In 1996, DOD  established a 3-month carryover standard for all the working capital fund  activities except for the contract portion of the Air Force depot  maintenance activity group. To reflect this difference, DOD established a 4.5-month carryover  standard to account for the additional administrative functions associated with awarding contracts. Air Force reports show that the contract portion of the  depot maintenance activity group exceeded the 4.5-month carryover  standard at the end of fiscal years 2000 and 2001 by about $44 million and  $134 million, respectively, thereby resulting in more funds being provided  than allowed by the DOD carryover standard. However, we found that the  reported carryover balance did not accurately reflect the amount of  unfinished work on hand at the end of fiscal year 2000 due to (1) faulty  assumptions used in calculating work-in-process and (2) records not  accurately reflecting work that was actually completed by year-end. As a  result, the amount of carryover reported by the Air Force was understated  by tens of millions of dollars. Table 1 shows the actual reported year- end unfilled orders, work-in process, and carryover, in dollars and months  for fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2001. According to Air Force Materiel Command officials, the primary reason  that they exceeded the 4.5-month standard for fiscal year 2001 was the  receipt of a large amount of orders late in the fiscal year. These problems resulted in idle funds that could have been used for near- term readiness or other priorities.
What GAO Found

The Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 requires GAO to review various aspects of the Department of Defense (DOD) policy that allows Defense Working Capital Fund activities to carry over a 3-month level of work from one fiscal year to the next. The DOD 3-month carryover standard applies to all DOD activity groups except for the contract portion of the Air Force depot maintenance activity group, for which DOD established a 4.5-month carryover standard because of the additional administrative functions associated with awarding contracts. Reported carryover balances for fiscal years 2000 and 2001 were inaccurate and, therefore, the balances were not reliable for decision-making or budget review purposes. The reported carryover balances were not accurate due to (1) faulty assumptions used in calculating work-in-process and (2) records not accurately reflecting work that was actually completed by year-end. As a result, the amount of carryover reported by the Air Force was understated by tens of millions of dollars and customers' funds were idle that could have been used for other purposes during the fiscal year. Even though the carryover was understated, Air Force reports show that the contract portion of the depot maintenance activity group exceeded the 4.5-month carryover standard at the end of fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2001 by $44 million and $134 million, respectively. Air Force headquarters officials stated the primary reason that they exceeded the standard for fiscal year 2001 was the receipt of a large amount of orders late in the fiscal year.