Summary: GAO conducted a survey at the U.S. Army Forces Command and the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command to assess the practice of retaining and extensively repairing overage vehicles rather than buying new ones.
GAO found that continued cutbacks in the procurement of nontactical vehicles have caused the Army commands to adopt other, less economical means of keeping their nontactical fleets operating. Because the Army consistently bought fewer than half of the nontactical vehicles that it had determined were needed for 5 years, commands were forced to repair vehicles that exceeded their life expectancies and that could not be economically repaired. Prompt replacement of vehicles when they reach certain replacement criteria is cost effective because of lower maintenance costs, lower fuel consumption, and higher return from disposal sales. In addition, GAO found that major commands authorized their installations to compensate for the shortages by leasing vehicles without determining whether leasing was an economical alternative to procurement. In some cases, commands were forced to use tactical vehicles in nontactical roles, reportedly with adverse effects on both operating costs and combat readiness.
