GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

May 13, 2013

Congressional Committees

Subject: Defense Logistics: The Department of Defense’s Report on Strategic Seaports 

Addressed All Congressionally Directed Elements

Sealift is the primary means of deploying and sustaining the combat power required in major 

ground operations, typically accounting for upwards of 90 percent of all military cargo, and 

U.S. strategic seaports play an important role in ensuring that the U.S. military is able to 

quickly and efficiently deploy to address the country’s overseas interests. The strategic 

seaport program—administered jointly by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the 

Department of Transportation (DOT)—facilitates the movement of deploying military forces 

through the 17 commercial and 5 military seaports designated as strategic seaports. These 

ports serve as significant transportation hubs and are important to DOD’s readiness and 

cargo handling capacity.

Over the past several years Congress has directed that a number of studies be conducted 

to ensure the readiness of the strategic seaports. Most recently, in the conference report 

accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, Congress 

directed DOD to provide an updated report on strategic seaport facilities used for military 

purposes, specifying that DOD must include (1) an assessment of the structural integrity and 

deficiencies of the port facilities and determination of the infrastructure improvements 

needed to directly or indirectly meet national security and readiness requirements; (2) an 

assessment of the impact on operational readiness if the improvements are not undertaken; 

(3) an identification of potential funding sources for the needed improvements from existing 

authorities; and (4) an opinion as to whether DOD has the necessary authority to support 

section 50302 of Title 46 of the United States Code.1 DOD issued that report in January 

2013. 

Both the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 20132 and the Coast Guard and 

Maritime Transportation Act of 20123

 

1 Section 50302 of Title 46 of the U.S. Code states that the Secretary of Transportation, in cooperation with the 

Secretary of the Army, shall take a number of actions with regard to ports with the objective of promoting, 

encouraging, and developing ports and transportation facilities in connection with water commerce.

required us to conduct a sufficiency review of DOD’s 

report, and to report our findings to Congress within 90 days of receiving DOD’s strategic 

seaports report. DOD’s report was provided to Congress on January 7, 2013, and GAO 

received the report on January 9, 2013. To conduct our review, we assessed the extent to 

2 Pub. L. No. 112-239, § 333 (2013). 3 Pub. L. No. 112-213, § 413 (2012).
 GAO-13-511RSU Defense Logistics

 

Page 2

which DOD’s report included each of the four elements directed by Congress. To fulfill the 

mandate, in April 2013 we provided a briefing and the draft report to the congressional 

defense committees on the results of our work. This report transmits the information

provided at that time. See enclosure I for the briefing slides that contain information on the 

results of our work.

To conduct this work, two GAO analysts independently assessed DOD’s report to determine 

whether it contained the four congressionally directed elements. The analysts agreed on all 

four elements, and therefore it was not necessary for a third analyst to resolve any 

differences. Additionally, we reviewed previous DOD reports on strategic seaports and other 

documents relevant to the strategic seaports program. We also interviewed officials from 

DOD’s Transportation Command as well as officials from the Department of Transportation, 

including officials from the Maritime Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration, and 

the Federal Highway Administration, to obtain further information about the program and 

clarify aspects of the report. We conducted this performance audit from February 2013 

through May 2013 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate 

evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 

objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

In summary, we found that DOD addressed all four of the elements directed by Congress, 

as follows:

• First, DOD provided a detailed assessment of the structural integrity and deficiencies 

of the port facilities and the infrastructure improvements needed to meet national 

security requirements, providing both an explanation of its assessment and 

supporting data in its response. The report rated 15 of the 22 strategic seaports as 

having minor deficiencies, with negligible impact; 4 as having some deficiencies, with 

limited impact; 1 as having significant deficiencies that impair the capability to 

support required missions; and 2 as having major deficiencies presenting significant 

obstacles to mission accomplishment. We found some areas where the report could 

have been more explicit, such as citing the sources of cost estimates for port 

improvement projects and defining “national security and readiness requirements.” 

We also note that the report relied on self-reported information from the ports. DOD 

officials told us that they believe the information is reliable because it is in the ports’

interests to correct any deficiencies in order to support their commercial activities, 

and because DOD conducts periodic visits that serve as a visual check of port 

infrastructure conditions. 

• Second, DOD included an assessment of the impact on operational readiness if the 

improvements were not undertaken. The report noted that available alternatives to 

strategic ports include alternate seaports. 

• Third, DOD included an identification of potential funding sources for the needed 

improvements from existing authorities. The report identified and discussed six 

primary sources of capital for U.S. commercial ports, and noted that military ports 

rely on military construction appropriations for large projects. 

• Finally, the report included an opinion as to whether DOD has the necessary 

authority to support section 50302 of Title 46 of the United States Code. The report 

stated that DOD has the necessary authority, but also recommended that Congress 

consider amending the law to allow U.S. Transportation Command to coordinate 

directly with the Secretary of Transportation on port development issues.
 GAO-13-511RSU Defense Logistics

 

Page 3

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We provided a copy of a draft of this report, including the briefing slides, to DOD and DOT 

for comment. DOD concurred with our report; DOD’s comments are reproduced in enclosure 

II. DOT had no comment.

- - - - - 

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees and to the 

Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Transportation; the Commander, United States 

Transportation Command; the Secretary of the Army; and the Administrator, Maritime 

Administration. The report is also available at no charge on the GAO website at 

http://www.gao.gov. 

Should you or your staff have questions concerning this report, please contact me at (202) 

512-5257 or merrittz@gao.gov. Contact points for our offices of Congressional Relations 

and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key 

contributions to this report are Marilyn Wasleski, Assistant Director; Simon Hirschfeld; Kevin 

Keith; Michael Silver; Cheryl Weissman; Michael Willems; and Edwin Yuen.

Zina D. Merritt

Director

Defense Capabilities and Management

Enclosures – 2 
Page 4 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

List of Committees

The Honorable Carl Levin

Chairman

The Honorable James Inhofe

Ranking Member

Committee on Armed Services

United States Senate

The Honorable Dick Durbin

Chairman

The Honorable Thad Cochran

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Defense 

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable Tim Johnson

Chairman

The Honorable Mark Kirk

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies 

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable Howard P. “Buck” McKeon

Chairman

The Honorable Adam Smith

Ranking Member

Committee on Armed Services

House of Representatives

The Honorable C.W. Bill Young

Chairman

The Honorable Pete Visclosky

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Defense

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

The Honorable John Culberson

Chairman

The Honorable Sanford Bishop, Jr.

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies 

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 5 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Defense Logistics: The Department of Defense’s 

Report on Strategic Seaports Addressed All 

Congressionally Directed Elements

Briefing for Congressional Committees

Page 1
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 6 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Table of Contents

• Background

• Objective

• Scope and Methodology

• Summary

• Report Element 1: Structural integrity of seaports and 

determination of needed improvements

• Report Element 2: Operational readiness impact if needed 

improvements are not made

• Report Element 3: Potential funding sources for needed 

improvements

• Report Element 4: DOD’s authority to support section 

50302 of Title 46 USC

Page 2
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 7 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Background

• The strategic seaport program was established to facilitate the 

movement of deploying military forces through designated U.S. 

commercial and military seaports while minimizing disruption to 

commercial activities. For the purposes of this briefing, the strategic 

seaports are ports designated by the Secretary of Defense as 

significant transportation hubs important to the readiness and cargo 

handling capacity of the Department of Defense (DOD).1

• U.S. forces in the United States often deploy through seaports to 

respond to conflicts overseas. Also, in major ground operations more 

than 90 percent of U.S. warfighters' equipment and supplies (tanks, 

helicopters, trucks, etc.) travels by sea. Currently 22 strategic seaports 

(17 commercial and 5 military) are designated to handle these 

deployments.

Page 3

1 According to a letter of instruction from the Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC) of U.S. Transportation Command, in practice the 

commanding general of SDDC designates the strategic seaports.
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 8 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Background (cont.)

Page 4

Figure 1: Strategic Seaport Locations
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 9 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Background (cont.)

• The Maritime Administration (MARAD) of the Department of Transportation (DOT), in 

partnership with DOD, administers the strategic seaport program. Within DOD, the 

Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC) serves as the surface 

transportation component to United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) 

and executes the strategic seaport program for DOD.

• MARAD and DOD use Port Planning Orders (PPOs) to identify and coordinate DOD’s 

needs in advance with each commercial strategic port. These orders specify which port 

facilities, staging areas, and berthing space DOD will require in the event of a 

deployment, and they establish timelines for access. MARAD also coordinates with the 

commercial ports to maintain operational readiness reports that outline each port’s 

ability to meet the PPO requirements.

• The National Port Readiness Network, chaired by MARAD, provides for the 

establishment of port readiness committees at each commercial strategic port to, 

among other things, provide training and conduct exercises at the ports to facilitate 

handling DOD cargo movement requirements.

Page 5
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 10 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Background (cont.)

• Over the past several years SDDC has produced a series of reports on 

the strategic ports program:

• The conference report accompanying the National Defense 

Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year (FY) 2008 directed SDDC to 

develop a plan to optimize the use of strategic ports. In response, 

SDDC conducted and issued the Port Look 2008 Strategic Seaports Study, which reviewed DOD requirements for the number and location of strategic seaports.

• In June 2010 SDDC produced the Port Look Relook Study (classified secret), which focused on the movement of cargo through the 

commercial seaports in the event of a deployment.

• The NDAA for FY 2011 required DOD to update the Port Look 2008 

Strategic Seaports Study and specifically directed DOD to review the infrastructure in the vicinity of each seaport, including bridges, roads, 

and railroads. In January 2012, SDDC completed the Update to Port Look 2008 Strategic Seaports Study, which focused on the overall 

capacity of strategic seaports and their surrounding access 

infrastructure to meet DOD’s deployment needs. This report also 

contains a classified annex related to the military ammunition ports.

Page 6
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 11 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Background (cont.)

• The December 2011 conference report accompanying the 

NDAA for FY 2012 directed the issuance of another report on 

the strategic seaports and specified four elements that the 

report should address.

• Both section 333 of the NDAA for FY 2013 and section 413 of 

the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2012 

required GAO to conduct a sufficiency review of DOD’s report 

and submit the results of our review to Congress within 90 

days of receiving the report.

• DOD submitted its report, entitled Update to Port Look 2008: 

Strategic Seaport Assessment and Report, to Congress on 

January 7, 2013, and we received it on January 9, 2013.

Page 7
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 12 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Objective

We assessed the extent to which DOD’s report addressed the 

four elements directed by Congress. These elements were: 

• to assess the structural integrity and deficiencies of the port 

facilities and determine what infrastructure improvements are 

needed to meet national security and readiness requirements; 

• to assess the potential impact on operational readiness if the 

infrastructure improvements are not undertaken;

• to identify potential funding sources from existing authorities 

for the infrastructure improvements; and 

• to provide an opinion as to whether DOD has the necessary 

authority to support section 50302 of Title 46 of the U.S. 

Code.1

Page 8

1 Section 50302 of Title 46 of the U.S. Code, states that the Secretary of Transportation, in cooperation with the Secretary of the Army, shall take a number of 

actions with regard to ports with the objective of promoting, encouraging, and developing ports and transportation facilities in connection with water commerce.
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 13 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Scope and Methodology

To determine the extent to which DOD’s most recent report on strategic 

seaports included the four directed elements:

• Two GAO analysts independently reviewed the report to determine 

whether each directed element had been addressed. They agreed on all 

four elements. Each analyst also documented additional observations 

about the report.

• We interviewed officials at SDDC and MARAD who oversee the strategic 

seaports program and who produced and reviewed the report, 

respectively, to obtain further information about the program and clarify 

aspects of the report. 

• We obtained and reviewed documents pertaining to the strategic seaports 

program in order to better understand the report’s conclusions. 

• We discussed our preliminary analyses with SDDC and MARAD officials 

to obtain their perspectives. We also shared the information in this briefing 

with DOD and DOT officials, and incorporated their technical comments as 

appropriate.

Page 9
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 14 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Summary

Report Elements Directed by Congress GAO Assessment

To assess the structural integrity and deficiencies of the 

port facilities and determine what infrastructure 

improvements are needed to meet national security and 

readiness requirements.

Addressed

To assess the potential impact on operational readiness if 

the infrastructure improvements are not undertaken.

Addressed

To identify potential funding sources from existing 

authorities for the infrastructure improvements.

Addressed

To provide an opinion as to whether DOD has the 

necessary authority to support section 50302 of Title 46 of 

the U.S. Code.

Addressed

Page 10
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 15 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Element 1: Structural Integrity of Seaports and 

Needed Improvements - Addressed

• The report provided an assessment of the condition of the landside 

port infrastructure for each of the 22 strategic seaports.

• For the report, DOD defined the port infrastructure as roads, 

bridges, staging areas, rail infrastructure, and berths within port 

boundaries.

• The report also provided an overall rating of the capability of each 

seaport’s landside infrastructure to support DOD’s required 

missions. 

• Of the 22 strategic seaports, 15 were rated as having minor 

deficiencies, with negligible impact; 4 as having some deficiencies, 

with limited impact; 1 as having significant deficiencies that impair 

capability to support required missions; and 2 as having major 

deficiencies presenting significant obstacles to mission 

accomplishment.

Page 11
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 16 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Element 1: Structural Integrity of Seaports and 

Needed Improvements - Addressed (cont.)

We found some areas where DOD’s report could have been 

more explicit. For example,

• The report included a listing of infrastructure improvement 

projects identified by either the port authority or DOD. The 

projects ranged from requiring the replacement of wharves to 

routine maintenance. The report also provided cost estimates 

for the projects, where available.

• However, the report did not cite the source of these estimates 

or identify how they were prepared. SDDC officials said these 

estimates were provided by the port authorities and DOD, but 

SDDC did not independently validate the cost estimates.

Page 12
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 17 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Element 1: Structural Integrity of Seaports and 

Needed Improvements - Addressed (cont.)

The report did not explicitly define “national security and 

readiness requirements.” 

• However, a key assumption of the report was that the PPO 

facilities at the strategic seaports provide sufficient capacity to 

meet the DOD cargo requirements identified in the Mobility 

Capabilities and Requirements Study-2016 and operations 

plans, as determined in the 2010 Port Look Relook Study.

• SDDC officials told us that these cargo shipping requirements 

constitute the “national security and readiness requirements” 

for the purposes of the January 2013 report.

Page 13
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 18 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Element 1: Structural Integrity of Seaports and 

Needed Improvements - Addressed (cont.)

Finally, we note that the report relied on self-reported information from the ports.

• For the piers and wharves, DOD relied primarily on engineering assessments 

provided by the ports. SDDC officials told us they believe the information provided 

by the reports is reliable because it is in the ports’ interest to correct any structural 

deficiencies in order to support their commercial activities.

• Two of the assessments were based on inspections conducted in 2000 and 

2003—12 and 9 years, respectively, before the report was prepared. SDDC 

officials said these intervals are not significant because it is in ports’ interests to 

avoid infrastructure failures and thus to keep infrastructure inspections up to date.

• An assessment performed in 2006 of the pilings and piers at one port estimated 

that they had a remaining service life of 5 years. Thus, the service life should 

have expired in 2011—2 years ago. SDDC officials told us they were following up 

with the port officials to determine if the service life had truly expired. The officials 

also said that their periodic port visits, while not structural integrity assessments, 

serve as a visual check of port infrastructure condition. DOD officials last visited 

this port in 2010; the next visit is scheduled for FY 2013. 

Page 14
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 19 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Element 2: Readiness Impact if Needed 

Improvements Are Not Made - Addressed

• The report included an assessment of the potential impact on operational 

readiness if needed seaport infrastructure improvements were not made. 

This assessment was provided by area (West coast, East coast, Gulf 

coast, Alaska, and Guam) and by individual seaport.

• The report stated that in general, in the event that PPO berths at a 

particular strategic seaport were unusable, available alternatives would 

include the use of non-PPO berths, PPO facilities at other strategic 

seaports, or alternate seaports.

• SDDC identifies alternate seaports; however, these ports do not receive 

PPOs and do not have port readiness committees. According to the report, 

use of alternate seaports could result in a moderate delay to DOD’s cargo 

movement.

• The report stated that the military can use commercial rail to redirect 

deployment cargo to other strategic or alternate seaports anywhere in the 

United States, with the exception of geographically isolated ports. 

Page 15
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 20 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Element 3: Potential Funding Sources for 

Needed Improvements - Addressed

• The report identified and discussed six primary sources of 

capital for U.S. commercial ports: port revenues, general 

obligation bonds, revenue bonds, loans, grants, and other 

miscellaneous sources.

• The report did not identify specific funding sources for each 

infrastructure project identified for a given port. SDDC officials 

told us it is the ports’ responsibility to identify project funding.

• The report stated that military ports rely on military 

construction authorities and appropriations for large projects. 

The report did not discuss funding sources for anything less 

than large project undertakings. For example, operation and 

maintenance funds can be used to perform minor construction 

when the cost of the complete project is under $750,000.

Page 16
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 21 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Element 4: DOD’s Authority to Support Section 

50302 of Title 46 USC - Addressed

• The report addressed DOD’s authority regarding 46 U.S.C. §

50302, which states that the Secretary of Transportation, in 

coordination with the Secretary of the Army, shall take a 

number of actions with regard to ports—such as investigating 

the practicability and advantages of certain port 

improvements—with the objective of developing ports and 

transportation facilities in connection with water commerce. 

• The report concluded that the department has the necessary 

authority to support the law based on its involvement with 

MARAD in managing the strategic seaport program and its 

use of other authorities and programs, such as the Defense 

Critical Infrastructure Program, a risk management program 

designed to secure critical assets and infrastructure.

Page 17
Enclosure I: Briefing Slides

Page 22 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

Element 4: DOD’s Authority to Support Section 

50302 of Title 46 USC – Addressed (cont.)

• Although the report concluded that DOD has the necessary authority, it also 

stated that Congress may wish to consider modifying the language of 46 U.S.C. §

50302(a) to provide authority and responsibilities over port development to the 

Secretary of Transportation in cooperation with the Secretary of the Army (through 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ civil works program) and USTRANSCOM 

(through the strategic seaport program and ports for national defense program). 

Both the Army and USTRANSCOM would thus be able to coordinate directly with 

DOT on port development issues.

• The report stated that with this revision, both the Army and USTRANSCOM would 

have equal legal authority to coordinate directly with the DOT on port 

development issues. The report noted that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has 

responsibility for waterborne transportation but does not focus on landside 

seaport infrastructure, and that SDDC acting on behalf of USTRANSCOM is the 

“single port manager” under DOD policy.

• According to SDDC officials, the current language assigning those responsibilities 

in 46 U.S.C. § 50302 predates USTRANSCOM’s establishment in 1987. At that 

time, SDDC (then called Military Traffic Management Command) was a direct 

reporting unit under the Department of the Army. Today, SDDC operates under 

USTRANSCOM.

Page 18
Enclosure II: Comments from the Department of Defense

Page 23 GAO-13-511R Defense Logistics 

(351777)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, 

GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, 

go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.