Contractual Component Repair Policy: A Key to Improving Depot Responsiveness

Contractual depot4evel maintenance rnvolves the repair of recoverable spares, engine repair and overhaul, and programmed maintenance of weapon systems by private companies. As recently as 1992, OSD estimated that the Air Force spent $1.2 billion of its total $3.7 billion for depot-level maintenance...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chenoweth, Mary E, Abell, John B
Format: Report
Language:English
Subjects:
Administration and Management
AIR FORCE
AVIONICS
COMPUTER PROGRAMMING
CONTRACTORS
ENGINES
ENVIRONMENTS
FLOW
HYPOTHESES
LOGISTICS
Logistics, Military Facilities and Supplies
MAINTENANCE
METHODOLOGY
ORGANIZATIONS
POLICIES
REPAIR
RESPONSE
SUPPLY DEPOTS
VARIABLES
WEAPON SYSTEMS
Online Access:Request full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Contractual depot4evel maintenance rnvolves the repair of recoverable spares, engine repair and overhaul, and programmed maintenance of weapon systems by private companies. As recently as 1992, OSD estimated that the Air Force spent $1.2 billion of its total $3.7 billion for depot-level maintenance in the private sector (Kingsbury, 1992). Today the Air Force spends about 40 percent of its depot4evel budget on contractor support.1 This report documents an initial examination of the responsiveness of contractual repair of depot-level recoverables, in particular avionics components managed by the Ogden Air Logistics Center (ALC).2 Short repair cycle times help enhance depot repair responsiveness in two ways: by reducing the investment required by the Air Force to maintain a given level of support and by enabling logistics organizations to respond more readily to urgent, unanticipated demands. Although this research originally intended to explore the feasibility of extending a methodology to set repair and distribution priorities, called Distribution and Repair in Variable Environments (DRIVE) to contractual repair, it quickly became clear that prioritization alone would not achieve reasonable levels of responsiveness. Other, more fundamental problems would need to be addressed. As a result, this report: * Outlines the major steps involved in managing and executing contractual component repair * Assesses contractual repair responsiveness in terms of repair flow times for a select group of components * Suggests directions that the Air Force might take and hypotheses that it might evaluate that promise enhanced contractual repair responsiveness.