<mods xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.3" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-3.xsd" ID="P0b002ee180383df7">
<name type="corporate">
 <namePart>United States Government Publishing Office</namePart>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">publisher</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">pbl</roleTerm>
</role>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">distributor</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">dst</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="corporate">
 <namePart>United States</namePart>
 <namePart>Government Accountability Office</namePart>
 <namePart>National Security and International Affairs Division</namePart>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">aut</roleTerm>
</role>
 <description>Government Organization</description>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre authority="marcgt">government publication</genre>
<language>
 <languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</language>
<extension>
 <collectionCode>GAOREPORTS</collectionCode>
 <category>Legislative Agency Publications</category>
 <waisDatabaseName>gao</waisDatabaseName>
 <branch>legislative</branch>
 <dateIngested>2010-08-12</dateIngested>
</extension>
<originInfo>
 <publisher>U.S. Government Printing Office</publisher>
 <dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1997-10-02</dateIssued>
 <issuance>monographic</issuance>
</originInfo>
<physicalDescription>
 <note type="source content type">deposited</note>
 <digitalOrigin>born digital</digitalOrigin>
 <extent>34 p.</extent>
</physicalDescription>
<classification authority="sudocs">GA 1.13:NSIAD-98-7</classification>
<identifier type="uri">https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-98-7</identifier>
<identifier type="local">P0b002ee180383df7</identifier>
<identifier type="former package identifier">f:ns98007</identifier>
<recordInfo>
 <recordContentSource authority="marcorg">DGPO</recordContentSource>
 <recordCreationDate encoding="w3cdtf">2010-08-12</recordCreationDate>
 <recordChangeDate encoding="w3cdtf">2011-03-23</recordChangeDate>
 <recordIdentifier source="DGPO">GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-98-7</recordIdentifier>
 <recordOrigin>machine generated</recordOrigin>
 <languageOfCataloging>
  <languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</languageOfCataloging>
</recordInfo>
<accessCondition type="GPO scope determination">fdlp</accessCondition>
<extension>
 <docClass>REPORT</docClass>
 <accessId>GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-98-7</accessId>
 <reportNumber>NSIAD-98-7</reportNumber>
 <subject>Inventory control systems</subject>
 <subject>Aircraft components</subject>
 <subject>Military materiel</subject>
 <subject>Military inventories</subject>
 <subject>Surplus federal property</subject>
 <subject>Defense conversion</subject>
 <subject>Military cost control</subject>
 <subject>Property disposal</subject>
 <type>Letter Report</type>
 <seriesAbbrev>NSIAD</seriesAbbrev>
 <USCode title="40">
                      <section number="471-486"></section>
                </USCode>
</extension>
<titleInfo>
 <title>Defense Inventory: Management of Surplus Usable Aircraft Parts Can Be Improved</title>
</titleInfo>
<abstract>Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed selected aspects of
the Department of Defense&apos;s (DOD) disposal process, focusing on whether:
(1) DOD destroyed usable aircraft parts during the disposal process that
did not have military technology and flight safety implications; and (2)
the military services recalled aircraft parts from the disposal process
to preclude unnecessary purchases or repairs.&lt;p/&gt;GAO noted that: (1) management of the aircraft parts disposal process
can be improved; (2) DOD destroyed some usable aircraft parts and sold
them as scrap; (3) these parts were in new or repairable condition and
did not have military technology or flight safety implications; (4) the
parts could possibly have been sold intact at higher than scrap prices;
(5) this situation occurred for several reasons; (6) for example,
disposal offices destroyed parts because the demilitarization codes the
military services had assigned to the parts were inaccurate; (7) the
codes indicated the parts contained military technology when they did
not; (8) GAO work showed that the Oklahoma city disposal office
destroyed 62 of 71 sample items, even though they did not have
technology implications, because the assigned codes required their
destruction; (9) personnel responsible for assigning and reviewing the
codes had not been sufficiently trained and guidance was not adequate;
(10) in addition, policies and practices designed to prevent the
inadvertent or unauthorized release of parts with military technology
and flight safety implications did not distinguish between parts with or
without such implications; (11) parts without military technology and
flight safety concerns were destroyed along with parts that had these
characteristics; (12) GAO work also showed that DOD could have purchased
or repaired fewer aircraft parts if it would have recalled the needed
parts from the disposal process; (13) for example, the Army could have
reduced current and planned purchases by about $200,000 by using Cobra
helicopter parts scheduled for destruction; (14) DOD regulations require
the military services to know which parts they have placed in the
disposal process; (15) however, interface problems between service and
disposal office computer systems precluded the services from knowing
what parts were at the disposal offices; (16) the military services had
not instituted alternative ways to obtain this information on routine
basis; (17) problems with the disposal process are likely not unique to
the three disposal yards GAO visited because DOD, military service, and
Defense Logistics Agency policies and procedures generally apply to
activities being performed at all locations; and (18) GAO past reviews
and DOD internal studies have identified similar problems at these and
other locations over the past 10 years or earlier.</abstract>
<location>
 <url displayLabel="HTML rendition" access="raw object">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-98-7/html/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-98-7.htm</url>
 <url displayLabel="PDF rendition" access="raw object">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-98-7/pdf/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-98-7.pdf</url>
</location>
<identifier type="preferred citation">GAO/NSIAD-98-7</identifier>
<location>
 <url displayLabel="Content Detail" access="object in context">https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-98-7</url>
</location>
<note>Letter Report</note>
<extension>
 <searchTitle>GAO/NSIAD-98-7; Defense Inventory: Management of Surplus Usable Aircraft Parts Can Be Improved;
            </searchTitle>
</extension>
<subject>
 <topic>Inventory control systems</topic>
 <topic>Aircraft components</topic>
 <topic>Military materiel</topic>
 <topic>Military inventories</topic>
 <topic>Surplus federal property</topic>
 <topic>Defense conversion</topic>
 <topic>Military cost control</topic>
 <topic>Property disposal</topic>
</subject>
<relatedItem type="isReferencedBy">
 <titleInfo>
  <title>United States Code</title>
  <partNumber>Title 40 Section 471-486</partNumber>
</titleInfo>
 <identifier type="USC citation">40 U.S.C. 471-486</identifier>
</relatedItem>
</mods>