Webelievesigniffeantpedactioas in sbippiag mdhmdk&( cask? can be made by Amp.ro~&~ identLfic&.fs ami'scre~ pmcedmws ovw- ‘. i: seas in order to redmethe amount of retumedm&erlel.th&fs subject -._ --. to disposal. We are bring- these mtters to pmr attention at this time because of the continuing and increasfng mte at which US, mil3my forcesarebeingtithdrawnfkcmtheBcific area. It is logicaJ.to expectincreasingammtsofretrogmdem&zriel.tobegenerated, so we believe pmp': action is required to correct deficiemles M&h exist in the cment progm. , The voluneofmatexlelbeing relxrnedtithe Bcificto the west coast has increased steadily frozn a low of 35,000 measurement ._ . . tonsinfisc~year1~5~125,ooO~~~~~ttonspernonth~ thefirsthalfof fisc&tye&rZL~O. Upn~~~ivsl~nuchofthi~~~~.t+ rielwas classifiedssunse.rviceable mdmecomnicalto repair and was salt to dispcsal. . c -_ 50 TH Aff MVERSARY 1921- 1971 - --.-.. . . ’ : 4 --=--. \ . - \ ._ -. as well. as WI azlheaffion for olrfiszheaa. . Hmm, the costs for p-oc@SW at the poYt, t1psrra~Ytatfont to t&t pod of ezltzy, and iitlamd fax&mportatiOR to f3llaYp are Rot inelM. At !lhele Amsy Depot, 4,247 tons of IZ&ZYM. with a recordecl cost of $5e7 d.l.Zon were relxumd 33xa the R3&f%c area during fUa0. year 1970 and erubmly sell! to dispoti. lI3fx& th@ first qe of f3ercalyear lg?l, Tooele received l&59 major items--primuSy --. tracks, tzsdlers and lxactors--mch were late3 cliassified a6 umer- .-. ticeable and uneco&cal to repate aala therefore t2onaue - - We were told by an official at Tooele that, because of differ- em98 in 3?qar m, many itcsms cl&ssuled as le in the RacxLfic are de42zabed to be unecon~cal. to zqxxLr by Taoele. ItifYerencesbetweenthe est%m&drep&rcosts shownonthe Ewific reco~& and those shown on the Tooele records se&m to us 3~ be t3igdfhant. Based OR our coqarison of these records and discus- &ms t&h Tooele officials, it apars that the inqectors in the Faciflc base their estimates on the cost of rem the item to a seticeab3.e condition, while inspectors at Tkmele base their est3mates on rem the ita to a Eke-new condit5on as required by the -. re@ations and instructions f&m inmtim control polats. ._ &-zzv@es: --Aflel.dinspe&or esGnateditwotidcost$2,~, including return tranqortation, to repair a 2-l/2 ton refuse truck, and it -was returned to Tooele. At Tooele it was esidmated that it would cost $5,785 to repa3x. !Kbis exceeded the e&ho- rizedrepa%r costandt&etruckwas sentto diSpO6CiL. \ --A field inspector estimated it would cost $I.,775 to rep?& a 242 ton cargo truck, incbMi.ng txumm portation cost. At Tooele it was de&mined that the repair cost would be $5,550 and the truck was sent to disposal. -2- . L We retiewed 698 major items, involv3ng 48 different Federal Stock l3umberstithaP1acqtisitioncost ofappr7x&ately $4million, that had been classified as uneconomical to repair when received at Tooele. We were unable to determine the trsnsportation cost fkcm the Pacific area to the west coast, but the transpo~tion cost fmm the west cow& to Tooele amounted to about $ll4,000 for these items. We traced 2% of the 693 items to the property disposal office and found that 149 of the items with an acquisition cost to- $86,lSS had been sold for $6,210. The freight cost to transport these 149 items fron the west roast toTooele~Depotwas$l3,321. During our visit toAnnistonAzmyDepot,we dif3coveredthatahout go0 tons of materiel were received from the RBccific area during f5scal yew 19‘70, classified ens "unserviceable - uneconum%c&lly reparable" 8ndwere sentto disposal. Tothe extentthb volmeofunecontic~ reparable materiel shipped back to the United States"can be reduced, substantIa1 costs c&n be maided. RETUREOF IOW-COSTXTENSF#T ECOXOMICALTo REPAW The Army Materiel CommandRetrograde DistributJlon Hle, together with instructions from commodiw commands, mthorizes the autom&ic disposal overseas of certain' lot? value items. +%st items tith a value of $20 or less, regardless of semiceabiiity, are authorized to be sent directly to dispos81. We found that substantial quantities of materiel authorized for automatic disposal are being needlessly returned to mainland Army depots. During fiscal year 1970, 7 percent of all retrograde tonnage processed at Sharpe Army Depot w&s sent directly to disposal because the items were determined to be either obsolete, of insufficient value to warrant identification effort, or did not meet minimum line item value Units established by inventory controlpofnts. The same was true for 676 tons (valued at $63 tillion) of mkeriel received at Tooele during the sane period. These items could have been processed directly to disposel overseas, thereby avoiding the trans- portation and handling costs involved in stipping them back to the United States. \ . “3) B-173440 CROSS-SRII OF ITR.WSTQ AK9 FRG4 THE PACIF'IC DurZng fiscal year 1970, 12,000 tons of serviceable mterfel valued at about $34.7 million were rece%ved at Tooele Army &pot from the Pacific area, and materiel valued at $45.3 million was shipped to the Pacific area. We asked the data systems personnel at TooeLs to provfde us with a listing showing the details on stock numbers having both receipts and issues for the FWific area. The list showed that 46,943 of 66,812 stock numbers had both receipts and issues dur%ng fiscal year 1970. Approximtely 847,000 serviceshle units mlued at $5 mK!Xon were received, and over 2 million like items. valued St $13 million were issued. We believe this volume of cross-shipezents indicates that the screening of requirements against returns overseas was not fully effective. We understand that the screening required since October 1, 190, under new Drocedures of the Pacffic Utilization and Redistribution Agency will minimize such cross-shiments. We h8Ve discussed these matters with officitis in the office of the .Qz's Depl;ty Cl;ief of St& ef for Logistics, and they have con- curred with our observations. In order to realize the significant savings we believe are possible, we recommend that: --The criteria for determining the economic repairability of equipment be clarified so that inspectors in the 0. Pig3 > Pacific Ccmnnanddo not base their decisions on the cost of returning items to serviceable ccndition while inspec- tors at depots in the United States base their decisions on the cost of returning the items to like-new condition. --The necessity for closer screening of low-value materiel be emphasized to overseas commands in order to avoid the uneconomic return of items which are authorized to 'be sent directly to property disposal. -4- . l I
Examination Into the Return of Materiel From the Pacific Area to the United States--Principally to the Anniston, Sharpe and Tooele Army Depots
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1971-07-29.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)