United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces...

1United States Fleet ForcesUnited States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, PrimacyOperational Readiness, Effectiveness, PrimacyUnited States Fleet ForcesUnited States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, PrimacyOperational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy

Ship MaintenanceShip Maintenance

RADM Jeff BrooksRADM Jeff BrooksFFC N43FFC N43

Ver: VSRA Final 15 Feb 07


Required Focus Required Focus

A + A oFRP oLife Cycle A = Fleeto


Desired OutcomesDesired Outcomes

• CNO understanding of:– Maintenance governance

– Maintenance requirements process approach validity

– Maintenance communication thresholds

– FY07 execution plan

• Supporting Information:– Maintenance process changes underway across Fleet

Readiness Enterprise (FRE)

– Maintenance process/performance metrics in use/development to identify and drive change

– Future maintenance risk items with threshold potential


AgendaAgenda

• Where we are today

• Discussion of Alignment, Governance and Thresholds

• Vision of where we are heading:– Maintenance process improvements– Aligning warfare enterprises around

common processes – Potential out-year domain challenges

Deliver efficiency & effectiveness aligned with FRP


Navy Ship Maintenance ActivitiesNavy Ship Maintenance Activities

AS-39 USS EMORY S LAND @ La Maddalena

AS-40 USS FRANK CABLE @ Guam

MARMC Det. Naples

MARMC Det. Bahrain

Puget Sound Naval Shipyard & Intermediate

Maintenance Facility(PSNS & IMF)

(RMC)

Norfolk Naval Shipyard

SouthwestRegional

MaintenanceCenter (RMC)

San DiegoSouth CentralRMC Ingleside

Mid-Atlantic RMC Norfolk

Trident Refit Facility Kings Bay Southeast RMC Mayport

Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard & IMF

(RMC)

Ship RepairFacility

Yokosuka(RMC)

Nuclear Submarine Support Facility New London

SUPSHIP Groton

SUPSHIP Newport News

Portsmouth Naval Shipyard

Mission funded & aligned through “One Shipyard” construct.


POM/BudgetProcess

Today’s StrategyToday’s Strategy

Ship Maintenance & Modernization Domain

(SYSCOMs)

ENGINEEREDMAINT. PLANS (Platform Sponsors/PEOs)

MODERNIZATION

Requirements Generation

Fleet Readiness Enterprise$

CONDITIONBASED MAINT.

(Fleets) InputsM

aterialR

eadiness

Units Ready

For Tasking

Dem

and

Sig

nal

COCOMs

NCCsFRP Readiness + Life Cycle Readiness

Cost


Maintenance Supports OpsMaintenance Supports Ops

Notional CVN FRTP:

Continuous Maint. (CM) Periods

• PIAs & DPIAs are “Hard” Scheduling Targets• Dry-dock Constraints• FY $$’s• Industrial Base Loading

• CM Schedules More Flexible• Max Interface w/ TYCOM and Fleet N3’s

INTEGRATEDTRAINING

BASICTRAINING

6 Mo Planned Incremental

Availability (PIA) or 10 ½ Mo

Docking PIA

DEPLOYMENTREDEPLOYMENT(SUSTAINMENT)

MAINTENANCEPHASE

Ao FRTP + Ao Life Cycle = Ao Total


Maintenance Program ContentMaintenance Program Content

Modernization

Corrective Maintenance (CSMP)

Class Maint Plan (CMP)

Engineered Requirements

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

FY05FY98 FY05FY98 FY98 FY05

Exe

cute

d M

aint

enan

ce M

an-

days

41

43

16

70

20

10

82

8

1021

64

23

13

21

58

21

21

21

21

43

36

SurfaceCarrierSubmarine


Should Maintenance Content be the Same?Should Maintenance Content be the Same?

• Class Maintenance Plan content differs because of:

– System certifications (nuclear, subsafe, flight deck)

– Aging Effects

– Hull life expectancy

– Maintenance scheduling intervals


How Do We Determine the Right CMP Content?How Do We Determine the Right CMP Content?

MaintenanceExecution

Ship Configuration

Integration

Maint History& Feedback

Continuous Improvement

Class Maint Plans•Maintenance Requirements

•Assessment Procedures•Maintenance Strategies

Work Package Development

Requirements Deferral Review

ModernizationCSMP

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

CarrierSubmarine Surface

Modernization

Corrective Maintenance (CSMP)


Engineered Requirements

Exe

cute

d M

aint

enan

ce M

an-

days

Cycles of Learning Drive CMP improvements.

41

43

16

70

10

82

8

10

21

64

23

13

21

58

21

21

21

21

43

36

20


• Corrosion control

• Planning/Support services

• Maintenance intensive components/systems

• Modernization

What are the Big Cost Drivers?What are the Big Cost Drivers?

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Surface

Habitability/Upgrades

Program Alterations

Fleet Alterations

Corrective Maintenance


Corrective, contingency

CMP Scheduled Rqmts

CMP Corrosion, contingency

Corrosion Control

CarrierSubmarine

Exe

cute

d M

ain

tena

nce

Man

-day

s

Targets for Maintenance Improvement

1

27

30

7

16

7

5

7

1

42

16

18

1

12

82

1

58

11

7

13

8

1

1

1

29

24

13

13

6

6

6

3

41

24

9

18

7

21

21

26

15

16

1


Maintenance Cost Improvement InitiativesMaintenance Cost Improvement Initiatives

• Fleet-wide LEAN/Six-Sigma Implementation (ECD: Jan 07)

• Hull-specific Maintenance & Modernization Business Plans (ECD: Jun 07)

• Joint-Fleet/ASN/NAVSEA National Contracting Strategy (Implement: Oct 06)

• Paint/Preservation Task Force (ECD: Jan 07)

• Single Fleet Modernization Process (ECD: Sep 07)

• Ship Material Condition Metrics [MFOM 2.0] (Deploy:

Oct 06)


Program Life

% o

f O

rig

ina

l

100

Present

CVN 68

SSN 688

Trends Over Time?Trends Over Time?

CLASS DEPOT LIFECYCLE MANDAYS

CRU/DES

Beginning of Life

50

Adherence to Class Maint

Plans Atrophied

Integrated Class Maint Plan &

Maint Requirement

System

SHIPMAIN

Results


0

Ship Maintenance Funding TrendsShip Maintenance Funding Trends

Maint Funding With Supp PB07 POM08 Requirement Battle Force Ships

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Co

ns

tan

t F

Y0

6 D

oll

ars

(M

)

40

80

120

160

200

240

280

# S

hip

s

FY

320

360

The FREChallenge!


Enterprise RelationshipsEnterprise Relationships

Navy Enterprise

FleetReadiness Enterprise

Warfare Enterprises

CNO

N8/ FMB

TYCOMs OPNAV N8/6/4/1

Providers ResourceSponsors

RDAVCNO

CFFC/CPF

Thre

shol

d re

ports

FMBOD


AlignmentAlignment

NAVSEA

CSF CNAFCNSF

FREFRP

Alignment

CPFCFFC

WarfareEnterprises

FMBOD

Ship Repair• Technical Authority• Contract Authority• Life Cycle Mgmt.• Class Maint Plans• Shipyard Operation

Shipbuilding&

Modernization

PEOs/Platform Sponsor

Units Ready

For Tasking


Governance StructureGovernance Structure

Local Boards Of Directors (LBODs)

Members• RMC Cdr. (chair)• Customer TYCOMs• PHIBGRUs• DESRONs• SUBRONs• Ship ISICs• FMO (Reps)

Purpose Manage port

workload Align:

• Priorities• Funds• Resources

Fleet Maintenance Board Of Directors

(FMBOD)

Members• FMOs (chair)• SEA 04/08• OPNAV N43• TYCOM N43s

Purpose Ship maint.

enterprise issues Cross enterprise

maint issues Major policy

changes Major avail changes Budgetary impacts/

options Drives Productivity

Navy Ship Maintenance Oversight Board

(NSMOB)

Members• SEA 00 (co-chair)• OPNAV N4 (co-chair)• DASN (Ships)• DASN (Log)• CFFC (FMO)• CPF (FMO)• PEO (Ships/Carriers/Subs)

• OPNAV N8

Purpose Execution issues w/

significant impact on shipbuilding and repair industrial base

PPBE issues w/ potential impact on shipbuilding and ship repair industrial base


FMBOD ResponsibilitiesFMBOD Responsibilities

• Chartered by CFFC/CPF to:

– Establish overarching Fleet Maintenance Policy

– Determine ship maintenance resource requirements

– Adjudicate cross-enterprise ship maintenance issues

– Implement best practices and lessons learned across the

Fleet Readiness Enterprise to enhance productivity

– Oversee standardization of maintenance processes across

all platforms

– Develop meaningful ship maintenance metrics

– Maintain awareness of national ship repair industrial base

– Oversee availability assignment process

– Ensure stakeholders advised of threshold issues


ProviderCurrent Comments

CNSF G

CNAF G Expeditionary

CSF Y Peak in units unavailable

NECC G FRP is green; 1NCD,

NNWC GMSC G

RFT GroupsCur-rent

Next

6 mo Comments

CSG

Presence

G G Meet CCDR demand

Surge(6 + 1) Y Y 6+0 surge 6+0

Tempo Y YCNO approval for Enterprise

ESG

Presence

G G Meet CCDR demand

Surge Y Y Reduced LPD availability Tempo G G All metrics within red line

Account YTDReadines

s Impact

Comments

Air Ops G G

Air Maint. [from CNAF]

Ship Ops G G

Ship Maint. Y GCarrier overlap at Norfolk Naval Shipyard

Combat Ops Y G

Contracts committed, but not obligated. Close EOY on plan.

Support Comments

Personnel G FIT, IA notification time

Training TBD Live training/ranges, synthetic training

Ordnance G Weapon stations

Supply G Average Customer Wait TimeInstallations G

Environment

Y USWTR, sonar, exercise concerns

Health Svcs G Individual health status data

Con. Develop. & Experiment

G

(1) Strike Group Readiness: FRP, O-Plan

(2) Unit Readiness: FRP, O-Plan (4) Readiness Support

(3) YTD Financial Execution Readiness Impact

UNCLAS VERSION FOR BRIEF PURPOSES.

Fleet Readiness Status IndicatorsFleet Readiness Status Indicators

GY


Maintenance Maintenance [N43][N43]

GREEN: No impact on Fleet readiness and or maintenance

YELLOWYELLOW: Potentially impacts Fleet readiness and or maintenance

RED: Significantly impacts Fleet readiness and or maintenance (cost and/or schedule)

GREEN: No impact on Fleet readiness and or maintenance

YELLOWYELLOW: Potentially impacts Fleet readiness and or maintenance

RED: Significantly impacts Fleet readiness and or maintenance (cost and/or schedule)

Status indicators

Previous slide

• Ability to Meet COCOM Tasking–Nothing to report

• CNO Avail Planning and Execution–Growth and New work issues; shipyard performance

Funding–Program execution; funds timing

Industrial Base Issues– Availability assignments out of home port; “One Shipyard”

performance

Congressional Issues– Balancing public shipyard workload

G

G

G

G

G


ThresholdsThresholds

• Advise CNO/Stakeholders if/when:– Maintenance impacts major Navy metric and/or

Combatant Commander event(s) (e.g., 6+0 vice 6+1; CVN

deployment date slip)

– Noteworthy maintenance discovery (e.g., FFG hull thinning)

– Funds beyond normal appropriation guidelines required

– Public/Political interest is likely (e.g., public shipyard work loading)

– Decisions affecting out-year programming (e.g., CVN tanks)

– Industrial base capacity & critical skills issues (e.g., CVN

overlap solution)


Informed Decision Making Informed Decision Making

Software indicates which items should be repaired to support selected mission.


Feeding Other Metric SystemsFeeding Other Metric Systems

MFOM

NTAs

P E S T O

12

Defense Readiness Reporting System-

Navy

DRRS-N ScreenTotal Force Integrated

Readiness Model (TFIRM)

PersonnelEquipmentSupplyTrainingOrdnance

DRRS Screen

Connecting Cost via TFIRM


Maintenance Domain Risk ItemsMaintenance Domain Risk Items

• One Shipyard execution of Norfolk Naval Shipyard carrier overlap workload

• USS ENTERPRISE FY08 availability

• Congressional Hot Points

• Potential shipyard downsizing impacts


Naval Shipyard Workload ForecastNaval Shipyard Workload Forecast

• The CNO brief contained a workload forecast graph that was classified “For Official Use Only-Business Sensitive”. To avoid classifying this version of the brief in that manner, the graph was removed for purposes of general distribution and key points noted below.

• Graph key points:• Submarine workload begins significant decline in

FY09• BRAC retention of all four SYs exacerbated capacity

overload• High overtime the norm thru FY08 due to projected

requirement reduction starting in FY09• Manning reduction glide slope feasible without

adverse personnel actions


FY 07 Execution PlanFY 07 Execution Plan

5% Challenge is in Addition to Previous Marks and Mitigations

CNO was provided a synopsis of the FY07 ship maintenance execution plan that

included the challenge noted in the banner below for all ship maintenance domain

members to execute all requirements using only 95% of projected funding. Specific

briefing numbers included in the version of this brief presented to the CNO have been

removed as they are no longer current.


–Maintenance governance is correctly aligned

–Maintenance requirements process approach is valid

Take-AwaysTake-Aways

–FY07 execution strategy

–Maintenance communication thresholds


A + A oFRP oLife Cycle A = Fleeto


Top 5 Cost Drivers by Ship ClassTop 5 Cost Drivers by Ship Class

Slide 10 backup.

Class System System System System System

CVN 68Aircraft Launching Systems

Steam Heating Systems

Discharge Storage Systems Aircraft Elevators

Firemain and Flushing Piping

CG 47Waste Heat Systems

Propulsion Shafting Fuel Oil Tanks

Helo Handl/Spt Facilities

Propellers/ Propulsors

DDG 51Prop. Reduction Gear

Propulsion Shafting

Comb Msl/Rkt Lnch/Stow/Handl

Propellers/ Propulsors

SS Gas Turb Gen Spt Systems

FFG 7SS Diesel Generator Sewage System

Helo Handl/Spt Facilities HP Air System Steering System

LHA 1 Propulsion Boiler Ballast TanksData Display Group Main Feed Pumps Aircraft Elevators

LHD 1 Propulsion BoilerCargo Ammo Elevator

Self-Contained Guns

Comms Antenna Systems

CW Cooling Distrib System

LPD 4 Propulsion BoilerSelf-Contained Guns

SS Turbine Generator

Main Cond./Air Ejectors Ballast Tanks

LSD 41Propulsion Diesel Engines Ballast Tanks

SS Diesel Generator

Boat Handling/Stowage Auxiliary Boilers

MCM 1Propulsion Diesel Engines

Propulsion Shafting Sea Valves

Minesweeping Systems Rudder

MHC 51Propellers/ Propulsors

Auto Prop. Control System MP/LP Air System

Minehunting Systems Fuel Oil Tanks

PC 1Propulsion Shafting Stabilizing Fins

Propulsion Diesel Engines

Prop. Shaft Bearings Rudder

SSN 688Air Conditioning Plants

Steam Reducing Valves Periscopes Sound Vibration Lube Oil Purifiers

United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces...

Documents

Transcript of United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces...