However, the stocks must be (1) available in sufficient quantities to  meet the needs of deploying forces and (2) in good condition. It also began an afloat program in the 1990s,  using large ships to keep equipment and supplies available to support  operations around the world. Figure 1 shows the location of Army and Marine Corps  prepositioned equipment prior to OIF. Prepositioned Equipment Performed Well in OIF, Despite Shortfalls and Other Logistical Challenges

The Army and Marine Corps reported that their prepositioned equipment  performed well during OIF but that some problems emerged. Moreover, the U.S. Central Command, in an internal  lessons-learned effort, concluded that prepositioned stocks “proved their  worth and were critical in successfully executing OIF.”

		Some Prepositioned Equipment Was Out-of-Date or Did Not Match Unit Needs

Some of the Army’s prepositioned equipment was outdated or did not  match what the units were used to at home station. M113 Personnel Carriers—The prepositioned stocks contained many  older model M113A2 vehicles. The U.S. forces  had months to prepare for OIF, and plenty of time to adjust to the  equipment they had available. The theater supply-and-distribution system became  overwhelmed. Instead of  bringing their own equipment, these troops are continuing to use  prepositioned stocks. Thus, it may be several years—depending on how  long the Iraqi operations continue—before these stocks can be  reconstituted. Most of the equipment that the Army used for OIF is still in use or is being  held in theater in the event it may be needed in the future. Thus, it may be 2006 or later before this  equipment becomes available to be reconstituted to refill the  prepositioned stocks. Officials also told us that, after having been in use  for years in harsh desert conditions, much of the equipment would likely  require substantial maintenance and some will be worn out beyond repair. The  Army has estimated that the cost for reconstituting its prepositioned  equipment assets is about $1.7 billion for depot maintenance, unit level  maintenance, and procurement of required parts and supplies. Army Materiel Command officials said they have thus far  received only a small part of the amount funded in the 2004 supplemental  for reconstitution of the prepositioned equipment, but they noted that not  much equipment has been available. Since much of the equipment is still in  Southwest Asia, it is unclear how much reconstitution funding for its  prepositioned equipment the Army can use in fiscal year 2005. Issues Facing the Prepositioning Program

The defense department faces many issues as it rebuilds its prepositioning  program and makes plans for how such stocks fit into the transformed  military. In the near term, the Army and the Marine Corps must focus on  supporting current operations and reconstituting their prepositioning sets. In  the long term, however, DOD faces fundamental issues as it plans the  future of its prepositioning programs. These  include     ensuring that it has adequate equipment and spare parts and sustainment  supplies in its prepositioning programs, giving priority to afloat and Korea  stocks;    selectively modernizing equipment so that it will match unit equipment  and better meet operational needs; and    planning and conducting training to practice drawing and using  prepositioned stocks, especially afloat stocks. Determine the role of prepositioning in light of the efforts to  transform the military. Establish sound prepositioning requirements that support joint  expeditionary forces. Ensure that the program is resourced commensurate with its  priority, and is affordable even as the force is transformed. Congress will have  a key role in reviewing the department’s assessment of the cost  effectiveness of options to support DOD’s overall mission, including  prepositioning and other alternatives for projecting forces quickly to the  far reaches of the globe.
Why GAO Did This Study

Since the Cold War, the Department of Defense (DOD) has increased its reliance on prepositioned stocks of military equipment and supplies, primarily because it can no longer plan on having a large forward troop presence. Prepositioned stocks are stored on ships and on land in the Persian Gulf and other regions around the world. Prepositioning allows the military to respond rapidly to conflicts. Ideally, units need only to bring troops and a small amount of materiel to the conflict area. Once there, troops can draw on prepositioned equipment and supplies, and then move quickly into combat. Today's testimony describes (1) the performance and availability of Army and Marine Corps prepositioned equipment and supplies to support Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF); (2) current status of the stocks and plans to reconstitute them; and (3) key issues facing the military as it reshapes these programs to support DOD's force transformation efforts.

What GAO Found

The importance of prepositioned stocks was dramatically illustrated during OIF. While they faced some challenges, the Army and Marine Corps relied heavily on prepositioned combat equipment and supplies to decisively defeat the Iraqi military. They both reported that prepositioned stocks were a key factor in the success of OIF. Prepositioned stocks provided most of the combat equipment used and, for the most part, this equipment was in good condition and maintained high readiness rates. However, the Army's prepositioned equipment included some older models of equipment and shortfalls in support equipment such as trucks, spare parts, and other supplies. Moreover, the warfighter did not always know what prepositioned stocks were available in theater, apparently worsening an already overwhelmed supply-and-distribution system. The units were able to overcome these challenges; fortunately, the long time available to build up forces allowed units to fill many of the shortages and adjust to unfamiliar equipment. Much of the prepositioned equipment is still being used to support continuing operations in Iraq. It will be several years--depending on how long Iraqi Freedom operations continue--before these stocks will be available to return to prepositioning programs. And, even after they become available, much of the equipment will likely require substantial maintenance, or may be worn out beyond repair. The Army has estimated that it has an unfunded requirement of over $1 billion for reconstituting the prepositioned equipment used in OIF. However, since most prepositioned equipment is still in Southwest Asia and has not been turned back to the Army Materiel Command for reconstitution, most of the funding is not required at this time. When the prepositioned equipment is no longer needed in theater, decisions will have to be made about what equipment can be repaired by combat units, what equipment must go to depot, and what equipment must be replaced with existing or new equipment to enable the Army to reconstitute the prepositioned sets that were downloaded for OIF. DOD faces many issues as it rebuilds its prepositioning program and makes plans for how such stocks fit into its future. In the near term, the Army and Marines must necessarily focus on supporting ongoing OIF operations. While waiting to reconstitute its program, the Army also has an opportunity to address shortfalls and modernize remaining stocks. For the longer term, DOD may need to (1) determine the role of prepositioning in light of efforts to transform the military; (2) establish sound prepositioning requirements that support joint expeditionary forces; and (3) ensure that the program is resourced commensurate with its priority and is affordable even as the force is transformed. Congress will play a key role in reviewing DOD's assessment of the cost effectiveness of various options to support its overall mission, including prepositioning and other alternatives for projecting forces quickly.