USTC J9 Peak Season Call (2 July)

July 09, 2020

This peak season update is from last week (Thursday, 2 July). Although late, I wanted to provide the update for your information.  The 9 July update will follow soon.


The DP3 peak slides are for week 27, but depict week-26 data (21-27 June). The data shows we’re at 41% of the three-year average for pickups; and between 55 – 67% week to week over the past 5 weeks. 


Code 2 data reflects 7.9% of domestic shipments during the current peak season.


“No capacity” reports are picking up.  Kadena and Okinawa are having Code 4 to CONUS problems.  Hawaii remains challenged according to DoD.  Additional details on “no capacity” start on slide 26.


The manual booking capability for booking shipments is not working as intended; the recent short-fuse expansion to 10 days is providing some relief for PPSO bookings when there is no capacity. 


Slide 8 shows the time-out ratio skyrocketing; J9 was exploring the reason behind the abrupt change.


Slide 14 reflects the refusal ratio; still not seeing the proportional amount of blackout ratio.  Blackout ratio is still significantly lagging behind the refusal ratio.


Slide 16 shows that for JPPSOs to book 9,066 shipments in week 26, there were 55,000 refusals compared to last year where 8,224 shipments were booked with only 14,292 refusals for the same week.


An industry question was asked to J9 about whether the notification of potential exposures for COVID-19 are required just from industry to the DOD, or whether when DOD discovers a member or family member with COVID, if the DOD has to notify industry.  J9 re-affirmed (and HAFC also confirmed they had made TSP and agent notification) that DOD is required to notify industry of potential COVID exposure. 


J9 was also asked about what the policy on punitive actions is when a TSP or agent who a TSP relies on, has a positive COVID outcome and has to shut down operations for a few weeks?  Will a TSP receive punitive action for not being able to service a shipment.  J9 said they’d expect that a TSP might arrange to bring in labor from outside the area if possible; but if anyone worked exclusively with an impacted agent, and not willing to seek other help, they’d need to black out.  But as long as TSPs were doing everything they could in that environment, there should be no issues with punitive actions.


The Marine Corps provided a reminder that workers that interact with customers must have a background check; therefore, they shouldn’t be hearing of complaints on the use of uncleared day laborers.


The decision to extend peak rates 45 days was confirmed on the call.  J9 followed up on 8 July and issued an advisory detailing the specifics of the extended rate period.


JPPSO-SC brought up that for just their JPPSO, they’ve paid out over $900,000 to TSPs for the Stop Movement Adjustment fee.  But in the opposite direction, JPPSO-SC reminded TSPs of the requirement to process payments in a timely manner back to the DoD when a TSP fails to perform a reweigh as required. 


J9 mentioned they are hearing of a significant increase in requests for SIT saturations and long distance deliveries. J9 stated TSPs need to understand where storage is available along the way and take advantage if where the capability is.  J9 stated that regardless of where a TSP stores a shipment, their position is that the TSP has already been paid for delivery all the way to destination; therefore, if a TSP has to reserve some of that compensation for an agent for a long delivery, that’s on the TSP. 


JPPSO-SC wanted attendees to know that they’ve researched the agents where they’ve had issues with face covering and health protection certifications being accomplished and have made contact with those agents and TSPs who use them; and have received good feedback from those they’ve reached out to.


JPPSO-SC also stated they are seeing a lot of automatic reweighs not being accomplished.  They acknowledged IAM has raised issues with unclear reweigh policy in the IT20; but stated the examples they are referring to are not unclear.


APPLE stated they are seeing a relaxing of PPE on international shipments where requirements aren’t as stringent overseas and soldiers and movers are agreeing not to wear PPE.  The Army said they are working those cases when they hear about it, and ensuring the PPE standards are being upheld.