Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 1 Ship.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 1 Ship."— Presentation transcript:

1 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 1 Ship Maintenance RADM Jeff Brooks FFC N43 Ver: VSRA Final 15 Feb 07

2 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 2 Required Focus A + A o FRP o Life Cycle A = Fleet o

3 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 3 Desired 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

4 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 4 Agenda 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

5 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 5 Navy 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 Southwest Regional Maintenance Center (RMC) San Diego South Central RMC Ingleside Mid-Atlantic RMC Norfolk Trident Refit Facility Kings Bay Southeast RMC Mayport Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard & IMF (RMC) Ship Repair Facility Yokosuka (RMC) Nuclear Submarine Support Facility New London SUPSHIP Groton SUPSHIP Newport News Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Mission funded & aligned through “One Shipyard” construct.

6 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 6 POM/Budget Process Today’s Strategy Ship Maintenance & Modernization Domain (SYSCOMs) ENGINEERED MAINT. PLANS (Platform Sponsors/PEOs) MODERNIZATION Requirements Generation Fleet Readiness Enterprise $ CONDITION BASED MAINT. (Fleets) Inputs MaterialReadines s Units Ready For Tasking Demand Signal COCOMs NCCs FRP Readiness + Life Cycle Readiness Cost

7 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 7 Maintenance 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 INTEGRATED TRAINING BASIC TRAINING 6 Mo Planned Incremental Availability (PIA) or 10 ½ Mo Docking PIA DEPLOYMENT REDEPLOYMENT (SUSTAINMENT) MAINTENANCE PHASE Ao FRTP + Ao Life Cycle = Ao Total

8 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 8 Maintenance Program Content Modernization Corrective Maintenance (CSMP) Class Maint Plan (CMP) Engineered Requirements 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% FY05FY98 FY05 FY98 FY05 Executed Maintenance Man-days 41 43 16 70 20 10 82 8 10 21 64 23 13 21 58 21 43 36 SurfaceCarrierSubmarine

9 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 9 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

10 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 10 How Do We Determine the Right CMP Content? Maintenance Execution Ship Configuration Integration Maint History & Feedback Continuous Improvement Class Maint Plans Maintenance Requirements Assessment Procedures Maintenance Strategies Work Package Development Requirements Deferral Review Modernization CSMP 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Carrier Submarine Surface Modernization Corrective Maintenance (CSMP) Class Maint Plan (CMP) Engineered Requirements Executed Maintenance Man-days Cycles of Learning Drive CMP improvements. 41 43 16 70 1010 82 8 1010 21 64 23 13 21 58 21 43 3636 20

11 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 11 Corrosion control Planning/Support services Maintenance intensive components/systems Modernization What are the Big Cost Drivers? 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Surface Habitability/Upgrades Program Alterations Fleet Alterations Corrective Maintenance Class Maint Plan (CMP) Corrective, contingency CMP Scheduled Rqmts CMP Corrosion, contingency Corrosion Control Carrier Submarine Executed Maintenance Man-days Targets for Maintenance Improvement 1 27 30 7 16 7 5 7 1 42 16 18 1 12 8 2 1 58 11 7 13 8 1 1 1 29 24 13 6 6 6 3 41 24 9 18 7 21 26 15 16 1

12 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 12 Maintenance 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)

13 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 13 Program Life % of Original 100 Present CVN 68 SSN 688 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 SHIPMAI N Results

14 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 14 0 Ship Maintenance Funding Trends Maint FundingWith SuppPB07POM08RequirementBattle Force Ships 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013 Constant FY06 Dollars (M) 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 # Ships FY 320 360 The FRE Challenge!

15 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 15 Enterprise Relationships Navy Enterprise Fleet Readiness Enterprise Warfare Enterprises CNO N8/ FMB TYCOMs OPNAV N8/6/4/1 Providers Resource Sponsors RDA VCNO CFFC/CPF Threshold reports FMBOD

16 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 16 Alignment NAVSEA CSFCNAF CNSF FRE FRP Alignment CPFCFFC Warfare Enterprises FMBOD Ship Repair Technical Authority Contract Authority Life Cycle Mgmt. Class Maint Plans Shipyard Operation Shipbuilding & Modernization PEOs/Platform Sponsor Units Ready For Tasking

17 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 17 Governance 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

18 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 18 FMBOD 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

19 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 19 Provider Curren t Comments CNSFG CNAFG Expeditionary CSFY Peak in units unavailable NECCG FRP is green; 1NCD, NNWCG MSCG RFT Groups Cur- rent Nex t 6 mo Comments CSG Presenc e GGMeet CCDR demand Surge (6 + 1) YY 6+0 surge 6+0 Tempo YY CNO approval for Enterprise ESG Presenc e GGMeet CCDR demand Surge YYReduced LPD availability Tempo GG All metrics within red line Account YTD Readiness Impact Comments Air OpsG G Air Maint.[from CNAF] Ship OpsG G Ship Maint.Y G Carrier overlap at Norfolk Naval Shipyard Combat Ops Y G Contracts committed, but not obligated. Close EOY on plan. SupportComments Personnel G FIT, IA notification time Training TBD Live training/ranges, synthetic training Ordnance G Weapon stations Supply G Average Customer Wait Time Installations G Environme nt 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 Indicators GY

20 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 20 Maintenance [N43] GREEN: No impact on Fleet readiness and or maintenance YELLOW YELLOW: 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 YELLOW YELLOW: 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

21 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 21 Thresholds 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)

22 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 22 Informed Decision Making Software indicates which items should be repaired to support selected mission.

23 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 23 Feeding Other Metric Systems MFOM NTAs PESTO Defense Readiness Reporting System- Navy DRRS-N Screen Total Force Integrated Readiness Model (TFIRM) Personnel Equipment Supply Training Ordnance DRRS Screen Connecting Cost via TFIRM

24 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 24 Maintenance Domain Risk Items One Shipyard execution of Norfolk Naval Shipyard carrier overlap workload USS ENTERPRISE FY08 availability Congressional Hot Points Potential shipyard downsizing impacts

25 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 25 Naval 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

26 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 26 FY 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.

27 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 27 –Maintenance governance is correctly aligned –Maintenance requirements process approach is valid Take-Aways –FY07 execution strategy –Maintenance communication thresholds

28 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 28 A + A o FRP o Life Cycle A = Fleet o

29 United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 29 Top 5 Cost Drivers by Ship Class Slide 10 backup.


Download ppt "United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy United States Fleet Forces Operational Readiness, Effectiveness, Primacy 1 Ship."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google