Specifically, for civilian institutions, the  Corrosion Office has documented procedures for selecting projects, but it  has not documented procedures for approving these projects. According  to Corrosion Office officials, the procedures for some aspects of the TCC  program are not documented because the program is still evolving and  they would like flexibility to enable innovation in determining how to  manage the program. The Corrosion Office Lacks Readily Available and Consistent Documentation on the Amount of Funds Used for the TCC Program

Corrosion Office officials provided the amount of funds for the TCC  program for fiscal years 2008 to 2013, but lacked readily available or  consistent documentation to support some of the funding data. As a  result, it is unclear what the Corrosion Office has spent on the TCC  program. Without tracking and  maintaining accurate records and fully documenting funding information  that is readily available for examination, Corrosion Office officials cannot  ensure that they accurately account for and report the TCC program costs  in the annual budget report to Congress. DOD Has Set Goals for the TCC Program, but Lacks a Process to Address Its Requirement to Transition Demonstrated Project Results to Military Departments

		The Corrosion Office Has Established Two Goals for the TCC Program

DOD’s Corrosion Office has established two goals for the TCC program,  and has a process in place to monitor the results of the program. According to the 2014 DOD Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic  Plan, TCC has the following goals: (1) develop individuals with education,  training, and experience who will form the future core of the technical  community within DOD and private industry that specializes in work on  corrosion prevention or control; and (2) produce solutions (i.e.,  knowledge, technologies, processes, and materials) that tangibly reduce  the effect of corrosion on DOD infrastructure and weapon systems. Corrosion Office officials track results and have cited the number of  students and research papers that have been produced as a result of  receiving TCC funds. The Corrosion Office Lacks a Process for Transitioning TCC’s Demonstrated Project Results to the Military Departments

The Corrosion Office has established a research goal for producing  solutions that tangibly reduce the effect of corrosion on DOD  infrastructure and weapon systems; however, the office has not  established a process for transitioning any results of the demonstrated  research projects to the military departments. Corrosion Office officials stated that it is difficult to transition results of the  TCC projects to the military departments because outputs of TCC  research are in the early stages of technology evolution and thus are not  mature enough to be used by the military departments. Therefore,  Corrosion Office officials acknowledged the need to establish a process  to transition TCC results to the military departments. Until the Corrosion  Office establishes a process to study and determine what, if any, TCC  results could transition to the military departments, DOD will not be able  to demonstrate the success of the TCC program and the extent to which  TCC results are helping to prevent or mitigate corrosion. Without fully  documenting its decision-making procedures for selecting and approving  projects, the Corrosion Office cannot demonstrate how projects were  selected and approved for the TCC program. To enhance DOD’s ability to make consistent and informed decisions in  its management of the TCC program in accordance with internal control  standards, we recommend that the Under Secretary of Defense for  Acquisition, Technology and Logistics require the Director, Corrosion  Policy and Oversight Office, to document the procedures for approving projects within the TCC  program for civilian institutions; document the procedures for selecting and approving projects within  the TCC program for military academic institutions; document the procedures for selecting and approving military  research labs supporting civilian and military institutions in conducting  projects within the TCC program; and  track and maintain accurate records that include amounts of funds  used for the TCC program, and have them readily available for  examination to ensure that funding data will be accurately accounted  for and reported in future reports, such as the annual budget report to  Congress. Additionally, DOD stated that the DOD  Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan describes this  collaborative effort. We noted in our report  that DOD Instruction 5000.67, which implements Section 2228 of Title 10  of the United States Code, requires the Corrosion Office to develop a  long-term strategy for corrosion prevention and mitigation that, among  other things, provides for a coordinated research and development  program that includes the transition of new corrosion-prevention  technologies to the military departments. To determine the extent to which DOD can provide information on the  amount of funds it spent on the TCC program, we reviewed financial  records such as documents that show funds the Corrosion Office  provided to the universities and military research labs, and Military  Interdepartmental Purchase Requests. any successes to date cited by DOD. Defense Management: The Department of Defense’s Annual Corrosion  Budget Report Does Not Include Some Required Information.
Why GAO Did This Study

According to DOD, corrosion can significantly affect maintenance cost, service life of equipment, and military readiness by diminishing the operations of critical systems and creating safety hazards. Pursuant to Section 2228 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code, DOD's Corrosion Office is responsible for prevention and mitigation of corrosion of military equipment and infrastructure. To help identify technology to prevent or mitigate corrosion and educate personnel about corrosion prevention and control, DOD funds universities and military labs in the TCC program.
GAO was asked to review DOD's TCC program and its goals. In this report, GAO addressed the extent to which DOD (1) has established procedures for managing the TCC program, (2) can provide information on the amount of funds spent on the program to date, and (3) has established goals for the TCC program and transitioned demonstrated results from projects to military departments. GAO reviewed DOD policies and plans and met with DOD corrosion officials and TCC participants.

What GAO Found

The Department of Defense's (DOD) Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight (Corrosion Office) has documented some, but not all, key procedures for the Technical Corrosion Collaboration (TCC) program. For civilian institutions, the Corrosion Office documented procedures for selecting projects, but has not done so for approving these projects. In addition, for military academic institutions, the office has not documented procedures for selecting and approving projects. Corrosion Office officials stated that procedures for some aspects of the TCC program are not documented because the program is still evolving and they would like flexibility to enable innovation in determining how to manage the program. However, without fully documenting its decision-making procedures for selecting and approving projects, the Corrosion Office cannot demonstrate how projects were selected and approved for the TCC program.
Corrosion Office officials provided data on the amount of funds spent on the TCC program for fiscal years 2008 through 2013, but in some cases the data were not readily available and were inconsistent for the same time frame. As a result, it is unclear what the Corrosion Office has spent on the TCC program. Section 2228 requires the Corrosion Office to include a description of the amount of funds used for the TCC program in its annual corrosion budget report to Congress. However, because the Corrosion Office does not track and maintain accurate records, it is unable to determine the amount of funds spent. In the absence of fully documented funding data that are readily available for examination, Corrosion Office officials cannot ensure that they will accurately account for and report TCC costs in the annual budget report to Congress.
DOD has set goals for the TCC program, but has not developed a process to transition demonstrated results from projects to military departments. According to the DOD Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan , TCC program goals are to: (1) develop individuals with education, training, and experience who will form the future core of the technical community within DOD and private industry; and (2) produce solutions that will reduce the effect of corrosion on DOD infrastructure and weapon systems. To track the goal of developing people, the Corrosion Office cited, among other things, the research papers that have been produced as a result of the TCC program. Section 2228 requires that the Corrosion Office coordinate a research and development program that includes a plan for the transition of new corrosion-prevention technologies to the military departments. To track the goal to produce solutions that will reduce corrosion, the Corrosion Office monitors TCC projects' results; however, the office has not established a process to transition demonstrated results of the research projects to the military departments. Corrosion Office officials stated that it is difficult to transition results because outputs of TCC research are in the early stages of technology evolution and thus are not mature enough to be used by the military departments. Therefore, Corrosion Office officials acknowledge the need to establish a process to transition TCC results to the military departments. Until the Corrosion Office establishes a process to study and determine what, if any, TCC results could transition to the military departments, DOD will not be able to demonstrate the success of the TCC program and the extent to which TCC results are helping to prevent or mitigate corrosion.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends five actions to improve DOD's management of the TCC program. DOD partially agreed with two actions: to document procedures to select and approve labs, and to track and maintain accurate funding data. DOD did not agree with three recommendations to document procedures to select and approve projects, and to establish a process to transition project results to the military departments. GAO believes that these recommendations remain valid.