Which of the following represents indicators of potential MMR noncompliance?

• A. Regular maintenance of all equipment and routine safety drills.
• B. External audits are the sole determinant of noncompliance.
• C. Missing inventories, unapproved storage, improper labeling, and failed inspections.
• D. Immediate formal approvals are not required for minor deviations.

Answer: (C)

Indicators of potential noncompliance with the Military Munitions Rule show up as gaps in control and documentation rather than routine compliance activities. When inventories are missing, there’s no reliable record of what munitions exist or where they are, which creates opportunities for loss, theft, or improper use. Unapproved storage means items are kept outside the authorized, secure, and inspected spaces, increasing risk and violating approved procedures. Improper labeling leads to confusion, misidentification, and mistakes in handling, storage, and disposal. Failed inspections reveal that the program isn’t meeting required standards and has deficiencies that must be corrected. These concrete red flags point to actual or potential deviations from policy. By contrast, regular maintenance and safety drills reflect ongoing compliance, and relying on external audits as the sole determinant ignores internal control issues. A policy that allows not requiring formal approvals for minor deviations signals lax governance, which can breed noncompliance, but it’s a policy issue rather than a direct indicator on its own.