Calling Notice for a NATO Asset Tracking Working Group AAP-51 Review Meeting from 30 Jun-02 July 2014 in Den Haag, NLD

Transcription

1 DEU Bundeswehr Logistics Command Department Corporate Logistics Planning - Section Multinational Logistics - Hausanschrift Zeppelinstraße 18, Erfurt Germany Tel +49 (0) POC Hptm (OF-2) Mario Hofmann mariohofmann@bundeswehr.org Erfurt den TO: SUBJECT: REFERENCE: See Distribution List Calling Notice for a NATO Asset Tracking Working Group AAP-51 Review Meeting from 30 Jun-02 July 2014 in Den Haag, NLD Military Committee Land Standardization Board Asset Tracking Inter-service Working Group (AST WG) Meeting held in Paris, FRA, from February 2014 DATE: 2 May Purpose. Per the reference to the letter, to convene an all panels meeting of the AST WG to review Study Draft 1 of Allied Administrative Publication 51 (AAP-51), the revised standard for the NATO asset tracking business process. 2. Background. The requirement to revise AAP-51 was agreed at the Jun 2012 meeting of the AST WG. The process models from a working draft of the Allied publication were briefed and discussed extensively at the February 2014 meeting of the AST WG. The document has now been adjusted in line with comments received at the meeting and extensive new material has been added. To progress to the point of being able to place a Final Study Draft to the MC Land Standardization Board, a further detailed review of the document is required by the document writing team supplemented by at least 6 to 10 more subject matter experts drawn from all AST WG panels. That review will take place at the meeting announced in this letter. Consideration of comments on and proposed changes to Study Draft 1 will be the meeting s only order of business. 3. Meeting Details. The pre-work for the meeting, the work of the meeting itself and the administrative arrangements for the meeting are as follows: a. All nations regardless of whether they intend to be represented at the review meeting are requested to review AAP-51 Study Draft 1. This document will be posted to the AST WG s NATO Standardization Agency forum by 0830 hrs Central European Time on Monday 5 May 2014; b. Comments on Study Draft 1 are to be submitted using the matrix provided at Annex A. The matrix is to be completed in accordance with 1

2 the guidance on its completion included at Annex B. Only one, consolidated comments matrix is to be submitted by each nation. The completed matrix is to be submitted to the custodian points of contact indicated in Para 7 not later than midday Central European Time on 16 June 2014; c. The AAP-51 custodian will produce a single consolidated comments matrix from national inputs and disseminate a copy of that document to meeting participants not later than midday Central European Time on 24 June 2014; d. Nations should consider the single consolidated matrix prior to the review team meeting in order to understand other national views. The AAP-51 custodian and writing team members will review the document in order to propose an adjudication to be presented and discussed at the review meeting; e. Attendees at the review meeting will, as far as possible, sentence each comment (i.e., agree, agree with modification or not accept). The AAP-51 custodian will update the consolidated comments matrix accordingly; and f. The Study Draft will be modified to the maximum extent possible either during the meeting or shortly thereafter, with the intention of presenting an endorsed version of the document for the AST WG to consider at its 28 th meeting in September Any issues that are identified that are incapable of resolution and require wider national discussion will be actioned to AST WG nations ahead for discussion at the next full meeting of the AST WG. The meeting will be conducted in English, led by DEU as the AAP-51 custodian and be hosted by NCIA at their facility in The Hague. The meeting will run from: Mon 30 Jun, 09:00 h Wed 02 Jul 2014, 16:00 h. Work will normally conclude at 1700 hrs each day, except the last day of the meeting. 4. Meeting Attendance. As considered at the AST WG s 27 th meeting, the AAP-51 review requirement is for meeting participants who are subject matter experts in asset tracking, have the time to review and comment on AAP-51 Study Draft 1 and are able and willing to contribute to the meeting discussions during the document review. Participants that meet those criteria are welcome from any AST WG panel. Nations are requested to send one or more attendees to assist in this task. If insufficient participation is signalled it is estimated that at least 10 experts are required to establish a quorum then the meeting may need to be re-scheduled. 5. Joining Report. Attendees who will participate in the review meeting are requested to register via the NCIA site at as soon as possible and not later than Friday 6 June If problems are experienced with the site, please complete and return the joining report at Annex C, to the same timetable. The completed form should be returned to mary.lamarra@ncia.nato.int and mariohofmann@bundeswehr.org. 2

3 6. Accommodation. NCIA has negotiated rates with a number of hotels in The Hague. Some of these hotels offer perks for NCIA bookings, such as free transfers to and from NCIA or free car parking. Details of these hotels are included at Annex D. Addressees wishing to exploit these arrangements must do so via the registration web link at or, in the event of problems, via NCIA Conference Services, contactable via conferences.corporate@ncia.nato.int. 7. Transportation. Travel to The Hague and to and from NCIA each day is the responsibility of each attendee. As indicated in the preceding paragraph, some hotels offer a shuttle service to and from NCIA. A map showing local hotels and NCIA is included at Annex E. 8. Security. Security clearances must be provided to NCIA security staff in order to ensure unescorted access to the NCIA building. Details of this requirement and the points of contact are included at the NCIA registration web page at 9. Costs. A maximum conference fee of 25 will be payable by participants. Meals and incidental expenses will be the responsibility of individual attendees. 10. Points of Contact. The points of contact for the meeting are as follows: Document Custodian LTC Christian Siegert; Tel: +49 (0) Unclass christian1siegert@bundeswehr.org Captain Mario Hofmann; Tel: +49 (0) Unclass mariohofmann@bundeswehr.org Service Post Office Box of BwLCom/ Section Multinational Logistics: logkdobwabtplanungi2mnlog@bundeswehr.org Meeting Host Mrs Mary Lamarra; Tel: Unclass mary.lamarra@ncia.nato.int -Originally signed- On behalf of the Section Chief BwLCom/ Dpt. Corporate Logistics Plannung/ Section Multinational Logistics M. Markowsky Commander 3

4 Annexes: A. NATO Standard Comments Matrix AAP-51, Asset In-Transit Tracking, Business Process Model, SD (1) as of B. Additional Instructions and Guidance for the Completion of the AAP-51 Comments Matrix. C. Joining Report. D. Illustration of NATO Rates for Hotels in The Hague. E. The Hague/Scheveningen Map. Distribution: via NATO Standardization Agency (NSA) Protected Web Site AST WG forum via ASTWG secretary to addresses of nominated national POCs to NSA via ASTWG secretary to other WGs of the NSA LSB 4

5 ANNEX A NATO STANDARD COMMENTS MATRIX The matrix shown below will be used to record comments during the staffing of Allied publications. The column headings depicted on the matrix are largely self-explanatory. However, the following guidelines apply to the matrix. All comments will be numerically numbered and arranged in chronological order. The comments will be categorized in the following manner: C Critical (Contentious issue that will cause non-concurrence with publication), S Substantive (Factually incorrect, misleading, etc.), E Editorial (grammar, punctuation, style, etc.) (Normally editorial comments are placed on a separate matrix and are only considered by exception or on request). The originator column should, as a minimum, indicate the standard NATO three-letter code for the country providing the comment. The section and line column headings are self-explanatory where a bullet is used in a section, refer to the section containing the bullet and the line number where it starts. Comment should be placed in the Comment column. Comments should be line-in/out format and propose a recommended course of action. General observations without proposed solutions should not be submitted. Rationale will be submitted for all comments. The adjudication column is used by the custodian to record the adjudication of the comment. The responses are Accepted (A), Accepted w/ Amendment (AA), Withdrawn (W), or Not Accepted (NA). All amendments to a comment are recorded on the matrix. The matrix becomes the record of decisions for the publication review. AAP-51, Asset In-Transit Tracking, Business Process Model, SD (1) as of Serial C / S / E Originator Section Line Comment Rationale Adjudication [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] A-1

6 [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] Additional lines should be added to the matirx as needed A-2

7 B-1 ANNEX B ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS AND GUIDANCE FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE AAP-51 COMMENTS MATRIX 1. In addition to the guidance provided at Annex A as part of the procedure for the completion of the standard NATO comments matrix, the following instructions should also be followed in preparing and submitting AAP-51 comments within that matrix: a. Nations should make arrangement for their country s comments to be collated and submitted by a single point of contact. Furthermore, that point of contact is to harmonize their nation s comments before submitting them. Where this does not occur and a nation submits contradictory comments and/or proposed solutions concerning AAP-51, then the Custodian may choose which matter to address or to propose not to accept the nation s multiple positions entirely. b. Where a nation collates comments from multiple parties, the consolidated comments matrix should still adhere to the requirement for comments to be recorded as per the chronology of the document, i.e., a comment on Section 2.4.2, line 7 should appear before a comment on Section 4.1, line 3. c. The sort function within Microsoft Word makes it a straightforward task to meet the chronological requirement of the previous sub-para, if all reviewers stick to the same numbering schema. Therefore, the section detail in the comments matrix should contain only the number of the section concerned. The line detail should show the line number exactly as it appears in the left-hand margin of the document. d. The serial number assigned to each comment should proceed in sequence from the beginning to the end of the comments matrix. Auto-numbering is set within that column. Preserving that formatting arrangement will make the sequencing task much simpler beware of copying and pasting unformatted data into that column. e. A comment on the document should both explain the issue and propose a solution to the issue. So, for example, stating the first sentence of the section is difficult to understand. It should be re-worded. is inadequate. The first sentence may indeed be hard to comprehend, but the reviewer must propose some actual re-wording and not call for someone else to do it. The June 2014 review meeting will consider the merit of the proposed re-wording and whether the sentence itself is difficult to understand. When providing comments, try and be precise about the wording that causes the problem it is perfectly acceptable to quote text from the AAP-51 Study Draft in the comments matrix and the solution (where precisely do you wish the revised

8 text to be inserted). If no proposed solution to a comment is provided the Custodian will propose non-acceptance. f. Each comment must be accompanied by some rationale. This concerns the underlying thought behind the comment and its proposed solution. Consider the previous example. If the author had written, The first sentence of the section is difficult to understand. I propose that it be re-worded as follows: Policy for in-transit visibility is, then we now have a valid comment and a proposed revision. But what does it bring to the document, if the proposed revision is accepted? This does not have to be lengthy explanation. In the example just given, the rationale could simply be clarity or improved understanding. Other similarly brief rationale could be: i. Accuracy (being more precise; see also correctness). ii. iii. iv. Relevance (improving focus). Correctness (correcting some factual error; see also accuracy). Completeness (adding further detail or explanation). v. Grammar (modifying the use of language). vi. vii. viii. ix. Readability (qualitative aspect relating to encouraging reading; see also see also clarity and presentation). Clarity (simplifying or re-wording to assist understanding; see also readability and presentation). Presentation (improvements to layout, structure, figures and tables; see also readability and clarity) Typographical (related to errors or possible modifications concerning spelling, punctuation, numbering, indexing and so on). x. Objectivity (the avoidance of material not or not yet qualified to be doctrinal). xi. xii. Coherence (avoiding contradiction with policy or other agreed standards). Duplication (avoiding overlap concerning standardized matters addressed in another NATO agreed publication). B-2

9 ANNEX C JOINING REPORT If problems are experienced with the NCIA online web registration, meeting participants should complete and return the joining report below: First Name Surname Rank NATO Rank Equivalent Passport Number [Not Required] Nation or NATO Cmd/Agency Representing Travel and Lodging Information Arrival Date Arrival Time Departure Date Departure Time By Means Of: [Not Required] Arrival Information (Flight Number) [Not Required] Contacts Telephone Number (International Format) Other Information Are you a Head of Delegation? YES NO Remarks: C-1

10 ILLUSTRATION OF NATO RATES FOR HOTELS IN THE HAGUE ANNEX D Details of the types of potential hotels are provided in the tables below. The hotels and their prices are illustrative only hotel details and pricing are subject to change. The hotel deals typically include breakfast, service charges and city tax. NCIA does not accept any liability including, but not limited to, deviations or to any no-show claims. Reservations for NATO rates can only be made via NCIA Conference Services - always send a request via to: conferences.corporate@ncia.nato.int or via the NCIA conference registration page, if available. Current details of hotels and prices can be obtained at the previous address. Please provide your credit card details for arrival after hrs. D-1

11 D-2

12 ANNEX E The address of NCIA, The Hague is: Oude Waalsdorperweg 61, 2597 AK The Hague, Netherlands E-1