MLF 9.3 (April 2015)

Afghanistan Retrograde O F-35 Sustainment Corrosion Mitigation O Life Cycle Control

The Publication of Record for the Military Logistics Community

Support Strategist

Rear Adm. Jonathan A. YuenCommander, Naval Supply Systems Command and Chief of Navy Supply Corps

www.MLF-kmi.com

April 2015Volume 9, Issue 3

NAVAIR

Special pull-Out Supplement

Excusive Interview with:

ReaR adm. Paul SohlCommander, Fleet Readiness Centers and Assistant Commander for Logistics and Industrial Operations, NAVAIR

Because failure is not an option

The real world can be challenging, but you face the challenges head on and so should your computer. With the most secure, most manageable rugged notebooks, you can focus on what matters most.

Learn More at Dell.com/rugged

Cover / Q&AFeatures

Your single-source solution for material and services.

www.SupplyCore.com

ReaR admiRal Jonathan a. Yuen

Commander Naval Supply Systems Command

and Chief of Supply CorpsU.S. Navy

12

Departments Industry Interview2 editoR’s PeRsPective10 suPPlY chain18 White PaPeR foRum19 ResouRce centeR

KaRen WalKeRVice President for Range and Environmental Services ManTech International Corporation

April 2015Volume 9, Issue 3MILITARY LOGISTICS FORUM

20

4team of teamsBy December 31, 2014, the united States transferred over 300 military installations and $180 million in excess property to the afghan government. concurrently, over 30,000 pieces of rolling stock and 50,000 shipping containers were sent back to the united States.By C. Todd Lopez

8stoP the Rustcorrosion accounts for over $22 billion in annual spending by DoD. the navy’s portion amounts to $7.4 billion while the marine corps spends $500 million a year on corrosion.By Peter BuxBaum

16life cYcle lessonsDoD managers have focused intensely on minimizing the life cycle costs of platforms and systems for well over a decade. Yet according to defense contractors, there are still opportunities for further reductions that pursue the same objective either internally or for commercial customers. By Henry Canaday

Transforming defense supply and logistics requires a new perspective.Leidos is building on our legacy support for the armed forces with transformation, innovation and global expertise.

learn more at

leidos.com/logistics

© Leidos. All rights reserved.

navaiRsPecial Pull-out suPPlement

1Exclusive interview with:

Rear Adm. Paul SohlCommander, Fleet Readiness Centers and Assistant Commander for Logistics and Industrial OperationsNAVAIR

7f-35’s alisThe Autonomic Logistics Information System is key to the Lightning’s sustainment program. Version 2.0 of the F-35 Lightning II’s Autonomic Logistics Information System is now being rolled out.By Henry Canaday

Because failure is not an option

The real world can be challenging, but you face the challenges head on and so should your computer. With the most secure, most manageable rugged notebooks, you can focus on what matters most.

Learn More at Dell.com/rugged

As transportation demands from DoD continue to decline in step with the retrograde plan from Afghanistan, stress is increasing on the commercial providers that pick up the capacity excess where organic transportation assets leave off.

Examples are abundant. Compared to 2011 levels, the ocean liner sector has declined about 50 percent—including 13 percent from last year alone. The U.S. flag fleet has seen a 20 percent workload reduction since January 2012. The results are tangible. In 2013, 11 international trading vessels within the Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) program either reflagged to foreign flag ships or were scrapped without replacement due in large part to the reduction in demand. While that may not have a substantial effect today, the problem will magnify when there is a surge capacity requirement and there are fewer ships in VISA. There is little doubt that TRANSCOM would find the capacity and provide the lift, but the time delays will impact readiness and responsiveness.

General Paul Selva, commander, U.S. Transportation Command, also noted that within the next 10 years, 1.6 million square feet of roll-on/roll-off capacity will leave the ready reserve force due to age. This amplifies the sealift shortfall that can easily be envisioned.

Sequestration-driven funding “challenges” in fiscal year 2013 threaten USTRANSCOM access to Maritime Security Program (MSP) ships and supporting infrastructure and reduce overall VISA capacity. Companies that sign up for MSP are paid stipends to offset operating costs associated with maintaining the U.S. flag registry and for being a part of either VISA or the Voluntary Tanker Agreement.

Airlines are faring no better. Declines in troop movements have decreased capacity requirements dramatically and could further impact airlines’ interest in being a part of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF). In March 2014, World Airways shuttered its doors, citing the cancellation of a DoD contract. World shouldered much of its 68-year career carrying troops. Evergreen International Airlines was another airline that was hurt by declining DoD contracts, closing its doors in late 2013.

DoD, USTRANSCOM and the Air Mobility Command recently concluded a head-to-toe study of the CRAF program. CRAF partner airlines and outside experts also participated in the study. Selva announced that as a result of the study, several changes are scheduled to be implemented as part of the FY16 Airlift Services in support of the contract. The changes will allow the “continuation of a viable and ready CRAF program that is capable of answering any future requirements, and provide best value and service to the U.S. government.”

One of the main missions of Afghan president Ashraf Ghani during his recent visit to the United States was to try and slow down the withdrawal of U.S. forces. From a purely transportation perspective, this would have only a minor impact on the system. It would decrease the amount of lift coming out and only modestly increase the lift going back in as troop rotations step up.

Selva has been quite clear that further reductions in funding threaten our surge lift capabilities—“future reductions in U.S. flag capacity put our ability to fully activate, deploy and sustain forces at increased risk.” He was speaking directly about shipping, but the same holds true for airlift. In the United States, line haul truckers and train systems are also feeling the pinch.

Publication of Record for the Military Logistics Community

editorialEditor-In-ChiefJeff mcKaughan [email protected]

Managing EditorHarrison donnelly [email protected]

Copy EditorsCrystal Jones [email protected] Magin [email protected]

CorrespondentsHeather Baldwin • Christian Bourge • Peter Buxbaum Henry Canaday • Cheryl Gerber • Hank Hogan Marc Selinger • Karen Thuermer • William Murray

art & designArt DirectorJennifer Owers [email protected]

Ads and Materials ManagerJittima Saiwongnuan [email protected]

Senior Graphic DesignerScott morris [email protected]

Graphic Designers andrea Herrera [email protected]

advertisingAssociate PublisherJane engel [email protected]

Kmi media GroupChief Executive OfficerJack Kerrigan [email protected]

Publisher and Chief Financial OfficerConstance Kerrigan [email protected]

Editor-In-ChiefJeff mcKaughan [email protected]

ControllerGigi Castro [email protected]

Trade Show CoordinatorHolly Foster [email protected]

operations, circulation & ProductionOperations AdministratorBob Lesser [email protected]

Circulation & Marketing AdministratorDuane Ebanks [email protected]

CirculationDenise Woods [email protected]

a Proud member of:

subscription informationMilitary Logistics Forum

issn 1937-9315 is published 10 times a year by

KMI Media Group. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction with-out permission is strictly forbidden. © Copyright 2015.Military Logistics Forum is free to qualified members of the U.S. military, employees of the U.S. government and

non-U.S. foreign service based in the U.S. All others: $75 per year. Foreign: $159 per year.

corporate officesKMI Media Group

15800 Crabbs Branch Way, Suite 300 Rockville, MD 20855-2604 USA

Telephone: (301) 670-5700 Fax: (301) 670-5701

Web: www.MLF-kmi.com

Military Logistics Forum

Volume 9, Issue 3 • April 2015

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Jeff McKaughaneditOr

THE PLATFORM

MATTERSSpecial missions call for special aircraft. Gulfstream’s military service record

stretches nearly a half-century and is marked by versatility, reliability

and performance. Gulfstream aircraft perform as trainers and transports,

intelligence gatherers and medevac platforms. Our aircraft have always

ranked among the top in dispatch and reliability for the military. An efficient

business-jet platform means crews fly high and fast for extended periods.

Whatever your mission, Gulfstream delivers.

BOB RANCK | +1 703 276 9500 | GULFSTREAM.COM/SPECIALMISSIONS

By December 31, 2014, the United States transferred over 300 military installations and $180 million in excess property to the Afghan government. Concurrently, over 30,000 pieces of rolling stock and 50,000 shipping containers were sent back to the United States.

Much of that work was accomplished under the direction of U.S. Army Central’s 1st Sustainment Command (Theater) as part of its four-phase Operation Drum Beat (ODB) and Operation Reliable Tempo (ORT) June 2012 to December 2014, which was designed to retrograde U.S. servicemembers, equipment and vehicles from Afghanistan by the presidentially-mandated December 31, 2014 deadline, thus transitioning the U.S. presence there from Operation Enduring Freedom to Operation Resolute Support (ORS).

Under the orders of International Security Assistance Forces Joint Commander Lieutenant General Joseph Anderson and United States Forces Afghanistan (USFOR-A) Commander Major General Jeffery Colt, who provided operational command over ODB, the 1st TSC & 3rd Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) conducted ORT with a team-of-teams, which was required to tackle this monumental mis-sion; no one command or agency could do it alone.

To accomplish the mission, the 1st TSC and USFOR-A depended upon strategic partnerships with Army Materiel Command; Defense Logistics Agency; U.S. Transportation Command; Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command; United States Central Com-mand J-4; United States Central Command Deploy-ment Distribution Operations Center; Army G-4; Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logis-tics and Technology; and others. “Our relationship with these strategic partners was the key to success,” said Major General Darrell Williams, commander, 1st TSC. “This is the ultimate team sport.”

“The 1st TSC’s operational command post, located in Kuwait, and their main command post, located at Fort Bragg, N.C., provided tremendous reach-back capability, fostering success in personnel and equip-ment management that supported the retrograde of equipment from Afghanistan,” said Williams.

Operating in Afghanistan from April to December 2014 to con-duct Phases 3 and 4 of ORT for the 1st TSC was the 3rd ESC, com-manded by Brigadier General Flem B. “Donnie” Walker Jr.

The 3rd ESC and the team-of-teams accomplished the largest ret-rograde of equipment and personnel in the Army’s modern era. This is due to the challenging geographical location of Afghanistan and the aggressive timeline to retrograde equipment out of the country by the end of 2014.

The 3rd ESC was involved in Ph.D.-level logistics, using lessons learned from Iraq to get the mission accomplished. To retrograde equipment, it was necessary to use every possible transportation node

while placing an emphasis on the stewardship of resources and creat-ing efficiencies.

“Our mission in Afghanistan was to be the single-sustainment mission command for the entire combined joint operations area,” Walker said. “Our doctrinal mission is to serve as a forward opera-tional command post for a theater sustainment command; we executed this mission under the 1st TSC, whose focus is on the entire USCENTCOM area of responsibility.”

Walker said the 3rd ESC’s mission involved five major lines of effort: daily sustainment operations; theater provided equipment (TPE) retrograde; materiel reduction; support to base closure/trans-fer; and preserving the first team.

Retrograde-specific lines of effort included collecting TPE and sending it back to the United States. “We executed that through the 401st Army Field Support Brigade, out of ASC. TPE accountability and retrograde have been top-priority missions,” said Walker.

Materiel reduction was a huge task; this included the sorting, processing and shipment of virtually any type of equipment imagin-able that was either identified for disposal or put back into the Army’s inventory for future use.

Another challenge was base closures and transfer of installations. “We’ve been very successful in doing that through our USCENTCOM Materiel Recovery Element (CMRE) Brigade,” stated Walker. “The

CMRE was developed based on many lessons learned from the Iraq retrograde operation and proved to be our biggest game-changer in terms of our success in expeditious, standardized base deconstruction efforts.”

Finally, the 3rd ESC focused on preserving the 1st Team. “We practice on a daily basis the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program with all of our down-trace units,” explained Walker.

Transfer of Bases

At one point, there were some 300 military installa-tions that ranged in size from installations like Kanda-

har Air Field or Bagram Air Field (BAF)—two of the largest—down to installations that amounted to maybe just one building.

By the start of ORS, the U.S. footprint had to be reduced to less than 30 installations. Making that happen meant de-scoping or transferring existing installations to the Afghans. Included among the responsibili-ties of base closure was the removal of personnel, equipment, rolling stock and non-rolling-stock equipment, as well as either complete or partial removal of facilities before handover to the Afghans.

Lieutenant Colonel Mark Ogburn, commander of the 608th Construction Management Team, managed two engineer battalions in Afghanistan that performed much of the base closure. His team

maj. Gen. darrell Williams

By C. Todd Lopez

Managing The drawdown, reTrograde and redisTriBuTion froM afghanisTan.

4 | MLF 9.3 www.MLF-kmi.com

coordinated and synchronized those assets throughout the Combined Joint Operations Afghanistan to determine what was needed by the customers in order to start de-scoping a facility.

He described the work as taking the timeline for building up a base and flipping it on its head.

“We manage construction. You start from zero; you pour the foun-dation; and you end with the roof,” he said. “Then you paint everything and move in. Now we are doing that in reverse. We took our schedule and flipped it upside down and did it in reverse. It was still the same ... we just had to learn to untie our shoes instead of tie our shoes.”

“What we’re doing is setting up Afghans for success,” he said.

MaTerieL reduCTion

The 1st TSC set goals to move a significant amount of both equip-ment and vehicles. The Phase 3 goal was to move more than 3,374 vehicles out of country. For Phase 4, that goal was 3,453. Overall, the 1st TSC shipped over 14,000 combat vehicles out of the country.

Similar goals existed for non-rolling stock—anything from com-munications gear to mine detection equipment. Phase 3 saw a goal of 240 20-foot-equivalent units of equipment slated to leave the country, while the goal in Phase 4 was to ship 232 TEU’s of equipment.

The 1st TSC not only met its goals, but exceeded them by 15 per-cent for each phase and by each item.

While most materiel was prepared to go home, other items were either sold to the Afghans or destroyed and the scrap sold off. Such

equipment would have cost more to send home than it would cost to buy in the states, said 1st Lieutenant Petar Mostarac, 133rd Quar-termaster Company, at the KAF retro-sort yard.

At Mostarac’s retro-sort yard at KAF, they received containers of equipment from the field, sometimes as many as 500 TEUs a month, that needed to be sorted through to determine its value and whether to send it back home or not.

Mostarac said the SARSS helped them determine the value of an item by using its National Stock Number. How much the Army needed an item back in the supply system also played a role in the decision. The partnerships with AMC helped with the retro-sort operation, Mostarac said.

“You might see a toaster-sized item come through here that’s worth $300,000,” Mostarac said. “It’s critical we capture those items.”

Mostarac’s retro-sort yard was not the only one in Afghani-stan. There was another at BAF as well. In addition, teams went to outlying installations as they were closing to capture materiel and determine if those materials were even worth sending to the larger retro-sort yards for further processing.

Making such decisions at the origin means the materiel doesn’t have to be convoyed back—putting soldiers’ lives at risk, said Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Fresh, support operations officer, 45th Sustainment Brigade, CMRE.

“That materiel was either reduced or given to DLA-DS to be redistributed or scrapped out forward,” Fresh said. “The soldiers

RAPIDGate-Logisitcs-02192015.indd 1 2/27/15 9:31 AM

www.MLF-kmi.com MLF 9.3 | 5

didn’t have to drive it back. It saved soldiers’ lives, it saved money. We reduced it all forward.”

DLA-DS operated a yard at BAF where equipment and gear that would not be retrograded or could not be sold to the Afghans were properly disposed of. In many cases, that meant using a large indus-trial shredder or having contractors dismantle it with a torch.

“All of the materiel came to our receiving area and they deter-mined the de-mil code of the item, which determined what happened to that property,” said Kathy Wigginton, DLA-DS, BAF.

“We are actually the last stop for all government-owned property. Everything comes here that isn’t retrograded back to the United States, Wigginton said. “It’s our job to make sure the proper disposal is taken for that property. If it is a military offensive or defensive piece of equipment, we totally destroy it so that it can’t be used against us.”

Other equipment, such as gear from Mostarac’s retro-sort yard, did go home, however, to be accounted for and reinserted into the Army’s inventory for training or the next war.

Unit equipment turned in was received by the 401st for account-ability and processing. Deedy Neal served with the 401st in Afghani-stan as a wholesale responsible officer at the Bagram Redistribution Property Accountability Team yard. Neal’s work in Afghanistan had her in-processing and accounting for equipment from unit turn-ins.

“The equipment that was brought in was handled carefully,” Neal said. “It was cleaned and brushed off. It was cleaned with an air com-pressor, then bubble-wrapped and put in a kicker box so nothing was broken in transit.”

“The reason it’s important for all the equipment to be accounted for is because it saved the taxpayers money,” she said. “It put the equipment back into the system so we can have equipment if we need to go to war again.

Sergeant Braden Chalmers, supply sergeant, Delta Company, 1st of the 502nd, 2nd BCT, 101st Airborne Division, had an array of gear to turn in to Neal’s RPAT yard in August 2014.

He said his unit had closed down Torkham Fire Base, Afghanistan.Chalmers said he took care of both his own organizational equip-

ment that needed to go back to his unit in the United States, as well as the TPE that his unit used while on their deployment.

“To see the property book shrink—feels good,” he said.

geTTing sTuff hoMe

Combat vehicles, equipment taken from installations that were transferred and TPE that units have turned in all had to get home.

During Phases 1 and 2 of ORT, equipment might have gotten out of theater via ground transportation via the Pakistan ground lines of communication or the northern distribution network. But toward the end of Phase 2, said Brigadier General Duane Gamble, deputy com-manding general, 1st TSC, a new way was tried.

Working with USTRANSCOM and USCENTCOM, the command performed an “accelerated retrograde proof-of-principle,” where a “channel flight” was set up between Kuwait and Afghanistan.

The channel flight is a rotation of aircraft between Afghanistan and Kuwait. Equipment could be sorted, cleaned and shipped from Kuwaiti via sea ports to the United States.

“This channel flight method highlighted moving equipment out of Kuwait via sealift. The 595th Transportation Brigade (SDDC) sta-tioned in Kuwait assisted in the retrograde effort through scheduling transportation of equipment for movement by commercial sealift,” said Williams.

“We set up Kuwait as an equipment intermediate staging base where we could fly items into Kuwait, then hand it off to the 402nd AFSB stationed in Kuwait instead of doing all the processing through the 401st in Afghanistan; we called it throughput,” Gamble said.

“The most reliable line of communication or route from Afghani-stan was the ALOC to Kuwait where elements of 402d AFSB helped download, obtain disposition instructions and prepare equipment for onward movement back to the United States,” said Williams.

During Phases 3 and 4, the 402nd in Kuwait performed “break bulk” operations on gear that was coming into country from Afghani-stan via channel flights, said Lieutenant Colonel Dan Grundvig, bri-gade operations officer for 401st AFSB, BAF.

In Afghanistan, he said, there might not have been enough mate-riel to fill a box to go just to one place back in the United States. “They would hold it there till it was full so that stuff would sit here longer,” Grundvig said. Now, Grundvig said, those same boxes could be filled immediately in Kuwait with anything that needed to go home, regardless of where the final destination would be.

“This helped us in several areas,” Grundvig said. “We could put items in a box and [have them] separate it in Kuwait where they have more time, space and manpower. Rolling stock didn’t need customs cleaning like sending it to other places. Equipment received a full customs wash in Kuwait.”

Air Force Major Christopher Carmichael, commander of 455th Expeditionary Aerial Port Squadron, and his team at BAF played a huge role in airlifting cargo out of Afghanistan to Kuwait. He and his team moved more than 84,000 tons of cargo between January and August 2014, as well as 134,000 passengers. “We were the busiest aerial port in the Department of Defense,” he said.

Carmichael said his team had on occasion cleared a cache of 325 MRAP all-terrain vehicles in just 72 hours, about 625 tons of cargo and 1,300 passengers each day.

According to Lieutenant Colonel Jamey Haukap, support opera-tions mobility branch chief for 3rd ESC, 2,400 pieces of rolling stock were left in country at the conclusion of ORT, which will play a part in ORS. Eventually, those will be retrograded and divested, he said.

As ORT and ODB concluded and ORS continues to support the Afghan Army, the 1st TSC and USFOR-A along with their strategic partners continue providing logistical support through sustenance, descoping of military facilities and retrograde operations.

“I applaud the efforts of our team-of-teams in Afghanistan, Kuwait, Fort Bragg and around the world. The work and effort put forth by our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, DoD civilians and contractors who operated under the mission command of the 1st TSC is commendable and we could not have done it without their profes-sionalism and dedication,” said Williams. “I also thank our strategic partners the Army Materiel Command, Defense Logistics Agency, U.S. Transportation Command, Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, USCENTCOM J-4, USCENTCOM Deploy-ment Distribution Operations Center, Army G-4, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology and others. Our relationship with these strategic partners was the key to success,” said Williams, commander, 1st TSC. O

Editor’s Note: This is the second article of a two-part series.

For more information, contact Editor-in-Chief Jeff McKaughan at [email protected] or search our online archives for related stories

at www.mlf-kmi.com.

www.MLF-kmi.com6 | MLF 9.3

From the start, the F-35 Lightning II has been both a highly inno-vative and controversial program. The F-35’s aggressive innovations have extended to sustainment, with an Autonomic Logistics Informa-tion System (ALIS) and a global approach to spares and sustainment. It is still early in the program, but not too early to ask how these initiatives are working out.

Version 2.0 of ALIS is now being rolled out. Charlie Brown, F-35 Joint Program Office deputy director of sustainment, said 2.0 takes ALIS from Windows XP, which is no longer supported, to Windows 7. There are also enhancements, like software patches that occur all the time to help maintenance techs do their jobs better and faster.

The challenges of introducing 2.0 are thus similar to those encountered throughout the life cycles of legacy platforms, for which upgrades and new versions are constantly introduced. “These changes are not without challenges, but they are not insurmountable,” Brown noted. “We have a plan and risk-mitigation measures in place.”

As of March 26, there were 110 F-35s in service, not counting test aircraft. Readiness and availability are steadily improving and slowly progressing to where the program needs to be at 200,000 flight hours, or maturity.

Brown said availability is now about 49 percent, and the mission-capable rate is in the high 50s. The aircraft now has about 29,000 flight hours, including both development and operational flying, and is on track to achieve the flying hours contracted for with Lockheed Martin. “Yes, we are where we expected to be, and we are seeing availability and mission capability about where they need to be. It’s a good story.”

“There are always surprises,” the sustainment exec acknowledged. But these surprises are normally not in how the aircraft operates, but rather in how it is maintained. There are quite a few F-35s in a modi-fication program for upgrades and service life mods. “There is a slow learning curve and voyage of discovery,” Brown said. “We are always finding something.”

The program office has a well-worked-out process to identify possible changes, obtain engineering assessments and make needed alterations in maintenance. Brown said no one change stands out in particular. All are being implemented at the six air logistics complexes and fleet logistics centers that perform depot maintenance on the F-35.

On the manufacturing side, changes in component manufacture may be made if they are found to improve reliability and maintain-ability. “We may change a component if the change will increase time on wing,” Brown said. These kinds of changes may be made either by retrofit or attrition. Brown emphasized they are at the component level, not on the aircraft itself. For example, changing fasteners or adhesives may result in improvements for sustainment.

The F-35’s international partners will sustain and repair the aircraft in exactly the same way as U.S. forces do. “They are partners in a global system enterprise,” Brown said. “They use the same joint

technical data we do, everyone’s line replaceable units will be repaired the same way, they are part of a global spare pool, and they go through the same training and get the same certification given to artisans at our depots.” International partners also use ALIS in exactly the same way U.S. forces do.

The program office has been tasked with steadily decreasing total life cycle costs. “We know that at maturity, with more aircraft out there, costs will go down,” Brown said. Improvements in main-tenance will also yield benefits over the long term, and repair turn-around times will shorten. The office is also looking at how it can reduce costs in contracting, how it may save money with economic order quantities and how it can achieve economies by repairing at lower levels. Brown believes maintenance costs can be reduced 30 percent.

To help get there, the program office has established a “cost war room” that will take recommendations from industry partners or anyone else who has a promising proposal. “And if there’s a good business case for it, we will implement it,” Brown stressed.

Comparing maintenance costs or man-hours for the F-35 with those on other aircraft, such as the F-18, is “comparing apples and oranges,” Brown insisted. The F-35 maintainers do not have 10 or 15 years of experience with the new airplane.

Still, “maintenance flight hours are on par with where we expected to be,” Brown said. One of the biggest challenges has been verifica-tion and restoration of low observable (LO) portions of aircraft. When panels have been removed for inspection of LOs and then replaced, significant time must be spent to ensure they adhere properly.

Brown thought there may be some lessons and benefits from the new approach to F-35 sustainment for sustainment of other plat-forms. For example, there may be some synergies with sustainment of unmanned aerial vehicles or the V-22 Osprey and some general lessons in best practices for working with manufacturers and design-ing contracts.

Brown also saw advantages in the global spare pool for the F-35 and the global infrastructure for maintaining the aircraft. The United States would not have to deploy so much equipment and part stocks, as it did for legacy aircraft during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, with this global base already out there. “We won’t have to bring all the carts and tooling like we have done for 15 years. We won’t need a mountain of support.” This kind of approach might work for other platforms, both air and sea. “Hopefully, we can reduce the footprint across systems in the future.” O


at www.mlf-kmi.com.

By henry Canaday, MLf CorrespondenT

The auTonoMiC LogisTiCs inforMaTion sysTeM is key To The LighTning’s susTainMenT prograM.


By peTer BuxBauM, MLf CorrespondenTBeTTer prevenTion, BeTTer deTeCTion, BeTTer TreaTMenTs.

The natural and inevitable corrosion process that affects just about any piece of equipment made of metal plays a sig-nificant role in U.S. military spending. Corrosion accounts for over $22 billion in annual spending by the Department of Defense. The Navy’s portion amounts to $7.4 billion, of which $3.2 billion is related to naval vessels. The Marine Corps spends $500 million a year on corrosion related to ground vehicles and support equipment alone.

Corrosion also has its impact on the level of readiness of ships and vehicles. “Corrosion and preservation impacts the maintaining of ships,” said Mark Lattner, program manager at the Navy’s Painting Center of Excellence. “The longer they are in for maintenance, the less time they are available operationally.”

The $500 million the Marine Corps spends on corrosion in ground vehicles includes the valuation of equipment that was washed out due to corrosion. “If an asset has been damaged to the point where it is economically unrealistic to repair it, then that asset is washed out and will be replaced,” said Major Jeffery Van Bourgon-dien, project officer at the Marine Corps Systems Command’s Corrosion Prevention and Control (CPAC) program office. A big part of the Marines’ corrosion strategy is to repair equipment early in the corrosion

cycle in order to prevent their removal from service.

The Navy and Marine Corps have responded to this challenge in a variety of ways. Many methodologies, both high- and low-tech, have been brought to bear to more efficiently combat corrosion and reduce its costs. The Marine Corps has developed an elaborate system of catego-rizing corrosion issues as well as a tiered organization for dealing with it. DoD and the Department of the Navy have pro-mulgated corrosion strategies and reward projects and programs that are applicable across the defense enterprise.

“When we submit equipment to the repair cycle, it is degrading to its mission capability,” said Van Bourgondien. “It is no longer available operationally, so in that sense corrosion contributes to the degra-dation of the equipment’s availability.”

DoD takes a three-pronged approach to corrosion involving prevention, detection and mitigation. “DoD looks at corrosion and preservation holistically,” said Lattner. “We see the education and training of personnel as part of the process. We are also on the lookout for technical develop-ments—like better materials and coat-ings and better tools—for preservation and maintenance.”

The Navy’s approach to combating cor-rosion also includes designing corrosion

prevention into equipment from the begin-ning and taking joint approaches that ben-efit all the services and their equipment. “We look at the potential for corrosion pre-vention up front when we design and build these ships,” said Lattner. “Our program also has oversight over the specifications and standards to the extent that they sup-port corrosion control.”

The Navy gives funding priority to cor-rosion control projects and programs that can benefit multiple users. “We have a bet-ter chance of receiving funding if a project is applicable to more than NAVSEA,” said Howard Castle, a Navy engineering man-ager. “If it is also applicable to NAVAIR and the Marine Corps, there is a better chance that the project is going to receive funding.”

“We take a holistic approach that is then boiled down to focus on individual efforts,” said Van Bourgondien. “We focus our resources on sustaining and repairing those assets in most critical need.”

The Marine Corps has developed cat-egories to code the priority of corrosion maintenance on its equipment, and has also established a hierarchy of corrosion maintenance, repair teams and facilities that deal with different corrosion prob-lems, depending on their severity. “We developed a system which has been mod-eled in the Department of the Navy and in DoD called the category code system,”



at www.mlf-kmi.com.

said Bernard Friend, the CPAC program operations and sustainment manager. “We came out with the system in 2004, and it was later institutionalized and made part of the Marine Corps order and policy for equipment.”

The category codes rank equipment between 1 and 5 and identifies the extent of any problems as well as at what level corro-sion issues are to be dealt with:

• Category 1 items require no corrosion repair or preservatives and have been assessed within the past six months.

• In category 2, equipment requires surface preparation, spot paint and preservation at the operator and/or organizational level.

• Category 3 requires maintenance beyond the operator level for treat-ment that may include complete repainting.

• Category 4 equipment requires repair to sheet metal and frame components and may require replacement or repair of components such as doors, fenders, chassis frame rails or battery boxes.

• Category 5 items have degraded to the point that they require depot-level repair or replacement based on the deterioration caused by corrosion.

“When it is more economically feasible, a piece of equipment is replaced rather than repaired,” said Van Bourgondien.

“We monitor the fleet today of 96,000 assets,” added Friend. “By monitoring the category codes, we improve overall readi-ness by repairing or maintaining within those categories.”

An essential part of the Marine Corps’ corrosion program is the array of corro-sion teams and facilities that it maintains. The idea here is to keep corrosion-related maintenance and repair as local as possible and as consistent with the extent of the problem as reflected in the category code.

“Corrosion teams are located through-out Marine Corps installations, both CONUS and OCONUS,” said Van Bourgon-dien. “These are small teams or individuals that conduct preventative maintenance and to a limited degree corrective mainte-nance at what the Marine Corps calls the organizational level. They also conduct assessments for equipment throughout the fleet and recommend repairs of equipment that are above their capabilities.”

That recommendation could involve evacuation of equipment to one of four corrosion repair facilities located in Oki-nawa, Hawaii, Camp Pendleton, Calif., and Camp Lejeune, N.C. Mobile corrosion repair facilities supplement the capabilities of the four primary repair assets. These are considered to be intermediate-level facilities. Beyond them are the depot-level facilities at which ultimate repair or replace decisions are made.

Many of the cost-savings initiatives revolve around the joint use of facilities and capabilities by more than one of the services. “We are always trying to find opportunities for costs saving and facilities sharing,” said Van Bourgondien. “When those arise, we jump on them proactively.”

The Army and the Army National Guard often make use of Marine Corps cor-rosion maintenance and repair capabilities. “The Marine Corps is currently providing services to the Army on Okinawa,” said Friend. “The Army uses that facility on a fee-for-service basis to repair vehicles. That’s much more cost-effective than to try to duplicate those facilities themselves.”

The Navy investigates paints and coat-ings that are usable for more than one application. “Navy ships have a lot of tanks for storing fuel, drinking water and waste water,” said Castle. “We have investigated paints that provide a service life as high as 20 years. We look for coatings that have a joint applicability across facilities. So, if we have a tank sitting pierside, we use the same paint on it as we use on a ship. That is the kind of cross-platform approach we use when investigating new products.”

Among the advancements the Marine Corps has focused on have been upgrades to wash rack facilities and the implementation of dehumidification equipment in storage areas. “This serves to withdraw moisture from the equipment, especially the elec-tronics located on them,” said Friend.

Some low-tech solutions, such as increased use of tarps and bedliners, have also proved important in fighting corro-sion. “Bedliners have had a high impact on equipment as far as reducing repairs,” said Friend. “These have been in use in the commercial market for some time, but have caught on in the military only in the last five years. These are now provided for all vehicle cargo areas.”

The Marine Corps is also taking some preventative approaches to corrosion. “We are using more undercoatings on military

equipment,” said Friend. “We don’t wait until it becomes a repair requirement. We have the original equipment manufacturer apply the undercoating to prevent repairs three to five years down the road.”

Another cost savings implemented by the Marine Corps has been in the deploy-ment of systems that recover used blast media. “It used to be that after blasting a vehicle everything that remained on the floor became waste,” said Friend. “Now we have implemented booths in our facilities that have floor systems that separate waste from reusable media. This has reduced waste by 50 percent, and it also makes blasting vehicles much quicker. At Camp Lejeune, we recovered the cost of the sys-tem in savings within two years.”

The Navy has pursued an active effort to update and improve its coatings. “When-ever we update the specs, we try to improve something about the coating,” said Castle. “We recently procured a rapid-cure single-coat tank paint that produces a thick corrosion-resistant coating very quickly. It’s a big change from when we had to put up to coat five coats on a tank.”

Navy ships are taking a beating as the armed services move to new types of air-craft such as the joint strike fighter and the V-22 Osprey. “These produce different kinds of exhaust gas than current aircraft,” said Castle. “We are looking at high-heat resistance, non-skid products for ships. Moving forward, coatings will not even be paints anymore but epoxies. One new product contains aluminum oxide to pro-vide better heat and wear resistance. We are trying to improve the performance of coatings all over the ship.”

“We are trying reduce costs by working smarter,” said Friend. “We used to service all vehicles. Now we stop servicing legacy vehicles when the acquisition community announces that it will be fielding a new family of vehicles and taking older vehicles out of service.

“The overall objective is to reduce costs, and we are achieving that by ser-vicing more equipment with the same budget,” Friend added. “Eight years ago we serviced 52,000 assets. Today, we service 92,000 pieces of equipment with the same or smaller budget.” O


Compiled by KMI Media Group staffSUPPLY CHAIN

Dynamic Systems, Inc. (DSI), a provider of barcode software solutions and special-izing in data collection applications, has announced the Total Track system, a low-cost turnkey system for all DoD departments, including all government agencies. The system includes software, labels, scanners, quick-start implementation and training.

The systems reduce the loss of tools and track inventory. The maintenance manager tracks service performed and due on equipment. Inventory Manager tracks materials used and prints purchase orders. Total Track increases the efficiency and streamlines the process of managing inventory.

“I’m impressed with the simplicity and adaptability of your DoD systems,” said Bill Allen, a process control consultant. “They are user-friendly, customizable and affordable.”

If it requires one minute checking a tool in and out, and if the company’s staff spends even 20 minutes a day searching for tools or servicing equipment, the overhead savings is dramatic. “Loss of tools, malfunctioning equipment and accurate inventory counts is a major cost today,” said Alison Falco, DSI president.

In business since 1981, DSI provides barcode tracking systems for tools, mainte-nance, equipment, documents, inventory and ID badge systems.

A Cargo Airship Caucus has been created in the U.S. House of Representatives to encourage the develop-ment of these potentially revolutionary aircraft for military and civilian use.

Airships currently under develop-ment in the United States have the poten-tial to carry large cargo payloads over long distances at a fraction of the cost of fixed-wing aircraft, and can reach some of the most remote locations inac-cessible for maritime traffic and tradi-tional aircraft. Airships require far less infrastructure on the ground and can therefore land and unload cargoes much closer to their final destination.

Moreover, the transport of cargoes weighing several hundred tons is possible with advanced airships currently under development (such as the Aeroscraft) with travel at speeds many times that of ocean-going vessels.

From a military standpoint, cargoes could be delivered to remote locations faster than traditional multimodal shipments, while eliminating many of the risks—such as casualties and disruptions—which accompany the need to truck cargo over-land after arrival at the sea and air ports.

“Modern cargo airships have nearly three times the fuel efficiency as air trans-port alternatives, and can land in very remote locations,” said Congressman Brad Sherman (D-Calif.). “They have

enormous potential to enable economic development opportunities and accelerate export logistics, expand U.S. capabilities in disaster relief response and drive green-house gas reductions in aviation.”

Congressman Tom Rooney (R-Fla.)added, “The recent advances in airship technology are exciting, and the caucus will help illustrate the breadth of benefits enabled by cargo airships’ efficient and infrastructure-independent operations, including benefits to military operational tempo and mission flexibility, enhanced delivery capability and operational cost savings.”

The successful development of these aircraft will also have benefits for humanitarian efforts, as earthquakes and storms that create such catastrophes often devastate the very infrastructure, such as ports and airports, needed to deliver critical supplies.

Airships also have applications for energy projects that require delivery of large equipment, such as wind farms; often, the most efficient wind farm loca-tions are on ridges far from any ground transportation facilities.

Congressmen Rooney and Sherman are beginning the process of recruiting additional members to join the caucus and are planning the first meeting, which will introduce members to the recent advancements in airship development.

Tool Inventory System

Congressional Cargo Airship Caucus

The U.S. Army is streamlining efforts to provide squad- and platoon-level ground soldiers operating in austere environments with an organic aerial resupply capability that will empower and sustain them on the battlefield.

The Enhanced Speed Bag System (ESBS) fills this capability gap by drastically increasing the survivability rate of critical resupply items such as water, ammunition, rations and medical supplies, which must be air-dropped from helicopters to small units on the ground. The system includes a hands-free linear brake, rope and a padded cargo bag that can hold up to 200 pounds and be dropped from 100 feet.

ESBS was originally developed by engineers from the Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center (NSRDEC)’s Aerial Delivery Directorate and the Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center’s Logistics Research and Engineering Directorate to standardize the impro-vised airdrop methods used in theater to resupply units in remote locations, where traditional resupply methods, such as truck convoys, are too impractical or threat-laden.

At an evaluation conducted in July 2013 on Fort A.P. Hill, Va., teams packed six ESBS cargo bags with 12,720 rounds of ammuni-tion, each distributed based on a squad-level basic load and dropped from a 100-foot crane. They thoroughly inspected the rounds and conducted a live fire to determine the ammunition system’s effectiveness. The results were a 98 percent survivability rating of ammunition dropped with the ESBS—a vast improvement from the 50 to 60 percent rating experienced with ad-hoc methods.

Advancement of the system gained increased momentum through the involvement of the U.S. Army’s Rapid Equipping Force (REF).

“REF received a 10-liner requirement from a unit that needed a safe and reliable way to resupply water and other critical items to ground soldiers in a location where traditional resupply options, such as convoys, were not practical due to environmental factors and threats,” said REF project manager Todd Wendt. “The unit was aware of NSRDEC’s Enhanced Speed Bag System and identified it as a possible technology solution. Upon mission analysis and further market research, REF identified ESBS as a good candidate solution.”

The ESBS will undergo further testing throughout 2015. If the system is selected for fielding, a formal program of record will be established, and the REF will have met the immediate need.

Article by Jeff Sisto, NSRDEC public affairs.

Aerial Resupply Precision


U.S. Naval air SyStemS CommaNd

2015

agility Provider

rear adm. Paul SohlCommander, Fleet readiness Centersassistant Commander for logistics and industrial operations Naval air Systems Command

Rear Admiral Paul Sohl serves as commander, fleet readiness centers and as assistant commander for logistics and industrial operations, Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md. Previously, he served as commander, Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, China Lake and Point Mugu, Calif., and as assistant commander for test and evaluation, NAVAIR.

Sohl is a 1985 graduate of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he received a Bachelor of Science in aeronautical engineering. He holds a Master of Science in aeronautical and astronautical engineering from Stanford University. He received his commission through the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps and was designated a naval aviator in 1988.

Sohl reported to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 113 aboard USS Independence (CV 62), where he deployed to the Western Pacific during Operation Desert Shield. He is a 1993 graduate of the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School and reported to the Weapons Test Squadron, China Lake, where he was later selected as an aerospace engineering duty officer (AEDO).

As an AEDO, he was the deputy program manager for the F/A-18 pro-gram at Naval Aviation Depot, North Island, Calif. Next, he reported to the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program Office, first as the executive assistant to the director and second as a member of the JSF Source Selection Team.

Additionally, he served on the staff of commander, NAVAIR, where he volunteered for a tour in Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom.

Sohl’s decorations include the Legion of Merit, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Meritorious Service Medal and the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal.

Q: Being NAVAIR’s readiness and logistics component, what are the chal-lenges facing your team—and how are they being addressed?

A: We face many challenges that are common to most industrial facilities, such as maintaining a safe work environment that is free of contamination, fall hazards and other risks. Beyond those challenges, there are issues that are somewhat unique to our organization, among them being hiring of enough civilian and contract (CSS) employees to enable us to return aircraft, engines and components to the fleet, which has been very difficult in the last two years for a number of reasons. These reasons include sequestration-related hiring freezes and restrictions, mandated reductions in the CSS workforce and litigation related to insourcing. Those problems have largely been resolved, and we are now in a hiring surge to address increased work in progress and increased levels of attrition.

There is also concern about levels of military manning due to reduc-tions in force. In order to have an effective forward presence, our sailors and Marines rightfully need to be at sea. Unfortunately, it also impacts our shore

operations. It’s a difficult balance, and we’re working to make sure that we have the right people at the right place, doing the right job at the right time.

From a platform standpoint, being able to produce enough F/A-18 A-D aircraft to meet our customers’ needs is critical to our success. The Hornet was designed for 6,000 hours, however, we’ve asked far more from the aircraft that was ever envisioned. Many of these aircraft have been extended beyond 8,000 hours; a pre-selected subset of high-flight hour (HFH) Hornets will undergo repairs and modifications to extend their structural service life up to 10,000 flight hours. The engineering, material and produc-tion effort required to achieve these life extensions on tactical aircraft are extraordinary and unprecedented.

As the fleet gets more usage out of the Hornets, the faster they’re com-ing into the FRCs. Due to the inherent variability in material condition from one aircraft to the next, the amount of time spent in an FRC can vary greatly with each aircraft. While the Navy and Marine Corps have enough aircraft to meet their operational needs, it is incumbent on the FRCs to return aircraft to the fleet as quickly as possible. The average turnaround time for each aircraft inducted for a HFH inspection is 631 days, which accounts for both stand-alone and concurrent with other depot-level maintenance actions.

Commander, Fleet Readiness Centers (COMFRC) is continually exam-ining and transforming to serve the fleet with efficiency, agility and velocity. This means that “business as usual” isn’t good enough anymore. The fleet performs its missions and requirements in real time, and we must enable ready-for-tasking readiness in real time.

Planning an effective depot-level maintenance solution early in a sys-tem’s acquisition life cycle is a precursor to timely depot source of repair assignments. Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) has put an initiative in place to support aviation weapons system programs with their early depot-level maintenance and repair-solution planning and to maintain

Rear Admiral Paul SohlCommander, Fleet Readiness Centers

Assistant Commander for Logistics and Industrial Operations

Naval Air Systems Command

Agility ProviderContinually Examining and Transforming to Serve With Efficiency, Agility and Velocity

Q&AQ&A

www.MLF-kmi.com U.S. Naval Air Systems Command | MLF 9.3 | 1

U.S. NAVAl Air SySTEmS CommANd

Garry Newton Deputy Commander

Cmd. Master Chief Shaun Brahmsteadt

Vice Adm. David Dunaway

Commander

NAVAIR SYSCOM

Brig. Gen. Frank L. Kelly

USMCVice Commander

Rear Adm. Mark Darrah

Unmanned Aviation & Strike Weapons

Lt. Gen. Christopher C. Bogdan

F-35 Lightning II Program

Rear Adm. CJ Jaynes Air ASW

Assault & Special Mission Programs

Rear Adm. Donald GaddisTactical Aircraft

PROgRAM ExECutIVE OffICERS2015

NAVAir U.S. NAVAl Air SySTEmS CommANd

Toni Meier Director, Logistics

Management Integration Department

Dennis WestDeputy Commander,

Fleet Readiness Centers and Director, Industrial Operations

Todd MellonDirector,

Design Interface and Maintenance

Planning Department

Capt. Eric SchochActing Director,

Aviation Readiness and Resource

Analysis Department

Rear Adm. Paul Sohl Commander Fleet Readiness

Centers and Assistant Commander for Logistics & Industrial Operations

Capt.Bob Farmer

Executive Director

Tracy MoranDirector, Industrial &

Logistics Maintenance Planning/Sustainment

Department

Todd Balazs Deputy Assistant Commander for Logistics and

Industrial Operations

Gary KurtzAssistant CommanderCorporate Operations

& Total Force

Keith Sanders Assistant Commander

for Acquisition

Rear Adm. Michael Moran

Commander, NAWC Weapons Division and Assistant Commander,

Test and Evaluation

James MeadeAssistant Commander

Contracts

Rear Adm. G. Dean PetersCommander, NAWC Aircraft

Division and Assistant Commander, Research

and Engineering

NAVAIR COMPEtENCIES

LOgIStICS & INduStRIAL OPERAtIONS


compliance with applicable statutes and regulations. The two major tools of the initiative are the preliminary industrial assessment (PIA, the DoD milestone that approves a weapon system’s entry into the technology devel-opment phase of acquisition performed prior to Milestone A certification) and the industrial assessment (IA, the milestone that approves a weapon system’s entry into the engineering and manufacturing phase of acquisition performed prior to Milestone B certification).

The components of the PIA and IA are a core logistics analysis (CLA, a determination of what capabilities are needed to support a repair), source of repair analysis (an analysis of possible locations for the repairs), workload estimates (to include effort, time, required expertise and cost) and any applicable strategic considerations that will enable programs to plan resource expenditures early and to support timely decisions on depot maintenance posturing. Along with providing programs with early planning junctures, the PIA/IA has the benefit of initiating early/upfront discussions between the programs and COMFRC/fleet readiness centers (FRC) business offices, and other services’ depot, workload planning orga-nizations. This proven framework supports programs by determining best value depot-level maintenance and repair solutions.

Q: How would you characterize the information technology (IT) connec-tivity, and how well the various elements of contracting, maintenance, supply, scheduling, etc. communicate within NAVAIR logistics?

A: In the recent past, our IT infrastructure mirrored our former command construct with little interoperability from site to site. The IT solution set was optimized locally at the separate FRCs at the expense of cost and long-term maintainability. In the last 10 years, the FRC infrastructure has prioritized process integration and design for maintainability while increasing security hardening and reducing cost. Our efforts in data and application standardization culminated in our recent migration of the FRC infrastructure to a Defense Information Systems Agency center. Closing our individual FRC datacenters reduced our server footprint by more than 400 servers.

Many of our recent enterprise IT initiatives have been sponsored to increase process integration, operability and communication, such as the recent integration with our material supplier partner, Defense Logistics Agency.

We have given a great deal of attention to three vital tenets of logistics: maintenance planning, scheduling and execution (MPS&E), particularly with regard to IT connectivity. We have been using the acronym MPS&E to remind our team of the need to think holistically at solving our readiness and cost problems. In recent years, NAVAIR and the fleet saw increases in out-of-reporting rates, turnaround time and costs. In the program offices, we are seeing more and more late cycle and expensive changes in support strategies and delays in repair capability standup. Last year, we launched an initiative to align stakeholders and put together an MPS&E capability improvement program involving training, guidance material and a highly-connected, integrated suite of IT tools.

By replacing the stovepiped and sometimes crude methods of the past, and enabling efficiency gains in our core disciplines affecting MPS&E, we will effectively increase support to programs and the fleet. Our subject-matter experts in program offices and across the fleet service teams will have much greater insight into how best to evolve a program’s mainte-nance concept into the final product support package and keep it current based on actual performance in the field. This capability, some of it already available and in use, will be phased in over time across the Naval Aviation Enterprise and is demonstrating its ability to safely extend maintenance

intervals in some cases and/or arrange maintenance efficiently thereby getting the most out of our resources, including cost.

From a Naval aviation logistics IT portfolio viewpoint alone, one can see a history of independently developed systems, applications and databases with overlapping capabilities, capability gaps, stovepipes, and minimal integration. This is simply not a viable strategy in a resource-constrained environment. As such, we have been aggressively pursuing an initiative to centrally govern and manage the development and sustainment of NAVAIR’s logistics IT solutions in an effort we call the Aviation Logistics Environment (ALE). There is exceptional potential for ALE to leverage existing capabilities in creating enterprise solutions spanning all naval aviation programs.

Centrally managing the ALE portfolio is the catalyst for achieving application reconciliation, data center consolidation, system integration and system interoperability. The modernization of the ALE portfolio will make our logistic business processes faster and more robust, reduce errors, allow for processing of iterative scenarios and alternatives, and structure the data management framework to support higher-level busi-ness intelligence and advanced analytics. And if that were not enough, it will also save the Navy money.

Q: Tell me about the work necessary to integrate new aircraft systems—the P-8 and F-35 come to mind—into the existing pipeline of mainte-nance, supply chain, etc.

A: As a commercial derivative weapon system, the P-8 Poseidon offers the opportunity to leverage a vibrant support market. NAVAIR employs a dis-ciplined maintenance planning process to establish support capability for its peculiar subsystems. Our FRCs and support organizations possess the expertise in maintaining the kinds of complex mission systems that make the P-8 such a capable warfighting asset.

During its more than six decades of operation, Fleet Readiness Center East (and its predecessor) has provided maintenance, repair and overhaul support to virtually every weapons platform in the Marine Corps fleet. We were extremely excited to add the Corps’ newest aircraft, the F-35B Lightning II, to the list when the first aircraft was inducted for required modifications on July 15, 2013. So, the process for integrating this aircraft into the Navy’s maintenance and logistics support system has already begun for us. I will say that there have been challenges along the way. For example, we’ve expe-rienced learning curves associated with the restoration process for the low observable coatings on the aircraft and with accessing Lockheed Martin’s unique Autonomic Logistics Information System. However, our team has responded to every challenge very well with great results, capturing lessons learned and then employing solutions on the next inducted aircraft as an iterative process improvement program. We look forward to future support opportunities and forging long-term relationships with our F-35 customers.

Q: Is eight the right number of FRCs? Based on the projected workloads, do you foresee a time where consolidation or expansion would be in NAVAIR’s best interest?

A: Because we take an enterprise approach to most of our activities, we are continually examining not only the way we are doing business but how and where we are doing business. There is a certain amount of efficiency having FRCs located as close to the flight line and our customers as possible, but we have to make sure what is near the customer is what the customer needs.

We’re examining whether it makes sense to concentrate certain func-tions at one FRC rather than have the task being performed at two or more sites. Our goal is to make best use of existing capacity and plan for our

www.MLF-kmi.com4 | MLF 9.3 | U.S. Naval Air Systems Command


future needs and to respond to our customers’ needs with efficiency, flex-ibility and velocity.

We have brilliant minds working on the issues we see, both tactically and strategically. We employ some of the best people in aviation mainte-nance, and they know how to do their jobs better than anyone.

Q: Many people talk in terms of incorporating industrial best practices into the DoD world. Are there examples of your best practices that have shown results and could be useful in the commercial world?

A: In some areas, we are doing better than incorporating industrial best practices. In NAVAIR logistics, we are working with industry and DoD counterparts to converge best practices into actual standards and “how to” guidebooks. Some examples include logistics product analysis and data, other analytical disciplines such as reliability centered maintenance and level of repair analysis (LORA). Each of these in turn produces prod-ucts that drive our industrial resources. We have a leading advantage because of our diverse portfolio of programs, along with many lessons learned along the acquisition trail. Standards are important but we need to evolve our industrial practices (like we see in the IT and communica-tion industry) if we want to remain a world-class industrial repair facility.

I think one thing we have in common with our commercial counter-parts is the desire to produce the best product as we can as efficiently as pos-sible. While there are differences in the purpose of commercial and military aircraft, both require aircraft operating on time and on budget.

Within COMFRC, we have several initiatives that help us reduce costs and improve agility. We have found redundant overhead, different processes from site to site, multiple rates for the same type of work and local views on investments. We’re squeezing that out of our business by being more stra-tegic and global with decisions, creating common processes and procedures and by being bold with leadership. Reducing our administrative burdens helps reduce cost to our customers.

Q: Do you have responsibility for unmanned systems—air and maritime? What are the challenges in striking the balance between repair and replace?

A: We are re-energizing some old-school disciplines such as LORA, using the latest standards and modeling technology available, that helps our program managers determine the balance between repair and replace.

NAVAIR Logistics and Industrial Operations (AIR 6.0) has the respon-sibility to provide unmanned air system (UAS) logistics expertise to the program executive office. Affordability is key challenge for both manned and unmanned air systems, and we continually look for ways to reduce cost at all levels. One area of focus for our logistic teams is operation and support (O&S) costs. UAS logistics teams are influencing O&S costs early in the acquisition phases by leveraging lessons learned from manned platforms, conducting rigorous business case analyses (BCA) (that includes qualitative and quantitative factors), and conducting LORA to determine the most cost-efficient support strategies and maintenance concepts. Our teams constantly strive for the lowest cost alternative while maintaining readiness. Mainte-nance decisions are based on BCAs and LORAs regardless of size.

Q: How are you working to increase production of F/A-18 Hornets and other aircraft and components and get them back out to the fleet?

A: The Navy and Marine Corps are engaged all over the world. Opera-tional tempo is high, which not only means a high demand for aviation assets but increases pressurization on naval aviation repair facilities. An

unprecedented number of Hornets have been inducted into the FRCs and our workforce has encountered unusual aircraft conditions in recent years. We are working to accelerate the rate of production using critical chain project management (CCPM). A proven project-management methodology used by FRCs in the past, CCPM is based on the theory of constraints and accounts for variability and resource sharing across projects.

FRC Southeast has completed its initial CCPM implementation and is now in the execution phase. FRC Southwest is currently undergoing implementation and execution of CCPM is anticipated by third quarter, fiscal year 2015.

The methodology calls for the FRCs to focus on a small set of aircraft that can be worked on today and to get those aircraft through the system before inducting the next aircraft for maintenance. An aircraft does not progress to the next phase or move to another repair area if the work cur-rently being performed hasn’t been completed. That is the key.

We are seeing increases in throughput from the FRCs that are using it, and future plans call for expanding its application to other FRCs.

Q: Nearly half of the Navy’s F/A-18A-Ds are not available to meet the operational needs of the Navy and Marine Corps because they are in the fleet readiness centers waiting for maintenance, repair or over-haul. What is being done to get these aircraft back to the fleet?

A: Nearly half of Hornets are out of reporting. Now what does that mean? That means they are at FRCs waiting to get to get fixed by somebody other than a fleet flight line maintainer. So you can imagine with the number of Hornets that are out there with half of them in that status, there is a shortage of Hornets in the fleet. You couple that with today’s high operational tempo and that makes our challenge monumental to begin with. Couple that with furloughs in late 2013 and sequestration, which created budget uncertainties, it adds up to reduced production.

I invite people to visit a fleet readiness center to see for themselves what we are doing. We take these aircraft and we completely break them down to their smallest component. We perform center barrel replacements (CBR) for aircraft as a matter of course. (CBR repairs forward and aft dorsal decks, and forward, aft and keel longerons (structural beams)). The innova-tion started with some very smart folks at FRC Southwest (at Naval Station North Island, Calif.) who believed they could put together a good nose and a good tail from Hornets and a new center barrel to produce a full aircraft. It took two years of experimentation, and now we do it routinely.

I would argue that that very repair process for center barrel is exactly why the Hornets are living today. Without that we would have had to buy more aircraft. That is an exciting piece of how we do our business and I want others to share in that experience, so I just say come visit.

Q: Additive manufacturing is a cutting-edge technology. What are you doing to use that technology?

A: Additive manufacturing is playing a huge part in keeping Hornets in the hands of the warfighter because we can speed that process of building parts that are either obsolete, out of production or a one-off piece that is an actual part on an aircraft or a support piece for fixing an aircraft. If I can’t get it quickly from the manufacturer, I might be able to 3-D print the part, get it right back to the line and keep that repair process moving. The name of the game is to keep the work going. And that is what is great about the FRCs.

We think sometimes about just fixing the aircraft, but additive manu-facturing piece is a huge enabler that helps us meet the customer’s needs.O

www.MLF-kmi.com U.S. Naval Air Systems Command | MLF 9.3 | 5


Client: Pratt & Whitney Military EnginesAd Title: Carrier Varient - Breakthrough FighterPublication: Military Logistics Forum - AprilTrim: 8.375" x 10.875" • Bleed: 1/4" beyond trim • Live:

The breakthrough fighter for blue water ops.

The 5th generation Pratt & Whitney F135 engine is in production – bringing safe, proven and reliable power to the F-35 Lightning II. What’s more, highly advanced engine technologies designed specifically to meet the demands of Navy blue water operations will increase readiness and reduce maintenance costs to keep the F-35 flying and projecting Navy power. Learn more at f135engine.com.

It’s in our power.™

31753 F135 CV Breakthough_MilitaryLogisticsForum.indd 1 3/31/15 2:55 PM

Recalling the Defense Logistics Agency’s initial support to Hurricane Sandy as a significant example of DLA’s ability to quickly come together in response to a crisis, DLA Vice Director Ted Case recently welcomed participants from across the agency to the DLA Logistics Plans and Exercise Summit at the McNamara Headquarters Complex.

The 106 attendees at the summit, which was spon-sored by the Joint Logistics Operations Center ( JLOC), were challenged by Case to continue to improve and lean forward for future missions.

The summit, the first to bring exercise planners, contingency and crisis action planners, and liaison officers together, was sched-uled for March 3-5, but a government closure due to severe winter weather cut it one day short.

“The summit is an important venue to ensure the agency’s planning and exercise processes and prod-ucts align organization goals with the agency’s strategic plan to meet the require-ments of our supported DoD and interagency customers,”

said Don Bruce, deputy chief of the JLOC plans, exercises and readiness branch.

The main objective of the summit was ensuring DLA planners had a common understanding of the doctrine, processes, tools and systems used to develop contingency logis-tics support plans. The other main goal was to identify new process improvement opportunities and advance the logistics supportability analysis and continuous process improvement efforts currently under way.

The summit ended with a question-and-answer session by Navy Rear Admiral Vincent Griffith, DLA logistics operations director, and Guy Beougher, executive director of operations for logistics operations, that provided perspective on the role of exercises and operational planning in DLA’s future operating environment.

“Don’t forget that when you are deployed to support an operation or exercise, you have a big family behind you,” Case said. “Do not hesitate to reach back to the 25,000 assets DLA has available to you from around the world.”

The U.S. Air Force has awarded a three-year contract to BAE Systems to provide obsolescence management support for a number of complex systems and platforms, including aircraft, vehicles, machines and electronics. The initial award is valued at $3 million with the total value of the three-year contract estimated at $37 million.

To help manage obsolete parts, BAE Systems’ experts will use the company’s Advanced Component Obsolescence Management (AVCOM) tool. The web-enabled system helps users forecast when a part will become obsolete or too expen-sive, then finds suitable replacements from across the marketplace.

“In addition to supporting mission readiness, AVCOM delivers significant savings for the total cost of a system or platform by efficiently resolving difficult part obsolescence issues and providing

advanced planning capabilities for managing the full life cycle needs of a product,” said DeEtte Gray, president of BAE Systems’ Intelligence and Security sector.

AVCOM has been used to support a number of Air Force programs with obso-lescence management since 1991. In the last seven years, the programs that AVCOM supports have routinely been awarded the industry’s Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) highest honors. DMSMS monitoring is a necessary and integral part of system life cycle management and AVCOM has been recognized as the Air Force’s “DMSMS Tool of Choice” annually since 2001.

BAE Systems has held the obsoles-cence management contract with the U.S. Air Force’s Strategic Alternative Sourcing Program Office for five years.

DLA Crisis Response Summit

Obsolescence Management Support

Compiled by KMI Media Group staffSUPPLY CHAIN

The Fleet Logistics Center, Jacksonville, issued a solicitation looking for logistics and life support to expeditionary naval forces operating in Belize during the APR 2015 timeframe. This ashore presence is part of a larger U.S. Southern Command-directed mission: Continuing Promise 15 USNS Comfort.

The expeditionary service contractor shall conduct security background checks on employees and subcontractor employees with local or national police department or other government organizations. Approximately 100 Navy medical/dental and 20 engineering/construction personnel will require port-a-potties, dumpsters, security lights, privacy screens, security barriers, canopies, chairs, tables, warehouse fans and hand washing stations.

Also required are buses, vans and SUVs for transportation of personnel between the Comfort to medical project sites at the beginning, during and at the end of the mission, one 5,000-pound lift-capable outdoor forklift, diesel fuel for generators, and a 20-foot tractor-trailer for transportation of equipment between the Comfort and Comfort helo landing zone to medical project sites at the beginning, during and at the end of the mission. Furthermore, the vendor will be required to deliver building materials to engineering sites on startup day as well as bottled water to fleet landing. The vendor must provide a means (i.e.,

ramp) to onload and offload tools and equipment transported to and from the project sites.

Support for Continuing Promise Exercise


Rear Admiral Jonathan A. YuenCommander, Naval Supply Systems

Command and Chief of Supply CorpsU.S. Navy

Support StrategistSupplies Delivered Faster, More Efficiently and at a Reduced Cost

Rear Admiral Jonathan A. Yuen became commander, Naval Supply Systems Command (NAVSUP) and 47th Chief of Supply Corps on October 3, 2013. Previously, he served as commander, NAVSUP Global Logistics Support, headquartered in San Diego.

Yuen graduated with distinction from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1983. While a midshipman, he attended the U.S. Military Acad-emy at West Point and was selected as an Olmsted scholar. He has a Master of Business Administration degree from the Wharton School of Business, University of Pennsylvania, and is a graduate of the Stanford Graduate School of Business and the University of Vir-ginia, Darden School of Business Executive Education Programs. Additionally, he completed the University of North Carolina’s Kenan-Flagler Business School’s, Navy Executive Business Course.

His supply corps sea duty assignments include tours on USS Narwhal and USS Constellation, and as supply officer on USS Nassau.

His shore assignments include Navy acquisition contracting officer intern; aide to the director of the supply, programs and policy division in the office of the chief of naval operations; career counselor and community manager, Navy Supply Corps Person-nel; executive assistant, Defense Logistics Support Center, Defense Logistics Agency; executive officer, NAVSUP Fleet Logistics Center Yokosuka; deputy commander of corporate operations, Naval Sup-ply Systems Command; deputy commander for ships and subma-rines, NAVSUP Weapon Systems Support; fellow on the Chief of Naval Operations’ Strategic Studies Group; and deputy chief of staff for logistics, fleet supply and ordnance, U.S. Pacific Fleet.

His joint assignments include serving as deputy commander/chief of staff of the Joint Contracting Command-Iraq/Afghanistan, headquartered in the International Zone of Baghdad with 18 regional offices throughout both theaters. He also completed a Navy individual augmentee assignment as director, U.S. Central Command Deployment and Distribution Operations Center, Camp Arifjan, Kuwait.

A member of the Acquisition Professional Community, Yuen has earned supply warfare qualifications in submarine, aviation and surface warfare.

Personal awards include three Legions of Merit, a Bronze Star, two Defense Meritorious Service Medals, two Meritorious Service Medals, three Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medals, and two Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medals, among unit and campaign commendations.

Q: Within the naval supply chain, where are you focusing efforts on improving processes and gaining efficiencies?

A: At Naval Supply Systems Command (NAVSUP), we are con-stantly looking for ways to improve processes in support of deliv-ering warfighting capabilities to our customers. We partner with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to identify high-demand items by region and forward position those items closer to the end-user so items can be delivered faster, more efficiently and at a reduced cost. Our positioning strategy allows us to stabilize our planned replenishments via surface and ocean modes versus the less eco-nomical air option. Additionally, we work with Military Sealift Command (MSC) and employ combat logistics force assets in various numbered fleet areas of operation to deliver bulk consum-ables to fleet units. Our partnership with MSC allows us to realize efficiencies and drive down transportation costs while leveraging the use of organic sealift assets.

We’re using the requisition sourcing functionality of Navy Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) to improve the visibility and utilization of material today, thus moving a step closer to a single national inventory for all Department of Defense materiel. For example, prior to Navy ERP, filling fleet unit requisitions from excess material held at naval air stations was a cumbersome, offline process.

Today, this process has been automated with ERP. Similarly, we recently partnered with industry on a direct ship initiative to gain efficiencies (i.e., lessen the supply chain response time for our

Q&AQ&A


customers and reduce transportation costs). This initiative utilizes the automatic sourcing functionality of Navy ERP to refer requisi-tions directly to qualified vendors that previously would have been filled only after vendor material was received at a DoD stock point and then reshipped to the requisitioner, thus saving both time and shipping costs. This initiative started in October 2014.

To date, hundreds of requisitions have been sourced by various vendors. As this initiative matures, we project continuous improvements in fleet support and readiness levels as we continue integrating our commercial partners into our material support strategy. The bottom line is that we are continuously looking for areas both within the naval supply system and with industry to increase support to the warfighter.

Q: With budget uncertainties, how has that affected your long-range acquisition estimates?

A: While I can’t speak for the other major Navy activities for which NAVSUP provides contracting support, budget uncertainties pres-ent a very real challenge for us and our industry partners as we attempt to forecast demand for supplies and services. To try to mitigate some of that risk, we’ve introduced demand banding, which are upper and lower limits stipulated in the contract based on anticipated fleet customer demand. Demand bands are utilized by the government to mitigate contractor risk and lower offered pricing by providing a contract mechanism that allows for fluc-tuations in demand and funding. We’ve also included gain-sharing provisions into some of our contracts. If the contractor imple-ments a product/process improvement which increases reliability, therefore reducing demands, then we share the savings amount of that decrease 50/50. We are not advocating shortened periods of performance. In this kind of uncertainty, our best defense con-tinues to be the promotion of a competitive environment, which demands increased industry innovation while reducing prices.

Q: How has NAVSUP readied itself for the F-35? What’s been involved in adding a new platform to the supply chain?

A: The program of record plans to sustain the F-35 with 100 percent contract logistics support (CLS); however, the cost to accomplish such an approach is quickly making the program unaffordable. We aim to get these costs under control. The Joint Program Office (JPO) commissioned a number of business case analyses (BCAs) that provided some insight into how to possibly reduce sustainment costs. All the BCAs made it clear that the established organic solution or a hybrid solution would provide long-term sustainment cost savings. The JPO is currently consid-ering a hybrid approach between commercial activities and DoD.

With this in mind, NAVSUP has been working with DLA, the Air Force, United States Transportation Command and the JPO to develop a hybrid supply chain management system using the best aspects of CLS and DoD’s supply chain to provide an optimal support solution. DoD would act as one of the product support providers, which would provide inventory management functions similar to what NAVSUP Weapon Systems Support (NAVSUP WSS) and DLA do today. This is promising, since recent DLA cataloging efforts revealed that 40 percent of the parts on JSF already exist within DoD inventory.

Another area of interest is air vehicle integration into Navy operations afloat and ashore. The Navy will homebase seven F-35C squadrons and a fleet replacement squadron at Naval Air Station Lemoore, Calif., commencing in 2016. The first afloat deployment is scheduled for 2017 on board the USS Wasp with the Marine Corps F-35B. There are currently 16 ship change documents required on board each aircraft carrier and amphibious ship to support the stark differences between legacy aircraft and this fifth-generation fighter.

There are also multiple and complex information technology requirements in the form of the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS). From the logistics perspective, ALIS is the heart and soul of the F-35. ALIS manages everything, including maintenance, training and supply support. Nothing happens to, or for, the aircraft without ALIS. Traditional maintenance support practices have also changed under CLS. The JSF initially intended an “O” to “D” con-cept (organizational to depot) with almost no intermediate (I-level) support.

Not just a venue to buy and sell partsFor over 30 years, ILS has provided a marketplace for buying and selling aviation and marine parts and services, but we also offer value-conscious tools for sustainment.

• Find qualifi ed sources for hard-to-fi nd parts

• Broadcast requirements to a global supplier and MRO community

• Obtain vital supply and demand data

• Build costs projections with catalog and historic quote pricing points

• Cross reference to discover alternate part numbers and procurement data

Contact us today to discover the solution that best fi ts your needs.

Offi ces in: Atlanta, Boston, Dallas, Dubai, Frankfurt, Istanbul, London, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Paris, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Diego, Seattle, Shanghai, Singapore, and St. Louis

Inventory Locator Service,® LLC1-901-794-5000 (Worldwide) • 1-800-233-3414 (N. America) • [email protected] • www.ILSmart.com

MLF_March.indd 1 3/5/2014 11:37:30 AM


The JPO is currently conducting a level of repair analysis to determine if this is an optimal solution for the Navy and Marine Corps, considering our skilled I-level capabilities that have a long history of reducing the burden of critical reach-back and enabling us to remain forward-deployed for longer periods of time. Maintain-ing the jets’ stealth worthiness, adding new support equipment, lithium battery practices, new and additional hazmat, a “Star Wars” type of pilot’s helmet that is form-fitted to a specific pilot, and many more challenges with this air vehicle are all integral to the F-35’s overall sustainment.

Over the next several years, NAVSUP efforts, in coordination with DLA, the Air Force, USTRANSCOM and JPO, will be instrumen-tal in developing an affordable, executable, state-of-the-art supply chain management system.

Q: How are you approaching the problem of counterfeit and/or defective parts—both from a prevention and detection point of view?

A: As you can imagine, with billions of dollars spent by DoD to procure parts, there is some risk of introducing counterfeit and defective parts into the supply system. The NAVSUP team mitigates that risk through a coordinated approach of DoD-wide participation in the Government and Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP), employment of Product Data Report and Evaluation Program (PDREP) Automated Information System (AIS), use of pointed con-tract language, and by partnering with organizations like Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).

Our participation in GIDEP helps mitigate counterfeit and defec-tive material risk. GIDEP is a partnership of government and indus-try seeking to reduce or eliminate expenditures by sharing technical information during research, design, development, production and operational phases of a system’s life cycle. We actively use GIDEP for counterfeit material reporting and preventative actions.

The PDREP AIS is designed to report, collect, retrieve and ana-lyze supplier performance information covering areas such as prod-uct quality deficiencies, warranties and non-conforming material. PDREP is the Department of the Navy’s (DoN) authoritative source for critical safety items (CSIs) and counterfeit material reporting (CMR). PDREP provides support for detection, investigation, reme-diation, restitution and prevention remedies to defend against the introduction of counterfeit material into DoD’s supply chain.

Further, a large part of our counterfeit and defective material management strategy is sound contracts and effective contract management. We employ contract clauses as the first line of defense to prevent and mitigate risk associated with counterfeit and defec-tive parts. Then, we partner with DCMA for oversight and enforce-ment during the contract execution process. Through strong contract language and effective enforcement, we hold suppliers accountable for receipt of taxpayer dollars, as well as the safety and welfare of our sailors.

Q: Last year, the NAVSUP WSS H-53E Performance Based Logis-tics (PBL) Team was recognized with a SECDEF PBL award. What does it take to effectively manage a PBL contract?

A: On every PBL, NAVSUP WSS remains the designated logistics manager for all items supported by the arrangement. The H-53 PBL typifies the management and oversight process at NAVSUP WSS.

PBL begins with a solid requirement. PBL metrics are aligned with warfighter needs.

PBL is not “fire and forget.” PBL at NAVSUP WSS is not contrac-tor logistics support. Performance-based support is fully incorpo-rated into the naval supply system and continuous monitoring of performance is essential. Open communication and collaboration at regularly scheduled Navy/industry reviews is standard and a very important part of the process.

Q: The bedrock of any organization is its people. What are some of the keys to building a strong workforce and investing in its growth?

A: NAVSUP emphasizes an environment of inclusiveness that wel-comes innovation and new ways of thinking, allowing us to fully leverage the diverse backgrounds and abilities of all employees. Sustaining a high-performing organization also requires constant assessment of strategic direction and workforce gaps to best align recruiting and retention efforts.

Our people are NAVSUP’s most important resource. We owe them our commitment and loyalty. First, NAVSUP ensures an environment free of sexual assault, harassment and discrimination. This assurance, along with uncompromising ethical standards and fulfillment of our obligation to train our employees about rules in the government, DoD, the Navy and NAVSUP, positively affects our culture. Equally important is providing our employees a safe place to work where their contributions are valued and where we make their personal and professional growth a priority.

The bond with our workforce begins with the hiring process—fair and open, where all are evaluated equally. After being brought on board, they are provided with a centralized in-processing pro-gram, where possible, to provide basic new employee information and fulfill administrative requirements in a manner where the employee is the focus. We bring the team to the employee.

Working to establish an individual development plan with each employee helps the supervisor-employee professional relationship, as common goals are discussed and training identified which would prove beneficial to professional growth. Having an environment where people can openly and freely discuss goals and aspirations is essential, so I am working to make sure everyone knows that my senior leaders and I are approachable, active listeners. Another way we’re working toward ensuring success is our recently initiated civilian mentoring program at NAVSUP, which connects some of our more seasoned workforce with our less-experienced employees. These kinds of relationships, too, help educate our newest team members about rules and their applications, and how they can work within the rules to do what is good, right and honorable.

Q: Tell me about your material handling equipment program.

A: NAVSUP has the responsibility to serve as the Navy’s life cycle manager for material handling equipment and shipboard mobile support equipment.

As part of this requirement, we perform traditional inventory control functions such as determining overall requirements and conducting positioning and distribution operations. We also per-form functions that are outside the scope of our normal logistics operations and more in line with the work of a traditional program office.


For example, we’ve established the Naval Surface Warfare Center detachment at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey to serve as an acquisition engineering agent and in-service engineering agent to provide technical support. With their help, we’ve established operating, training, safety and utilization standards. Addition-ally, we perform the programming and budgeting for acquisition, replacement and overhaul.

In the NAVSUP Enterprise, we lean on NAVSUP WSS to execute these responsibilities and provide programmatic oversight. Cur-rently, NAVSUP WSS has cognizance of about 7,000 assets world-wide.

Q: What is the relationship with DLA, and how do you expect the relationship to evolve over the next 12 months?

A: DLA has always been a critical partner with NAVSUP in the larger global logistics network that provides direct logistics sup-port to the warfighter. DLA’s capabilities and contributions to the readiness of our naval warfighters are absolutely essential. Because of this, the NAVSUP Enterprise and DLA consistently partner to ensure the warfighter enjoys the highest possible material avail-ability.

Our Navy-DLA partnership is in keeping with the strategic theme of the newly released document, “A Cooperative Strategy for the 21st Century.” The relationship with DLA enables our Navy to remain stronger by operating together, engaged with our allies and partners. As we look toward supporting our new weapons sys-tems and platforms, we must continue to collaborate with DLA for innovative ways of support with new ideas and processes despite limited resources.

A few examples of where and how we partner are the constant interactions between NAVSUP WSS and DLA Distribution and DLA’s primary-level field activities to ensure material is readily available for depot-level repairables as those items move into the repair cycle: NAVSUP global logistics support’s fleet logistics centers coordinate services and material disposition between the warfighter and DLA’s material processing centers to redirect cargo more quickly as the warfighter’s mission changes; DLA’s willingness to address Navy concerns driving down lead times and avoiding high-priority transportation costs by stocking material forward where our forces operate; and DLA’s responsiveness in ensuring Navy’s fuel and subsistence requirements are met at the right time and place with high-quality products.

I look forward to working with Lieutenant General Busch and his DLA team as we continue to find efficiencies that improve the readiness of our naval forces.

Q: Small businesses drive a great deal of innovation. Large busi-nesses can often bring economies of scale to a contract?

A: NAVSUP is committed to utilizing both small and large busi-nesses in our efforts to deliver sustained global logistics and quality-of-life support to the Navy and joint warfighter. While acknowledging the contributions of our large prime contrac-tors, we support the role that small businesses play in America’s security and prosperity, recognize their contributions to financial stability in the marketplace and appreciate the critical role of small businesses in helping NAVSUP accomplish our mission. Long-term and strategic sourcing relationships with small and large

businesses are very important, and we continue to seek opportuni-ties to promote these relationships.

I’ve challenged the acquisition community, including contract-ing officers, requiring officials and small-business professionals, to promote maximum socioeconomic opportunities in all phases of our acquisition process.

To find the perfect balance, it takes commitment from the acquisition community along with a supportive and collaborative relationship between our large-and small-business partners. To that end, programs like Navy’s Mentor-Protégé encourage partnerships between large and small businesses to assist small firms in success-fully competing for prime and subcontract awards.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the AbilityOne program, which provides a unique way to tap into a talented workforce, provide jobs and promote self-sufficiency among people with dis-abilities. Through the AbilityOne program, NAVSUP employs 14 individuals performing contract management services through a contract with National Industries for the Blind. Recently, one of those employees was hired by DLA for a permanent job in the field of contracting.

By conducting early and thorough market research, NAVSUP can ensure that our contracts are structured to ensure we optimize the talents of both large and small businesses, whether through prime or subcontracting opportunities. Last year, NAVSUP awarded 25 percent of contract spending and half of our contract actions to small businesses. Our continued focus on how to tap into small-business capabilities and our willingness to promote partnerships through mentor-protégé relationships and with AbilityOne allows us to benefit from small-business innovation and large-business economies of scale.

Q: Anything to add about the men and women of Navy Supply?

A: The individuals who comprise our supply team are our most val-ued asset. When I refer to our team, I am talking about the family of active duty and reserve military, government civil servants, and con-tractors who are responsible for all we do around the world. We are serving in critical logistics roles throughout the DoD, supporting the U.S. fleet, our sister services and our coalition partners, working side by side with fellow warfighters. We pride ourselves on under-standing warfighter requirements through firsthand experience.

I truly feel our people are our strength. Bringing together our employees’ diverse and unique perspectives fostered through their own work experiences, customs, ideas, socioeconomic backgrounds, ethnicities and lifestyles drives innovation and helps us meet the needs of an increasingly diverse and constantly changing Navy. The creativity of our team will be even more important in the coming year with Navy emphasis on creative solutions that will effectively balance warfighting capability and capacity in support of the chief of naval operations’ tenets of Warfighting First, Operate Forward and Be Ready.

A mentor once taught me a priceless lesson, “Good ideas come from everywhere ... not anywhere, but everywhere.” I believe in evalu-ating every answer and every idea on its own merit and encouraging everyone to have an opportunity to identify, provide and implement better solutions in the process.

The men and women of our Navy Supply team represent the abso-lute best of our citizens who set themselves aside to fight for our val-ues, freedoms and security, and I’m proud to be part of that team. O


By henry Canaday, MLf CorrespondenTTurning To indusTry for soLuTions ThaT iMpaCT CosT savings.

Defense Department managers have focused intensely on minimizing the life cycle costs of platforms and systems for well over a decade. Yet according to DoD contractors, there are still opportunities for further reductions that pursue the same objective either internally or for commer-cial customers.

For example, a year ago Navistar launched OnCommand for its commercial customers. Jim Grooms, who heads up logistics and sus-tainment for Navistar Defense, explained that OnCommand is a remote-diagnostic tool that could provide the equivalent of cloud-based, condition-based maintenance (CBM) plus for military customers.

“You can do better maintenance, better logistics,” Grooms argued. “You can analyze cost and reliability trends and compare them across fleets of different trucks.” The tool enables predictive maintenance on exist-ing vehicles and, by comparing fleets, sug-gests which types might be advantageously increased or shed.

Just knowing the true condition of current vehicles can pay off big. “Avoiding one unnecessary engine change pays for a subscription for 30 vehicles,” Grooms noted. “Avoiding one part change pays for four or five vehicles for a year.”

Navistar’s business cus-tomers seem to agree. In its first year, OnCommand has

been applied to 70,000 commercial vehicles, and usage is growing exponentially.

OnCommand uses open architecture and works with different communication links, including Wi-Fi, cellular or satellite. The system can work with any make of truck, such as Penske or Ryder, so long as it has electronic control modules. Mine-resis-tant ambush protected (MRAP) vehicles, the family of medium tactical vehicles (FMTV) and joint light tactical vehicles (JLTVs) are run by computers and sensors and generate the necessary data.

Grooms is now approaching military customers with OnCommand. One chal-lenge is that, unlike in commercial markets, “some people own the equipment; some own CBM; and others own forwarding the data. We have to get all of them together. It will happen, but it takes longer.”

OnCommand might be run by Navistar, the military or a combination of both. “The hard part is collecting the data,” Grooms said. “Once you have the data, you can spread it

around anywhere. For exam-ple, maintenance managers will want alerts when repairs are due. Top-level managers will want much more data for trends, correlations and comparisons that they can manage themselves.”

Over the years, Oshkosh Defense has learned a couple lessons in managing life cycle cost, according to Mike Ivy,

vice president of global integrated product support. “First, there is always room to improve life cycle management in legacy programs like HEMTT [Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck] or FMTV,” Ivy said. “But the payoff is smaller and harder to achieve than in the design phase, for example the JLTV.”

It’s cost-prohibitive to do many things with legacy platforms, so managers must focus tightly. With 20,000 HEMTTs fielded, it is simply too expensive to make even small changes in the platform itself. Instead, Ivy recommended looking at spare levels and where spares are located: depot, wholesale or retail. Another opportunity for improvement might be in part packing, which is usually established during initial provisioning. “You may find some low-hanging fruit if there is under-packing or over-packing by using best commercial packing techniques.”

For new programs, opportunities are much broader. Oshkosh has just finished the engineering and manufacturing-design phase for its bid for low-rate initial produc-tion on the JLTV. For life cycle management, it concentrated first on engines, transmis-sions and axles, the major cost drivers, because these components are very expen-sive and they endure hard usage. “That’s not all we think about, but it is where we start.”

Designing tougher vehicles often means more expensive parts upfront to save money over the long term. So Oshkosh uses both commercial-off-the-shelf and in-house mod-els to demonstrate benefits.

Jim Grooms


Ivy said military customers have learned to be smarter about life cycle costs, just as OEMs, business customers and consumers have. He thinks the greater sophistication started in aviation, where the assets are so expensive, and has now spread to ground vehicles.

Apart from design and sustainment concepts, Ivy said his company is good at executing life cycle tasks to reduce costs. As an OEM, Oshkosh can train operators and mechanics, in person or online. Its field sup-port reps are good at getting product exper-tise into the field, Oshkosh updates technical manuals efficiently, and the company man-ages spare parts at very competitive prices. Oshkosh is also doing a reset of MRAP-all-terrain vehicles (M-ATVs) for the Army.

Could it do more? “We have very savvy customers,” Ivy said. “They know the tool-box, although sometimes they face restraints, such as the budget.”

What about those aviation companies where the life cycle focus started? They are still very busy looking for gains.

Lockheed Martin has implemented several improve-ments to life cycle manage-ment over the past few years, noted Louis Kratz, vice presi-dent, logistics and sustain-ment. Improvements have been made in four areas, capi-talizing on what Kratz called “the digital tapestry”:

• exploiting data analytics• optimizing additive manufacturing• deploying embedded diagnostics and

prognostics• maximizing supply chain efficiencies

Kratz believed several Lockheed improve-ments are applicable to DoD programs, espe-cially data analytics, additive manufacturing and prognostics.

“Digital tapestry” means Lockheed devel-oped a seamless environment that integrates data throughout all phases of product or pro-gram life cycle. This tapestry provides consis-tent, real-time information across disciplines and teams. It enables advanced-engineering approaches, model-based manufacturing and data-centric logistics.

Lockheed can thus use a system-design and operational effectiveness (SDOE) meth-odology developed with the Stevens Insti-tute of Technology. SDOE defines systems as

including both operations and support. “This allows us to have one holistic life cycle picture from beginning of design,” Kratz explained. “We are designing and building both platform and support system simultaneously.”

One example of the benefits of SDOE, supported by the digital tapestry, is the design, testing and production of Lockheed’s A2100 satellite bus. The effort included vir-tual production, additive manufacturing and streamlined design, production, final assem-bly and test. “The digital tapestry enabled us to successfully complete a never-done-before design and leverage materials by design,” Kratz said.

Exploiting data means incorporating data analytics in supply chain management. This enables Lockheed to combine software, processes, procedures and expertise to oper-ate more economic supply chains for both itself and its customers.

Kratz said Lockheed used data analytics to optimize initial spare packages for their

C-130J. Gains were dramatic. “These efforts reduced initial spare costs by more than 45 percent, enhancing C-130J affordability for our world-wide customers.”

Lockheed has a data-analytics tool called LM Wis-dom that reduces risk in its internal supply chain. Using LM Wisdom, the company is working on a pilot effort with the Defense Logistics Agency

to identify sources of supply for construc-tion materials in distant theaters. “Using Standard & Poor’s open-source information, we will be able to discover sources of supply and identify obvious red flags that wouldn’t come to light during a normal source-selection process.”

Lockheed is also optimizing use of addi-tive manufacturing and advanced materials in design, production and sustainment to provide stronger, lighter and more afford-able parts. Kratz said optimization dramati-cally reduces cycle times, non-conformances and testing errors.

Kratz believes that additive manufac-turing has great potential to reduce inven-tory and transportation times and enhance material availability in DoD. The Navy and Army are assessing additive manufacturing to support operations, and the Air Force is researching additive manufacturing at maintenance depots for Sustainment Com-mand’s Complex of the Future.

Lockheed is deploying advanced diag-nostic and prognostic systems on all its new systems, such as the F-35 Lightning II. The approach increases system availability and reduces operating costs by providing accu-rate system-health reporting and indicating issues before they occur.

To reap all the potential benefits of diagnostics and prognostics, Lockheed is collaborating with the Air Force to improve processes and develop enabling technolo-gies. This initiative is called Flightline of the Future. “We have created a platform, Inter-rogative Diagnostic Solution (IDS), that has demonstrated reduction in troubleshooting time and improvements in efficiency and affordability,” Kratz said. The Air Force is now looking at the possible application of IDS to existing F-16s.

Lockheed is also demonstrating tablet capabilities to provide integrated data solu-tions for both technical data and training. And, in partnership with the Air Force Research Laboratory, the company is look-ing at reusing advanced prognostic algo-rithms as a library of prognostic solutions for multiple aircraft types.

One example is the use of prognostics on the littoral combat ship. The LCS was designed and produced with close atten-tion to total life cycle cost and operational effectiveness. A closed-loop feedback system brought knowledge from the field back to Lockheed engineers, who used it to improve LCS economics. CBM and collaborative repairs ensure both effective sustainment and timely modification.

Sixty percent of the value of Lockheed systems is subcontracted or supplied parts, subsystems and materials. The company’s supply chain includes 16,000 firms in 50 countries. Lockheed uses advanced data analytics to guide supply chain initiatives such as category management, enterprise agreements, security and preventing coun-terfeit parts.

One example is the F-35 production line. Here, Lockheed implemented auto-matic identification technology, advanced kitting and inventory-flow management. These techniques ensure affordable aircraft production. And by combining production and sustainment purchases, Lockheed fur-ther improved sustainment economics. O


at www.mlf-kmi.com.

louis Kratz


Compiled by KMI Media Group staffWHITE PAPER FORUM

An effective way to have military logistics decision-makers, influencers and program officers follow your pioneering research and focused capabilities while driving our qualified and loyal group of readers to your website.

Elements of featured posting includes• Company name• Title of White Paper• Your unique URL • Description/Summary of your White Paper (approx. 140 words)• Image of White Paper cover

Benefits to You• An effective and efficient way for you to communicate your

understanding and commitment to a solution• Build credibility with senior level military logistics decision-makers• Increase traffic to your Web site through qualified White Paper

readership

Your Posting• 4 Featured Postings available per issue in

hard copy of publication• White Paper summary and unique URL to appear on the MLF

Web site for one month• After one month, White Paper to appear in archives for 3 years

For more information on your White Paper submission contact: Jane Engel, Associate Publisher / (301) 670-5700 ext. 120 / [email protected]

White Paper ForumIntroducing...

TrAnsformIng LogIsTIc commodITIes And serVIces (Lcs) wIThIn The UK mInIsTry of defence (mod)This first ever outsourcing of military logistics capability, on this

scale, encompasses the procurement of commodities and the

distribution of the MOD’s material to Leidos. The storage facilities

and distribution network will be optimized by applying team member

Kuehne+Nagel’s best commercial practices while MOD’s existing

buying processes will be improved by leveraging the procurement

expertise of team member TVS Supply Chain Solutions. The center

of our solution is the Support Chain Integration Platform (SCIP),

built by Leidos. The SCIP is a Service Oriented Architecture which

enables plug-and-play capability and integrates Team Leidos’

business systems to orchestrate storage, distribution and freight,

commodity support services, and

asset management.

to download this white paper, visit:

https://leidos.com/uk/lcstwp

operATIonAL conTrAcT sUpporT

DoD has spent billions of dollars on contract support during operations in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2002 and anticipates continuing its heavy reliance on contractors in future operations. Generally, operational contract support (OCS) is the process of planning for and obtaining needed supplies and services from commercial sources in support of joint operations. The Government Accountability Office has issued a report identifying long-standing concerns with DoD’s efforts to institutionalize OCS.

For the complete report, go to:http://bit.ly/1EE1QNv


The

adve

rtis

ers

inde

x is

pro

vide

d as

a s

ervi

ce to

our

read

ers.

KM

I can

not b

e he

ld re

spon

sibl

e fo

r dis

crep

anci

es d

ue to

last

-min

ute

chan

ges

or a

ltera

tions

.

MLF RESOURCE CENTER

Northrop Grumman Technical Services C2www.northropgrumman.com/logisticsNorthrop Grumman Technical Services 2-3www.northropgrumman.com/performancePratt & Whitney C4http://f135engine.com

Special SUppleMeNT

CalendarApril 13-15, 2015Sea-Air-SpaceNational Harbor, Md.www.seaairspace.org

April 20-23, 2015Army Engineer Association Industry ExhibitionFort Leonard Wood, Mo.www.armyengineer.com/

April 20-24, 2015I H S CeraWeekHouston, Texashttp://ceraweek.com/2015

May 5-7, 2015AUVSI’s Unmanned SystemsAtlanta, Ga.www.auvsishow.org/auvsi2015

June 3, 2015Hot Topic – SustainmentArlington, Va.www.ausa.org/meetings/2015

June 23-25, 2015Mega RustNewport News, Va.www.navalengineers.org

September 1-2, 2015Fleet Maintenance & Modernization SymposiumSan Diego, Calif.https://www.navalengineers.org/events

September 10-13, 2015NGAUSNashville, Tenn.www.ngausconference.com

September 14-16, 2015Air & Space ConferenceNational Harbor, Md.www.afa.org

September 22-24, 2015Modern Day MarineQuantico, Va.www.marinecorpsexpos.com

May 2015 Vol. 9, Issue 4NEXTISSUe The Publication of Record for the Military Logistics Community

Maj. Gen. Kevin G. o’ConnellCommanderU.S. Army Sustainment Command

Cover and In-depth Interview with:

U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management CommandA special pull-out supplement featuring:

• An exclusive interview with Major General Gwen Bingham, commander of the Army’s TACoM Life Cycle Management Command

• A two-page organizational profile of TACoM

A handy reference guide with a long shelf life.

Special Sectionglobal LogisticsA global, coordinated network is bringing U.S. forces and their gear out of Afghanistan.

FeatureSequipment resetReset is a cost-effective option to extend the operational life and improve capabilities of major weapon systems.

rock Island Arsenal profileAn in-depth look at the unique manufacturing and maintenance capabilities found at the arsenal and its industry connections.

Asset VisibilityVarious technology advancements are driving clarity and accountability to the supply chain.

BonuS DiStriButionNDIA Midwest Small Business Symposium • SOFIC

Insertion Order Deadline: April 24, 2015 | Ad Materials Deadline: May 1, 2015

Contact Jane Engel at 301.670.5700 x120 or [email protected]

advertisers indexDell Rugged Mobility C2www.dell.com/ruggedEID Passport Inc 5www.rapidgate.comGulfstream Aerospace Corporation 3www.gulfstream.com/specialmissionsInventory Locator Service 13www.ilsmart.comLeidos 1www.leidos.com/logisticsLeidos 18https://leidos.com/uk/lcstwpSAIC C4www.saic.comSupplyCore 1www.supplycore.com


Karen WalkerVice President for Range and Environmental Services

ManTech International CorporationKaren Walker is vice president for range

and environmental services at ManTech International Corporation. She has exten-sive experience managing National Envi-ronmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance efforts in support of environmental pro-grams for the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force and Air National Guard, as well as commercial clients. Walker is a member of the NEPA subgroup of the U.S. Navy Range Sustainability Group, which has oversight responsibility for all complex Navy range environmental planning efforts. She gradu-ated from Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind., with a Bachelor of Science degree in public and environmental affairs.

Q: What does your company bring to the logistics table, and how does that pass ben-efits on to the military?

A: ManTech has supported the readiness of all branches of the U.S. military for over 40 years. In my area, we address regulatory requirements for the Navy’s Range Sustain-ability Program. In particular, we work to ensure that our clients are in compliance with all the laws and regulations mandated to minimize the potential environmental impacts of training and range development.

Our focus on the readiness of ranges ensures that operational forces have the sea space, air space, land areas and range capabilities they need to execute realistic and effective training and testing while adhering to schedules dictated by operational contin-gencies.

Q: What are the overall goals of your pro-grams?

A: We are committed to our clients. In fact, we are considered a “plank owner” in the field of Navy range sustainability, and thus truly share the mission of the Navy’s Range Sustainability Program—the support and facilitation of fleet readiness. And that is really a reflection of ManTech as a whole. Across the board, the goals of ManTech’s programs invariably are the success of our customers’ missions. The measure of a com-pany is the success of its customers.

Q: How extensive is ManTech’s experience in range sustainability?

A: ManTech has some of the most extensive experience and expertise in the industry in the preparation of comprehensive military readiness activities documentation, partic-ularly range and environmental planning documents for Navy and Marine Corps range complexes throughout the world. We have been a prime contractor for the Navy’s Range Sustainability Program since 2003. For over a decade, we have executed the most complex range and environmental planning tasks on behalf of the Navy. We have worked every-where that the Navy or Marine Corps trains in the Pacific Ocean.

Q: How would you characterize the com-pany’s performance recently, specifically in innovation and efficiency?

A: We are very proud of our record of per-formance. For example, we recently won the 2014 Chief of Naval Operations Environ-mental Award for the Hawaii-Southern Cali-fornia Training and Testing Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement. This is our fourth award in this category for work performed under the Navy’s Range Sustainability Program.

ManTech continuously demonstrates our commitment to the Navy’s Range Sustain-ability Program as well as our capability to deliver comprehensive environmental and range planning products of the highest qual-ity to the Navy and Marine Corps.

One particular area of innovation is in the development of complex range and envi-ronmental planning documents. ManTech has developed proven, innovative tools to enhance the efficiency of this very rigorous process. For example, we have substantially

reinvented the process of integrating and submitting electronic deliverables. Through our Document Commenting System (DCS), we have significantly improved the document review process by simplifying the way in which reviewer comments are collected, con-solidated and shared. DCS has been used suc-cessfully on all the Navy range sustainability documents—resulting in significant savings in both cost and schedule and improvement in the overall quality of comment adjudica-tion and final document quality. DCS is now used at all levels of the Navy.

ManTech also developed the Public Com-menting Management System (PCMS) to facilitate the collection of required public discourse on NEPA documents. PCMS is regularly incorporated into Environmental Impact Statement project websites and docu-ments for public review. The system is an extremely efficient tool for cataloging public comments and inserting them into relational databases.

Q: How important are industry partnerships in meeting your corporate objectives?

A: Our partnerships are very important. We have been fully engaged with industry partners in range sustainability initiatives on behalf of the Navy since environmental and encroachment issues became the focus of increased scrutiny and deliberate Navy attention more than a decade ago. We have aligned our mission with the Navy’s mission to help continue to meet corporate objec-tives.

Q: From the industry perspective, are there improvements you would like to see made that would streamline the contract-ing process?

A: The government contracting process is inherently difficult, and the sheer number of regulatory requirements ensures a drawn-out process. We would obviously like to see shortened acquisition cycles, but more importantly, it should be fair. The contract-ing organizations I work with are dedicated to maintaining a level playing field, and that is the best result of all. O

INDUSTRY INTERVIEW Military Logistics Forum


Navy Air/Sea is an authoritative review of U.S. Navy, Coast Guard and maritime news and technologies.

A PUBLICATION WWW.NPEO-KMI.COM

PUBLISHED DIGITALLY

EVERY TUESDAY

Navy Air/Sea looks at programs at the individual level and how they become integrated into systems of systems. General topics include fixed wing, rotary wing, ships, submarines, unmanned systems, communications, sensors and optics, detection and surveillance systems, survivability, missile defense, logistics, maintenance, weapons and ordnance, to name a few.

Each issue of Navy Air/Sea includes...

ConTraCT awardscurrent fiscal year. The Pearl harbor Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility, Pearl harbor, is the contracting activity.

Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded a $35,600,000 cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order against a pre-

viously issued Basic Ordering Agreement (N00019-14-G-0020) to complete a Joint Strike Missile (JSM) risk reduction and in-tegration study of the F-35 Air System for the government of Norway. The objectives of the study are to further mature JSM weapon design and to ensure compat-ibility of the weapon with the F-35. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas (50 percent) and kongsberg, Norway (50 percent), and is expected to be completed in March 2018. International partner funds in the amount of $10,000,000 are being obligated on this award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patux-ent River, Md., is the contracting activity.

H & H builders inc., (small busi-ness) Tooele, Utah, is being awarded a maximum amount $30,000,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-

quantity job order contract for electrical, mechanical, painting, engineering/design, paving (asphaltic and concrete), flooring (tile work/carpeting), roofing, structural repair, fencing, heating, ventilation and air conditioning and fire suppression/protection system installation in the Naval

Facilities engineering Command South-west area of responsibility for the San Diego, Calif., metropolitan area. No task orders are being issued at this time. Work will be performed at Facilities engineer-ing and Acquisition Division (FeAD) Naval Base Point Loma, FeAD Naval Base San Diego and FeAD Naval Base Coronado (excluding Naval Auxiliary Landing Field San Clemente Island). The term of the contract is not to exceed 60 months with an expected completion date of Febru-ary 2020. Fiscal 2015 operation and maintenance (Navy) contract funds in the

amount of $5,000 are being obligated on

this award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was com-petitively procured as a service-disabled veteran-owned small-business set-aside via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with 12 proposals received. The Naval Facilities engineering Command, Southwest, San Diego, is the contracting activity (N62473-15-D-2415).

Sikorsky Support Services inc., Stratford, Conn., is being awarded an $11,582,807 modification to a previ-ously awarded firm-fixed-price contract

(N00019-09-C-0024) to exercise an option for organizational, selected intermediate and limited depot-level maintenance for aircraft operated by Adversary Squadrons. Work will be performed at the Naval Air Station (NAS) key West, Fla., (40 percent), NAS Fallon, Nev., (30 percent) and the Marine Corps Air Station, Yuma, Ariz., (30 percent), and is expected to be completed in June 2015. Fiscal 2015 operations and maintenance (Navy Reserve) funds

in the amount of $11,582,807 are being obligated at time of award, all of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patux-ent River, Md., is the contracting activity.

Raytheon Missile Systems, Tucson, Ariz., is being awarded a $9,603,500 modification to previously awarded contract (N00024 13 C-5403) for Standard

Missile 2 (SM-2) and Standard Missile 6 (SM-6) engineering and technical services. This contract will provide for engineering and technical services in support of SM-2 and SM-6 to ensure continuity in produc-tion, design integrity and total systems integration of the missile round and its components. This contract combines purchases for the U.S. Navy (23 percent) and the governments of Japan (50.2 percent), Taiwan (14.8 percent), the Neth-

erlands (4.3 percent), korea (4.2 percent), Germany (2.9 percent) and Spain (0.6 percent) under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program or cooperative agree-ments. Work will be performed in Tucson,

and is expected to be completed by De-cember 2015. FMS, fiscal 2015 research,

development, test and evaluation, fiscal 2014 weapons procurement (Navy) and Cooperative Agreements funding in the amount of $9,603,500 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity.

Krempp Construction inc., (small business) Jasper, Ind., is being awarded $6,699,538 for firm-fixed-price task order 0003 under a previously awarded multiple award design-build construction contract (N40083-14-D-2722) for renovations to Building 2034 and Building 2035 at the Naval Support Activity, Crane. The work to be performed provides for all labor, equipment, tools, supplies, transportation, supervision, quality control, professional design services and management neces-sary to perform asbestos abatement, gutting the existing buildings, construc-

tion of interior partitions, installation of fire-rated ceiling, fire suppression system, electrical and mechanical upgrades, addressing seismic issues, accessibil-

ity compliance, installation of interior finishes, installation of anti-terrorism force protection compliant windows and the installation of an exterior insulation finish system. Work includes but is not limited to design, general construction, alteration, repair, demolition and work performed by special trades. Work will be performed in Crane, and is expected to be completed by July 2016. Fiscal 2015 Navy working capital funds contract funds in the amount of $6,699,538 are being obligated on this award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Four proposals were received for this task order. The Naval Facilities engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic, Public Works Department Crane, Crane, is the contracting activity.

Correction: Contract awarded Feb. 3, 2015 to Maritime helicopter Support Co., Trevose, Pa., (N00383-11-D-0003F) for $25,499,598, should have stated the completion date as February 28, 2015. The short timeframe is to cover a one-month extension.

WWW.NPeO-kMI.COM

44 | FeBRUARY 10, 2015

PEO Air ASW, ASSAult & SPEciAl MiSSiOn PrOgrAMS

2015

Cindy BurkeBusiness/Financial

Management

Cmdr. Laura SchuesslerChief of Staff

Rear Adm. CJ JaynesProgram Executive Officer

Bruce DinopoulosAssistant Program Executive OfficerLogistics

Jim McLaughlinRDT&E

Shawn SladeScience & Technology

David MeiserAssistant Program Executive OfficerRDT&E

Jim SchmidtTest & Evaluation

Steve NickleContracts

Glenn PerrymanDeputy Program

Executive Officer

Chuck CobaughLogistics

Mac BrownAssistant Program Executive Officer

Test & Evaluation

NAVAIR SUPPORT

HEADqUARTERS

LOGISTICS

RDT&ETEST & EVALUTATION

low-profile Cargo handling System The Boeing CompanyCountry of origin: uSAlanguage: englishAircraft have different spaces and areas. Some of the areas may be

cargo areas for carrying cargo. Cargo areas may be on the main deck

or on the lower deck of the aircraft. while an aircraft is on the ground,

the cargo area may be unloaded and loaded. Existing cargo conveyance

systems used in aircraft may be installed on top of the floor of the cargo

area. The roller systems may be mounted on axles in a track channel,

or tray, that rests on the floor of the compartment. The upper surface of

the rollers, where the cargo will contact, may extend 2’”‘ to 3”‘‘ above

the cargo floor. Since the cargo area may have a fixed height, the height

of the cargo to be loaded may be restricted and the overall useable

volume of the cargo compartment may be reduced. Current cargo conveyance systems may incorporate several roller

trays in a cargo compartment. The roller trays may be oriented along the

longitudinal axis of the aircraft. In addition, transverse trays with balls

may be present in a cargo doorway area. The balls may be metal and

freely rotating. Freely rotating may be defined as rotating in any direction

and around any axis. Existing commercial cargo handling systems allow

the loading of standard or non-standard cargo containers, palletized

cargo or special equipment. Some applications, such as fuselage-mounted auxiliary fuel tanks,

may be loaded or unloaded during maintenance. These fuselage-

mounted auxiliary fuel tanks may increase the amount of fuel that can

be carried but are limited in volume by the restrictions imposed by exist-

ing cargo conveyance systems. Increasing the amount of fuel carried

may be used to increase the range of an aircraft or increase the amount

of fuel that can be offloaded by a tanker aircraft. This design relates generally to a cargo handling system and, in

particular, to a low-profile cargo conveyance system. More particularly,

the present disclosure relates to a method and apparatus for allowing

the loading of taller cargo into a cargo area on an aircraft and increasing

the cargo area volume compared to current cargo conveyance systems.

10 drawings

underwater Vehicle SimulationU.S. NavyCountry of origin: uSAlanguage of origin: englishDaily global ocean forecasts that include a four-dimensional (4-D)

(latitude, longitude, depth and time) estimation of ocean currents can

be generated. An approach taken for the estimation of vehicle position

over time is to start with a known position from infrequent fixes (global

positioning system (GpS), ultra-short baseline (USbL), terrain-based,

etc.) and use the vector sum of the vehicle velocity (heading and speed

through the water) with the forecast current. Validation of this approach can be accomplished using log data that

was received from underwater gliders which provides GpS positions at

each dive and surfacing point. An underwater glider propels itself using

a buoyancy engine and wings that create lift to produce horizontal mo-

tion. From a vehicle motion modeling perspective, an underwater glider

must have vertical motion to move horizontally. Since underwater glid-

ers do not use engines for propulsion, they generally have substantial

endurance suitable for ocean sampling, underwater plume tracking and

sustained surveillance. however, these vessels are slow, with sustained

horizontal speeds typically below 0.5 m/s, and navigating them is chal-

lenging, as ocean currents can exceed 2 m/s. The Naval Coastal Ocean Model (NCOM) was developed to gener-

ate daily global ocean forecasts predicting temperature, salinity and

currents. Figures 1 and 2 show representative current forecasts during

underwater glider deployment exercises. In these figures, color 303

represents current speed in m/s and arrows 301 indicate the current

direction. Figure 1 shows the current at the surface with speeds as great

as 0.8 m/s. Figure 2 shows the current at 1000 m, the maximum depth

of the glider dives, where the speed is predominately below 0.02 m/s.

position estimation for underwater vehicles operating in the open

ocean can be problematic with existing technologies. Using GpS can

require the vehicle to surface periodically, which poses a potential navi-

gation hazard and subjects the vehicle to the faster currents near the

surface. Inertial systems can be ineffective without the use of Doppler

Velocity Logs (DVL) whose ranges can be too limited for deep ocean op-

eration unless the vehicle is very near the seafloor. Surface- or bottom-

mounted transponder systems can be expensive to deploy and restrict

the geographic area that the vehicle can operate in. A ship equipped

with a USbL system can be used to track an underwater vehicle, which

can be an expensive option for long deployments. A complication in the open ocean is that position estimation is

problematic while submerged. Glider depth can be directly measured

by the vehicle using a pressure sensor. Vertical velocity can be derived

from depth versus time, and horizontal speed through the water can be

estimated given vertical velocity, vehicle pitch angle and a parameter-

ized hydrodynamic model for the vehicle. Consequently, the only certain

position information, for purpose of simulation, is depth (as a function of

time), the time of the dive and the starting and ending surface positions.

In the present embodiment, the motion model can use initial simplifying

assumptions, including zero hydrodynamic slip between the vehicle and

ocean current and a symmetric V-shaped flight trajectory. For the simu-

lations conducted, the maximum depth of the dive and the time of the

dive can be used to compute an estimate of a single vertical velocity.

beyond this model, sources of error in position prediction can include

Defense innovationsCompiled by KMI Media Group staff

FEbRUARy 3, 2015 | 33

www.NpEO-kMI.COM

The Navy’s

Proposed

FY2016 Budget

The Department of the Navy released its

proposed $161.0 billion budget for fiscal year

2016 on February 2.

This budget is part of the $534.3 billion

defense budget President Barack Obama

submitted to Congress on the same day.

Rear Admiral William Lescher, deputy

assistant secretary of the Navy for budget,

briefed media at the Department of Defense

budget press conference about the Navy and

Marine Corps portion of the budget.

“Our PB16 budget submission balances

warfighting readiness with our nation’s fiscal

challenges,” said Lescher. “Our force employ-

ment approach aligns capability, capacity

and readiness to regional mission demands,

ensuring our most modern and technologically

advanced forces are located where their com-

bat power is needed most, delivering presence

where it matters, when it matters.”

This year’s budget submission was guided

by the chief of naval operations’ tenets of

warfighting first, operate forward and be ready.

It makes critical investments in people, ships

and innovation so that the Department of the

Navy can execute the defense strategy.

The Department of the Navy requested

$44.4 billion for procurement, focused on pro-

viding stability in the shipbuilding account and

keeping the Navy on track to reach 304 ships

by FY20. In FY16 the Navy will buy nine new

ships, including two Arleigh Burke destroyers,

two Virginia-class submarines, three littoral

combat ships and the first next-generation

logistics fleet resupply ship, the T-AO(X).

Additionally, this budget includes fully

funding the refueling for the aircraft carrier

USS George Washington and the procurement

of a dock landing ship (LPD 28) that Congress

provided partial funds for in the FY15 budget.

The budget includes a $50.4 billion request

for operations and maintenance, reflecting

A PuBlicATioN

Warfighter FirstCombat Readiness, Material Readiness and Personal Readiness

Vice Admiral Thomas S.

Rowden

commander

Naval Surface Forces/

Pacific Fleet

Q: Tell me about your organization at Na-

val Surface Forces headquarters and what

your deployed footprint looks like. Do you

expect your org chart to look the same in

12 to 18 months?

A: We’re what’s known as a “type command,”

which means we’re responsible for outfitting

the surface combatants, making sure we have

the right sailors with the right qualifications

and that we are properly maintaining these

ships so they’re ready when fleet commanders

require them. To that end, my staff provides

logistical, training and combat systems sup-

port, as well as material inspections to stay

ahead of challenges.

We’ve seen progress in how we handle

the manning, training and equipping of the

force over the past few years, and we’ve laid

the foundation for what’s coming next. Our

organizational chart has grown and evolved,

particularly as we bring the Naval Surface

Warfighting Development Center online.

We will continue to see growth in the first

littoral combat ship squadron, DDG 1000

squadron, as well as Destroyer Squadron 7

in Singapore. All of these events move in

sync with the purpose of keeping our fleet

in the best material condition to support the

CNO’s tenet of “warfighting first.”

Q: You’ve been in command about six

months. What have you established as your

most important goals and what metrics

will you use to measure progress?

A: The most important thing is “warfighting

first.” It’s the CNO’s primary tenet and the

one I take as my charge as the type com-

mander for the surface force. It guides my

vision for the surface force. It is as simple as

it is crucial: “Providing combatant com-

manders with lethal, ready, well-trained and

logistically supported surface forces to assure,

deter and win.” You get there by prioritizing

goals, and I have only one real priority: to

ensure that everything we do makes us better

warfighters.

This goal is built on meeting three

enduring pillars which enable warfighting

first: combat readiness, material readiness and

personal readiness. Each answers a basic ques-

tion. Combat readiness asks, “Are we training

our sailors to fight and win?” Material readi-

ness asks, “Are we providing warships ready

for combat?” And personal readiness asks,

“Are we developing our sailors?”

You’ll notice all of these pillars tie into

one word: readiness. Every surface warfare

officer (SWO) understands the importance

of readiness. As “SWO Boss,” I have the

primary responsibility for readiness, and it’s

paramount to warfighting—and everything

else we are called to do.

Continued on pAGe 40 ➥ Continued on pAGe 31 ➥

www.NPeo-kmi.comFeb2015

plus:• WhO’S WhO

AT PeO(A)

• NAVY SBIR

INNOVATIONS10

FeBRUARY 10, 2015

WWW.NPeO-kMI.COMJAnuARy 2014 iMPlEMEntAtion PlAn FoR nAtionAl StRAtEGy FoR ARCtiC REGion

On May 10, 2013, the Obama Ad-ministration released a document titled “National Strategy for the Arctic Region.”20 On January 30, 2014, the Obama Admin-istration released an implementation plan for this strategy.21 Of the 36 or so specific initiatives in the implementation plan, one is titled “Sustain federal capability to con-duct maritime operations in ice-impacted waters.” The implementation plan states the following regarding this initiative:

objective: Ensure the United States maintains icebreaking and ice-strength-ened ship capability with sufficient capacity to project a sovereign U.S. maritime presence, support U.S. inter-ests in the polar regions and facilitate research that advances the fundamental understanding of the Arctic.next Steps: The federal government requires the ability to conduct operations in ice-impacted waters in the Arctic. As maritime activity in the Arctic region increases, expanded access will be required. Next steps include:

• The lead and supporting departments and agencies will develop a document that lists the capabilities needed to operate in ice-impacted waters to support federal activities in the polar regions and emergent sovereign responsibilities over the next 10 to 20 years by the end of 2014.• Develop long-term plans to sustain federal capability to physically access the Arctic with sufficient capacity to support U.S. interests by the end of 2017.

Measuring progress: Sustaining federal capability will be demon-strated through the Federal Government’s ability to conduct operations in the Arctic to support statutory missions and sovereign responsibilities, and to advance interests in the region. progress in implementing this objective will be measured by completion of the capabilities document, and long-term sustainment plan.

Lead Agency: Department of homeland SecuritySupporting Agencies: Department of Commerce (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), Department of Defense, Department of State, Department of Transportation, National Science Foundation[.]22CoSt EStiMAtES FoR CERtAin ModERnizAtion oPtionSnEW REPlACEMEnt SHiPS

The Coast Guard estimated in February 2008 that new replacement ships for the Polar Star and Polar Sea might cost between $800 million and $925 million per ship in 2008 dollars to procure.23 The Coast Guard said that this estimate

is based on a ship with integrated electric drive, three propel-lers and a combined diesel and gas (electric) propulsion plant. The icebreaking capability would be equivalent to the pOLAR Class

Icebreakers [i.e., Polar Star and Polar Sea] and research facilities and accommodations equivalent to Healy. This cost includes all shipyard and government project costs. Total time to procure a new icebreak-er [including mission analysis, studies, design, contract award and construction] is eight to 10 years.24

The Coast Guard further stated that this notional new ship would be designed for a 30-year service life.

The high-Latitude Study provided to Congress in July 2011 states that the above figure of $800 million to $925 million in 2008 dollars equates to $900 million to $1,041 million in 2012 dollars. The study provides the following estimates, in 2012 dollars, of the acquisition costs for new polar icebreakers:

• $856 million for one ship;• $1,663 million for two ships—an average of about $832 million each;• $2,439 million for three ships—an average of $813 million each;• $3,207 million for four ships—an average of about $802 million each;• $3,961 million for five ships—an average of about $792 million each; and• $4,704 million for six ships—an average of $784 million each.

The study refers to the above estimates as “rough order-of-magni-tude costs” that “were developed as part of the Coast Guard’s indepen-dent polar platform business Case Analysis.”25

25-yEAR SERViCE liFE ExtEnSionSThe Coast Guard stated in February 2008 that performing the exten-

sive maintenance, repair and modernization work needed to extend the service lives of the two ships by 25 years might cost roughly $400 million per ship. This figure, the Coast Guard said, is based on assessments made by independent contractors for the Coast Guard in 2004. The service life extension work, the Coast Guard said, would improve the two

icebreakers’ installed systems in certain areas. Although the work would be intended to permit the ships to operate for another 25 years, it would not return the cutters to new condition.26 An August 30, 2010, press report stated that the commandant of the Coast Guard at the time, Admiral Robert papp, estimated the cost

www.NpEO-kMI.COM

14 | FEbRUARy 3, 2015

Exclusive Q&A interviews with Navy/Coast Guard leadership, program officers and operational force commanders

Acquisition program reviews

Solution-based technologies

Strategy and doctrine analysis

Research and development activities

Budget and funding trajectories

Insightful commentary from military, industry and academia

Industrial Intelligence – monthly U.S. and international patent reviews

For more information and to subscribe, contact Jeff McKaughan at [email protected]

SAIC’s services and solutions, powered by our expertise as a technology integrator, make us ready to tackle your most complex challenges.

saic.com

16-0

031

| S

AIC

Com

mun

icat

ions

© SAIC. All rights reserved. Image Credit: Photo Courtesy of U.S. Navy

Smart Solutions for a Complex World.

Documents

MLF 9.3 (April 2015)