Summary: GAO examined the Air Force's expenditures for aerospace ground equipment (AGE), focusing on whether there was a need for such equipment or whether less costly alternatives would satisfy Air Force requirements.
GAO noted that: (1) the cost of 9 of 88 special AGE items could have been substantially eliminated--$341,500 out of $343,600--if the Air Force had used maintenance procedures not requiring special AGE; (2) an additional $339,900 could have been saved on 23 items if the Air Force had considered the less costly alternative of manufacturing AGE in-house in lieu of procurement from the contractors; (3) thus, the cost of 32 of 88 items could have been reduced by $681,400; (4) further savings could have been realized if nine additional items had been standardized to perform common functions on several aircraft; (5) GAO concluded that procedures used in selecting and screening AGE needed strengthening, particularly the information used to determine what equipment is available to perform various maintenance functions; and (6) when it is necessary to acquire new AGE, the Air Force should consider local manufacture if it is a more economical method of satisfying its needs.
