"Where's My Stuff?": examining the challenges of tracking foreign military sales material moving through the defense transportation system.

"Where's My Stuff?"

For centuries, operational commanders have demanded a response to that question from their logistics officers. Pinpointing an exact location of materiel shipments has only become possible in the last decade. Technological innovations have enabled commercial companies and transporters to identify carriers, containers, pallets, boxes and individual items in near real-time. The Defense Transportation System (DTS), however, lacks uniform shipment reporting and tracking methods. Advance notification of shipments does not always occur, and, for those shipments that DTS does track, there is no reliable reporting system to provide complete in-transit visibility to the foreign military sales customer. The international customers and the U.S. security assistance personnel in their countries are not much better off today in locating their DTS shipments than they were more than a decade ago. The good news is that an inter-service transportation working group is attempting to resolve many of the obstacles that impede foreign military sales shipments, and an enhanced freight tracking system is currently being tested.

The Defense Transportation System

The Defense Transportation System, managed by the U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM), consists of three elements:

* The Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC) operates military ports in both the continental United States (CONUS) and overseas (OCONUS).

* The Air Mobility Command (AMC) transports materiel and personnel around the world through organic and commercial contracted air carriers.

* The Military Sealift Command (MSC) transports materiel around the world through organic and contracted commercial surface ships.

These organizations are responsible for the movement of about 560 tons of freight per day, and they service seventy-five percent of the world's countries on a weekly basis. (1) Actual foreign military sales (FMS) shipments, however, comprise only about six percent of USTRANSCOM's annual business. (2) The FMS shipments that move overseas through DTS are identified by delivery term codes (DTC) 7 or 9 on the letter of offer and acceptance (LOA). It is for these overseas shipments that DTS lacks reliable in-transit visibility. To complicate the picture further, the limited data that does exist is not available to the FMS customer directly, but rather must be pulled from various DoD data systems by the security assistance office (SAO) or other U.S. representative in country.

The DoD prefers not to be involved in the movement of FMS material, and encourages customers to be self-sufficient in arranging for transportation from the point of origin to the final destination. (3) FMS customers are strongly encouraged to hire commercial freight forwarders to make these transportation arrangements for them. However, not all material can be moved through commercial channels and not all customers employ freight forwarders. The Defense Transportation System is the only alternative. The DTS is defined as any port or carrier, commercial or organic, which is under contract to the DoD.

Foreign military sales customers use the DTS for several reasons. Many countries lack the volume of shipments that make employing a commercial freight forwarder a cost-effective option. Other countries lack the financial resources to employ a commercial freight forwarder, since they must use national funds to do so. (4) Most arms, ammunition and explosives (AA&E) are prohibited by both transportation and security regulations from moving through commercial freight forwarders or commercial ports. (5) For this reason, countries use the DTS to move AA&E through a DoD-controlled port of embarkation to a port of discharge in their country or to a port of discharge in a nearby country, from which the customer can arrange onward transportation to the final destination. This arrangement is indicated by a delivery term code 9 on the LOA. Others use the DTS to move classified freight when their freight forwarder lacks the necessary security clearances. While many countries arrange to pick up their material at a CONUS port of embarkation using their own carriers, others lack these resources and expect delivery to their final destination. These "door-to-door" deliveries are indicated on the LOA by a DTC 7.

Total Asset Visibility

DoD's goal is for total asset visibility throughout the supply chain, beginning at the manufacturer's facility, through the distribution and transportation process, to receipt confirmation by the end-user. (6) Automated identification technology is the key to tracking the shipment, and is accomplished through a multi-layer process that includes linear and two-dimensional bar coding and passive and active radio frequency identification devices (RFID). Identification devices are affixed to the product, its package, its transport unit, and the containers and carriers in which the boxes are moved, as shown in Figure 1.

Reliable identification of shipping unit contents is essential for reliable global in-transit visibility. DoD defines in-transit visibility as the near-real-time capability to track logistic resources and transportation assets while they are mobile and underway. In 2004, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (AT&L) directed the use of active RFID technology on all consolidated shipments moving to, from, or between overseas locations via DoD-controlled ports. Radio frequency identification technology is a data input system that consists of a transponder, generally referred to as a tag; a tag reader, also known as an interrogator, that reads the tag using a radio signal; centralized data processing equipment; and a method of communication between the reader and the computer. The interrogator sends a signal to the tag, prompting the tag to respond. The battery-powered tag sends a signal to the interrogator with information about the container, pallet, or item to which it is attached. The information is forwarded to the central data processing equipment where it is stored and can be used to provide visibility over inventory items as they move throughout the supply chain. The DoD mandated 100 percent compliance of RFID on consolidated shipments by January 2007, but in June 2007 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that during a six-month period between 2006-2007, thirty-five percent of containers moving into Kuwait and Iraq could not be identified. (7) Some containers had no radio frequency tags while others had broken tags. Some tags had incorrect information and did not match the container contents.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

The success of global in-transit visibility depends not only on being able to accurately identify each shipment unit and the carrier in which it is moving, but also on being able to report this information to the customer. USTRANSCOM operates the Global Transportation Network (GTN), an in-transit visibility system that collects and distributes transportation information to DoD customers. The GTN receives input from a myriad of military departments' and agency-managed data systems (9), as well as unique reporting systems from participating contractors and commercial carriers. The reliability of the GTN data is dependent upon accurate input of data to the systems that feed GTN, and therein lays the problem. The GAO determined that many DoD ports lacked the information technology tools, or lacked trained personnel to report shipment receipts.

There are other reasons why these reporting Systems do not provide a complete picture of materiel pickups or deliveries. Shipments made from commercial vendors and through commercial ports are not required to have RFID tags at all, although many in CONUS do. Not all commercial carriers under contract to the DoD report their deliveries to their destination. This is particularly true of foreign carriers who move material from an OCONUS port to the next destination. As a result, FMS customers or their US representatives may be able to see that their DTC 7 shipment arrived at an overseas POD, such as Ramstein Air Base, but have no idea where it went after that. When DoD contracts with a commercial carrier to move material from a depot or contractor facility to a CONUS military or commercial port, the carrier will have a record of the delivery to that port which may be accessible through the carrier's web site. That delivery should be uploaded to a data system that feeds GTN. Routine, unclassified, non-hazardous FMS material shipments with DTC 7 and 9 often go through commercial ports rather than through a U.S. military port. The commercial port should report onward shipping information to a DoD system, but this process doesn't seem to be consistent. The information trail often ends at the CONUS port and the FMS customer or SAO has no idea if onward movement has been made, where the stuff is or when it will arrive in country.

Another complication with in-transit visibility is the length of time the transportation information is available in GTN. The GTN purges data 120 days after the last record is posted. (10) Commercial carriers, such as FEDEX, DHL and UPS delete delivery records from their web sites after 45 to 90 days, depending upon the carrier. An FMS customer who is unaware that an item has been shipped may not start questioning where the shipment is until the customer is billed for the item. The Defense Finance and Accounting Service sends billing statements to the customer only every 90 days. The record of the shipment's last known location may be unavailable by the time the SAO or FMS case manager assists the customer in looking for it.

Arms, ammunition and explosives, most very hazardous items and many classified items are required to transit through a DoD-controlled port. (11) The Defense Transportation Regulation (DTR) requires a Report of Shipment (REPSHIP) notification for such surface shipments from CONUS, and surface shipments from all overseas locations. (12) The regulation requires DoD shippers to use an automated means to transmit this notification to the U.S. military representative in the receiving country before DTC 7 and 9 shipments arrive. A REPSHIP must be sent to the consignee no later than two hours after a shipment's departure, and may be in the form of a message or a copy of the bill or lading. The notification is usually sent to the Type Address Code (TAC) 4 address in the Military Assistance Program Address Directory (MAPAD). If the TAC 4 address in the MAPAD is not that of the SAO, the SAO must make arrangements directly with the SDDC documentation division at Fort Eustis, Virginia, to be on distribution for these notifications, otherwise neither the SAO, nor the customer, will know that the classified, hazardous or AA&E shipment is coming. Sensitive and hazardous shipments have arrived in OCONUS DoD ports without available storage facilities and no instructions for making pickup arrangements.

Shipment of classified freight requires a written, approved transportation plan that details the ports and carriers to be used for movement, and identifies by name the designated government representatives authorized to transfer and accept the classified material for the U.S. and receiving government. (13) The transportation plan is required for shipments made through the DTS system as well as through commercial ports and carriers. The plan does not accompany each shipment, and is usually not provided to the SAO. Security regulations require advanced notification to the customer on classified shipments. Notices of Availability (NOA), however, are not sent when the classified shipment is moved through DoD ports and carriers because the DTR does not require NOAs for DTC 7 or 9 shipments. (14) As a result, SAOs and FMS customers have been unprepared to receive classified shipments that arrived in country without proper coordination.

Reports of shipment are not required for routine, non-hazardous surface shipments, and there is no requirement in the DTR to provide advance shipment notification to the customer or SAO for air shipments of any type of cargo. As a result, FMS shipments on DTC 9 frequently show up at commercial and DoD ports without any coordination with the SAO or customer to arrange for pickup. Shipments on DTC 7 may show up at the final destination when the customer is not prepared to receive them.

The SDDC is responsible for military port operations, to include materiel containerization and shipment documentation. However, the Defense Logistics Agency is responsible for individual supply item documentation and consolidation at the distribution depot. Customers are electronically notified of initial item shipment through the supply system, which provides the customer with a transportation control number (TCN) against which the item is shipped. Tracking and visibility become an issue because TCNs change as cargo moves between the vendor, a consolidation point and the final destination. Depending on the size and priority of the shipment, many items are consolidated into a larger shipping container for onward movement. Consolidation means repacking multiple supply units and individual requisitions into a single multi-pack, tri-wall container or pallet. The consolidated shipment unit is tracked by a single transportation control number, which should cross-reference to each individual supply requisition inside. If each supply item's information is entered accurately into a tracking system, the customer should be able to identify the location of the individual item of supply by querying the requisition document number.

For security assistance customers, shipments should be consolidated based on the purchaser's service and in-country destination (the Mark For code). The consolidated shipment unit must also have on the outside of the container documentation of each item packed inside to permit customs clearance at both ends. However, FMS shipments have occasionally been frustrated by mixing customer countries and destinations in the same consolidated shipment unit, or missing documentation. Thus, FMS shipments bound for one country end up in another, freight intended for a customer's Navy ends up at an Army installation, and freight arriving without paperwork cannot clear customs.

Resources for Finding Shipments

In an effort to assist FMS customers and SAOs, DISAM conducted a study of shipment tracking resources and procedures. The informal study was based on complaints DISAM received from customers and SAOs concerning lack of notification of DTC 9 and 7 shipments. The countries that reported problems included Colombia, Croatia, Djibouti, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lithuania, Netherlands, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, Senegal, Sweden, and the Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq (MNSTC-I). DISAM identified 112 individual shipments (15) made to many of these countries between May 2006 and August 2007 with DTCs of 7 or 9, and attempted to track their movement.

DISAM determined that there are no in-transit visibility data systems accessible to the FMS customer. The Global Transportation Network and the systems that feed it are blocked to non-DoD users. Most require passwords and/or CAC certificates. Many security assistance offices may be able to access these systems, but only if they use a .mil network. The SAOs who work off Department of State networks are also unable to access these systems.

Initial shipment notification to the customer may not occur if the FMS customer is not receiving electronic status updates via the Defense Automatic Addressing System Center's (DAASC) International Logistics Communications System (ILCS). FMS customers who subscribe to ILCS receive an electronic shipping notification, usually identified by an AS1 or AS2 document, and a TCN. The customer should then be able to track the shipment by either the document number or the TCN. If the total supply requisition has been broken down into more than one shipment, each shipment will have a different TCN. A query by document number should reveal all the applicable TCNs for that requisition. If only one shipment is of concern, a query by TCN should provide status on that particular shipment unit. FMS customers who do not have an electronic interface with DAASC do not get this shipment notification from the supply system. Their only source of shipment information is the Security Cooperation Information Portal (SCIP).

The Security Cooperation Information Portal (SCIP), developed and managed by the DSCA, is a window into the military departments' logistics management systems for international programs. The latest supply status resident in these legacy systems is visible to the user. FMS customers who use SCIP can view a list of active requisitions against their various LOAs, and if the item has shipped, the TCN will be indicated, as shown in Figure 2. (16) This is not true, however, for active requisitions against U.S. Air Force LOAs, because the USAF's SAMIS system does not reflect shipping details. Consequently, a query of active Air Force requisitions in SCIP provides no TCNs even if the item has shipped. The SCIP doesn't have the capability to "drill down" through the TCN to determine shipment status. To accomplish this, the user must query yet another data system. For Air Force cases, the user must further query each individual active requisition to determine if a BA status (pending shipment status) is recorded. If so, the customer could potentially query another data system by document number to determine shipment status. Customers who use SCIP for determining the TCN should be aware that SCIP truncates the TCN in the on-screen display, generally dropping the first character. Since the TCN usually consists of the FMS document number followed by two additional characters representing shipping increments, users should query by document number, not by the TCN shown in SCIP, to ensure accurate input. Such a query will provide the user with all available shipment status against that document number.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Once it was determined that an item had shipped, the next step was finding out where it went. One useful system, managed by the Defense Logistics Agency, is the Distribution Standard System (DSS) requisition tracking system. The site provides supply transaction history of shipments made through DLA, not in-transit visibility. This is the only system that is available to both DoD and FMS customers without a login, password or CAC certificate. The web site is ogden.disa.mil/mrostatus. A document number query will provide a list of applicable TCNs, and display the date, time, and name of the carrier to whom it was released from the supply depot. It also includes the carrier's tracking number. The carrier's tracking number may be hot-linked to the carrier's web site, which then provides delivery information to the next destination.

When the shipment leaves the supply depot, its departure is reported via the DAASC and should be reflected in an in-transit visibility reporting system. The same is true when a shipment comes from a contractor facility. The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) arranges for DTS transportation from the vendor, and this movement should be captured in an in-transit visibility system. Of all the requisitions examined in DSS, about 62 percent did not provide status to indicate if or when the item had been delivered to the next destination by the carrier. In some cases, there was no link to the carrier's tracking system, and in others, the carrier had already deleted the record of delivery. Two additional tracking systems, The Global Transportation Network (GTN) and Tracker, were queried, and in both cases, the record of shipment ended with the initial pickup of the shipment at the depot or vendor's facility.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

The next destination is typically either a CONUS DoD-controlled port or a commercial port. At this point, the shipment may be further consolidated and containerized for overseas movement by another carrier. A new TCN is usually created and an active RFID tag should be applied to this container identifying the contents. The information about the contents, the carrier, the origin and the destination should be available in an in-transit visibility reporting system. USTRANSCOM's comprehensive Global Transportation Network, https://www.gtn.transcom.mil/index.jsp, is only accessible from a .mil network, and requires advanced registration with USTRANSCOM. When the shipment data is current, that is, within 120 days, some delivery information may be available to the SAO. Queries for FMS materiel in GTN are best made by document number or TCN, without date or location constraints, requesting last known status. This query provides the widest output of available information. All 112 shipments were queried in GTN. The GTN returned only twelve records, but with the same information as that reported by Tracker.

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

Tracker is a web-based system managed by the Air Force Materiel Command. Tracker, at https:// tracker.wpafb.af.mil/ can only be accessed with a CAC card from a .mil site, but does not require a user account. Tracker retains data for ten years. An FMS case manager or SAO can query Tracker by requisition document number, TCN, commercial tracking number or bill of lading number.

[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]

Tracker intercepts copies of transactions that are transmitted between computer systems used to acquire, store, repair and move assets for the U.S. Air Force. Additionally, Tracker pulls useful data from other data warehouses, so the system is useful for locating FMS shipments initiated by the Army, Navy or DLA. Tracker is not one of the systems that feed GTN.

There were 110 shipments with a record in Tracker, but there was a wide range of data available within those records. Sixty-seven shipments were released by the supply depot or contractor to a carrier, with no subsequent delivery information. Twenty-eight shipments were reported as having been delivered by the carrier to a CONUS port, but showed no onward transportation information. Four shipments with delivery term codes of 7 had a record of arrival at the OCONUS port of debarkation, but no information of onward movement from the overseas port to the final destination. Of the 112 FMS shipments initially tracked in this study, only eleven could be tracked to their final destination in an in-transit visibility system.

The research concluded that the FMS customer and the SAO have two difficult issues to wrestle with:

* First, there is no reliable notification system of shipments arriving either at the final destination or to an overseas port from which the customer must arrange onward transportation.

* Second, once the supply system provides initial shipment notification, total asset visibility data is generally incomplete to permit the customer or the SAO to determine where the shipment might be in transit. (17)

Of the two tracking systems available to the SAO, only Tracker retains data longer than four months after the last recorded transaction against a particular document number.

The Inter-service Transportation Working Group

An Inter-service Transportation Working Group (ISTWG) has been meeting quarterly for nearly three years to address transportation issues. The group members include the transportation coordinators from the three military departments' International Logistics Control Offices (the U.S. Army Security Assistance Command), the Navy Inventory Control Point-OF, the Air Force Security Assistance Center), DSCA, and representatives from various ports under the control of USTRANSCOM.

The ISTWG has been successful in resolving many problems with FMS shipments clearing U.S. Customs, and is now focusing on the DTS shipment notification process. The ISTWG has proposed several changes to how FMS material will be shipped and notified in the future, and the group has identified the numerous DoD and service publications that must be updated to reflect the process changes. Changes to notification procedures at U.S. military ports will be implemented first. The ISTWG proposes that no routine FMS cargo should be shipped via a DTS air terminal. No classified and sensitive cargo will be released to an OCONUS port until the port acknowledges that coordination has been made to receive the material, and onward transportation arrangements have been coordinated as necessary. The ISTWG, however, has no influence over the in-transit visibility issue, and one can only assume that as DoD improves the ITV reporting procedures for its own shipments that the trickle-down effect will be an improvement to tracking FMS shipments as well.

The Enhanced Freight Tracking System

In 2003, the GAO identified the lack of movement and receipt confirmation as a major flaw in the FMS process. (18) Without adequate in-transit visibility, the only way for the DoD to know that the FMS customer has actually received a shipment of materiel, is for the FMS customer or SAO to send a report back to the FMS case manager. Currently several SAOs are doing exactly that, sending periodic spreadsheets of closed document numbers back to the implementing agency to close the loop on shipments. This manual effort should become unnecessary as ITV improves.

In the future, tracking FMS shipments will be accomplished through the Enhanced Freight Tracking System (EFTS), now being tested in a pilot program. The system, which will be accessible to FMS customers and SAOs through the SCIP, intends to pull and store shipment data daily from GTN so that it is accessible to SCIP users even after USTRANSCOM purges it from the GTN database.

Additionally, participating freight forwarders will report receipts of FMS material through a data transfer to the EFTS. When the FMS customer employs a freight forwarder, the current DoD tracking process ends upon delivery of the shipment to the freight forwarder. It becomes the freight forwarder's responsibility to arrange onward transportation. There is no requirement for the freight forwarder to report onward movement back to the DoD, nor is there any requirement for the customer to report receipt at final destination. International customers understand that a freight tracking program would reduce missing shipment claims. With EFTS, freight forwarders would report receipts of material received from the DoD supply centers and contractors, as well as material returns coming from the FMS customer, and report onward movement. In the future, an application should be available for customers and/or SAOs to report deliveries in country.

The EFTS is now being tested by Germany, Israel, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Finland and Egypt. Full production of EFTS is expected to start in early 2008. Freight forwarder participation isn't mandatory, and each has a contract with their associated country, so it takes some political coordination to get them involved. However, as more countries recognize the benefits of freight tracking, more freight forwarders are expected to participate. For the customers who do not employ a freight forwarder, or for those shipments that must go via DTS, accessibility to GTN data via SCIP will provide FMS customers and SAOs with a better picture of material shipments than they have access to today.

Acknowledgements

The following individuals and organizations were consulted in the research for this article:

* Gene Chambers, Robert Loviska, David Blackford and Lieutenant Colonel Amy Pappas--USTRANSCOM

* George Verghis and Ken Kittredge--NAVICP

* Diana Altoft--NAVAIR/GDT

* Mark Minch--DAASC

* Orris Groenenboom--USASAC

* Tom Sippel--DSADC/SCIP

* Vernita Anderson-Manning--SDDC

* John Rhodes--AFMC Tracker

* Major Ted Davis--DISAM

(1.) 2007 USTRANSCOM mission video at: www.USTRANSCOM.mil.

(2.) Source: USTRANSCOM TCJ5/4.

(3.) Security Assistance Management Manual C5.F3, Letter of Offer and Acceptance Standard Terms and Conditions Section 5.1.

(4.) Arms Export Control Act, Section 23.

(5.) DoD 4500.9-R, Defense Transportation Regulation, Vol. II, Cargo Movement, Appendix E, and DoD 5100.76-M, Physical Security of Sensitive Arms, Ammunition, and Explosives.

(6.) Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Policy, 2 October 2003.

(7.) GAO Report 07-807, Defense Logistics, June 2007.

(8.) Graphic courtesy of USTRANSCOM J5/4.

(9.) E.g. Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Contract Management Agency, and the General Services Administration.

(10.) Source: USTRANSCOM J6.

(11.) When the FMS customer employs a freight forwarder, the company must have a facility clearance from the Defense Security Services in order to handle classified freight.

(12.) DoD 4500.9-R, Defense Transportation Regulation, Vol. II, Cargo Movement, Chapters 204 and 205.

(13.) DoD 5105.38-M, Security Assistance Management Manual, C.7.16.

(14.) DoD 4500.9-R, Defense Transportation Regulation, Vol. II, Cargo Movement, Appendix E, Para F.3. and DoD 5105.38-M, Security Assistance Management Manual, C.7.7.

(15.) A total of 49 supply requisitions resulted in multiple shipments having separate transportation control numbers.

(16.) Country designators have been modified to protect the identity of the FMS customer.

(17.) GTN permits a query format to be saved for repeated use. A query of multiple document numbers can be submitted on-line for an overnight run, with output to an e-mail account. Tracker users can submit a list of document numbers to the Tracker program office at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio and receive an e-mail status report. Contact the Tracker PMO at [phone] for customized queries.

(18.) GAO Report 03-599, Foreign Military Sales, June 2003.

Joanne Hawkins is an Associate Professor and has been teaching at the Defense Institute of Security Assistance Management (DISAM) since 1992. She is a retired Army logistician. She is the coordinator for logistics instruction at DISAM and developed the Logistics/Customer Support Course (SAM-CS). She also instructs in international programs security, FMS process, finance, legislation and foreign policy. She holds a Master of Education degree from Campbell University, North Carolina and a Master of Science degree in Administration from Central Michigan University.