Develop and implement a long-term strategy to reduce corrosion and  the effects of corrosion on the military equipment and infrastructure of  the Department of Defense not later than 1 year after the date of the  enactment of the act. Although the full impact of corrosion cannot be quantified due to the  limited amount of reliable data captured by DOD and the military services,  current cost estimates, readiness, and safety data indicate that corrosion  has a substantial effect on military equipment and infrastructure. Corrosion Costs Appear to Be Enormous

Corrosion’s impact on military costs appears to be enormous, representing  one of the largest life-cycle cost components of military weapon systems. In a 2001 government-sponsored study, corrosion is estimated to cost the  Department of Defense at least $20 billion a year. For example,  a 2001 study concluded that corrective maintenance of corrosion-related  faults has degraded the readiness of all of the Army’s approximately  2,450 force modernization helicopters. Just 2 years earlier, the Navy had identified corrosion as the cause of a  landing gear failure on a F-18 that occurred during carrier operations. For  example, during the 1980s, uncommanded fuel valve closures caused  several F-16 aircraft crashes. Full Impact of Corrosion Unknown Due to Incomplete Cost, Readiness, and Safety Data

For more than a decade, a number of DOD, military service, and  private-sector studies have cited the lack of reliable data to adequately  assess the overall impact of the corrosion problem. DOD and Services’ Approach to Corrosion Control Is Not Effective but Has Achieved Some Successes

While the military services have achieved some successes on individual  corrosion prevention projects, significant weaknesses in their overall  approach to corrosion control have decreased the effectiveness of their  efforts. Limited Coordination Within and Among the Services

DOD has multiple corrosion control efforts—with different policies,  procedures, and funding channels—that are not well coordinated with each  other; as a result, opportunities for cost savings have been lost. DOD is in  the process of establishing a central corrosion control office in response to  the authorization act, but no single office exists within each of the military  services to provide leadership and oversight for corrosion control of  equipment and infrastructure. The Navy and Air Force also have multiple corrosion prevention and  mitigation offices. These priorities and  incentives are very different from and sometimes conflict with those held  by the operational or installation commands and their subordinate units. As a result, many  proposed corrosion control projects—even those with large cost saving  potential and other benefits, such as increased readiness and enhanced  safety—often remain underfunded because they are a low priority to the  commands compared to operational and repair projects that offer more  immediate results. In its technical comments, DOD did not  concur with our finding that the department does not have an effective  approach to prevent and mitigate corrosion.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of Defense (DOD) maintains equipment and infrastructure worth billions of dollars in many environments where corrosion is causing military assets to deteriorate, shortening their useful life. The resulting increase in required repairs and replacements drives up costs and takes critical systems out of action, reducing mission readiness. GAO was asked to review military activities related to corrosion control. Specifically, this report examines the extent of the impact of corrosion on DOD and the military services and the extent of the effectiveness of DOD's and the services' approach to preventing and mitigating corrosion.

What GAO Found

Although the full impact of corrosion cannot be quantified due to the limited amount of reliable data captured by DOD and the military services, current cost estimates, readiness, and safety data indicate that corrosion has a substantial impact on military equipment and infrastructure. In 2001, a government-sponsored study estimated the costs of corrosion for military systems and infrastructure at about $20 billion annually and found corrosion to be one of the largest components of life-cycle costs for weapon systems. Corrosion also reduces readiness because the need to repair or replace corrosion damage increases the downtime of critical military assets. For example, a recent study concluded that corrective maintenance of corrosion-related faults has degraded the readiness of all of the Army's approximately 2,450 force modernization helicopters. Finally, a number of serious safety concerns have also been associated with corrosion, including Navy F-14 and F-18 landing gear failures during carrier operations and crashes of several Air Force F-16 aircraft due to the corrosion of electrical contacts that control fuel valves. DOD and the military services do not have an effective approach to prevent and mitigate corrosion. They have had some successes in addressing corrosion problems on individual programs, but several weaknesses are preventing DOD and the military services from achieving much greater benefits, including potentially billions of dollars in additional net savings annually. Each service has multiple corrosion offices, and their different policies, procedures, and funding channels limit coordination. Also, the goals and incentives that guide these offices sometimes conflict with those of the operational commands that they rely on to fund project implementation. As a result, proposed projects are often assigned a lower priority compared to efforts offering more immediate results. Together, these problems reduce the effectiveness of DOD corrosion prevention. While DOD is in the process of establishing a central corrosion control activity and strategy, it remains to be seen whether these efforts will effectively address these weaknesses.