Book Description

State, DOD, and DHS have made some changes in the program but have not corrected weaknesses we previously identified in the FMS program?s shipment verification process, and DOD's expanded monitoring lacks written guidance for selecting countries for compliance visits. First, State has not finalized its regulations to establish DOD's role in the FMS shipment verification process, and CBP port officials lack information needed to verify that FMS shipments are properly authorized. As a result, of the port data we reviewed, we found six FMS sales agreements where CBP permitted shipments of defense articles to the foreign country even though DOD records showed that shipments were no longer authorized under the agreements. CBP officials stated that a planned centralized data system could provide the needed information to port officials so they can verify FMS shipments, but the planned system does not currently have funding to include such export information. Second, DOD lacks mechanisms to fully ensure the correct FMS shipments reach the right foreign customers-in part because DOD does not track most FMS shipments once they leave DOD supply centers and continues to rely on the foreign governments to notify the department when a shipment has not been received. Finally, since 2003, DSCA personnel have led teams to visit 19 out of 76 countries that have purchased sensitive defense articles, such as Stinger missiles, under the FMS program. However, DOD does not have written guidance to prioritize compliance monitoring visits using a risk management approach, and DSCA has not yet conducted such visits in countries with a high number of uninventoried defense articles.