	Background

The Air Force and the Navy budget and spend billions annually to procure and repair aviation spare parts. Air Force and Navy Policies Result in Overstated Requirements

Although Air Force and Navy policies and procedures related to reserving on-hand assets for depot maintenance requirements differ, both agencies’ policies and procedures result in overstated requirements. These inaccuracies were due to the use, in requirement computations, of unsupported or incorrect (1) maintenance replacement rates, (2) demand rates, (3) planned program requirements, (4) due-out quantities, (5) lead times, (6) repair costs, and (7) asset quantities on hand and on order. The inaccuracies caused the fiscal year 1995 budget requirements to be understated by about $2 million on some items and overstated by about $10 million on others. We obtained and reviewed fiscal years 1995 and 1996 buy and repair budgets for the Air Force’s aviation spare parts. We have decreased the amount of assets reserved for depot maintenance needs from $226 million to $132 million. This reflects a reduction in the Navy’s assets from at least $154 million to at least $60 million.
Why GAO Did This Study

GAO reviewed the Air Force's and Navy's policies and procedures for procuring aviation spare parts, focusing on whether their requirements and budgets reflect the amounts they actually need.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) the Air Force and Navy budgeted $132 million more than needed for aviation spare parts because they used questionable policies to determine their requirements and assign accountability for depot maintenance assets; (2) the Air Force did not include $72 million of its on-hand assets in preparing its fiscal year (FY) 1996 budget request; (3) the Navy twice counted $60 million in depot maintenance requirements when preparing its FY 1997 budget request; (4) Air Force and Navy computation errors were a result of unsupported and incorrect maintenance replacement rates, demand rates, planned program requirements, repair costs, lead times, due-out quantities, and asset quantities on hand and on order; and (5) errors found in the sample items reviewed totalled $35 million and resulted in some requirements being overstated by as much as $25 million and some being understated by $10 million.