Read Microsoft PowerPoint - RDML McManamon SNA 11 Jan.pptx text version

Surface Ship Maintenance Sustaining Th Current Fleet S t i i The C t Fl t

RDML McManamon

11 January 2011

1

Team Ships Organization

PROGRAM EXECUTIVE OFFICER SHIPS RDML DAVE LEWIS DEPUTY COMMANDER FOR SURFACE WARFARE RDML JAMES McMANAMON

SWE SUPPORT

PEO STAFF SURFACE WARFARE DIRECTORATE COMBATANTS OFFICE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AMPHIBIOUS & AUXILIARY SEALIFT OFFICE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

FLEET READINESS SEA 21A

DPM

SHIPS ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT OFFICE DIRECTOR

DEPUTY DIRECTOR

PMS 377

LHD8 / LCAC / LHAR / AADS

DPM

COMMANDING OFFICER SURFACE SHIP ENGINEERING PLANNING PROGRAM (SURFMEPP)

DEPUTY

PMS 400D DDG51

PMS 400F DPM PMS 317

LPD-1 7/ JCC(X) CGs / FFGs / DDG51s

DPM

DPM PMS 470

PMS 500 DDG 1000

DPM PMS 325

AUXILIARY SHIPS / SMALL BOATS & CRAFTS

AMPHIBIOUS /AUXILIARY/MINE

DPM

DPM PMS 333 DPM INACTIVE SHIPS

PMS 501 LCS

DPM PMS 385

STRATEGIC AND THEATER SEALIFT

INACTIVE SHIPS/ SHIP TRANSFERS

DPM PMS 326

DPM SHIP TRANSFERS

PMS 502 CG(X)

DPM

INTERNATIONAL FLEET SUPPORT

DPM

PMS 333/336

INACTIVE SHIPS/ SHIP TRANSFERS

2

SEA 21A ­ Surface Warfare - Readiness

Ensuring Surface Ships are Ready for Tasking

Increase Operational Availability (Ao) and reduce Total Ownership Costs (TOC) by adhering to time tested, combat proven, standards of performance, reliability, performance reliability and effectiveness Deputy Commander, Surface Warfare Commander, Naval Surface Forces

Bridge to the Fleet

SEA 21 is the `bridge' bridge linking requirements and acquisition commands to the waterfront and the Navy's operating forces

Our vision is clear

We are dedicated to building and sustaining a culture of readiness in th N forces t to i the Navy's surface f ' f ensure surface ships are ready for tasking

Fleet Readiness Fleet Maintenance Surface Training Fleet Logistics

Alignment

Operating within the integrated framework of the Surface Warfare Enterprise (SWE), our strategic objectives are challenging

Our mission is of critical importance to the nation

SEA 21 is responsible for the maintenance and modernization of nonnuclear surface ships that are currently l f hi th t tl operating in the Fleet

Planning Yard MSMO Contracts Fleet Technical

Accountability

Surface Combatants Amphibious Ships Special Mission / Boats & Crafts / Mine Warfare

2

3

Surface Single Training Integrator (SSTI)

· Created a single, centralized NAVSEA division responsible for developing, managing, executing, standardizing and evaluating all aspects of Fleet Introduction and Manpower, Personnel, and Training (MPT) p , , g( )

· Readiness Deep Dives / MPT Support · Crew Swap Coordination TEAM SHIPS Fleet Introduction Team Surface Warfare Enterprise Personnel Readiness Team

·

Manages and coordinates MPT initiatives across the lifecycle to increase and maintain surface ship readiness

· Planning: Crew scheduling and phasing plans, Training Planning Process Methodology (TRPPM) Boards, Training System Installation Plans (TSIPs) · A Acquisition: MPT management of new construction ships t i iti t f t ti hi transferring t th Fl t C f i to the Fleet, Crew Scheduling & Phasing Plan (CSPP) · Modernization: Mid-life/modernization manpower analysis, review and update of Ship Class Navy Training System Plan (NTSP) · Maintenance: Crew swap coordination, Surface Warfare Enterprise Personnel Readiness Team, Human Performance Readiness Reviews (HPRRs)

4

Take Away: SEA 21A Is...

· The single point of entry into NAVSEA for resolution of Fleet readiness issues

· The preferred provider for Fleet readiness answers

· Ensuring a balance of lifecycle management and responsive, Fleet readiness issue resolution

· Increasing and maintaining operational availability

· The provider of complete lifecycle answers, recommendations and decisions

· Integrator of technical guidance and program priorities

· The policy setter, process owner, and coordinator for Fleet readiness metrics for NAVSEA

· Governing body ensuring readiness is achieved efficiently and based on analytical rigor

· Bridging the gap between platform acquisition and Lifecycle Management

· Reduce Total Ownership Cost to the Fleet

Readiness is a Result of Good Lifecycle Management Practices

5

Carrier - Submarine ­ Surface Engineering Life Cycle Support Comparison

Carriers

FY 11 $ / Hull $ / H ll Service Life Service Life Prognosis

$5M 50 years 50 years

Subs

FY 11

$721K 33 years SSN 40 years SSBN

Surface

FY 11

$246K 3050 years 3050 years

?

NAVSEA Recommended Actions increase this to $636K / Hull

This is Thi i part of th cost of Ownership t f the t fO hi

6

6

Surface Ship End-to-End Process Map, Maintenance & Modernization Process Gaps

Assessment y Plan/Policy IMA Capacity/ Capability Sustainment Program Avail Execution/Wor k Certification

SURFMEPP

· Need for Integrated Assessment Program · Need for Integrated Sustainment Program · SSLCM scope limitations

· · No Maintenance Material Management Need for sufficiently "Engineered" Work Packages

· · · Availability Schedule Milestones Maintenance and Modernization Integration Establish appropriate Avail Type, Schedule and Duration Work P k W k Package Development, Logistics D l t L i ti

· Reconstitution of IMA Capacity/Capability

· "I" Level

· No Existing Avail Completion/Work Certification Process

· ·

Insufficient IT support systems

·

Gaps Identified p f

Lack of QA oversight

7

SURFMEPP Developed from Proven Carrier & Submarine Processes

SURFMEPP is "Getting the Maintenance Requirement `RIGHT'" · Technical Foundation Papers (TFP) by CLASS) · SHIP SHEETS · Baseline Availability Work Packages (BAWPs) · · · · · · ·

INACT

Surface Ship End-to-End Maintenance Process

Surface Ship Maintenance n Moderni zation Future State_v2.igx Deli very A-7 Years A-30 (A-900) A-29 (A-870) A-28 (A-840) 01 October 2005 A-27 (A-810) A-26 (A-780) A-25 (A-730) 01 January 2006 A -24 (A-720) A-23 (A -690) A-22 (A-660) A-21 (A-630) A-20 (A-600) A-19 (A-570) A -18 (A-540) A-17 (A-510) A-16 (A-480) 01 October 2006 A-15 (A-450) A-14 (A-420) A-13 (A-390) 01 January 2007 A-12 (A-360) A-11 (A-330) A-10 (A-300) A-9 (A-270) A -8 (A-240) A-7 (A-210) A-6 (A -180) A-5 (A-150) A-4 (A-120) 01 October 2007 A-3 (A-90) A-2 (A-60) A-1 (A-30) 01 January 2008 A-0 SA00 A+1 (A+30) CA00 A+2 (A +60) C+1 (C+30) C+2 (C+60) C+3 (C+90) SRA 1-1 SRA 1-2 SRA 1-3 DSRA 1 SRA 2-1 S RA 2-2 SRA 2-3 EDS RA ESRA SRA 3-1 SRA 3-2 DSRA 2 SRA 4-1 SRA 4-2 SRA 4-3 DSRA 3 SRA 5-1 SRA 5-2 O th e r

Tying It All Together LRMS (by hull) CMP Strengthening CDM Modernization Planning Yards Ship Life Cycle Health Cost Wise Readiness Risk Assessments

ASSESSMENTS

Timeline

A-650 50% ICMP Screened

A-600 80% ICMP Screened

A-530 Final BAWP

A-240 Pre-AWP #1

A-120 80% D Level Maint. Locked to $

A-85 P re-AWP #2

A-45 Final AWP

A-30 WPE R

A-0 Avail Start

C+60 Avail Close Out

A-530 100% ICMP Screened

A-240 50% D Lev el Maint. Locked to $

A-75 100% D Level Maint. Locked to $

A-35 WP Definitized

A-14 Send "Ready to Start" MSG

NSA (RMC acting) review work package with Executing Activities and AITs at Work Package Integration Conference (WFIC) (A-4)

NSA (RMC acting) definitizes (fi nali zes terms and conditions of contract) with MSMO (A-35 days)

MSM O

AVAIL WORK CERT SURFMEPP SUSTAINMENT RMC MANNING

NSA

S YSCOM

F le e t

O PNAV

A-765

DoD / D oN

Integ gration

S h ip

Ship Continuously Assessing Condition, wri ting 2Ks and entering into Shi p Speci fic C5MP

P lanning Start (A-12)

MSMO compl etes planning and estimating of work assigned by A-8 timeframe (A-55 days) Port E ngineer (RMC) screens / authorizes 80% of Dlevel repai r work package; MSMO initi ates pl anning (A -4)

MSMO compl etes planning and estimating of work assigned by A-4 timeframe (A-55 days) Port Engineer (RMC) screens / authori zes 100% of Olevel repair work package; MSMO initiates planning (A -4) Port Engi neer (RMC) screens / authorizes 100% of Ilevel repair work package; MSMO ini tiates planning (A -4)

MSMO completes planning and estimating of all work assi gned (A-55 days)

E x e c u tin g A c tiv it y

S h ip s F o rc e

Maintenance Team Monthly Planning Meetings (PB4M)

Executing Activity establishes Avai labi lity in Navy Maintenance Database (NMD) (A-12) RMC Requests Avail abil ity funding from TYCOM for initial planni ng of repair work (A-345 days)

Port Engineer (RMC) screens / authorizer 50% of D-level repair work package; MSMO i nitiates pl anning (A-8)

Port Engineer (RMC) screens / authorizes 100% of Dlevel repai r work package; MSMO initiates planning (A -4)

MSMO reports closeout data (cost) in NMO (C+1) Maintenan ce T eam conducts Work Package Execution Review (WPER) fi nali ze funding (A1)

Start of Avai l (SA00)

Dock Undoc Ship k Ship (DD00) (DD00)

Comp Prod. Work (WC0 0)

A vai l Compl. (CA00)

Mai ntenan ce Team conducts hot wash (C+1)

Maintenan ce Team i ssues departure report identifying final Avail costs (C+2)

S U R F M E P P " P la n n in g A c ti v ity "

Technical Foundation Paper Complete

Li fe Cycle Planning Conference

Execute Assessments and Document Requi red Repai Actions on SHOREFILE (Review Deferral Items with TYCOM/CR)

RM C

Review Deferred Items with CR Review Deferred Items with CR

Port Engineer (RMC) closes out Avail, close out date to NMD (C+2)

Issue Formal Pl anning Schedule Letter

Pl anning Activity (PEO / PARM) identifies tial list Headquarters id tifi iinii ti l li t off H d t Controlled & Procured Material (HCPM) (A-22) Update BAWP ICMP Tasks Wi th Assessment Results/New Requirements CSMP Review and B randing With TYCOM/CR & MT

P lanning Activi ty (PEO / PARM) p o des c e e ta u d g o provides incremental funding for acquisi tion of Headquarters Controlled & Procured Material (HCPM) (A-20) Update BAWP ICMP Tasks With Assessment Resul ts/New Requirements

Maintenance WP a te a ce Requirements to Controls All 2ks Branded Defer/Adjudicate Continuous Conduct BAWP Finalization Meeting

Planning Activity requests funding for equests u d g o development of Ship Installation Drawings (A-16) Turn over PreAWP to CLAS SRON

Upload BAWP Life Cycle ICMP Tasks to RMAIS

Planning SEA 05 Begins Activity ct ty C a ge Change compl etes all Deferral ship checks Request Letter (A-9) Adjudi cation Review Review Change Change Defferal Deferral Request Request Letters Letters

Planning Activi ty issues ship integration d a gs (S s) to teg at o drawings (SIDs) NSA for use by Executi ng Y ard and AITs (A-6)

Planning Activi ty deli vers materiall (LLTM and Kitt d t i d Kitted Materi al) (A-1)

BA WP/AWP C ose Out Close-Out Verifi cation & Assessment Meeting

Submit Final BAWP/AWP Closeoutt Cl Report Submi t Budget Input (Ship Sheet) TSO next PR/POM Review (Deferrals/ LRMS)

Final BAWP (Hand Off to TYCOM) Shi p deployed w/ initi al Operating Capability Shi p Modernized & Maintained to Current Operating Capabili ty (A-7 years) TYCOM identifi es CNO/CM Availability S chedule at Annual Fleet Schedul ing Conference (A-24) Pre AWP Review. Approves AWP for RMC/MT. Issues Moderni zation LOA

RMC/SPM negotiate MMBP s with TYCOM (Mar prior FY)

Update AWP ICMP Tasks With Assessment Resul ts/New Requirements

AVAILABILITY EXECUTION

Issue Final AWP

End of Cycle Analysis

Issue Pre-AWP #1

LRMS Update by hul l

TY C O M

Review Change Deferral Request Letters

Review Change Deferral Request Letters

Issue Pre-AWP #2

Review Change Deferral Items with RMC Technical Authority (Continuous) Modernization Sponsors provide fundi ng to Planning Activi ty for Ship Change Design (A-14) Moderni zation Sponsors lock work package to support Ship Checks (A-13)

Initial Class Maintenance Plan identifies l ife-cycl e maintenance requirements (deli very)

P EO / PA RM

Advanced planning letter (A-18)

SEA 2 issues initi al Hull Modernizati on P lan / Letter of Authorization (LOA) (including AITs) (A-12)

Modernization Sponsors provide funding to Pl anning Activity for Ship Installation Drawing (S ID) development (A-14)

Moderni zation & Repair Sponsors provide incremental funds for acquisition of l ong lead-time material by Executi ng Activity (A-9)

SEA 21 LOA Change 1 (A-6) Locks

Moderniza tion & Repair Sponsors submit and receive approval on all Moderniza tion Risk Assessme nts (A-5)

Moderniza tion Sponsor (AIT Manager) i dentifies AIT, support / schedule / impact requi reme nts (A-135 days)

Moderni za tion S pon sor (AIT Pl anning Acti vity (P EO) issues Manager) final Hull Modernizati on P lan / awards AIT Letter of Authorization (LOA) contract for Change 2, Certi fication Plans work not being done approved by prime (A-4) contractor (A-3)

Review and Approve Al teration/ Modernizati on Risk Assessment Letter. Submit and Implement Alterzation/ Modernizati on Risk Assessment Letter Moderniza tion Spon sor provides A vai lability Funding for Moderniza tion to RMC (A-45 days)

Revi ew and Approve B AWP/AWP Close-Out Report Fi nal Risk Assessment Letter

Send "Ready to Start" Message

Upload BAWP/AWP Mandatory ICMP Tasks

War Ships Ready for Tasking Now and In the Future

C+90

Refi ned Class Mai ntenance Pl an i dentifies Life Cycle Mai ntenance Requirements (continuous)

Instal l certification readi ness review (SEA 62) (A-18 to A-15)

SEA 62 conducts final certification readiness review (FCRR) (A-15 to A-12)

SYSCOMs conduct Weapons System Integration & Operability Test (WSIIT) (A-12 to A-9)

SYSCOMs Consolidated Software Del ivery NSWC Port Hueneme (A+2)

SYSCOMs conduct Final Platform Certification Decision (IPCD) (SEA 062) (C+4)

Fleet Schedul ing Conference @ A-7 years. Sy first identi fied, workload first identified, Capability Plan revised (August) (A-7 years)

SYSCOMs conduct initial Pl atform Certification Decision (PCQ) (SEA 062) (A-5) NCMC provides l ong-range Programming Review (FYOP and beyond) (A-24) P lanned basel ine review focus on stri ke force and interoperability, i ntegrati on, capability and balance issues NCMC, EMI assessment (A-18) Fleet identi fies maintenance fundi ng allocati on, availability, in shi p specific Maintenance & Moderni zation Business Plan (MMB P) (March; A-10) Planned baseline review focus on i nteroperabi lity, integration and maturi ty issues NCMC, EMI assessment (A-9) C5IMP deadline for Modernizati on, late proposals use Electroni c Change Configuration Board NCMC (A-6)

Quarterly Meeti ng NCMC to review C51 Modernization Plan, EMI assessment

Quarterl y Meeting NCMC to review C51 Modernization Plan, EMI assessment

IRCA - PR 09 (November) (A-14 months)

Quarterly Meeting NCMC to revi ew C51 Modernization Pl an, EMI assessment

A pproved C5IMP i nstal lations not certified requires SYSCOM request ri sk assessment approval from the cogni zant TYCOM (A-4)

Scene Setter - POM 08 IRGA - POM 08 OPNAV N43 presents "current FAST Team reviews workload, state" of planning all organizati ons negotiates revised workload offer feedback (October) guidance (November) (A-27 months) (A-26 months)

Sponsor P rogram Proposal (SPP) - P OM 08 Third iterative review of workload programming process OPNAV Sponsor N43 (February) (A-23 months)

DoN Budget Submittal - POM 08 Fleet submits proposed Maintenance Type budget to DoN (June) (A-19 months)

S cene Setter PR 09 (October) (A-16 months)

SPP - PR 09 (October) (A-16 months)

OSD Budget Submittal - POM 08 DoN submits proposed Maintenance type budget to OSD (September) (A 16 (A-16 months)

PresBudget Submittal - POM 08 DoN submi ts proposed Maintenance Type budget to President's Budget (January) (A-12 months)

DoN Submi t - PR 09 (June) (A 8 (A-8 months)

OSD Submi t - PR 09 (September) (A 4 (A-4 months)

PresBudg Submit - PR 09 (January) (A 0 (A-0 months)

Up dated EndEnd to ­ End Process

Maintenance and Modernization Integration

Single POC for ALL REQUIREMENTS & Material History

Cross ­ Enterprise Alignment SURFMEPP SUBMEPP CPA

8

SSLCM to SURFMEPP Transition

SURFMEPP & PRE / PRL SUBMEPP

Covered by ISEAs at NSWC

2S COG Discussion 2S COG Discussion

SHAPEC / Planning Yard Integration

SSLCM

Included Plan includes integrated waterfront support SURFMEPP w / continued Support from NAVSEALGOCEN Increased due to functional complexity & Scope Increased due to PMS & Modernization Integration Increased to improved System and Hull level requirements

9

9

Surface Force Corrosion Challenge

· PROBLEM: "Annual Cost of Corrosion for Navy Ships" study estimated 25% of surface ship maintenance b dget is e pended maintaining and s rface budget expended correcting corrosion/structure issues

Significant surface force maintenance cost driver g

· SOLUTION W t f t surface force organizations will l SOLUTION: Waterfront f f i ti ill leverage all ll existing efforts - including submarine force material preservation and corrosion control methodologies (Spruce Program) - to develop and execute a standardized preservation plan to maintain and sustain the highest level of surface force preservation across asset lifecycles

Develop and execute ships force corrosion prevention and control program

10

Corrosion Control

Corrosion Control Assistance Teams (CCAT)

· Training · Technical Expertise

· Tools Expand In NFLK

· Technology Insertion

Establish In MYPT Integrate Paint Teams

Envelop Anti-Corrosion Covers

· Significant

Water Tight Doors

· Fluidized Bed

reduction in corrosion related maintenance. maintenance

All ships by FY 11

Coating provides complete coverage in g p gaps and cracks.

FY 11 Pilot (23 on LSD-43 (10) On DDG-51

11

11

ABS Assessments

Material Condition Pilots

Timeline/Products

Pilot Ships & Survey Timeline

· LSD 42 USS GERMANTOWN

(EDPMA, 03 Dec 08 - 12 Aug 09, San Diego)

Pilot Products

· Finite Element Model · Survey Process Checksheets · Hull Maintenance Model

AMERICAN BUREAU OF SHIPPING

Naval Vessel Hull Assessment Check Sheet VESSEL:DDG-55 SYSTEM: N/A TANK: Fuel Tk GP-4 # 5-300-2-F

Compartment Findings 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 6 7. 8. 9. 10.

STATUS:

DATE:

LOCATION: INNERBOTTOM (Fr.300-338) Tk # 5-300-2-F

Status

Any RED responses should be brought to the attention of the Surveyor-in-C harge prior to survey / process being considered complete. COMMENTS:

Surveyor

· DDG 67 USS COLE

(DSRA, 15 Apr 09 - 28 June 09, Norfolk)

· Initial Survey Reports · SafeNet Doc mentation Documentation

· CG 53 USS MOBILE BAY

(EDSRA, June 09 - April 10, San Diego)

· Ship Life Assessment Booklet Update · Hull Maintenance Model Update · Periodic Survey Plan

· FFG 36 USS UNDERWOOD

( (DSRA 10 Apr 09 - 6 July 09,, Mayport) p y yp )

11

USS New Orleans USS Bonhomme Richard USS Chosin USS Winston Churchill USS Sampson USS Benfold USS Ashland USS Mesa Verde USS Shoup USS Barry USS Sterret USS Bulkeley USS Germantown (Revisit) USS L k Ch Lake Champlain l i USS Port Royal USS Stout

FY 11 Ships

USS GERMANTOWN Survey Summary

WB Tank 6-56-1-W WB Tank 6-43-1-W WB Tank 6-52-1-W 6 52 1 W WB Tank 6-70-2-W WB Tank 6-74-1-W WB Tank 6-85-4-W WB Tank 6-101-1-W WB Tank 3-93-1-W WB Tank 2-107-3-W Severe corrosion breakdown, stiffeners with thinned edges. Recommend blast, renewal of wasted steel, re-coat tank. Thinned and wasted stiffeners. Recommend renewal. Wasted overhead stiffeners Recommend renewal stiffeners. renewal. Heavily wasted overhead stiffeners, transverse bulkhead stiffeners, longitudinal bulkhead stiffeners, poor coating condition, poor outfitting condition. Recommendations have been addressed during availability. Tank blasted and coated, holes in stiffeners and plating coated over. Recommend repair wasted structure. Tank blasted and coated, holes in stiffeners and plating coated over. Recommend repair wasted structure. Fair coating condition with thinned and wasted transverse bulkhead stiffeners and wasted overhead longitudinal stiffeners. Recommend repair structure. Poor coating condition, thinned and wasted bulkhead stiffeners and poor condition of the outfitting in the tank. Recommend repair structure tank structure. Fair coating condition however rated poor due to wastage in way of the overhead longitudinal stiffeners, holed out deck plating in way of the longitudinal bulkhead vertical stiffeners and poor condition of the outfitting within the tank. Recommend repair structure. Fair coating condition, however rated poor due to wastage in way of the overhead longitudinal stiffeners, after transverse bulkhead vertical stiffeners, and holed out overhead plating. Recommend repair structure. Poor to fair coating condition however rated poor due to wastage in way of the overhead longitudinal stiffeners. Recommend repair structure. Severely wasted. Renewal required. Tank tops with holes and thinned plate, only minor repairs made in way of holed tank top. Recommend wasted tank top be renewed.

16

WB Tank 5-115-1-W WB Tank 5-125-1-W Foundations Under A/C Plants AC Machinery ­

If this were a commercial vessel and these critical deficiencies were corrected, ABS would feel confident classing the ship

Baseline Material Condition

· Utilizing ABS commercial experience & tracking software · Focus is Hull Structure & Key Distributed Systems

­ Hull, Scantlings, Deckhouse, Tanks ­ A/C El A/C, Electric Pl i Plant, CHT Fi CHT, Firemain, Chill d W i Chilled Water

Germantown Initial Results

Outstanding support from Crew, CLASSRON and RMC Survey identified areas requiring attention Analysis demonstrated the following:

· ·

· Finite element models produced · Risk assessment enables targeted maintenance activity · Way ahead ­ Integration w/SURFMEPP & RMCs, CLASSRONs y g ,

­ Included in ICMP updates

Initial structural design well-conceived Structured survey plan necessary to achieve expected service life

Developed tools will facilitate analytically-based future maintenance planning

12

5

12

ABS Assessments Example of SSLCM / SURFMEPP Impact

Baseline Material Condition

· Utilizing ABS commercial experience & tracking software · Focus is Hull Structure & Key Distributed Systems · Hull, Scantlings, Deckhouse, Tanks · A/C, Electric Plant, CHT, Firemain, Chilled Water · Finite element models produced · Risk assessment enables targeted maintenance activity · Way ahead ­ Integration w/SSLCM & RMCs, CLASSRONs · Included in ICMP updates

FY10 Ships ·USS Philippine Sea ·USS Roosevelt ·USS Paul Hamilton ·USS Antietam ·USS Fort McHenry ·USS John Paul Jones ·USS Rushmore ·USS Arleigh Burke ·USS Hue City USS ·USS Boxer FY11 Ships ·USS New Orleans ·USS Bonhomme Richard ·USS Winston S. Churchhill ·USS Chosin ·USS Sampson ·USS Benfold ·USS Ashland ·USS Mesa Verde ·USS Shoup USS ·USS Barry ·USS Sterret ·USS Bulkeley ·USS Stout ·USS Lake Champlain p ·USS Port Royal ·USS Germantown (Revisit)

Ex. of Findings on LSD 43: Excessive corrosion and metal loss ­ ballast tank 6-103-0-W

Conditions found and documented on Ship CSMP: Repairs in progress

13

Tackling Wholeness Issues across all Stakeholders

Phase1: Establish Readiness Task Force Phase 2: Capture & Analyze Current State Readiness Data Phase 3: Develop Actionable Recommendations Phase 4: Final Report & POA&M Development Phase 5: Manage Recommendation Execution

· SPY AWS Task Force (Phase 5) SPY-AWS

· Significant Sustainment Recommendations Identified · Ship's Self Sufficiency, Shore Support, Enhanced Periodic Assessments · Next Steps: · $12M in FY10 sweep-up funds identified to apply to FY10 and FY11 recommendations, and acceleration of many FY12 recommendations · CFFC AEGIS IPR

· MCM Readiness Task Force (Phase 5) R di T kF (Ph

· Completed Actions: Recommendation prioritization & Final Report signed out by SEA 21­ · 28 Dec 2010 · Next Steps: POM -13 issue papers developed for each recommendation and POA&M 13

· LPD-17 Readiness Task Force (Phase 3)

· Completed Actions: Assessment Team Deep Dive followed by Class Wholeness TF Update Dec 2010 · Next Steps: MP&T IWG/ Assessment Team Workshop Phase III + Final Recommendations

· BMD Readiness Task Force (Phase 2)

· Completed Actions: Up to Deep Dive on Detailed Recommendations · Next Steps: Japan Ship visits followed by Review of initial inputs for Draft report p p p y p p

14

14

Back Up

· · · · · · · · · SSRI Process SSRI Pilot Ship Progress Total Ship Readiness Assessment (TSRA) Sustainment Program SSLCM to SURFMEPP Transition IMA Capacity / Capability p y p y Availability Execution & Work Certification A Global RMC Organization Wholeness Task Forces

· SPY-AWS · MCM

15

SURFMEPP Stand Up Status

Building on success of SSLCM, SURFMEPP will synergize benefits of HQ and waterfront alignment

PRODUCTS

Engineering Studies / Technical Foundation Paper (TFPs)

FY09 RESULT

PR11 technical "quick-look" d t i t di and parametric studies complete DDG-51 class complete: 74,000 man-days of understated requirements per DDG

FY 10 RESULT

LSD-41/49 LSD 41/49 complete. 127 000 man-day l t 127,000 d requirements increase per LSD over remaining service life per hull Completed CG-47 and LHD-1 Class TFPs DDG -51, and LSD 41/ 49 SHIPSHEETs based on TFP Supported TYCOM with all SHIPSHEETS for FY 12 & FY13 Availabilities. (Unfunded Technical Requirements (UTR) and high value targets incorporated) BAWP: Business Rules established and p y implemented by USFFC/CPF SSRI: SURFMEPP is integration node for End ­ to ­End Surface Ship Maintenance Process Map Initial individual ship transition s from BAWP to AWP in progress (A-360 milestone) SURFMEPP leadership for management of all Surface Ship corrosion initiatives Integration o ABS results in teg at o of S esu ts requirements definition and budgeting process

FY 11 PLAN

Complete LPD-17 and LCS Complete LPD 17 TFPs Complete Long Range Maintenance Schedules (LRMS) ISO DDG/CG/LSD & LHD individual ships

SHIPSHEETS

Complete SHIPSHEETS for all Surface Ships to support POM 13 (Oct / Nov 10)

Baseline Availability B li A il bilit Work Packages (BAWPs) / SSRI (Surface Ship Readiness Initiative)

28 of 28 DDG 51 ships with f DDG-51 hi ith FY12 CNO avails being managed by rigorous and disciplined process

Execution of Business Rules for FY12 availabilities for LSD/CG/LHD Class ships. (70 total ships) FY 11-16 plan ISO assessing (148) surface ships Complete automation. C l t t ti ABS to be a tool, not a separate program

16

Corrosion Control/ABS

4 ships Initiated automated process to captu e ABS repair capture S epa recommendations to BAWP development process

MSMO M-Curve Pilot Implementation ­ BAE SDSR:

THE PLAN ­ BAE San Diego:

Pilot Phase 1: DDG 53 EDSRA (23 Jun SOA) ­ Limited to 4 BAE trades & 1 Subcontractor Pilot Phase 2: DDG 76 SRA ( 8 Sep SOA) ­ Expanded to all trades and all workers to include subcontractors

Goal: Demonstrate capability to track ingress and egress of shipyard personnel onto ships pier side or y private ship repair y p p yard. The into drydock areas in a p Proof of Concept is limited in scope and duration.

DDG 53 (JOHN PAUL JONES) EDSRA

End JPJ Monitoring

DDG 76 (HIGGINS) SRA

Post Analysis

6/10

7/10

8/10

9/1

10/1

11/1

12/1

1/11

2/11

3/11

Pilot Phase 1 Timeline

· · · · · Funding in place Purchase Order processed Equipment Delivered to BAE Install and Test Start of Availability DDG 53 EDSRA 3 May 5 May 28 May 9-16 June 23 June · ·

Pilot Phase 2 Timeline

Equipment Delivered to BAE qu p e t e e ed Start of Availability DDG 76 SRA 28 May 8 ay 8 Sep

Pilot Phase 1 Complete; Phase 2 Underway...

17

MSMO BAE SDSR Pilot p Proof of Concept:

Drydock Antenna Installation (JPJ) Pier #1 Antenna Installation (HIGGINS)

18

BAE SDSR Pilot

All Departments & Contractors: p

"RAP" = Resource Allocation Program (headcount)

21 October 2010 Report

19

BAE SDSR Pilot g Mid-Term Findings:

Findings

· Software issues

­ Cribmaster support was required to resolve software issues ­ Manual head count was very close to manning expectation; electronic data shows manpower shortages. ­ We preformed manual head counts several times that showed actual manning vs. projected manning results within h d t l i j t d i lt ithi 10%. Electronic data showed 50-60% shortage

· Structural placement

­ Location of receiver important. Cribmaster verified location and installation of antenna

· Excellent Management tool

­ Time on task clearly displayed, even with limited data collection

BAE Systems Proprietary Information 4

M-Curve Implementation ­ San Diego Ship Repair LPR Pilot

Recommendations for improvement

· Research the possibility of having the RFID tag embedded into the hard y p (i.e. inclement hat by the manufacturer. Ship Yard work environment ( weather, hydro blasting, etc.), can render the RFID tag inoperable. · Standardized placement of antennas on brows would prevent reconfiguration for each pier side availability and erroneous data.

Reporting Process

· BAE S t Systems has collected data on a daily b i f all d h ll t d d t d il basis for ll departments by t t b shift. The reports are available to various departments within BAE Systems. On a weekly basis, SDSR provides SWRMC and SEA 21 with a PDF snapshot of the M-Curve report, reflecting one day's activity with verification back up information.

BAE Systems Proprietary Information

5

20

M-Curve Implementation y Way Ahead:

Goal: Implement M-Curve tracking in all MSMO (prime) private yards.

· Socialize M-Curve requirement with all MSMO Primes · Plan is to provide equipment, services and software as Government Furnished (GFE/GFM) · Mod existing MSMO contracts and ensure future contracts include: · New CDRL/DID requirement · Award Fee Evaluation Board (AFEB) criteria to evaluate "Management" actions based on demonstrated cost reductions attributable to productivity enhancements derived from M-Curve analysis · Continue working closely with SEA 04X to document lessons learned & best practices from public and private yard pilots ti f bli d i t d il t

Other Considerations

· · · · Equipment/Software Configuration Baseline, Varies by Facility Baseline Union Buy-In Overall Procurement & Installation Cost Reporting Formats & Analysis

21

Tackling Wholeness Issues Across All Stakeholders

Phase1: Establish Readiness Task Force Phase 2: Capture & Analyze Current State Readiness Data Phase 3: Develop Actionable Recommendations Phase 4: Final Report & POA&M Development Phase 5: Manage Recommendation Execution

· SPY-AWS Task Force (Phase 5)

· Significant Sustainment Recommendations Identified

·

Ship's Self Sufficiency, Shore Support, Enhanced Periodic Assessments, Policy Updates $12M in CPF EOY FY10 sweep-up funds identified to apply to "must do" recommendations; Request support in POM 13 required to affect long term fixes

· Next Steps:

·

· MCM Readiness Task Force (Phase 4)

· Completed Actions: Survey, Assessment Interviews, IWG Draft Recommendations, Recommendation Prioritization · Next Steps: Final Report Development and Submission ­ ECD 31 Oct 2010

· LPD-17 Readiness Task Force (Phase 3)

· Completed Actions: Charter & POA&M promulgated Survey Results Analyzed Historical Studies analyzed promulgated, Analyzed, analyzed,

Assessment Team completed Fleet and Organizational deep dive interviews and analysis in Norfolk, VA

· Next Steps: Assessment Conducting Site Assessments in San Diego ­ ECD 31 OCT 2010; IWG Draft Recommendation

Development ­ ECD 1 Jan 2011

· BMD Readiness Task Force (Phase 1)

· Completed Actions: Initial Tasking Letter approved by CNSF, Charter / POA&M promulgated, IWGs Established · Next Steps: Survey Development ­ ECD 25 Oct 2010, System Component Reviews ­ ECD 20 Dec 2010

22

CNRMC Lines of Report

RDA CNO

ECH I

BSO 70

CPF PEO CV

IN SERVICE CVNs

BSO 60

SEA 00

BSO 24

SEA 04 SEA 07

RQ QMT GEN

FFC

ECH II

SEA 21

REQ QUIREMENTS GEN NERATION

SEA 09

SEA 04X

SRF

PMS312

RQMT GEN N

SURFMEPP

PHNSY + IMF

C400

PROCESS and EXECUTION

PSNS + IMF

NNSY

PNSY

SUB MEPP

CNSL

ECH III

C101

CPA SWRMC SERMC NSSA ECH IV

23

BRAC 2005

CNRMC Intentions

CNRMC to Engage Key Surface Community Initiatives:

Surface Team One (ST1) Life Cycle Management Group Surface Ship Readiness Initiatives

Transition to SURFMEPP Assessments (TSRA) Sustainment RMC Manning / "I" Level Manning Availability Execution and Work Certification

P f Performance Agreement / Improvement A t I t Industry Relationships

24

ST1 & LCMG Status Efforts in Progress

· C Continuing S Support of the S f f Surface Ship Fleet Readiness Initiative (C S (Carrier and S S Sub SMEs involved where appropriate) )

· · · · · · · · · Surface Ship Sustainment Program Integrated Assessment Program Transition from SSLCM Activity to SURFMEPP Availability Execution and Work Certification RMC / I-Level manning Analyzing Fleet and subject matter experts' feedback and performance metrics. Gaining insight into existing resources and action plans Cataloguing sustainment resources/plans so as to mitigate duplication and maximize efficiencies Prioritizing resources, including Sustainment

· Establishing LCMG (Carrier best practice)

· Implementing "Global RMC" Practices

·Coordinating the Global RMC Annual Budget and Requirements Planning Process ·Implementing a Global RMC Consistency and Commonality Initiative ·Implementing a Global RMC Performance Measurement Plan

· Developing Strategic Approach for Availability Planning and Execution p g g pp y g

· Developed and implementing a unifying Availability Project Team Handbook. (Carrier and Sub best practice) · Strategy Development Underway (Carrier and Sub best practice)

· ·

USS ARLEIGH BURKE (DDG51) FY10 Mod Avail: 7 Specific Execution Strategies in development (including Risk Management, Hull Access, Work Integration, etc.) USS CHOSIN (CG 65) M d FY11 A il 12 Pl Mod Avail: Planning St t i d ft d E i Strategies drafted, Execution St t i under d ti Strategies d development l t

· Continuous Hot Wash Process on LSD 41 Mid-Life Program allows for strategic collection of lessons learned throughout avail execution.

· Leveraging Hot Wash / Super Hot Wash Program

· Align with ST1 and "Global RMC" approach Global RMC · Serve as input to Availability Planning/Execution Strategies, Avail Project Team Handbook, Project Team Development, Knowledge Sharing Networks

25

Surface Ship Readiness Initiative (SSRI)

Fleet Intro

Expected Service Life p

Assessments:

Decom

Assess Ship

TSRA

· Skilled techs performing documented procedures · Utilize NMD & other tools · Mission specific focus

SURFMEPP:

Continuous Sustainment Contin o s S stainment Process

Maintain Readiness

Sustainment Plan M i t Pl Maintenance

SURFMEPP

· · · · ·

Class Maint. Planning g Availability Planning Maint. Planning Data Systems Cost Engineering Material Management

Avail Ex. & Work Cert:

· Technical Adjudication of work · Event Readiness · Test & Certification of work

Sustainment:

Avail Ex. & Work Cert

Execute Avail.

· · · · ·

Maintenance Engineering Performance Monitoring Fleet Engineering Support Training & Tech. Docs Obsolescence

26

SSRI Pilot Ship Progress

14 October 2010 Update

Ass sessment End dtoEnd End d Date Pos sition Sus stainment SUR RFMEPP

27

Ava ail Ex &

Ava ail Type

Star rt Date

Hom meport

Wo ork Cert

LSD 43 LPD 17 LSD 47 LSD 47 DDG 51 DDG 105 CG 66 LPD 18 LHD 6 FFG 54 DDG 67 MCM 2 MCM 3 CG 65 MCM 13 DDG 81 DDG 65 FFG 38

Norfolk Norfolk San Diego San Diego Norfolk San Diego Mayport San Diego g San Diego Puget Sound Norfolk Japan San Diego Pearl Harbor Bahrain Norfolk San Diego San Diego

EDPMA CMAV EDPMA EDSRA PSA DSRA PMA DPMA SRA SRA DSRA DSRA DSRA DSRA DSRA EDSRA DSRA

5/10/2010 3/7/2011 5/31/2010 6/18/2010 7/21/2010 6/15/2011 8/4/2010 1/28/2011 9/8/2010 12/13/2010 9/29/2010 3/23/2011 11/2/2010 / / 1/9/2011 / / 11/3/2010 7/13/2011 11/15/2010 2/4/2011 1/5/2011 4/5/2011 1/12/2011 4/13/2011 1/12/2011 3/16/2011 1/19/2011 7/13/2011 1/31/2011 5/2/2011 2/9/2011 5/25/2011 2/16/2011 8/3/2011 5/4/2011 8/5/2011

Begun Begun Begun Begun Begun Begun A27 A28 A40 A90 A97 A97 A104 A116 A124 A131 A209

Full Test, 0 "gaps" Partial Test, significant "gaps"

Partial Test, minor "gaps" No Yield, major "gaps"

Enhance ESL & Improve Readiness on Every Hull

Manning

Pro ogram

Pro ogram

Pro ocess

RM MC

Ship p

TSRA

Continuous Assessment During FRP

· TSRA I - Baselining systems material condition to support end-ofavailability integrated test phase

· Pre-Availability (A-240) · Identify all Depot level worthy items

· R d Reduce l late di discovery · Reduce growth and new work (Premiums)

· TSRA II - Tanks, voids, structures and selected HM&E/C5I systems

· Concurrent with CNO Availability · Integrated Test Plan (CNRMC instruction)

· TSRA III - Get ship ready for successful deployment

· Pre-deployment (D-90 to D-180) · HM&E, Combat Systems & C4I systems (assess, repair and train) · BMDRA - Mission Specific

· Initial phase of BMDRA (D-90 to D-180) · Pre-Deployment (D-30 to D-45)

· TSRA IV - Get ship ready for special events

· Pre-INSURV (I-90 and I-120), TYCOM directed, etc.

28

TSRA (Cont'd)

Status

· DRAFT TYCOM Instruction

· CNSL lead, Joint CNSP/CNSL Instruction

· DRAFT CNRMC Policy Instruction · N ti Notional b d t projections b i d l budget j ti being developed f POM 13 l d for POM-13 · Ship class assessment matrices developed

· Assessment procedures 95% completed development p p p · TFBRs submitted for non-ICMP tasks (incorporate into ICMP)

· Position descriptions developed for RMC Assessment Directors · TSRAs commenced on Pilot ships

· CHOSIN TSRA I ­ 85% complete · BENFOLD TSRA IV ­ In progress · ARLEIGH BURKE, RUSHMORE, HUE CITY TSRA II ­ In progress

· Aggressive management of Pilots to improve effectiveness/efficiency of TSRA policy & execution

29

Sustainment Program

· The Sustainment Program received end of year funding from USFFC and CPF

· Fully funded HM&E and C5I for ISEAs to support the SSRI pilot program across 16 + 1 ships (USS COLE added) dd d)

· Supports CASREP / DFS / TSO reviews · Funds PMS / EOSS / TM deficiencies

· Naval Maintenance Database Sustainment ($4.75M)

· Provides NMD software maintenance and upgrades · Funds troubleshooting and discrepancy resolutions

· HM&E sustainment ($13.1M)

· Supports shortfalls in p pp performance monitoring ( g (MRDB) ) · Technical Document deficiencies · Obsolescence management · Distance Support

· Other Sustainment Functions ($8.4M)

· Supports Surface Team 1 & Lifecycle Management Group

· Critical Spares Procurement ($ TBD) $

30

SSLCM to SURFMEPP Transition

· Transition to SURFMEPP

· SURFMEPP shore-based command establishment at Under Secretary of the Navy for approval · Additional FY10 funds received from CPF and USFF to support further acceleration of core products

· · · ·

Technical Foundation Papers (TFP) and BAWPs Class Maintenance Plan Strengthening Corrosion Control Management ABS Management 16 ships scheduled for FY11 survey / Providing direct oversight of for all FY11 dry-dock surveys g p y g g y y

SURFMEPP ­ TYCOM BAWP / AWP / TFP Management

CLASS DDG CG LSD LHD LHA LPD LCC MCM PC FFG LCS TOTAL 28 70 134

31

FY10 FY 10 28

FY11 FY 11 55 8 5 2

FY12 FY 12 87 16 9 4 0 3 1 5 4 3 2

· Additional ship classes receive BAWPs, AWPs and TFPs every year · All ship classes will have BAWPs, AWPs d TFP b AWP and TFPs by FY 14 · Production schedule is dependent upon resources in place at SURFMEPP

IMA Capacity / Capability

· Staff RMCs with appropriate skill-sets to execute the Navy's maintenance efforts and train future Sailors to be Journeyman engineers · Return Journeyman training at I-Level organizations · Increase I-Level capacity by 385 CIV and 1584 MIL · Re-establish capabilities in the following areas:

· HM&E (Inside/Outside) (Propulsion, Electrical Repair) · Services (Weight Test Rigging Cranes, Corrosion Control, Small Boats/Rhibs Lagging Test, Rigging, Cranes Control Boats/Rhibs, Lagging, Tool Issue) · Combat Systems (VLS, Nav, Sonar, Fire Control, Chain Gun, CIWS, Int/Ext. Comms) y g y · QA, Tech Library, Planning, Safety

SERMC SWRMC NWRMC NSSA HRMC Total Civ. Mil. Civ. Mil. Civ. Mil. Civ. Mil. Civ. Mil. Civ. Mil. 324 116 1,025 430 73 33 1,430 546 89 13 2,941 1,138 72 396 320 0 539 30 103 111 262 569 21 110 35 385 1,584

Department Name Current RMC Manning Proposed RMC Manning Increase Total Required RMC Manning

436 1 085 1 000 1,085 1,000

135 1 692 1 115 1,692 1,115

13 3 386 2 734 3,386 2,734

32

Availability Execution & Work Certification

· Tasking sent to RMC Commanders 17 Sept 2010:

· Pilot Implementation Letter · DRAFT I t ti and P li f Pil t Shi Instruction d Policy for Pilot Ships

· 5 focus areas for improvement:

· · · · · Technical Adjudication of work identified in execution Integrated Test Plan management Availability Certification Event Readiness Availability Closeout

· Actions to Date:

· · · · · Commenced Pilots (RMC ownership) ( p) Teams commissioned for rapid process improvement: Identify resource shortfalls to execute availabilities Plan to Institutionalize changes to standard items: updates to JFMM etc. On glide slope for Full implementation in FY12

· Preliminary Results:

· Trained CHOSIN, ARLEIGH BURKE & FORT MCHENRY project teams on new processes · Collecting survey feedback on current state & new processes

33

A Global RMC Organization

· ...of a Global RMC Organization that operates in a consistent

manner utilizing increasingly common processes. · ...of a Global RMC Organization that will have an effective centrally monitored business, manning and operations plan that supports the entire organization. · ...of a Global RMC Organization that enables each RMC to be responsive to their assigned ships with regard to the planning and execution of maintenance and modernization AND th t our d ti f i t d d i ti that collective performance measures will show that responsiveness.

34

SPY-AWS TF Current Status

Phase

Phase1: Establish Readiness Task Force Phase 2: Capture & Analyze Current State Readiness Data Phase 3: Develop Actionable Recommendations Phase 4: Final Report & POA&M Development Phase 5: Manage Recommendation Execution

Action Description FY10 / FY11 / FY12 Recommendations SWE BOD Action Ite ems FY11 Periodic Assessment (PA) Plan Status Updates POM 13 Issue Papers N86 Recommendations N1 Recommendations

Status $12M in FY10 sweep-up funds received; initiated TPSs to apply funds to remaining FY10, FY11 and discrete FY12 recommendations. RDML McManamon briefed SWE BOD on TF Status. Completed FY11 PA schedule ­ majority of Fleet EOY Funding supporting PA's. Per request: provided a status of current funding and recommendations to ADM Harvey staff for input to VCNO. Developed and coordinated papers with N1, N86, N43, and NETC N4. N86 briefed N86 owned recommendations in developed POM 13 issue papers. N1 owned POM 13 issue papers briefed to Admiral Pandolfe.

Date 08 SEP

15 SEP 24 SEP 04 OCT 04 OCT 08 OCT 18 OCT

Next Steps S

· 26 OCT: Task Force to begin tracking recommendations and associated funding execution in implementation model and dashboard

35

2

MCM TF Current Status

Phase

Phase1: Establish Readiness Task Force Phase 2: Capture & Analyze Current State Readiness Data Phase 3: Develop Actionable Recommendations Phase 4: Final Report & POA&M Development Phase 5: Manage Recommendation Execution

Action Description Recommendation Review

Action Items n

Status Task Force Leadership met with each working g p (MPT, ILS, Sustainment) and provided group ( , , ) p additional feedback on each recommendation. Final actionable recommendation including cost, funding sponsor, and implementation plan submitted by each working group group. Draft of Task Force final report developed and submitted to SEA 21A Leadership for review. Reading session held by SEA 21A Leadership with key stakeholders. Recommended edits and feedback were provided to the writing team.

Date 4 OCT

Recommendation Submittals 1st Draft of Final Report Reading Session

8 OCT

15 OCT 18 OCT

Ne Steps ext

· 31 OCT: All recommended edits and feedback incorporated and report finalized.

36

3

LPD 17 TF Current Status

Phase1: Establish Readiness Task Force Phase 2: Capture & Analyze Current State Readiness Data Phase 3: Develop Actionable Recommendations Phase 4: Final Report & POA&M Development Phase 5: Manage Recommendation Execution

Phase

Action Description

Endorsement of Charter and POA&M Norfolk Assessment Deep Dive

Status

COMPACFLT endorsed, with USFF for signature and then to be returned to NAVSEA . Assessment Team completed deep dive i t i A tT l t dd di interviews with ESG 2, NSSA, Port Engineers, INSURV, PMR, CNE, ATGLANT, SURFLANT, LPD 17, LPD 19, and LPD 21 communities. Assessment Team deployed t S Di A tT d l d to San Diego t conduct to d t deep dive interviews. To date, the Assessment Team has met with LPD 18, LPD 20, CLASSRON, and Port Engineers. Task Force status and preliminary findings briefed to RDML Murdoch.

Date

17 AUG ­ (Ongoing) 8 OCT

Action Items

San Diego Assessment Deep Dive

11 OCT ­ 1 NOV

Task Force Status

13 OCT

Ne Steps ext

· 18 OCT ­ 1 NOV: Assessment Team to continue PACFLT / West Coast deep dive interviews with SWRMC, ESG3, CS Port Engineers, CNSP (N6, N7, N43), ATG, SPAWAR, EA-PAC, and NSWC PHD. · Ongoing: IWG developing preliminary findings and recommendations leveraging assessment team and historical data data.

37

4

BMD TF Current Status

Phase

Phase1: Establish Readiness Task Force

Phase 2: Capture & Analyze Current State Readiness Data

Phase 3: Develop Actionable Recommendations

Phase 4: Final Report & POA&M Development

Phase 5: Manage Recommendation Execution

Action Description Charter / POA&M Weekly Outbrief W kl O tb i f

Action Items n

Status Charter and POA&M submitted to RDML McManamon for signature. Developed standardized weekly outbrief schedule D l d t d di d kl tb i f h d l for the Task Force to review detailed issues, begin development of recommendations, and update schedule as needed. Comprehensive BMD survey distributed to the Fleet. Task Force conducted system component analysis on AWS 400 Hz ECW and APC-1A to understand AWS, Hz, ECW, APC 1A associated Readiness concerns with these components.

Date 28 SEP ­ (Ongoing) 04 OCT

Survey System Component Analysis

13 OCT 19 OCT

Ne Steps ext

· 22 OCT: Final determination of Assessment Team site visits / travel schedule. · 26 OCT: System component analysis of CDLMS complete. · 29 OCT: Surveys returned from the Fleet, and commencement of Survey analysis. ·15-19 ·15 19 NOV: Task Force Deep Dive Interview #1: NSWC Corona Corona.

38

5

Information

Microsoft PowerPoint - RDML McManamon SNA 11 Jan.pptx

38 pages

Find more like this

Report File (DMCA)

Our content is added by our users. We aim to remove reported files within 1 working day. Please use this link to notify us:

Report this file as copyright or inappropriate

291109