Continued Improvements Needed in Air Force Procedures and Practices

Gao ID: PLRD-83-36 February 7, 1983

GAO completed a follow-up review of the effectiveness of actions taken by the Air Force to improve its procedures and practices for identifying and cancelling excess on-order stocks of system support stock fund items.

In response to an earlier GAO report, the Air Force made a policy change which increased the potential for cancelling excess on-order stocks by $39 million or more. A follow-up review showed that the Air Force can further correct identified weaknesses and increase its potential for cancellation of such stocks by $58 million or more. In computing requirements and termination levels for on-order stocks, the Air Force is still using excessive buffers of stock above item requirements. This practice precludes timely identification and cancellation of on-order stocks which exceed requirements. In addition, GAO found that the Air Force still does not have an effective system to monitor the performance of air logistics centers in cancelling excess on-order stocks. The Air Force could further increase its dollar potential for cancelling excess on-order stocks by excluding unfunded war reserve requirements from computation of termination levels for on-order stocks. Improvements in Air Force procedures and practices for maximum reduction of on-order stock excesses are especially appropriate now because of current and anticipated shortfalls in the Air Force's fiscal year 1982 and 1983 stock fund obligational authority.


Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Harry R. Finley Team: General Accounting Office: National Security and International Affairs Division Phone: (202) 512-5187

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.