Summary

GAO reviewed the supply and maintenance support for F-4 aircraft assigned to the Navy and Marine Corps, focusing on: (1) aircraft availability; and (2) supply and maintenance deficiencies which adversely affected efforts of operating squadrons to keep the maximum number of aircraft available for use.

GAO noted that: (1) management weaknesses such as errors in the stock records of activities stocking the material and inaccurate reporting of stock balances and stock condition to Aviation Supply Office (ASO) contributed to the problem of spare parts shortages; (2) the loss of control over 11 replacement parts was responsible for for F-4 aircraft being out of service in 323 instances during fiscal year 1964; (3) these instances amounted to a total aircraft-waiting time of 3,200 days or the equivalent of nine aircraft being unavailable for service during an entire fiscal year; (4) in fiscal year 1964, 11 parts had not been promptly purchased due to the failure of commodity managers at ASO to initiate buy action at the time that requirements for parts became known; (5) although ASO had established an internal administrative procurement processing time of 1 to 5 months, this criteria was being significantly exceeded in some instances; (6) where repositioning action was indicted under automatic data processing (ADP) program criteria, commodity managers did not always act promptly to reposition stock; (7) the use of ADP equipment at ASO for repositioning purposes was limited to nonrepairable items; (8) in GAO's opinion the extension of the use of such equipment to repairable items would facilitate the timely repositioning of stock; (9) to preclude numerous redistributions of minor quantities, the ADP program at ASO provided for redistribution only if the amount of the supply that was excess to current needs could satisfy at least 80 percent of a requiring activity's needs; (10) the ADP program provided that redistribution would be limited to stock with a total value of $2,200 or less; (11) this criterion was instituted to guard against erroneously repositioning large quantities of high-value items, however, the value of a part may not be the best criterion for establishing such controls; (12) sufficient quantities of repairable parts were not being repaired in time to meet current needs; (13) reuseable items remained in unserviceable condition for longer periods of time than GAO considered reasonable; (14) shortages of serviceable stocks was not being promptly accomplished; and (15) GAO, therefore, believes that the timely repair of unserviceable stocks continues to be a factor contributing to F-4 aircraft being out of service.