Report to Congressional Committees

United States General Accounting Office 

GAO

May 2004 MILITARY 

OPERATIONS 

DOD’s Fiscal Year 

2003 Funding and 

Reported Obligations 

in Support of 

the Global War 

on Terrorism 

GAO-04-668 
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-668.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Neal Curtin at 

(757) 552-8100 or curtinn@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-04-668, a report to 

congressional committees 

May 2004

MILITARY OPERATIONS 

DOD’s Fiscal Year 2003 Funding and 

Reported Obligations in Support of the 

Global War on Terrorism 

In fiscal year 2003, DOD reported obligations of over $61 billion in support of

the Global War on Terrorism. GAO’s analysis of the obligation data showed 

that 64 percent of fiscal year 2003 obligations reported for the war on 

terrorism went for Operation Iraqi Freedom; among the DOD components, 

the Army had the most obligations (46 percent); and among appropriation 

accounts the operation and maintenance account had the highest level of 

reported obligations (71 percent). 

Global War on Terrorism Obligations by Operations for Fiscal Year 2003 as of 

September 30, 2003 

 

 

26%

10%

 64%

$15,913,050

Operation Enduring Freedom

$38,838,865

Operation Iraqi Freedom

$6,275,079

Operation Noble Eagle 

Total $61,026,994

Source: The Defense Finance and Accounting Service's Consolidated DOD Terrorist Response Cost Report as of

September 30, 2003. 

Dollars in thousands

Note: GAO did not audit this data. 

The adequacy of funding available for the Global War on Terrorism for fiscal 

year 2003 military personnel and operation and maintenance accounts varied 

by service. For military personnel, the Army, Navy, and Air Force ended the 

fiscal year with more reported obligations for the war than funding and had 

to cover the shortfalls with money appropriated for their budgeted 

peacetime personnel costs. For operation and maintenance accounts, the 

Army, Navy, and Air Force appeared to have more funding than reported 

obligations for the war. However, the Navy and Air Force have stated that 

the seeming excess funding ($299 million and $176.6 million respectively) 

were in support of the war on terrorism, but had not been recorded as such. 

Therefore, Navy and Air Force obligations exactly match funding. The 

Marine Corps used funds appropriated for its budgeted peacetime operation 

and maintenance activities to cover shortfalls in funding for the war. 

The Global War on Terrorism—

principally involving operations in 

Afghanistan and Iraq—was funded 

in fiscal year 2003 by Congress’s 

appropriation of almost $69 billion. 

To assist Congress in its oversight 

of spending, GAO is undertaking a 

series of reviews relating to 

contingency operations in support 

of the Global War on Terrorism. In 

September 2003, GAO issued a 

report that discussed fiscal year 

2003 obligations and funding for 

the war through June 2003—

Military Operations: Fiscal Year 

2003 Obligations Are Substantial, 

but May Result in Less 

Obligations Than Expected, 

GAO-03-1088. This report continues 

the review of fiscal year 2003 by 

analyzing obligations reported in 

support of the Global War on 

Terrorism and reviews whether the 

amount of funding received by the 

military services was adequate to 

cover DOD’s obligations for the 

war from October 1, 2002, through 

September 30, 2003. GAO will 

also review the war’s reported 

obligations and funding for fiscal 

year 2004. 

In official oral comments on a draft 

of this report, DOD officials stated 

that there were no objections to the 

report. 
Page i GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3

Background 4

Obligations for GWOT Operations 5

Funding Adequacy for GWOT Varied by Service 9

Agency Comments 12

Tables 

Table 1: Military Personnel Fiscal Year 2003 GWOT Funding 

and Obligations 10

Table 2: Operation and Maintenance Fiscal Year 2003 GWOT 

Funding and Obligations 10

Figures 

Figure 1: Primary Locations of DOD’s Fiscal Year 2003 Global War 

on Terrorism Operations 4

Figure 2: Global War on Terrorism Obligations by Operation for 

Fiscal Year 2003 as of September 30, 2003 6

Figure 3: Global War on Terrorism Obligations for Fiscal Year 2003 

by DOD Organization as of September 30, 2003 7

Figure 4: Global War on Terrorism Obligations for Fiscal Year 2003 

by Appropriation as of September 30, 2003 8

Abbreviations 

DOD Department of Defense 

GWOT Global War on Terrorism 

Contents 

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. 
Page 1 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

May 13, 2004 

Congressional Committees 

Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States 

began military operations to combat terrorism both in the United States 

and overseas. These operations are known collectively as the Global War 

on Terrorism (GWOT). Between September 2001 and September 2003, the 

Department of Defense (DOD) has spent about $78 billion in support of 

the war. 

To assist Congress in its oversight role, we are undertaking a series of 

reviews relating to contingency operations in support of GWOT. In 

September 2003, we issued a report that discussed fiscal year 2003 

obligations and funding through June 2003.1

 This report continues our 

analysis of fiscal year 2003 GWOT obligations and funding, which covers 

the fiscal year from October 1, 2002, through September 30, 2003. In a 

future report, we will also review the fiscal year 2004 reported obligations 

and funding picture for the war. Obligations are incurred through actions 

such as orders placed, contracts awarded, services received, or similar 

transactions made by federal agencies during a given period that will 

require payments during the same or a future period.2

 DOD’s accounting 

systems capture the obligation of funds. Specifically, for fiscal year 2003 

we (1) analyzed the obligations reported by DOD in support of the war and 

(2) compared whether the amount of funding received by the military 

services was adequate to cover DOD’s incremental costs incurred in 

support of GWOT.3

 1

 U.S. General Accounting Office, Military Operations: Fiscal Year 2003 Obligations 

Are Substantial, but May Result in Less Obligations Than Expected, GAO-03-1088

(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 17, 2003). 

2

 See Department of Defense Financial Management Regulations, 7000.14-R, vol. 1, 

Definitions, page xvii. 

3

 The term “incremental costs” means those directly attributable costs that would not have 

been incurred if it were not for the operation. Sections 230406 and 230902 of Department 

of Defense Financial Management Regulations 7000.14-R, volume 12, chapter 23, 

Contingency Operations (Feb. 2001) provide additional information on incremental costs. 

We further note that DOD’s financial systems only capture total obligations and the 

services use various management information systems to identify incremental obligations 

and to estimate costs. 

United States General Accounting Office 

Washington, DC 20548 
Page 2 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

To identify DOD’s fiscal year 2003 GWOT obligations, we used DOD’s 

Consolidated Department of Defense Terrorist Response Cost Reports, 

which report the monthly and cumulative GWOT obligations, and analyzed 

this data. We focused our review on DOD’s obligations reported for 

conducting military operations in support of the war. We did not review 

the obligations reported by the intelligence community, but mention the 

amount appropriated and obligated, because the amount appropriated was 

part of the total DOD appropriation. We also did not review the obligations 

incurred to rebuild Iraq, which is included in other, related, GAO reviews.4

To determine whether the amount of funding received by the services to 

conduct military operations in support of the war was adequate, we 

reviewed applicable fiscal year 2003 appropriations to include the transfer 

of funds among appropriation accounts for GWOT and compared the 

funds available to each service to the amounts obligated by each service in 

support of GWOT as reported in the consolidated cost reports. Our 

analysis focused primarily on the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine 

Corps, as these services accounted for about 87 percent of total DOD 

GWOT obligations.5

 We also met with the Office of the Under Secretary of 

Defense (Comptroller) and Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps 

officials to discuss both funding levels and obligations. 

Although we did not validate the accounting systems or data that the 

Defense Finance and Accounting Service uses to produce these 

consolidated cost reports, we did discuss the data presented in these 

reports with DOD and service officials and agreed that for the limited 

scope of this review, the consolidated reports provided the best available 

data. We also did not verify whether reported obligations were actually in 

support of GWOT. However, we are beginning a separate review of the 

obligations accumulated through the various sources of information 

used by the services, including the method by which the Defense Finance 

and Accounting Service acquires and consolidates this data into the 

consolidated cost reports and whether the obligations support the war. 

We conducted our review from January 2004 through March 2004 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

 4

 These reviews are focused on (1) the efforts and costs to develop democracy in Iraq, 

rebuild its infrastructure, and develop its security forces and (2) reconstruction-related 

contract actions by DOD (primarily the U.S. Army, including the Army Corps of Engineers), 

the U. S. Agency for International Development, and the Department of State. 

5

 The remaining 13 percent of obligations were reported by 15 DOD agencies including the 

Defense Logistics Agency and the Defense Information Systems Agency. 
Page 3 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

In fiscal year 2003, DOD reported obligations of over $61 billion in support 

of the Global War on Terrorism.6

 Our analysis of the obligation data 

showed that fiscal year 2003 obligations for the war on terrorism were 

greatest for Operation Iraqi Freedom; among the DOD components, the 

Army had the most obligations; and among appropriation accounts the 

operation and maintenance account had the largest amount of obligations. 

The adequacy of funding available for fiscal year 2003 GWOT obligations 

reported in military personnel and operation and maintenance accounts 

varied by service. The Army, Navy, and Air Force ended the fiscal year 

with more reported obligations for the war than funding for military 

personnel and had to cover the shortfalls with funds appropriated for their 

budgeted peacetime operations. The Army, Navy, and Air Force, however, 

appeared to have more funding than obligations in their operation and 

maintenance accounts for the war. The Navy and Air Force advised us that 

the seeming excess funding ($299 million and $176.6 million respectively) 

were in support of the war on terrorism, but were not recorded as such. 

Therefore, Navy and Air Force obligations exactly match funding. The 

Marine Corps used funds appropriated for its budgeted peacetime 

operation and maintenance activities to cover shortfalls in GWOT funding. 

We are not making recommendations in this report because our objective 

was to communicate amounts reported for fiscal year 2003 obligations and 

funding for the Global War on Terrorism. 

In official oral comments on a draft of this report, DOD stated that it had 

no objections to the report. 

 6

 DOD also received about $5.7 billion in funding in support of GWOT within the 

intelligence community. While obligations incurred against this appropriation are not 

captured in DOD’s Consolidated Terrorist Response Cost Reports, DOD reports that this 

amount was fully obligated in fiscal year 2003. 

Results in Brief 
Page 4 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States 

began military operations to combat terrorism both in the United States 

and overseas. Operations to defend the United States from terrorist 

attacks are known as Operation Noble Eagle. Overseas operations to 

combat terrorism are known as Operation Enduring Freedom, which 

takes place principally in Afghanistan, and Operation Iraqi Freedom, 

which takes place in and around Iraq. Figure 1 shows the primary 

locations where U.S. forces conducted operations in support of the war 

in fiscal year 2003. 

Figure 1: Primary Locations of DOD’s Fiscal Year 2003 Global War on Terrorism Operations 

To support the war in fiscal year 2003, Congress appropriated $68.7 billion 

to DOD: $6.1 billion in the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003,7

 7

 P.L. 108-7 (Feb. 20, 2003). 

Background 

Philippines

Djibouti

Iraq Afghanistan

Source: GAO.
Page 5 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

and $62.6 billion in the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations 

Act, 2003.8

 While most of these funds were only available for expenditure 

in fiscal year 2003, some could be expended in subsequent fiscal years. 

Of the $68.7 billion appropriated for GWOT, almost $16 billion was 

appropriated in the fiscal year 2003 Wartime Supplemental to a transfer 

account called the Iraqi Freedom Fund. The Iraqi Freedom Fund is a 

special account providing funds for additional expenses for ongoing 

military operations in Iraq, and those operations authorized by P.L. 107-40 

(Sept. 13, 2001), Authorization for Use of Military Force, and other 

operations and related activities in support of the global war on terrorism.9

Congress has also appropriated funds for the reconstruction of Iraq and 

Department of State and U.S. Agency for International Development 

projects.10 We are reviewing the contracts involved in the reconstruction, 

as well as the funding for other projects and will be issuing separate 

reports on these issues. 

As of September 30, 2003, DOD reported obligating a total of over 

$61 billion in fiscal year 2003 in support of the war. Among the operations 

that comprised the war on terrorism, Operation Iraqi Freedom amounted 

to about $39 billion or 64 percent of the total obligations, as shown in 

figure 2. The obligations reported for Iraqi Freedom are probably 

understated and the obligations reported for Operation Enduring Freedom 

overstated because, according to DOD officials, the initial obligations 

associated with the build up to Iraqi Freedom were charged to Enduring 

Freedom. Officials in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 

(Comptroller) reclassified reported obligations to the appropriate 

operation after Iraqi Freedom began, based on anticipated and projected 

GWOT operations. 

 8

 P.L. 108-11 (Apr.16, 2003). 

9

 P.L. 108-11, chap. 3 (Apr. 16, 2003). 

10 P.L. 108-11, chap. 5 (Apr. 16, 2003). 

Obligations for GWOT 

Operations 
Page 6 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

Figure 2: Global War on Terrorism Obligations by Operation for Fiscal Year 2003 

as of September 30, 2003 

Note: GAO did not audit this data. 

Of the overall reported amount obligated within DOD for GWOT during 

fiscal year 2003, the Army reported the largest amount of obligations, 

46 percent of the total, as shown in figure 3. (The Army had the largest 

number of military personnel engaged in the war.) In addition to the 

obligations reported by the other military services, about 13 percent of 

DOD’s GWOT obligations were reported by a total of 15 other DOD 

organizations, such as the Defense Information Systems Agency and the 

Defense Logistics Agency. Of these DOD organizations, the Defense 

Logistics Agency reported the largest amount of obligations—over 

$3.6 billion. 

 

 

26%

10%

 64%

$15,913,050

Operation Enduring Freedom 

$38,838,865

Operation Iraqi Freedom

Total $61,026,994

$6,275,079

Operation Noble Eagle

Source: The Defense Finance and Accounting Service's Consolidated DOD Terrorist Response Cost Report as of

September 30, 2003. 

Dollars in thousands
Page 7 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

Figure 3: Global War on Terrorism Obligations for Fiscal Year 2003 by DOD 

Organization as of September 30, 2003 

Note: GAO did not audit this data. 

The obligations reported for GWOT fall into three categories—operation 

and maintenance, military personnel, and investment. Operation and 

maintenance account funds obligated in support of the war are used 

for a variety of purposes, including transportation of personnel, 

goods, and equipment; unit operating support costs; and intelligence, 

communications, and logistics support. Military personnel funds obligated 

in support of the war cover the pay and allowances of mobilized reservists 

as well as special payments or allowances for all qualifying military 

personnel both active and reserve, such as Imminent Danger Pay and 

Family Separation Allowance. Investment funds obligated for the war are 

used for procurement, military construction, and research, development, 

test and evaluation. As shown in figure 4, GWOT obligations reported in 

the operation and maintenance account amount to almost $44 billion or 

71 percent of the total. 

 

 

13%  46%

$7,849,460

Navy

 22%

$13,475,159

Air Force

 13%

$7,659,299

Other DOD organizations

$28,335,629

Army

$3,707,447

Marine Corps

Total $61,026,994

Source: The Defense Finance and Accounting Service's Consolidated DOD Terrorist Response Cost Report as of

September 30, 2003. 

6%

Dollars in thousands
Page 8 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

Figure 4: Global War on Terrorism Obligations for Fiscal Year 2003 

by Appropriation as of September 30, 2003 

Note: GAO did not audit this data. 

The Consolidated Department of Defense Terrorist Response Cost Report

displays obligations in all accounts by specific categories. As previously 

cited, chapter 23 of the DOD Financial Management Regulations, which 

governs how all DOD organizations report financial data for contingency 

operations, defines these categories. Within the operation and 

maintenance account, the operating support category had the largest 

amount of reported obligations for fiscal year 2003—over $32 billion or 

74 percent of the total. This category, which includes obligations incurred 

for such things as training, operational support, equipment maintenance, 

and troop support, had the highest level of obligations, in part reflecting 

the cost of using civilian contractors to provide housing, food, water, and 

other services to over 180,000 troops deployed overseas in support of 

GWOT. A large part of the operating support costs category—48 percent—

is in two miscellaneous categories, other supplies and equipment 

($7 billion) and other services and miscellaneous contracts ($8.5 billion). 

 

 

26%

 71%

$15,566,119

Military personnel

$43,692,851

Operation and

maintenance

3%

$1,768,024

Investment

Total $61,026,994

Source: The Defense Finance and Accounting Service's Consolidated DOD Terrorist Response Cost Report as of

September 30, 2003. 

Dollars in thousands
Page 9 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

Most of the remaining reported GWOT obligations, $15.6 billion or 

26 percent, were in the military personnel accounts. Within the military 

personnel account, the category reserve component called to active duty 

had the highest level of reported obligations—almost $9.3 billion or 

59 percent of the total. This category captures the obligations reported for 

the salaries paid to reservists mobilized for active duty. According to 

service officials, more reservists were called to active duty than originally 

estimated and remained on active duty longer than planned. As with 

operation and maintenance obligations, there was also a large 

miscellaneous category, other military personnel, which accounted for 

about $3.8 billion, or 24 percent, of all military personnel obligations. 

In discussing the results of our analysis with the Office of the Under 

Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and the military services, there was 

recognition of the large amount of obligations captured in miscellaneous 

categories. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) is 

considering how best to provide more specific detail in future cost reports. 

The adequacy of funding available for fiscal year 2003 GWOT obligations 

reported in military personnel and operation and maintenance accounts 

varied by service. The funding available for the war consists of funds 

directly appropriated to the military services for GWOT, the net transfer of 

funds from the Iraqi Freedom Fund, and reprogrammed funds originally 

appropriated to the services for peacetime operations. 

Within the military personnel accounts, as shown in table 1, in fiscal year 

2003 the Army, Navy, and Air Force reported more obligations in support 

of the war than they received in funding for the war. To cover the shortfall 

in GWOT funding, these services had to use funds appropriated for their 

budgeted peacetime operations. Officials from each of these services 

explained that the shortfall was a relatively small portion of their budgeted 

peacetime military personnel account. For example, the Army’s reported 

shortfall of $155.2 million represents less than 1 percent of its total 

peacetime appropriation. The Marine Corps, which had augmented its 

GWOT military personnel appropriation with funds from its peacetime 

military personnel account, ended the fiscal year with slightly less in 

obligations than it had in available funding—$1.8 million or less than 

1 percent of its peacetime appropriation. 

Funding Adequacy 

for GWOT Varied 

by Service 
Page 10 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

Table 1: Military Personnel Fiscal Year 2003 GWOT Funding and Obligations 

Dollars in millions 

 Air Force Army Navy Marine Corps

Total GWOT Funding Available $3,363.4 $8,574.2 $1,813.8 $1,483.6

Obligations Reported 3,409.1 8,730.0 1,933.8 1,481.8

Difference (45.7) (155.8) (120.0) 1.8

Source: P.L. 108-7, 108-11, and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service’s Consolidated DOD Terrorist Response Cost Report as of September 30, 2003. 

Note: GAO did not audit this data. 

Within the operation and maintenance accounts, as shown in table 2, in 

fiscal year 2003 the Army, Air Force, and Navy received funding that 

exceeded their reported GWOT obligations. At the same time the Marine 

Corps reported more GWOT obligations than it received in funding. 

Table 2: Operation and Maintenance Fiscal Year 2003 GWOT Funding and Obligations 

Dollars in millions 

 Air Force Army Navy Marine Corps

Total GWOT Funding Available $10,050.7 $19,423.0 $6,067.4 $2,005.7

Obligations Reported 9,874.1 19,392.8 5,768.4 2,078.2

Difference 176.6 30.2 299.0 (72.5)

Source: P.L. 108-7, 108-11, and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service’s Consolidated DOD Terrorist Response Cost Report as of September 30, 2003. 

Note: GAO did not audit this data. 

In discussing our analysis of the difference between GWOT obligations 

and funding with the Army, Air Force, and Navy, we were told the 

following. 

• The Army reported slightly more funding than obligations for the war. 

At the end of fiscal year 2003, the Army reported obligations that initially 

appeared to be more than $500 million less than the available funding. 

However, as of January 2004, the Army has subsequently updated its 

fiscal year 2003 reporting to reflect about $470 million in additional 

reported obligations. According to Army officials, the Army had not 

included in the September 30, 2003, consolidated cost report $494 million 

in obligations reported to support the Coalition Provisional Authority in 
Page 11 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

Iraq.11 The Army received GWOT funding in fiscal year 2003 to support this 

organization, but the obligations were not captured in the Army’s 

accounting system used to record most other Army obligations. The Army 

also cancelled some obligations made before the end of the fiscal year, 

resulting in a total adjustment to the fiscal year 2003 cost report of 

$470 million. Thus the Army ended the year with about $30 million more in 

funding than reported obligations. 

• Air Force officials told us that the $176.6 million, which appeared to be 

unobligated GWOT funding, was actually obligated late in the fiscal year. 

According to the officials, that amount was obligated for flying operations 

requirements that the Air Force decided were related to the war, but were 

not reported as such. 

• Navy officials told us that the apparent unobligated GWOT funds 

($299 million) were in fact obligated in support of the war but were 

originally, and incorrectly, reported as obligations in support of budgeted 

peacetime operations. These officials said that they would be updating 

their reporting for obligations incurred in fiscal year 2003 to reflect an 

additional $299 million in operation and maintenance obligations for the 

war. At the same time, the Navy returned $198 million to the Iraqi Freedom 

Fund that it believed was in excess of its operation and maintenance 

requirements for the war. The available funding in table 2 was adjusted to 

reflect the return of the $198 million. Returning these funds is in keeping 

with recommendations we made in our September 2003 report discussed 

above to monitor the obligation of funds in the services’ operation and 

maintenance accounts and ensure that all funds transferred to the services 

that are not likely to be obligated by the end of the fiscal year are 

transferred back to the Iraqi Freedom Fund.12

In subsequent work we plan to review GWOT obligations to detail the 

specific purposes for which funds were used and to determine whether the 

service requirements for which funding was obligated were war-related. 

The additional Air Force flying operations’ requirements and the funds the 

Navy recharacterized as being in support of the war will be included in 

that review. 

 11 The Coalition Provisional Authority is the name of the temporary governing body, which 

has been recognized by the United Nations as the lawful government of Iraq until such time 

an internationally recognized interim administration or representative government is 

established by the people of Iraq. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483, 

(May 22, 2003). 

12 GAO-03-1088. 
Page 12 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

While the Marine Corps obligated $72.5 million more for GWOT than it had 

in funds at the end of fiscal year 2003, it, like the Navy, returned money to 

the Iraqi Freedom Fund. At the end of fiscal year 2003, Marine Corps 

officials believed that they could not obligate $152.2 million that had been 

transferred to the Marine Corps’ operation and maintenance account from 

the Iraqi Freedom Fund before the end of the fiscal year and so transferred 

it back to the fund. In retrospect, however, the Marines obligated more 

than expected. According to Marine Corps officials, this shortfall was 

covered by using normal peacetime operation and maintenance 

appropriations that units deployed in support of GWOT were not going 

to use. 

As noted with the Army and Navy analyses, the services have reported 

obligation updates to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 

(Comptroller) for inclusion in the Defense Finance and Accounting 

Service’s Consolidated DOD Terrorist Response Cost report for fiscal year 

2003. The Defense Finance and Accounting Service is issuing monthly 

fiscal year 2003 update reports as the obligation data is updated, which 

must be added to the report as of September 30, 2003, to determine the 

total fiscal year 2003 obligations reported in support of GWOT. 

In official oral comments on a draft of this report, officials from DOD’s 

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) stated that the 

department had no objections to the report. DOD also provided technical 

comments and we have incorporated them as appropriate. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Chairmen and Ranking 

Minority Members of the House and Senate Budget Committees, the 

Secretary of Defense, the Secretaries of the military services, and the 

Director, Office of Management and Budget. We will also make copies 

available to others on request. In addition, the report will available at no 

charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

Agency Comments 
Page 13 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

If you or your staff has any questions, please contact me on (757) 552-8100 

or by e-mail at curtinn@gao.gov. Major contributors to this report were 

Steve Sternlieb, Ann Borseth, Madelon Savaides, Leo Sullivan, and John 

Buehler. 

Neal P. Curtin 

Director, Defense Capabilities and 

Management Team 
Page 14 GAO-04-668 Military Operations 

List of Congressional Committees 

The Honorable Ted Stevens 

Chairman 

The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye 

Ranking Minority Member 

Subcommittee on Defense 

Committee on Appropriations 

United States Senate 

The Honorable John W. Warner 

Chairman 

The Honorable Carl Levin 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Jerry Lewis 

Chairman 

The Honorable John P. Murtha 

Ranking Minority Member 

Subcommittee on Defense 

Committee on Appropriations 

House of Representatives 

The Honorable Duncan Hunter 

Chairman 

The Honorable Ike Skelton 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

House of Representatives 

(350511) 
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. 

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 fulltext 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. 

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: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Public Affairs