SECURITY 

ASSISTANCE

Better Records 

Management and 

More Reporting 

Needed on 

Presidential 

Drawdowns

Report to Congressional Committees

April 2016

GAO-16-291

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-16-291, a report to 

congressional committees

April 2016

SECURITY ASSISTANCE

Better Records Management and More Reporting 

Needed on Presidential Drawdowns

Why GAO Did This Study

The President has special legal

authorities that allow him to direct the 

drawdown of defense articles, such as 

vehicles, food, or medical equipment,

and services, such as airlift support, as 

well as military education and training,

to provide assistance in response to an 

international crisis. Since 2011, there 

have been 13 drawdowns. The 

President may authorize up to $325 

million each year in drawdowns.

A House Armed Services Committee 

report accompanying a bill for the 

National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 2016 included a provision 

for GAO to conduct a review of 

drawdown authority. This report 

examines, since 2011, (1) the U.S. 

government’s process for planning and 

executing drawdowns, (2) State efforts 

to manage records on decisions to use 

drawdown authorities, and (3) the 

status of drawdowns and DOD efforts 

to report to Congress on defense 

articles and services delivered through 

drawdowns to recipient countries or 

international organizations. GAO 

analyzed documents relevant to 

drawdowns and interviewed State and 

DOD officials.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that (1) State

should assign responsibility or

establish a mechanism to maintain key 

drawdowns documents and (2) DOD

report more frequently on defense 

articles and services provided through 

drawdowns. State did not concur with 

GAO’s recommendation to establish a 

mechanism to maintain documents, but

GAO stands by its recommendation, as 

discussed in the report. DOD agreed 

that it should report more frequently on 

drawdowns.

What GAO Found

Drawdown proposals to provide U.S. assistance for an international crisis are 

typically developed through an interagency process led by the Departments of 

State (State) and Defense (DOD), and involving the National Security Council 

and the Executive Office of the President. State and DOD work with other 

agencies to determine whether to use a drawdown authority and identify the 

assistance to be provided. Based on the estimated value and availability of the 

articles and services, the agencies agree on the parameters of the drawdown. 

State prepares a justification package, and the President signs a Presidential 

Determination to authorize the drawdown. DOD then executes the drawdown by 

working with the military services to provide the articles and services.

Examples of Recipients of Defense Articles and Services from Drawdowns, 2013–2015 

State policy specifies that the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs leads State and 

interagency processes for presidential drawdowns. Key documents for this 

process include a memorandum of justification containing background 

information about the drawdown. However, inconsistent with federal internal 

control standards, State lacked readily available documents related to 

drawdowns, and there is no central office or official responsible for maintaining

key drawdown documents. As a result, it took several months for State to fully 

respond to our request for drawdown documents. For example, State officials 

initially did not provide documentation for the 2011 drawdown to Libya, but 

provided the documents over 4 months later. Without a mechanism to ensure 

that key documents relating to the use of drawdown authorities are readily 

available, State is unable to produce documents in a timely manner.

DOD provided some reports to Congress on the execution of drawdowns in 2011

and 2013. However, DOD has not submitted certain reports to Congress since 

2011 despite a legal requirement to keep Congress fully and currently informed 

regarding assistance provided through drawdowns under one specific authority. 

DOD officials said that they have not submitted these reports because they have 

not closed any of the 13 drawdowns since 2011— articles and services are still to 

be delivered. Nevertheless, without periodic reports to indicate the status of 

drawdowns, Congress may not have detailed information about the extent of the 

President’s use of drawdown authority.

View GAO-16-291. For more information, 

contact Charles Michael Johnson, Jr., at (202) 

512-7331 or johnsoncm@gao.gov, or Zina 

Merritt, at (202) 512-5257 or 

merrittz@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Letter 1

Background 2

Interagency Process for Drawdowns Involves State, DOD, 

National Security Council, and Executive Office of the President 5

State Lacked Readily Available Documents Related to 

Presidential Use of Drawdown Authority 7

DOD Has Not Closed Any Presidential Drawdowns and Submitted 

Few Reports on Defense Articles and Services Provided 8

Conclusions 11

Recommendations for Executive Action 11

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 11

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 17

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Defense 19

Appendix III Comments from the Department of State 21

Appendix IV GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 24

Tables

Table 1: Drawdowns of Defense Articles and Services, Fiscal 

Years 2011–2015 4

Table 2: Status of Presidential Drawdowns of Defense Articles 

and Services and Agency Efforts to Notify and Report to 

Congress, Fiscal Years 2011–2015 10

Figures

Figure 1: Examples of Recipients of Defense Articles and Services 

from Presidential Drawdowns, 2013–2015 3

Figure 2: U.S. Government Process for Presidential Drawdown of 

Defense Articles and Services 6

Contents
Page ii GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Abbreviations

DOD Department of Defense

DSCA Defense Security Cooperation Agency

State Department of State

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product 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.
Page 1 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

April 12, 2016

Congressional Committees

Since 1961, the President has had special statutory authority to order the 

drawdown of defense articles and services from the stocks of the 

Department of Defense (DOD) when it is vital to the security of the United 

States.1 Drawdowns of defense articles may include items such as 

vehicles, spare parts, clothing, food, and medical equipment. Defense 

services may include a range of efforts, such as airlift support, and 

drawdowns may also provide for military education and training.2

Drawdowns give the President the ability to respond to U.S. foreign policy 

and national security objectives, such as unforeseen military and 

nonmilitary emergencies, by providing assistance without first seeking 

additional legislative authority or appropriations from Congress. Congress 

has expressed interest in receiving reports on the President’s use of 

drawdown authority.

A House Armed Services Committee report accompanying a bill for the 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 included a 

provision for GAO to conduct a review of drawdown authority.3 This report 

examines, since 2011, (1) the U.S. government’s process for planning 

and executing drawdowns; (2) Department of State (State) efforts to 

manage records related to decisions to use drawdown authorities; and (3) 

the status of drawdowns and DOD efforts to report to Congress on 

defense articles, defense services, and military education and training 

delivered through drawdowns to recipient countries or international 

organizations.

 1

Section 506 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, Pub. L. No. 87-195 (Sept. 4, 1961), 

as amended (codified at 22 U.S.C. § 2318) grants the President this special authority. 

There were also additional drawdown authorities in recent years, such as Section 202 of 

the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-327 (Dec. 4, 2002) and 

Section 4 of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-338 (Oct. 31, 1998).

2

For the purposes of this report, references to defense articles and services include 

military education and training, unless specified otherwise.

3

H.R. Rep. No. 114-102 (May 5, 2015).

Letter
Page 2 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

To address these objectives, we reviewed relevant documentation, such 

as DOD and State guidance. We also interviewed DOD and State officials 

about the process for planning and executing drawdowns, and their 

efforts to maintain information on drawdowns and provide reports to 

Congress on the status of drawdowns. Our scope and methodology are 

discussed in more detail in appendix I.

We conducted this performance audit from July 2015 to April 2016 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

There are certain statutory authorities under which the President may 

draw down articles and services from the inventory and resources of U.S. 

government agencies. Section 506(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 

1961, as amended, allows for drawdowns of defense articles from the 

stocks of DOD and defense services of DOD and for military education 

and training to foreign countries or international organizations in 

emergency situations. Before exercising this authority, the President must 

determine and report to Congress that an unforeseen emergency exists, 

requiring immediate military assistance that cannot be met under any 

other law. This special authority was more recently used in 2013 to 

provide airlift and refueling support for counterterrorism efforts in Mali; in 

2014 to provide defense articles and services, as well as military 

education and training to assist the government of Iraq in combating the 

Islamic State of Iraq and Syria; and in 2015 to provide military assistance 

to Ukraine.4 (See fig. 1.) The maximum aggregate value of drawdowns 

under Section 506(a)(1) cannot exceed $100 million in any fiscal year.

 4 The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and alSham, Daesh, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

Background
Page 3 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Figure 1: Examples of Recipients of Defense Articles and Services from 

Presidential Drawdowns, 2013–2015

Section 506(a)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act, as amended, authorizes 

the President to draw down articles and services from the inventory and 

resources of any U.S. government agency and military education and 

training from DOD and use them to assist foreign countries or 

international organizations in a number of nonemergency situations. 

Before exercising this authority, the President must first determine and 

report to Congress that any such drawdown is in the national interest of 

the United States. The maximum aggregate value of drawdowns under 

Section 506(a)(2) is $200 million in any fiscal year, with no more than $75 

million provided from DOD inventory and resources.

Section 552(c)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act, as amended, authorizes 

the President to direct the drawdown of commodities and services from 

the inventory and resources of any U.S. government agency. In order to 

exercise this authority, the President must determine that an unforeseen 

emergency exists, that providing assistance in amounts in excess of 

funds otherwise available is important to the national interests of the 

United States, and that the unforeseen emergency requires the 

immediate provision of such assistance. The maximum aggregate value 

of drawdowns under Section 552(c)(2) in any fiscal year is $25 million.
Page 4 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Since 2011, there have been 13 drawdowns of defense articles and 

services pursuant to the three authorities cited above (see table 1). None 

of these drawdowns used the Section 506(a)(2) authority.

Table 1: Drawdowns of Defense Articles and Services, Fiscal Years 2011–2015

Fiscal year Countries involved

Authority 

useda Amount authorizedby the Presidentb

Amount of 

authorization 

unusedc

2011 Libya 552(c)(2) $25,000,000 $7,813

2013 Chad and France for Mali 506(a)(1) $50,000,000 $0

2013 Syria 552(c)(2) $10,000,000 $3,919,787

2013 Syria 552(c)(2) $15,000,000 —

2014 Countries supporting the African Union-led 

International Support Mission in the Central 

African Republic

506(a)(1) $60,000,000 $22,179,131

2014 France for Mali, Niger, and Chad 506(a)(1) $10,000,000 $0

2014 Iraq 506(a)(1) $25,000,000 $13,214,890

2014 Ukraine 506(a)(1) $5,000,000 $68,197

2014 Ukraine 552(c)(2) $20,000,000 $12,039,897

2015 France for Mali, Niger, and Chad 506(a)(1) $35,000,000 $13,675,429

2015 Benin, Cameroon, Chad, Niger, and Nigeria 506(a)(1) $45,000,000 $44,990,000

2015 Ukraine 506(a)(1) $20,000,000 $0

2015 Ukraine 552(c)(2) $1,500,000 $790,000

Legend: — Data not provided by Departments of Defense and State

Source: GAO analysis of Department of Defense documents and Federal Register notices. | GAO-16-291

a

The President may draw down articles and services under three authorities: Section 506(a)(1), 

Section 506(a)(2), and Section 552(c)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended. There 

were no drawdowns pursuant to Section 506(a)(2) from fiscal years 2011 through 2015.

b

The President may authorize up to $325 million each fiscal year under the drawdown authorities.

c

Value of assistance provided as of March 2016.
Page 5 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

State and DOD are the government agencies primarily charged with 

planning and executing uses of drawdown authority. State officials said 

they typically begin the process by developing drawdown proposals under 

the above authorities when an international crisis arises. Since 2011, 

officials said they have used drawdowns in conflict situations, such as in 

Ukraine and Syria. State’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs along with 

DOD’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), the National 

Security Council, the Executive Office of the President, and in some 

cases other executive branch agencies participate in an interagency 

process to develop a recommendation for articles and services that the 

U.S. government should provide under the drawdown authorities (see fig. 

2). Based on the estimated value and availability of the articles and 

services, the agencies agree on the parameters of the drawdown to 

recommend to the President, and State prepares a justification package 

that includes the Presidential Determination for the President’s signature, 

which is published in the Federal Register. The President may also 

delegate authority to make the determination to the Secretary of State, 

and documents this delegation in a memorandum that is published in the 

Federal Register. State notifies Congress of the President’s intent to 

exercise his authority before the President signs the determination and 

then notifies Congress once the determination has been made. According 

to State, the steps described above can be completed in about 2 weeks 

but usually require about 2 months before the implementation of a 

drawdown can begin.

Interagency Process 

for Drawdowns 

Involves State, DOD, 

National Security 

Council, and 

Executive Office of 

the President
Page 6 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Figure 2: U.S. Government Process for Presidential Drawdown of Defense Articles and Services

DSCA officials said they execute drawdowns after the President signs the 

determination by working with the military services and other DOD entities 

to determine what specific assistance the military services will provide 

and which of the services will provide it. A DSCA country program director 

creates an execution order with a maximum number of the articles or 

services to be provided through the drawdown, which may be updated 

over time. The country program directors work directly with the military 

services to track the execution of the drawdown, and the military services 

are responsible for providing execution data to update an automated 

database. The military services provide the defense articles and services 

they have available in their existing inventories. The military services 

cover the costs of the drawdown from their existing funds and without 

new appropriations. State officials said that the authority for a drawdown 

does not expire, and that the drawdown can be used until the maximum 

authorized dollar amount established for it in the Presidential 

Determination is reached, or until the crisis has been dealt with or the 

foreign policy goal has been met.
Page 7 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

State did not have a means to readily access justification package

documents related to presidential use of drawdown authority because it 

had not assigned responsibility or established a process for centrally 

managing these documents. Although State policy specifies that the 

Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Office of Regional Security and Arms 

Transfers, leads State and interagency processes for presidential 

drawdowns, the bureau does not manage all of the key documents 

associated with the use of drawdown authority, nor is there a mechanism 

to centrally manage such documents.5 Standards for Internal Control in 

the Federal Government also indicates that all documentation and 

records should be properly managed and maintained, and that 

documentation should be readily available for examination.6

Consequently, it took several months for State to fully respond to our 

request for key documentation on drawdowns, which includes

memorandums to the Secretary of State and Office of the President, and 

a memorandum of justification containing background information about 

the crisis a drawdown is intended to address. State officials had to 

contact individual bureaus that worked on the drawdowns in fiscal years 

2011 to 2015 to recover the justification packages that contained 

background information and context for why the drawdowns were 

authorized. In addition, State officials initially were not able to readily 

provide documentation for several drawdowns, such as the 2011 

drawdown to Libya, for which State produced documents over 4 months 

later. State produced documents for a drawdown to Iraq 8 months after 

our original request. State officials also confirmed that they do not 

maintain drawdown documents in one centralized place, but that 

individuals in each of State’s six regional bureaus may maintain 

documents on drawdowns affecting countries within their purview. We 

found that there was no single point of contact responsible for 

consolidating all the drawdown documentation and no mechanism 

established to maintain key documents related to the President’s 

drawdown. Without a mechanism to ensure that key documents relating 

to the use of drawdown authorities are readily available, State is unable to 

 5

Department of State, Foreign Affairs Manual, Chapter 1, Subchapter 416.1, “Office of 

Regional Security and Arms Transfers (PM/RSAT).”

6

GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1 

(Washington, D.C.: November 1999).

State Lacked Readily 

Available Documents 

Related to 

Presidential Use of 

Drawdown Authority
Page 8 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

produce documentation on drawdowns in a timely manner, consistent 

with federal internal control standards.

DOD has not closed and has not provided certain reports to Congress on 

the execution of drawdowns since 2011 despite congressional interest in 

receiving information regarding assistance provided through drawdowns. 

In particular, Section 506(b)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act, as 

amended, requires that the President keep Congress fully and currently 

informed of all defense articles, defense services, and military education 

and training provided under Section 506, including providing a report to 

Congress detailing what was delivered.7 The requirement to provide a 

report does not specify a date by which the reports must be submitted, 

but instead states that these reports shall be provided upon delivery of 

such articles, or upon completion of the services or education and 

training. DOD has provided no Section 506 reports for the eight 

presidential drawdowns undertaken pursuant to this authority in fiscal 

years 2013 through 2015. From 2010 until the end of calendar year 2013, 

DOD was also responsible for providing an annual report to Congress on 

drawdowns under Section 1247 of the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2010. DOD provided reports to Congress in response to 

this requirement.

Under DOD guidance, DSCA is primarily responsible for preparing 

Section 506 reports. DSCA practice has been that this reporting 

requirement arises when all articles, services, or both have been 

delivered, according to DSCA officials. DSCA officials noted that all of the 

drawdowns since 2011 are still being executed, meaning that there are 

still articles and services to be delivered. DSCA officials also noted that 

they work with State’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs to determine the 

best time to close a drawdown as completed, and noted that State has 

not determined to close out any drawdowns since 2011. State officials 

said that they do not have an active role in DSCA’s reporting to Congress 

but that they would expect to review Section 506 reports before DOD 

submits them to Congress.

According to DSCA’s guidance, a termination date of not more than 18 

months after the initial execution order will be stated in the execution 

 7

The reporting provision does not apply to drawdowns under Section 552.

DOD Has Not Closed 

Any Presidential

Drawdowns and 

Submitted Few 

Reports on Defense 

Articles and Services 

Provided
Page 9 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

order, unless otherwise directed by the country program director. DSCA 

officials stated that the termination date and the closure date that would 

trigger the reporting requirement are not the same. They also stated that 

if a particular drawdown reached its termination date with authority left 

(for example, only $10 million of the $25 million authorized has been 

used), DSCA would not terminate the drawdown if a crisis is still ongoing. 

For example, in December 2013 the President authorized $60 million in 

assistance to support African Union-led operations in the Central African 

Republic, and as of 2015, over $26 million remained undelivered, and the 

drawdown remains active more than 2 years later. In addition, DSCA 

officials stated that they may choose not to close a drawdown, even if all 

the available authority has been used, if a subsequent related drawdown 

is still active. For example, in 2013, the President authorized $50 million 

under Section 506(a)(1) to provide airlift support to Chad and France to 

assist in their operations in Mali. According to DSCA officials and 

documents, this drawdown has reached its authorization level but has not 

been closed because DSCA is waiting on subsequent drawdowns of the 

same nature to be completed before it reports to Congress.

Although DOD has not submitted Section 506 reports, it submitted 

Section 1247 reports until this reporting requirement terminated at the 

end of calendar year 2013. The Section 1247 reports contain information 

about all the articles or services delivered, as well as the military service 

that is implementing the drawdown, the quantity of items delivered, and 

the value. They addressed elements related to those required under 

Section 506(b)(2) and included drawdowns that DOD still considers to be 

in an active status. As noted earlier, State also notifies Congress of the 

President’s intent to exercise his authority before the President signs the 

determination and then notifies Congress once the determination has 

been made. These notifications, however, do not address the information 

required in Section 506 reports. Table 2 shows the status of notifications 

of and reports to Congress on presidential drawdowns of defense articles 

and services since 2011.
Page 10 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Table 2: Status of Presidential Drawdowns of Defense Articles and Services and Agency Efforts to Notify and Report to 

Congress, Fiscal Years 2011–2015

Fiscal year Countries involved

Authority 

used Status

Congressional 

notification of 

drawdowna Section 1247 reportb Section 506 reportc

2011 Libya 552(c)(2) Active   N/A

2013 Chad and France for Mali 506(a)(1) Active   X

2013 Syria 552(c)(2) Active   N/A

2013 Syria 552(c)(2) Active  X N/A

2014 Countries supporting the African 

Union-led International Support 

Mission in the Central African 

Republic

506(a)(1) Active 

N/A X

2014 France for Mali, Niger, and 

Chad

506(a)(1) Active 

N/A X

2014 Iraq 506(a)(1) Active  N/A X

2014 Ukraine 506(a)(1) Active  N/A X

2014 Ukraine 552(c)(2) Active  N/A N/A

2015 France for Mali, Niger, and 

Chad

506(a)(1) Active  N/A

X

2015 Benin, Cameroon, Chad, Niger, 

and Nigeria

506(a)(1) Active  N/A

X

2015 Ukraine 506(a)(1) Active  N/A X

2015 Ukraine 552(c)(2) Active  N/A N/A

Legend:  = notification or report provided; X= no report provided to Congress; N/A = report not required.

Source: GAO analysis of Department of Defense (DOD) documents and Federal Register notices. | GAO-16-291

a

Department of State officials said they notify Congress of the Presidential Determination in advance 

of the authority being used, as well as when a drawdown is authorized. The justification packages 

that State provided contained only draft notification letters.

b

Section 1247 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 required DOD to report 

annually to Congress on the impact of the use of presidential drawdowns on DOD. This requirement 

terminated at the end of calendar year 2013.

c

Section 506(b)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, requires the President to keep 

Congress fully and currently informed of all defense articles, services, and military education and 

training provided under Section 506 drawdown authority.

Although State has consistently notified Congress of each drawdown in 

advance of the authority being used, without receiving Section 506 

reports on the assistance delivered during the course of the drawdown, 

Congress is not receiving comprehensive and current information about 

the extent of the President’s use of drawdown authority.
Page 11 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Drawdowns give the President the flexibility to provide defense articles 

and services, and military education and training, to foreign countries and 

international organizations in a time of crisis without first seeking specific 

appropriations from Congress. Federal internal control standards note 

that documents should be readily available for examination. However, 

while State’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs leads State and 

interagency processes for presidential drawdowns, the bureau does not 

manage all of the key documents associated with the use of drawdown 

authority, nor is there a mechanism to centrally manage such documents. 

State’s lack of a single point of contact or centralized mechanism for 

maintaining drawdown documents weakens its ability to make key 

documents associated with the justification for drawdowns readily 

available. Furthermore, in making the accommodation in the Foreign 

Assistance Act that allows drawdowns to occur without first seeking 

specific appropriation from Congress, Congress required in Section 

506(b)(2) that the President keep it fully and currently informed on the use 

of Section 506 authority. While Congress prescribed no specific 

frequency for providing Section 506 reports, DSCA has not submitted any 

Section 506 reports since 2011 to Congress on drawdowns because, 

according to DSCA, the drawdowns have not yet been closed as 

completed. Without periodic reports to indicate the status of the 

drawdowns under this authority, Congress does not have detailed 

information on the extent of the President’s use of drawdown authority.

We are making the following two recommendations:

• To help ensure that key State documents and records on the 

presidential use of drawdowns are readily available, the Secretary of 

State should assign responsibility or develop a mechanism for 

maintaining State’s justification package documents.

• To help ensure that Congress has the information it needs on the 

President’s use of drawdown authority, the Secretary of Defense 

should direct DSCA to report more frequently to Congress on 

information outlined in Section 506(b)(2) of the Foreign Assistance 

Act, as amended, even if delivery of all the articles and services 

authorized has not been completed, or if the crisis is still ongoing.

We provided a draft of this report to DOD and State for comment. DOD 

agreed with our recommendation, but State did not. DOD’s and State’s 

written comments are reprinted in appendices II and III, respectively.

Conclusions

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

Agency Comments

and Our Evaluation
Page 12 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

In its written comments, DOD concurred with our recommendation that it 

report more frequently to Congress on the information outlined in Section 

506(b)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act, as amended. DOD also provided 

us with technical comments, which we incorporated into the report as 

appropriate. 

In its written comments, State did not concur with our recommendation 

that the Secretary of State should assign responsibility or develop a 

mechanism for maintaining State’s justification package documents. 

State noted that there are officials responsible for maintaining key 

drawdown documents. State also noted that the Office of Regional 

Security and Arms Transfers is the lead office for security related 

drawdowns and maintains the key drawdown documents. In our report, 

we do note that State’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Office of 

Regional Security and Arms Transfers, leads State and interagency 

processes for presidential drawdowns. However, we found that the 

bureau was unable to readily produce a complete list of uses of 

presidential drawdown authorities. We further noted that the bureau does 

not manage all the key documents within the office associated with the 

use of drawdown authority, nor is there a mechanism to centrally manage 

such documents. We based this information on multiple interviews with 

State officials, including those who confirmed on December 4, 2015, that 

they do not maintain a central drawdown repository or office dedicated to 

drawdowns. For example, an Office of Regional Security and Arms 

Transfers official said that she had knowledge of and documentation for 

only the specific drawdowns that she worked on. Other Bureau of 

Political-Military Affairs officials concurred with her statement. As such, 

there has been no one point of contact within the Bureau of PoliticalMilitary Affairs or State to consolidate all of the information and 

documentation regarding drawdowns. The State officials also said that 

State had to contact individuals who worked on the documents to make 

them available. 

State’s written comments further state that it is more useful to have a 

single Regional Security and Arms Transfers officer responsible for 

leading the entirety of the response to an emergency, including any 

drawdowns and the documents related to them, rather than having a 

single officer responsible for all drawdowns. We believe it would be 

beneficial for State to ensure that key documentation for presidential 

drawdowns is centrally maintained. According to federal internal control 

standards, documentation provides a means to retain organizational 

knowledge and mitigate the risk of having that knowledge limited to a few 

personnel, as well as a means to communicate that knowledge as 
Page 13 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

needed to external parties, such as external auditors. By not 

implementing this standard and relying on individual officials to maintain 

drawdown documentation, State could not readily identify and provide us 

with documentation for drawdowns if those officials responsible for 

specific drawdowns were no longer with the bureau. The lack of a central 

office or official responsible for maintaining documents relevant to 

drawdowns apparently accounted, at least in part, for State’s not 

providing us with a list of all drawdowns since 2002, or with 

documentation for drawdowns prior to 2011.

State also disagreed with the amount of time it took to provide 

documents. However, we stand by our finding that it took State several 

months to fully respond for our request for key documents. Specifically, 

on July 29, 2015, we requested a list of all the uses of presidential 

drawdown authorities and associated documents. We followed up with 

another written request for these same documents on August 4, 2015. On 

September 8, 2015, State’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs provided 

documents for seven drawdowns, noted it had some additional classified 

documents related to the original seven drawdowns, and said that it had 

no additional documentation. At that time State still had not provided a 

complete list of its uses of drawdown authorities. We subsequently 

identified five other uses of drawdown authorities by examining Federal 

Register notices and sent requests for the documentation for these 

drawdowns. In one case (Libya) that we highlighted in the report, in 

November 2015 we again requested that State provide key documents 

related to this drawdown. State did not provide the key documents until 

January 2016—over 4 months after the original document request. 

Overall, it took State 8 months, from August 4, 2015—the date of our 

written request—until March 17, 2016, to provide the documents related 

to all 13 uses of drawdown authority since 2011.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional 

committees, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and other 

interested parties. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the 

GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.
Page 14 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact 

me at (202) 512-7331 or johnsoncm@gao.gov. Contact points for our 

Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 

the last page of this report. GAO staff members who made key 

contributions to this report are listed in appendix IV.

Charles Michael Johnson, Jr.

Director, International Affairs and Trade
Page 15 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

List of Committees

The Honorable John McCain

Chairman

The Honorable Jack Reed

Ranking Member

Committee on Armed Services

United States Senate

The Honorable Bob Corker

Chairman

The Honorable Ben Cardin

Ranking Member

Committee on Foreign Relations

United States Senate

The Honorable Thad Cochran

Chairman

The Honorable Richard Durbin

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Defense

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable Mac Thornberry

Chairman

The Honorable Adam Smith

Ranking Member

Committee on Armed Services

House of Representatives

The Honorable Edward R. Royce

Chairman

The Honorable Eliot L. Engel

Ranking Member

Committee on Foreign Affairs

House of Representatives
Page 16 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

The Honorable Rodney Frelinghuysen

Chairman

The Honorable Pete Visclosky

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Defense

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 17 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

This report examines, since 2011, (1) the U.S. government’s process for 

planning and executing drawdowns; (2) Department of State (State) 

efforts to manage records related to decisions to use drawdown 

authorities; and (3) the status of drawdowns and Department of Defense 

(DOD) efforts to report to Congress on defense articles, defense services, 

and military education and training delivered through drawdowns to 

recipient countries or international organizations.

To assess the U.S. government’s process for planning and executing 

drawdowns, we interviewed officials from State and DOD, two agencies 

charged with planning and executing uses of drawdown authority, 

particularly with respect to defense drawdowns. We contacted the 

National Security Council to determine whether it had a listing of the uses 

of drawdown authority during the current administration, but the official 

who replied indicated that the agency did not have any such information. 

We reviewed the White House website on Presidential Actions and 

Presidential Memorandums for drawdowns and Delegation of Authority 

memorandums. We reviewed the Federal Register notices on drawdowns 

from fiscal years 2002 to 2015 as the source of publically available 

information on drawdowns. We chose 2002 because that was the date of 

publication of our prior report on drawdowns,1 but we found that there 

was a period from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2010 when there were no 

uses of drawdown authority, so we focused this report on drawdowns in 

fiscal years 2011 to 2015. To assess the reliability of the data, we 

interviewed cognizant officials at State and DOD, and compared the data 

in the Federal Register to documents we obtained from DOD, and 

determined that they were sufficiently reliable for showing the drawdowns 

in fiscal years 2011 through 2015.

To assess State efforts to manage records related to decisions to use 

drawdown authorities, we interviewed State officials and reviewed their 

available documentation on drawdowns. We also reviewed Federal 

Register notices on drawdowns to determine whether the documents 

State provided on drawdowns represented all drawdowns from 2011 

through 2015. We also reviewed State’s Foreign Affairs Manual and

Foreign Affairs Handbook to determine who within State is responsible for 

 1

GAO, Foreign Assistance: Reporting of Defense Articles and Services Provided through 

Drawdowns Needs to Be Improved, GAO-02-1027 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 20, 2002).

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 18 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

presidential drawdowns and to review State’s policies on records 

management.

To assess the status of drawdowns and DOD efforts to report to 

Congress on defense articles, defense services, and military education 

and training delivered through drawdowns to recipient countries or 

international organizations, we requested copies of all Section 506 

reports submitted to Congress, of which there were none, and of any 

other reports or information from 2011 through 2015. This included a 

review of DOD’s Section 1247 reports to see which were submitted and 

what reporting elements they contained. We also interviewed DOD 

officials about how they collect and maintain data on drawdowns under 

presidential authorities and their rationale for not submitting any Section 

506 reports. We reviewed DOD data on drawdowns from 2011 to 2015 to 

determine the status of drawdowns, including the termination date and 

the amount of authorization left on the drawdowns. To assess the 

reliability of these data, we interviewed cognizant DOD officials about how 

they collect and maintain data on drawdowns, and determined that the 

data were sufficiently reliable for reporting on the status of drawdowns. 

We reviewed a sample Section 506 report in the Defense Security 

Cooperation Agency’s (DSCA) Handbook for Foreign Assistance Act 

(FAA) Drawdown of Defense Articles and Services to see what reporting 

elements it would contain if one were submitted. The handbook also 

provided information about DSCA’s process for executing drawdowns, 

such as setting a termination date for drawdown execution orders and 

congressional reporting requirements.

We conducted this performance audit from July 2015 to April 2016 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 19 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 20 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities
Appendix III: Comments from the Department 

of State

Page 21 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Appendix III: Comments from the 

Department of State
Appendix III: Comments from the Department 

of State

Page 22 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities
Appendix III: Comments from the Department 

of State

Page 23 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities
Appendix IV: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 24 GAO-16-291 Presidential Use of Drawdown Authorities

Charles Michael Johnson, Jr., (202) 512-7331 or johnsoncm@gao.gov

Zina Merritt, (202) 512-5257 or merrittz@gao.gov

In addition to the contacts named above, Jeff Phillips (Assistant Director), 

Tom Gosling (Assistant Director), Leah DeWolf (analyst in charge), David 

Dayton, Martin de Alteriis, Susannah Hawthorne, Jeff Isaacs, Amie 

Lesser, Eddie Uyekawa, and Alex Welsh made key contributions to this 

report.

Appendix IV: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments

GAO Contacts

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(100118)
The Government Accountability 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.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. 

Listen to our Podcasts and read The Watchblog.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.