given on the reauthorization of the Paperwork Reduction Act. GAO supports the act's reauthorization because of its great potential for achieving substantial savings, increased productivity, and improved service delivery. GAO found that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has made some progress toward implementing the act, especially in reducing federal paperwork burdens. However, it has fallen behind schedule in meeting statutory milestones for completing other tasks. A substantial number of paperwork requirements have not yet been accounted for and controlled. Development of the Federal Information Locator System is progressing, but is behind schedule. OMB has made some progress on the tasks required to improve the acquisition and management of automatic data processing (ADP) and telecommunications technology and has developed a new 5-year ADP and telecommunications plan. However, ADP policies that existed prior to the act have not been revised to incorporate the act's information resources management concepts. GAO has identified four cases where opportunities exist for the significant reduction of the paperwork burden through the application of information technology. GAO believes that OMB needs to provide stronger leadership to federal agencies to capitalize on the potential benefits of advanced ADP and telecommunications technology. Finally, GAO found that OMB has done little to carry out its responsibilities for statistical policy development, coordination, and oversight. GAO suggested that Congress consider: (1) a requirement that OMB report to Congress on the resources needed and expended for its paperwork activities; (2) provision of separate funding to OMB for the implementation of the act; or (3) specific statutory prohibition of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs undertaking activities not related to the act.



The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.