The consolidation and forward positioning of critical inventories often provides substantial benefits over a geographically dispersed posture. Such benefits include, but are not limited to: increased inventory visibility, reduced transportation costs, and fewer manpower requirements. Presently, the United States Air Force (USAF) Civil Engineer (CE) community maintains a disseminated posture of equipment Unit Type Codes (UTCs), which regularly experiences inconsistencies in handling, tracking, and capability reporting. Provided the aforementioned discrepancies, this research effort examines several aspects surrounding the decision to potentially centralize critical CE inventories to either one or two locations. Specifically, the areas of cost, risk, and manpower are scrutinized to facilitate an objective decision by USAF CE senior leaders on whether or not to pursue an alternative equipment posture. Three scholarly articles are presented covering each area of interest and data supported recommendations are provided. The research offers insight concerning the decision of inventory consolidation as well as available methods to facilitate such a determination
