Do Stryker Brigade Combat Teams Need Forward Support ...

MDMP at the SDDC:
The Art and Science of Terminal Operations
by Lieutenant co L o n e L MarShaLL n. ra M S ey and Ma j o r ryo n F. ad a M S
According to Field Manual (FM) 5–0, Army
Planning and Orders Production, military planning
is both a science and an art. In the field
of terminal operations, this means using existing doctrine
(the science) to create plans and orders capable
of safely accomplishing the Army’s deployment and
redeployment missions. This must be accomplished
while accounting for myriad possible contingencies
and branches (the art). The 842d Transportation Battalion
in Beaumont, Texas, has turned that understanding
into practice through the military decisionmaking
process (MDMP).
The MDMP is an established and proven analytical
planning system. According to FM 5–0, it includes
seven steps (see below). Recently, the 842d Transportation
Battalion had the chance to place the MDMP
into action while supporting the deployment of the 3d
Armored Cavalry Regiment (3d ACR) from Fort Hood,
Texas. The 842d adapted the MDMP to best suit its
operational environment. The final output of the process
is an executable order that enables the Military Surface
Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC)
to support deploying or redeploying units in a manner
consistent with the best interests of the Government.
Seven Steps in the Military
Decisionmaking Process
Step 1: Receipt of Mission
Step 2: Mission Analysis
Step 3: COA Development
Step 4: COA Analysis (Wargame)
Step 5: COA Comparison
Step 6: COA Approval
Step 7: Orders Production
ARMY LOGISTICIAN PROFESSIONAL BULLETIN OF UNITED STATES ARMY LOGISTICS
Mission Analysis
The 842d initiated a deliberate planning process for
the deployment of the 3d ACR in the summer of 2007
by visiting with regimental and installation representatives
at Fort Hood. At that time, the 842d received the
mission requirements and the regiment’s deployment
timeline. Mission analysis commenced immediately
with the consideration of rail and truck requirements
and labor needs. The daily operations meeting provided
a forum for the staff to conduct mission analysis
and then develop and discuss possible courses of action
(COAs). Personnel had to plan for the arrival of over
2,100 pieces of cargo (including nearly 500 tracked
vehicles and 34 aircraft) and the staging, documentation,
and uploading of the equipment to vessels. The
unit expected to receive eight full trains’ worth of cargo
and considerable commercial line haul vehicles with 3d
ACR equipment.
During the mission analysis, the 842d incorporated
composite risk management by developing a risk
assessment of the operation. Once the battalion commander
approved the risk assessment, the unit safety
officer forwarded it to the 597th Transportation Group
at Fort Eustis, Virginia, for review. In the course of the
mission analysis, the staff listed key facts and assumptions;
specified, implied, and essential tasks; and
constraints. The type and quantity of equipment were
known facts, and it was assumed that these numbers
would not significantly change.
One major constraint was the unavailability of the Port
of Corpus Christi, Texas. The 842d determined that the
high volume of commercial cargo that would be present
in the Port of Corpus Christi during that time would leave
insufficient space available to receive, stage, and prepare
the 3d ACR’s aircraft. As a result, all COAs that involved
Corpus Christi were screened out of the process. Planners
assumed that all cargo could be accommodated in
Beaumont, Texas, because the Port of Beaumont’s commercial
operations would not impede the deployment
operations and sufficient labor would be available.
COA Development
COAs were then developed that would enable the
battalion to stage all cargo in a manner that best facilitated
safety, accountability, and ease of upload without
conflicting with the port’s commercial requirements.
According to FM 5–0, all COAs must be feasible,
acceptable, suitable, distinguishable, and complete.
3