Certain authorities in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, enable the President to draw down articles and services from the inventory and resources of U.S. government agencies. Section 506(a)(1): Allows for drawdowns of defense articles from the stocks of DOD, defense services of DOD, and military education and training to a foreign country or international organization 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. The maximum aggregate value of drawdowns under Section 506(a)(1) cannot exceed $100 million in any fiscal year. Section 506(a)(2): 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): Authorizes the President to direct the drawdown of commodities and services from the inventory and resources of any U.S. government agency for the purpose of carrying out peacekeeping operations. 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. State and DOD are the U.S. government agencies primarily engaged in planning and executing uses of drawdown authority. State’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, DOD’s 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. When a crisis occurs, the agencies work together to determine that a drawdown is required. The interagency process also determines which articles and services should be provided, depending on need and availability, and the maximum value of the drawdown that will be authorized within the statutory limits. If a decision is made to proceed with the drawdown, State prepares a Memorandum of Justification and Presidential Determination for the President’s signature. In addition, the Foreign Assistance Act requires the President to notify Congress before the President intends to exercise the authority provided. Within DOD, DSCA prepares and issues an EXORD identifying the articles and services to be provided under the drawdown. The military departments receive the EXORD and specify the assistance to be provided and the estimated cost of executing the drawdown. According to the SAMM and DSCA Handbook, new procurement is not authorized for a drawdown, and no new funds may be placed on existing contracts, with the exception of transportation and related services where new contracts would cost less than providing such services using DOD assets. As a result, the military departments take the items from on-hand inventories and pay the costs of the drawdown using existing appropriations— typically from their Operation and Maintenance (O&M) accounts. Upon receipt of the EXORD, the executing agencies or organizations within the military departments then provide the articles and services to the drawdown recipient or recipients. The SAMM and DSCA Handbook provide guidance for DSCA, the military departments, and other DOD components to follow when planning and executing drawdowns. We previously reported in April 2016 on additional provisions included in the House Armed Services Committee report. In that report, we found that, inconsistent with federal internal control standards, State lacked readily available documents related to drawdowns, and there was no mechanism to centrally manage key drawdown documents within State. Further, DOD had 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. We recommended that (1) State should assign responsibility or establish a mechanism to maintain key drawdown documents and (2) DOD report more frequently on defense articles and services provided through drawdowns. State did not agree with the finding and did not concur with our recommendation to establish a mechanism to maintain documents but subsequently stated that the department does believe it would be helpful to compile all documentation concerning security-related drawdowns in a single repository and that the appropriate office had established an electronic shared file folder for this purpose. DOD agreed that it should report more frequently on drawdowns. We also previously reported in 2002 on the use of drawdowns. At that time, DOD officials told us that drawdowns have potential impacts on military readiness and budgets. Specifically, DOD and military service officials stated that unreimbursed costs associated with a drawdown negatively affect the readiness of the U.S. military services. However, those officials could not provide any examples of programs forgone or specific deficiencies in unit readiness. We also found that the military services, in 2000, had reported to DSCA on the effect on readiness of drawdowns for counternarcotics efforts. Generally, the military services had characterized the effect as dollars spent on unplanned contingencies and, therefore, not available to support other requirements. In that report, we did not make recommendations with regard to the potential impacts of drawdowns on readiness and budgets. According to DSCA officials, the SAMM was updated in 2003 to state that when developing the interagency drawdown package, the military departments are to assess their ability to meet interagency-proposed requirements and are to review the impact of the drawdown on operational readiness and O&M budgets. DSCA officials said that this requirement was added after DSCA surveyed members of the DOD security cooperation community about what changes they would like to see in the 2003 update to the SAMM. Community members responded that they would like for the SAMM to provide more information on drawdowns, which resulted in a summary of the drawdown process being added to the SAMM. The requirement for readiness and budget impact assessments was added as part of the drawdown process. Since fiscal year 2011, the President has authorized 13 drawdowns to provide security assistance and build foreign partner capacity to France, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, and West and Central Africa (see fig. 1). According to State and DOD data, the total value of articles and services authorized for these drawdowns for fiscal years 2011 through 2015 was $321.5 million. State and DOD reported that the total value of articles and services delivered was approximately $194.8 million as of August 2016 (see table 1). The drawdowns of articles and services were under Sections 506(a)(1) and 552(c)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act. None of these drawdowns used the Section 506(a)(2) authority. Since fiscal year 2013, the President authorized five drawdowns under Section 506(a)(1) to provide airlift and aerial refueling support, as well as other defense support, toward countering terrorists and violent extremists in West and Central Africa. These five authorizations totaled $200 million and are in various stages of execution. As of August 2016, the value of articles and services delivered was approximately $125.0 million, constituting about 64 percent of all articles and services delivered under the 13 total drawdowns. The drawdown efforts have been in three areas: (1) airlift and aerial refueling assistance to France and Chad in their efforts to secure Mali from terrorists and violent extremists; (2) defense articles and support to countries supporting the African Union-led International Support Mission in the Central African Republic; and (3) defense services, including airlift and military education and training, to support Benin, Cameroon, Chad, Niger, and Nigeria in their efforts to defeat the terrorist group Boko Haram. State officials stated that these drawdowns provided just-in-time defense and helped peacekeeping on the African continent while furthering the security and foreign policy goals of the United States. For example, State officials said that the airlift facilitated the deployment of thousands of peacekeeping troops and that defense articles such as barriers facilitated the creation of headquarters for the international forces in the Central African Republic. In fiscal years 2014 and 2015, the President authorized a total of four drawdowns to provide military assistance, improve peacekeeping operations, and provide defense articles and services and nonlethal commodities in Ukraine. These four authorizations—including two under Section 506(a)(1) and two under Section 552(c)(2)—totaled $46.5 million, with $31.8 million of the authority used as of August 2016. DOD records show that for the 2014 drawdowns, the military departments provided vehicles, power generators, medical supplies, clothing, and plumbing and heating equipment. For the 2015 drawdowns, DOD records show that the military services provided radar systems with test equipment and spare parts. The President also authorized four drawdowns that supported countries experiencing political instability, such as in Libya, and to combat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria in Iraq and provide assistance to the Syrian Opposition Coalition and the Syrian Opposition’s Supreme Military Council. In fiscal year 2011, a drawdown of $25 million was authorized under Section 552(c)(2) to provide commodities and services to Libya to support efforts to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack.