PMP Charter Portfolio Sample Redacted

1 Enclosure (1)

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND HEADQUARTERS

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD, DC 20376

NAVSEASYSCOM 5216 Ser NXX/XX

From: Program Manager (PM), MAAC Ships, NAVSEA 21, PMS-407 COMNAVSEASYSCOM

Subj: LHD MAINTENANCE AND MODERNIZATION PROGRAM (MMP) PROGRAM

MANAGEMENT PLAN (PMP) Ref: (a) SECNAVINST M-5216.5 (b) NAVSEA TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION TS9090-310E (c) NAVSEA TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDANCE, SHIP CHANGE

DOCUMENT (SCD) TS9090-400A (d) NAVSEA TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS, SHIP ALTERATIONS

PREPARATION TS9090-600A (e) JOINT FLEET MAINTENANCE MANUAL (JFMM),

COMUSFLTFORCOMINST 4790.3, Rev C (f) COMLHDRON LHD-1 Class Maintenance and Modernization

Baseline Requirements, 30 Sep 2010 (g) LHD-1 Class Execution Plan (CEP) (h) SURFMEPP Technical Foundation Paper for LHD-1 WASP

Class (i) RDML Creevy, USN, brief, “Use of PMI Standards for

Ship Maintenance Management”, 27 Jan 15

Encl: (1) Landing, Helicopter Dock (LHD-1), WASP Class Maintenance and Modernization Program (MMP) Program Management Plan (PMP) dtd 18 Sep 14

1. Purpose. The WASP Class Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships are key elements that make up the primary element of the U.S. Navy’s/USMC’s Amphibious and Expeditionary force. These ships are facing issues of obsolescence in regards to the currently installed Combat Systems suites, as described in reference (d);

2 Enclosure (1)

and as well as Hull, Mechanical and Electrical (HM&E) equipment. The uniqueness of the steam propulsion of the LHD-1 Class requires significant attention in major engineering maintenance, overhaul and upgrade.

a. Facts. The following facts impact LHD-1 Class commonality and maintenance duration, and in turn play a significant role towards the class reaching expected service life.

(1) The Legacy Combat Systems (ACDS Blk 1 and 0) are unable to maintain pace with the high threat environment. The follow on to ACDS is SSDS MK II (CAPSTONE), which is the Program of Record (POR). CAPSTONE installation requires a significant maintenance period. SSDS MK II is currently installed in LHD-7 and LHD-8. A modified version of SSDS MK II (minus NSSM integration) is installed on LHD-1. Other programs that are non HM&E in nature include the following Programs of Record (POR), which are considered major components of the LHD MMP: CANES (PMW 750), Joint Strike Fighter (JSF, PMS-470) and major HM&E Installs (including, but not limited to, the following: Propulsion Management Program (PMP), Propulsion Auxiliary Control System (PACS), Brushless Generators and HES-C).

(2) Intentions. The LHD Mid-Life Project Management Team (PMT) has been created to identify, coordinate, manage and address LHD-1 Class issues associated with Maintenance Drivers, Obsolescence, Training and Legacy Equipment. The PMT is also chartered to facilitate the integration of major modernization, to include, but not limited to: CAPSTONE, CANES, JSF and HM&E Modernization. Due to the complexity of scheduling and budgeting, the PMT is chartered with facilitating the execution of modernization across the LHD Mid-Life Period. Coordination with key stakeholders (SURFMEPP, TYCOM, USMC, etc…) is critical in achieving a successful Mid-Life Period. (3) Procedures. The project will integrate improved combat systems technology solutions and robust maintenance and engineering improvements in order to establish a more vigorous WASP class warship, extending the product life of each ship as dictated by the Director, Expeditionary Warfare (OPNAV N95). (4) Mission. The LHD Program Maintenance and Modernization Team (PMT), as created and directed by PMS-470, will undertake

3 Enclosure (1)

all actions dealing with the programmatic phases and sections of the Maintenance and Modernization Program (MMP) that deal with LHD Mid-Life. These actions will facilitate the LHD-1 Class attaining an Expected Service Life (ESL) of 40 years. (5) Present or Future Coordination and Commitments. Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC), Ship Systems Engineering Station (SSES), Carderock, Philadelphia, PA (NSWCCD-SSES Philadelphia) will provide the Engineering Integration Plan (EIP) that will provide the specifics and details regarding the intended HM&E modernization, installations and upgrades. NSWC, Port Hueneme Detachment (PHD), will provide the Combat Systems Interface Plan (CSIP) for the installation and tracking of the SSDS MK II CAPSTONE installation, in conjunction with PEO IWS 10.1. This information will provide the specifics and details regarding the intended modernization, installations and upgrades of all intended CS modernization. The EMP and CSEP will be made annexes to this PMP. 2. Scope. The LHD Mid-Life program will include planning, scheduling and delivery of a complete Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization executable program. 3. Agreement and Understanding. All efforts will be managed by the PMT. All program and project work will be the primary focus of daily operations for the LHD PMT, and all required items will be communicated via the regularly scheduled LHD Mid-Life teleconferences and meetings, in accordance with the MMP Communications Plan. The duration of the overhauls will take place from CY 2016 (starting with LHD-2) to CY 2024(completing with LHD-8). The primary governing document for each ships Maintenance and Modernization package is this PMP. The primary document for all engineering work is the EIP, a sub-part of this PMP, written by Naval Engineers specifically for the LHD Mid-Life Program. The primary document for all Combat Systems work is the CSIP, a sub-part of this PMP, written by Combat Systems Engineers specifically for the LHD Mid-Life program. 4. Effective Date. This PMP is effective 27 Feb 14, and the LHD-1/LHA-6 MMP Shall be executed in accordance with the directive and policies contained herein.

4 Enclosure (1)

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

5 Enclosure (1)

Enclosure (1)

LHD Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization Program (MMP)

Program Management Plan (PMP)

6 Enclosure (1)

Enclosure (1)

TABLE OF CHANGES AND DRAFTS CHANGE / DRAFT DATE SUBMITTED RECIPIENTS CHANGE/UPDATE BY DRAFT #1 NOV 2011 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA DRAFT #2 FEB 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA DRAFT #3 MAR 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA DRAFT #4 APR 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP) ADDED

APR 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

DRAFT #5 MAY 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA DRAFT #6 AUG 2012 ALION PM, PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA OPNAV N95 LTR DRAFT “LHD MID-LIFE MMP” OBJECTIVES ADDED AND PMP UPDATED (LTR DTD 06 SEP 12)

SEP 2012 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

UPDATED STAFFING PLAN OCT 2012 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA UPDATED USS BONHOMME RICHARD (LHD 2) TO FDNF

NOV 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

FIRST ML AVAIL TO 07/13/16 NOV 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA ADDED ESC BRIEF TO COMM MATIRX NOV 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA ADDED INTEGRATED SURVEYS TO PPS SECTION

DEC 2012 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

ADDED NAB TO COMM MATRIX DEC 2012 PMT, NAB MICHAEL A. ESPARZA ADDED THERMAL MANAGEMENT TO COMM MATRIX

DEC 2012 PMT, SYNDICATES, THERMAL MANAGEMENT GROUP

MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

ADDED CORROSION SYNDICATE TO COMM MATRIX

DEC 2012 PMT, SYNDICATES, THERMAL MANAGEMENT GROUP

MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

ADDED ANNUAL STRATEGIC PLANNING CONFERENCE TO COMM MATRIX

JAN 2013 PMT, SYNDICATES MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

UPDATED PMP JAN 2013 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA ADDED LESSONS LEARNED MANAGEMENT PLAN (LLMP)

FEB 2013 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

ADDED MID-LIFE JFMM / CNO TYPICAL AVAIL PLANNING MILESTONES, ANNEX G

APR 2013 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

REMOVED CIRCULAR NAVSEA CREST JUL 2013 PMS 470, PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA UPDATED STAFFING PLAN AUG 2013 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA DRAFT #10 AUG 2013 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA ADDED CAPT (S) CRONE, USN, SIGNATURE BLOCK

AUG 2013 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

ADDED “SUBJECT TO CONTINUOUS CHANGE” TO SUMMARY BUDGET TITLE

AUG 2013 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA

ADDED “MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)” AS THE FIRST SECTION OF THE PMP.

SEP 2014 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA, PMP

UPDATED SUMMARY MILESTONE SCHEDULE, ADDED SCD FIELDING PLAN, ADDED PRELIMINARY BUDGET

SEP 2014 PMT, PMS-470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA, PMP

UPDATED LIST OF TABLES AND LIST OF FIGURES

SEP 2014 PMT, PMS-470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA, PMP

UPDATED LHD MMP ORGANIZATION CHARTS (TYCOM, PMS-470)

SEP 2014 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA, PMP

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PLAN (PMP)

7 Enclosure (1)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 1 TABLE OF CHANGES AND DRAFTS 6 PROGRAM CHARTER, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 PROGRAM PURPOSE/JUSTIFICATION 9 BUSINESS NEED/CASE 9 BUSINESS OBJECTIVES 10 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 11 THE USMC AND THE LHD MID-LIFE PROGRAM 11 PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND SUCCESS CRITERIA 12 LHD MID-LIFE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM AND MID-LIFE ORGANIZATION 15 PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS/CONSTRAINTS 18 ASSUMPTIONS 20 ACTIONS PRIOR TO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITY EXECUTION: SHIP’S INSTALLATION DRAWING (SID) AND SHIP CHANGE DOCUMENT (SCD) 21 ACTIONS PRIOR TO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITY EXECUTION: LHD-1/LHD-5 PPS/IS 25 PROGRAM PRELIMINARY SCOPE STATEMENT 25 LHD MID-LIFE SCD GUIDELINES 26 PROGRAM RISKS 27 PROGRAM PILLARS 28 PROGRAM SYNDICATES 32 SUMMARY MILESTONE SCHEDULE 29-30 SUMMARY MID-LIFE FIELDING PLAN 31-33 SUMMARY MID-LIFE BUDGET 34 PROGRAM APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS/PMR’S SUBMISSION 36

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1. PROGRAM PILLARS 11 FIGURE 2. LHD MID-LIFE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART 15 FIGURE 3. LHD MID-LIFE PMT, CORE 18 FIGURE 4. PROGRESSIVE MAINTENANCE WITHIN MID-LIFE, USS KEARSARGE (LHD 3) EXAMPLE 19


8 Enclosure (1)

LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. LIST OF WASP CLASS SHIPS THAT WILL UNDERGO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITIES 10 TABLE 2. SUMMARY MILESTONE SCHEDULE OF LHD 1-7 MID LIFE AVAILS START TO FINISH 21 TABLE 3. LHD MID-LIFE PERIOD SCDS 21-23 TABLE 4. LISTING OF TOP 25 MAINTENANCE DRIVERS 24 TABLE 5. LHD MID-LIFE BASELINE SUMMARY MILESTONES 29-30 TABLE 6. SUMMARY BASELINE SCD FIELDING PLAN 31-33 TABLE 7. LHD MID-LIFE NOTIONAL BUDGET FY 14, OMN/OPN, FY 15-25 34-35

LIST OF ANNEXES ANNEX A - RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP) 37 ANNEX B – LHD MID-LIFE STAFFING PLAN 45 ANNEX C – COMMUNICATIONS PLAN 52 ANNEX D – LESSONS LEARNED MANAGEMENT PLAN 59 ANNEX E – JOINT FLEET MAINTENANCE MANUAL MILESTONES 63 ANNEX F- COMBAT SYSTEMS INTERFACE PLAN (WARFARE SYSTEMS INTERFACE DIAGRAMS) 69 ANNEX G-HM&E INTEGRATION PLAN 74


9 Enclosure (1)

PROGRAM CHARTER, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The WASP Class Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships are national assets that make up the primary elements the U.S. Navy’s / USMC’s Amphibious and Expeditionary force. These ships are facing issues of obsolescence in regards to the currently installed Combat Systems suites and Engineering HM&E equipment. This situation results in the Amphibious Big Deck ships being unable to adequately operate and fight at peak efficiency. The LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT) has been established to address, identify and integrate solutions to correct the combat systems and Hull Maintenance and Electrical (HM&E) issues onboard the WASP class ships, and to modernize the ships in order to better be able to respond to assigned national tasking. While the SSDS MK II CAPSTONE install is a cornerstone to LHD Mid-Life, the project also encompasses various major HM&E maintenance and modernization jobs, aviation improvements for aviation support of expected airframes, and significant upgrades to major auxiliary systems that are intended to increase combat readiness. The project will integrate improved combat systems technology solutions and robust maintenance and engineering improvements in order to establish a more vigorous WASP class warship, extending the product life of each ship as dictated by national security requirements and the Director, Expeditionary Warfare (OPNAV N95). PROGRAM PURPOSE/JUSTIFICATION The purpose of the LHD Mid-Life Program is to combine the efforts of the various stakeholders and primary decision makers of the Program (the Program Sponsor being PMS 470) and present a uniform means of execution to the major elements of the maintenance and modernization efforts for the WASP Class ships; thereby extending the product lifecycle of each ship in the class to 40 years and beyond; improving the combat readiness of America’s Amphibious and Expeditionary force. These ships are facing issues

Business Need/Case

The business objectives for this program are in direct support of the PMS-470. Accordingly, LHD-ML requirements are intended to transform the Navy's integrated warfare investment strategy into affordable enabling systems through: synchronized modernization and depot level maintenance of existing capabilities, and the installation of new operational capabilities to meet validated needs. LHD-ML program requirements shall improve Hull Maintenance and Engineering (HM&E) system control, reliability, availability and survivability; integrate new aviation and combat system capability; and enable LHD-1 Class ships to meet full Expected Service Life (ESL) of 40 years with creditable combat relevance,


10 Enclosure (1)

at lower Total Ownership Cost (TOC). Further, expected fiscal pressures and increased investment consequence of LHD-ML’s scope and complexity makes critical the mid-life availability effective execution within allocated resources. As framed within the CNO’s Sailing Directions, “We will address economic change by being effective and efficient. We will innovate to: Sustain our fleet capability through effective maintenance [and] timely modernization.”

This document is intended to be the source document to be referred to by all stakeholders as the primary reference in the execution of the program. The Engineering Integration Plan (EIP), so called to differentiate the document from this Program Management Plan (PMP), is a very specific and detailed engineering plan that contains all the engineering tasks, schedules, technical requirements and testing plans for LHD Mid-Life, and is a critical part and sub-plan of this PMP; and will be written by the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) at NSWCCD-SSES and submitted via the appropriate chains of command for approval. The Combat Systems Interface Plan (CSIP) is also a very specific and detailed engineering plan that contains all the combat systems engineering tasks, schedules, requirements and Systems Operational Verification Tests (SOVTs) no later than (NLT) 12 months prior to the first targeted Mid-Life Availability start date. It must be noted, however, that the PMT will set regular due dates into the POAM where NSWCCD-SSES and NSWC PHD will be required to submit draft portions of the EIP and CSIP respectively, so that the Program Manager can deconflict and synchronize the various operational, engineering and combat systems schedules and maintain the program on track. Thus, the twelve months prior to date is merely a formality, as NSWCCD-SSES and NSWC PHD will have been submitting working copies of the EIP and CSIP to the PMT as soon as the work required starts to become identified and defined. In the event of a conflict between the PMP, EIP or CSIP, the PMP will be considered the primary document, and the matter referred to the Executive Steering Committee (ESC), for further adjudication to the appropriate members of the Chain of Command. Table 1 presents those ships that will be undergoing the Mid-Life Availability, with homeport included.

Ship (WASP Class) Homeport USS WASP (LHD 1) Norfolk, VA USS ESSEX (LHD 2) San Diego, CA USS KEARSARGE (LHD 3) Norfolk, VA USS BOXER (LHD 4) San Diego, CA USS BATAAN (LHD 5) Norfolk, VA USS BONHOMME RICHARD (LHD 6) Sasebo, JA USS IWO JIMA (LHD 7) Mayport, FL USS MAKIN ISLAND (LHD 8) San Diego, CA Table 1. Ships of the WASP Class to undergo LHD Mid-Life starting in FY-16 with USS ESSEX (LHD 2). Source: Naval Register of Ships, INTERNET, available at http://www.nvr.navy.mil/ Business Objectives • Develop annual balanced, optimized, integrated and funded Maintenance and Modernization Execution Plans for shipyards and Regional Maintenance Center (RMCs). • Execute the Maintenance and Modernization Execution Plan with accountability for results using metrics.


11 Enclosure (1)

• Apply Continuous Process Improvements to reduce maintenance Life Cycle costs. • Apply Risk Mitigation Strategies, by using Risk RADAR; by using the formal application of Risk

Identification Methods, creation of a Risk Register, and periodic review of the register by the Risk Management Board (RMB). Specifics of the Risk Management Strategy will be contained in the Risk Management Plan (RMP), Annex A, of this PMP.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The LHD Mid-Life Program will ensure 40 years ship service life. More specifically, it will meet the organizational and Strategic Business Plan needs of the Program Sponsor, PMS 470, and fulfill the mission requirements of the U.S. Navy. Combat readiness will be improved utilizing improved technology in the form of combat systems and engineering upgrades in order to maximize operational employability and ship service life. Mid-Life actions will be executed in accordance with the LHD Program Management Plan (PMP), which is the guiding document in the management and execution of the LHD Mid-Life program. All the HM&E and combat systems work (identified by the seven Pillars of Mid-Life, figure 1, below: Main Propulsion, Amphibious Systems, Auxiliaries, C5I, Environmental, Habitability and Maintenance1) will in turn be governed and executed

in accordance with the Engineering Integration Plan (EIP), and the Combat Systems Interface Plan (CSIP). The entire plan (referred to collectively as the PMP) is intended to be an evolving document, referred to periodically, and maintained for audit, record and lessons learned purposes. The PMP is designed to manage WASP Class ships during their Mid-Life period; to accomplish the Mid-Life objectives, while allowing the other ships of the class to deploy, operate, and train.

The United States Marine Corps (USMC) and the LHD Mid-Life Program As the main battery of the world’s greatest expeditionary force, the USMC holds a large stake in the successful execution and outcome of the LHD Mid-Life Program. Each Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU)

1 Robert P. Irelan, “Pillars and Syndicates” 25 Aug 2011, Power Point Brief, American Systems, INTERNET, available at https://extranet.americansystems.com


12 Enclosure (1)

deploys self-sufficiently, with the ability to maintain itself for an extended period of time. Their mode of transport and habitability, their means of sustenance, exercise and planning all depend on one thing: an able ship that is properly maintained, sufficiently modernized, and able to embark/debark approved USMC equipment and gear in an expeditious manner. Headquarters, Marine Corps (HQMC) addressed those areas of the Mid-Life Program that were of interest to the Marine Corps2, specifically the Vehicle Stowage Areas (VSAs) of the Assault Ships. Upon investigation of the Vehicle Stowage Areas (VSAs) of three LHDs, it was found that numerous lights and fire sprinkler heads had been bent by USMC vehicles and rolling stock during embark, debark and stowage maneuvers. Initial analysis revealed that that the damage was significant – and could have resulted in safety related issues. Initial recommendations received from the Marine Corps called for the use of recessed lighting and piping systems, the installation of more fresh water and air connections (recessed appropriately would contribute to efficient use of stowage space and facilitate greater movement and increased efficiency in AMW Operations) and more electrical connections could be used in the upper VSA to power mobile loaded 20ft Maintenance Vans.

PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND SUCCESS CRITERIA

A program is a process or collection of related projects organized to gain benefits from the projects collectively; in this case, all the ships of the WASP Class. LHDs 1-8 are individual projects which will serve as templates for each successive project; and together the projects make up the LHD Mid-Life Program. The objectives which mutually support the milestones and deliverables for this program have been initially identified. It must be understood that a program this complex is one of progressive elaboration: early on in the program, change will be high. This will wane as the program (and each project) nears completion. Keeping that firmly in mind, in order to achieve success with the LHD Mid-Life Program, the following objectives must be met within the designated time and budget allocations, while maintaining the mission scope. The following represent general LHD-ML program requirements executed through the efficiency of single duration Mid-Life Period, informed by a detailed availability analysis) which includes synchronized maintenance and modernization objectives by NNSY and SURFMEPP, and supported by an effective contracting strategy. Please note funding challenges may cause these requirements to be prioritized. a. Aviation (1) Pri-Fly Reconfiguration

2 Headquarters, Marine Corps, Seabasing Integration Division “LHD VISITS – USS WASP, USS KEARSARGE, USS IWO JIMA [sic]” 30 Sep 11


13 Enclosure (1)

(2) MV-22 Shop Modifications (3) MV 22 Topside Modifications (4) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Integration b. Propulsion (1) Install Power Management Platform (2) Install Propulsion Auxiliary Control System (3) Boiler System Improvements (4) Machinery Control Improvements to include a prognostic Machinery Monitoring System c. Survivability (1) Weight and Moment Compensation (2) Install Fuel Oil Compensation System (3) Damage Control Upgrades d. C4I/C5I/IC (1) Install SSDS MK II Capstone (2) Install SPS 48-G (3) Install CANES (4) Install ESSM (5) Address IC obsolescence issues


14 Enclosure (1)

(6) Incorporate Navy Amphibious Baseline e. Logistics - Steam Plant/Steam System component obsolescence resolution and new system NTSPs f. Assault (1) Replace LCPL with RHIB Davit (2) Remove Monorail System (3) Ballast/Deballast System Improvements (4) Address Maintenance driver issues associated with Folding Vehicle Ramp, Stern Gate, Aircraft Elevators, and Side Port Doors g. Maintenance: Ensuring maintenance backlog and fleet maintenance burdens are reduced within resource constraints. h. Planning - Develop a comprehensive LHD-ML acquisition strategy that collaboratively aligns Fleet Scheduling with a fully developed Mid-Life Availability Plan that includes: Organizational Roles & Responsibilities: (1) Management: Program management including oversight, metrics, communication, scheduling products: Advanced Planning / Production schedule (2) Planning, Estimating & Advance Planning Products: Automated Work Requests, Work Packages, Schedules, Late Adds, Package Locks, Ship Checks, Assessments, Ship's Force Assessments (3) Design Products: Availability Analysis, Legacy System Integration, shipboard distributed systems impact analysis (4) Material / Tools: Information, information systems, facilities, or tools


15 Enclosure (1)

(5) Technical Instructions: Technical manuals, policies, milestones Ship Install Drawings (SIDs), Liaison / Reverse Liaison Action Reports (LAR, RLAR) (6) Contracts & Funding: Contracting vehicle requirements, Award Fee Board Contracting Products: Technical Review, Definitization, CFR, RCCs, Work Specs (7) Testing: Pre-Installation Testing and Check-Out (PITCO) and Post-Installation Integrated Testing

LHD MID-LIFE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM (PMT) AND MID-LIFE ORGANIZATION The Program Management Team (PMT) for LHD M-L consists of personnel working to support the program at various levels. These personnel are then confirmed as resources by the working level program manager in accordance with the PMR’s directions, orders, this plan, and other directives that will serve to bring the project in on budget, on time, and within scope. This program is different from other Mid-Life programs (LSD, for example), in that it is being managed, from start to finish, as a program, and each hull, as a project,3 as far as it is practicable within the constraints and margins that exist within Navy culture and the Acquisition community. For each member of the team, it is vitally important to know the cultural climate, enterprise environmental factors and the organizational structure they are working in; in order to adapt quickly and minimize stress, learn the basic fundamentals of the job they are assigned, and to immediately start contributing ideas to the LHD Mid-Life Process.

LHD Mid-Life Program Organization

3 “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide)”, 5th Edition, Project Management Institute, 2004


16 Enclosure (1)

ADM Jonathan Greenert, USNChief of Naval Operations

(CNO)N00

VADM Bill Burke, USNDeputy CNO for Warfare

SystemsN9

MGEN Robert S. “Whaler” Walsh, USMC, Director, Expeditionary Warfare N95

CAPT Erik Ross, USN, Amphibious Warfare,

N953

CAPT Tim Crone, USNPMS 470

Program ManagerSEA 21/Surface Warfare

Directorate

Mr. Bradley SmithPMS 470

Deputy Program Manager

Mr. William BoozerPMS 470

Senior Class Manager

Mr. Harry SearchPMS 470RC2

LHA/LHD/LPD4/LCCClass Manager

Mr. Dan AllenAssistant, Military

Analyst

Mr. Christopher CundiffPMS 470RBC2A

LHA/LHD/LPD4/LCCDeputy Class Manager

Ms. Majorie WinstonPMS 470

Class Manager

Mr. Robert IrelanProgram Manager’s

Representative (PMR)

LHD Mid-Life Lead

Mr. Michael GwinnLHD MMP Chief Engineer

Project Manager

Mr. Michael A. Esparza PMP

Project Manager/C5I

Mr. Fred WilhelmWaterfront

Operations Officer

Ms. Jennifer DeardonSharepoint Site

Admin

VADM Thomas S. Rowden, USNCOMNAVSURPAC

(CNSP)N00

CAPT Wiliam J. Parker III, USNChief of Staff (CoS)

N01

Mr. L. StoneDeputy ACOS

Engineering ReadinessN43A

LCDR Nathan Beach, USNCNSP Type Desk Officer

N43E

Mr. Wally PorterCNSP Type Desk

N43E

Mr. Ryan BenoitLHD 2 Port Engineer

Mr. Don Gabriel LHD 2 Program Manager

Mr. Matt DavisLHD 4 Port Engineer

Mr. Jerry KnauLHD 4 Program Manager

Mr. Jerry SelphLHD 6 Port Engineer

Mr. Don OwensLHD 6 Program Manager

Mr. Todd StubblefieldLHD 8 Port Engineer

Mr. Andy SellersLHD 8 Program Manager

Mr. John NasshanLHD 2/4 CS Port Engineer

Mr. Gary JuddLHD 6 CS Port Engineer

Mr. Scott HessLHD 8 CS Port Engineer

RADM Pete A. Gumataotao. USNCOMNAVSURFLANT

(CNSL)N00

RDML Brian LaRoche, USNDeputy Commander

N00D

CAPT Douglas Nashold, USNChief of Staff (CoS)

N01

CAPT William “Rick” Tate, USNACOS Material Readiness

N43

CAPT , William Henderson, USNDeputy ACOS, N43A

CDR C. Wiilams, USNAmphib Type Desk Manager N43EA1

Mr. Larry FavorAmphib Type Desk

Mr. Time SpenceLHD 1 Port Engineer

Mr. Modestine SivelsLHD 1 Program Manager

Mr. Chuck MurphyLHD 3 Port Engineer

Mr. Kevin BolenLHD 3 Program Manager

Mr. Tom BourgelasLHD 5 Port Engineer

Mr. Todd SandhoffLHD 5 Program Manager

Mr. Chris SternLHD 7 Port Engineer

Mr. Leon CarverLHD 7 Program Manager

Mr. David CloseLHD 1/7 CS Port Engineer

Mr. John LassiterLHD 3/5 CS Port Engineeer

Program Sponsor Group (PSG)

Mr. Jess MatudioESG-2 Liaison PMR

Mr. Jim WheelerJapan PMS 470 PMR

Mr. Steve SeversNASSCO LHD PM

Mr. Dave MuisePMS 470 CS PMR

Mr. Mark HochstetlerPMS 470 PMR

Mr. Bill WoodBAE Project

Manager

Class Management Team (CMT)LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT)

Ms. Sharon McilnayPMS 470

Waest Coast Class Manager

RADM Christopher J. Paul, USNDeputy Commander

CAPT Ron Cook, USNACOS, N43

Mr. Bob FlynnPMS 470 CS PMR

ESG-2

Figure 2. LHD Mid-Life Organization by Stakeholder Group. Source: LHD Mid-Life PMT, Michael A. Esparza, PMP The LHD Mid-Life Program Organization Stakeholder groups (fig. 3). The efforts, resources, skills and specialties necessary to execute the Mid-Life package are significant; thus, the number of specialized organizations involved and personnel. All of these groups work in collaboration with one another to achieve the end objective: a fully modernized and maintained amphibious assault warship, that has kept paced with the threat, continued to evolve with the Marine Corps, and has an expected product life cycle of 50 years. When adjudication is required on a matter that cannot be worked out between the stakeholders themselves, the matter will be referred to the PMT, so that the PMR can promptly notify the Program Manager, PMS 470, as soon as practicable, preferably in writing, of the nature of the dispute, the issue at hand, and the impact of non-resolution. The Program Manager, in this case PMS 470, will refer the matter to the appropriate agencies and members of the Chain of Command for resolution, within a reasonable amount of time. PMS 470 will also notify the PMT if work must cease or can continue while the issue is being resolved. The Program Sponsor Group (OPNAV N95) handles the financials of the WASP Class ships, and ensures that the PMT is executing the proper actions to ensure that the mission objective is being met. The PSG


17 Enclosure (1)

also represents the WASP Class ships to the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO’s) Staff, N95, Director of Expeditionary Warfare.

The Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT) is a cadre of Amphibious Warfare professionals selected to manage the day-to-day operations of the Mid-life Program. The PMT takes care of LHD Mid-Life business 24/7 – this is the PMT’s primary duty. The Team Lead, known as the Program Manager’s Representative (PMR), reports to the LHD Class Manager, Program Manager, PMS 470.

The Class Management Team (PMS-470) Group. A group of professionals/ship-type experts who are adept in engineering (both CS and HM&E), Ship Class maintenance, budget, finance, logistics and other duties specific to a class. They are familiar with the long term ship life cycle maintenance philosophies and methodologies for docking, undocking, Board of Inspection and Survey (INSURV) preparation and follow up. They interact with the LHD PMT on a routine basis.

Engineering Group, NSWCCD-SSES. Naval Surface Warfare Center, Caderock Division - Ship System Engineering Station, Philadelphia, PA. The Navy's primary technical expertise and facilities for both naval machinery research and development and naval machinery life cycle engineering. A Primary stakeholder in the LHD Mid-Life effort, the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) at SSES will be drafting, reviewing and submitting for approval to the appropriate authorities within the Chain of Command the Engineering Integration Plan (EIP). Once approved, SSES will present the EIP to the PMT, who will authorize its execution, and report commencement to the PSG.

Engineering Group, NSWC PHD. Naval Surface Warfare Center, Port Hueneme Division, California. The mission of NSWC PHD is to Integrate, Test, Evaluate and Provide Life-Cycle Engineering and Logistics for Surface Warfare Systems. NSWC PHD will be responsible for drafting, reviewing and submitting for approval to the appropriate authorities within the Chain of Command the Combat Systems Interface Plan (CSIP). Once approved, NSWC PHD will present the approved CSIP to the PMT, who will authorize its execution, and report commencement to the PSG.

Engineering Group, SURFMEPP. Surface Maintenance and Engineering Planning Program, provides centralized Surface Ship lifecycle maintenance engineering, class management and modernization planning, and management of maintenance strategies aligned with and responsive to National, Fleet, Surface Type Commanders, and NAVSEA needs and priorities. SURFMEPP develops and issues several core lifecycle planning, budgeting, and work package execution documents designed to achieve the expected service life for non-nuclear surface ships.

Type Commanders (TYCOM), East and West. Commander, Naval Surface Forces, Atlantic (COMNAVSURFLANT) and Commander, Naval Surface Forces (COMNAVSURFOR) are the Type


18 Enclosure (1)

Commanders (TYCOMS) for the east and west coast, respectively. The commanders are in the administrative chain of command of each ship of the surface force; and the Type Commanders are responsible for the manning, training, equipping and maintaining of each unit under their command. In daily interactions with the LHD Mid-Life Program, the Type Commander will share operational and scheduling information, provide technical expertise and recommendations via the Type Desk and, most importantly, provide access to their assigned U.S. Navy Port Engineers.

Integrators Group. This is the group of organizations whose primary responsibility is to ensure that there is a seamless integration of warfare and combat systems into presently existing systems and combat suites. The groups that readily come to mind are COMSPAWARSYSCENLANT, NAVAIR 1.2, SPAWAR PMW 750, PEO C4I and PEO IWS 10.0.

LHD Mid-Life Core Program Management Team (PMT) (fig. 4) can be considered the commissioning team of the LHD Mid-Life program. They are considered the “Core” of the LHD Mid-life Team because they have been involved with the program since its inception, and have laid the foundations, processes and philosophies of the Mid-Life program; in conjunction with the Fleet, the Program Sponsor, and the Class Managers. The core team consists of six positions:

Robert P. IrelanLHD Mid-Life Hull Manager

Program Manager’s Representative (PMR)Team Lead

Fred Wilhelm Waterfront Operations

Manager

Michael A. Esparza, PMP

Program/Project ManagerC5I Officer

Jennifer DeardonSharepoint Administrative Support

(Part Time)

LHD MID-LIFE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM (PMT)

Michael GwinnProgram/Project ManagerLHD MMP Chief Engineer

Figure 3. LHD Mid-Life Core PMT. Source: LHD Mid-Life PMT, Michael A. Esparza, PMP

LHD Hull Manager, Program Manager’s Representative (PMR). Robert P. Irelan

Waterfront Fleet Representative (Fleet Rep). Fred Wilhelm.

LHD MMP Chief Engineer (Hull, Mechanical and Electrical (HM&E). Michael Gwinn.

Senior Combat Systems Engineer/Project Manager (SCSE). Michael A. Esparza, PMP.

Sharepoint Site Administrative Support (Part Time). Jennifer Deardon.

PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS


19 Enclosure (1)

This program must meet the following requirements in order to achieve success.

1. Each LHD Mid-Life Period (which includes the Pre, Mid-Life and Post Avails) must be executed on schedule and on budget.

2. Mid-Life periods must be implemented without disruption to scheduled operations and deployments. At this point, it must be noted that the program is also designed to be flexible and open to adjustment when necessary. The Program Sponsor has indicated4 that all the engineering work need not be executed within just one Window of Opportunity (WOO)/Availability, but can be spread out between two or more; and that the preceding and follow on Continuous Maintenance Availabilities (CMAVs) and regularly scheduled Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Phased Maintenance Availabilities (PMAs) could absorb some of the Mid-Life work, if adequately planned; and time, scope and cost allow (see figure 5). In the context of LHD Mid-Life, this known as Progressive Maintenance, as it progresses the maintenance effort towards fulfilling the objective of a fully maintained and modernized assault ship, capable of reaching a 40 year service life. Requirements may be added as necessary, with Program Sponsor approval, as the program, and each project, moves forward.

ID Task Name Start Finish Duration2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q11 PMA96d3/12/201410/30/2013PMA2 PMA96d6/22/20162/10/2016PMA3 PMA96d1/16/20199/5/2018PMA4 DPMA181d7/14/202111/4/2020DPMA

Q22019 2020 2021

Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2

Figure 4, Progressive Maintenance within LHD Mid-Life MMP Periods (EXAMPLE). Source: Program Manager, LHD Mid-Life PMT, Michael A. Esparza, PMP. Ship: USS KEARSARGE (LHD 3). Progressive Maintenance. In regards to the scheduling of the Mid-Life Availability, the 2016 PMA marks the availability in which the PMT has focused much of its planning effort. Notice, however, the CNO availabilities circled: the CNO avail in FY-14 and FY-18. If all the Mid-Life work required can be allocated between all three of these availabilities, and time, scope and budget allow, the PMR may task the Program Manager of the PMT to schedule the work accordingly, and spread Mid-Life SCDs and work among the various CNOs availabilities – in this case, the CNO availabilities in FY 14, FY 16 and FY 18. Thus, the maintenance is progressed towards the Mid-Life goal. Constraints The following set of initial constraints pertains to the LHD Mid-Life Program. Again, as the planning stage continues to unfold, the Program Management Team (PMT) will continue to identify constraints. Each constraint will be documented and planned for, and communicated up and down the chain of command. By using Rolling-Wave Planning, the PMT will conduct iterations of planning the work, and then execute the work – and will continue to identify program elements, such as requirements and constraints.

4 CAPT Michael R. Graham, USN, meeting, PMS 470 and PMR, Waterfront Fleet Representative (Fleet Rep) and Program Manager (PM), 19 Oct 2011, Washington DC, NAVSEA Headquarters.


20 Enclosure (1)

1. The LHD Mid-Life Program was originally to consist of one LHD Mid-Life Modernization Availability per year.5 The LHD Mid-Life MMP was going to focus on ONE AVAILABILITY, which was specifically referred to as the “Mid-Life Avail.” Based on the dynamic and ever changing nature of budgets, funding, schedule fluctuations and Global Force Management (GFM) issues, the paradigm was changed by the LHD Hull Manager from just “One” availability to do all the Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization, to what is now referred to as the “LHD Mid-Life Period”; which will typically consist of the Pre, Mid-Life and Post availabilities. 2. Each Mid-Life Period must be consistent with fleet scheduling and operational requirements; however, in the event that operations do cause a cancellation of a Pre, Mid-Life and Post Availability, the situation must be documented via record message traffic from the Type Commander (TYCOM), info NAVSEA 21/PMS 470 at a minimum. 3. LHD Mid-Life Program Availability duration. The program standard shall be to use the minimum of nine months availability, in accordance with the current Industrial Contract regime in effect (MSMO or MACMO). A duration analysis is required (and shall be conducted prior to the execution of the first LHD Mid-Life Availability in FY-16). Docking shall be integrated, when feasible, with Docking Maintenance Cycle (DPMA); with the assumption being a nine year Docking Cycle, as recommended by the Surface Maintenance Engineering Planning Program (SURFMEPP).

Assumptions The following is a list of assumptions identified during the initial stage of planning. The assumptions list will continue to grow as progressive elaboration takes place. It will be refined and corrected and each individual assumption will be addressed.

1. This program has the full support of the program sponsor, who in this case is the Program Manager for PMS 470. In addition it has the full support of the Program Manager’s Representative (PMR), stakeholders, and all departments.

2. The purpose of this program has already been communicated to the major stakeholders.

3. The initial core Program Management Team (PMT) has been identified.

4. Initial funding for the program supports execution.

5 While keeping in mind that the engineering requirements can be spread throughout the Mid-Life Period.


22 Enclosure (1)

ACTIONS PRIOR TO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITY EXECUTION: SHIP’S INSTALLATION DRAWINGS (SIDS) AND SHIP

CHANGE DOCUMENTS (SCDS). One of the critical action items that will impact the overall mission of the LHD MMP, is the development of SHIPALT drawings. The LHD PMT in coordination with the PSG and delegated assigned personnel (Norfolk Naval Shipyard and NAVSEA 05), will be overall responsible for the development of SIDs for the LHD Mid-Life Program. SHIPALT drawings are those drawings which are utilized by a shipyard or other activity for the accomplishment of all non-nuclear SHIPALT work. These drawings provide a record of ship configuration after SHIPALT accomplishment. These drawings are used by Ship's Force in maintenance and casualty control, utilized by material support activities in determining support requirements, and used by NAVSEA to maintain system and compartment configuration control. All of the required Ship Change Documents (SCD) drawings are identified in the Navy Data Environment (NDE) as part of the Navy Modernization Process (NMP). The LHD PMT has identified all SCDs from NDE that are applicable to the LHD Mid-Life period for modernization of the LHD-1 WASP Class ships. These drawings include, as required, system drawings and diagrams, arrangement drawings, structural drawings, manufacturing drawings, assembly and detail drawings, removal drawings, temporary access/egress drawings, cabling sheets and special drawings and shall meet all requirements as noted in Ref (x) 3.2.1. In nearly all instances, SIDs will be developed using a CAD application. This provides significant benefits in efficiency and accuracy, as well as reusability. When CAD files are generated they must follow a consistent set of CAD Standards with regards to layers, line weights, line fonts, and standard library parts inserted. Process. The Planning Yard for each ship class, as designated by NAVSEA SL720-AA-MAN-010, is the engineering design agent for assigned specific classes of ships. Responsibilities assigned to the Planning Yard in support of SHIPALT drawings include the all of the requirements as noted in ref (x) 3.3.1. The Planning Yard and NAVSEA Engineering Directorate representative(s) shall accomplish the development of SIDs utilizing the outline process noted below as per ref (x).

1. Determine lead ship design (performed prior to or after actual drawing preparation, but must be conducted on applicable ships prior to issuance of the drawing) to support specific availabilities.

2. Determine drawing adequacy and applicability to follow ships of a class (performed prior to or after actual drawing preparation, but must be conducted on applicable ships prior to issuance of the drawing) to support specific availabilities.

3. Conduct proofing (validation) of SHIPALT drawings (performed as part of proofing of SHIPALT design for SHIPALT records (SARs) which require proofing after SHIPALT accomplishment on the first ship to receive the SHIPALT).


26 Enclosure (1)


27 Enclosure (1)

ACTIONS CONDUCTED PRIOR TO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITY EXECUTION: PRELIMINARY PROGRAM SURVEY (PPS)

AND INTEGRATED SURVEYS (IS), USS WASP (LHD-1) AND USS BATAAN (LHD-5) The LHD Mid-Life Program initially required some preliminary action prior to the relevant hull’s Mid-Life Availability start date. The most important of these actions was to be the LHD Mid-Life Preliminary Program Survey (PPS) and the execution of various Integrated Surveys (IS). The surveys were intended to:

1. Establish a baseline of required Mid-Life work to include, but not be limited to, major distributive systems (both HM&E and C5I).

2. Provide a snapshot to the LHD PMT, PMS 470, NSWCCD-SSES and NSWC PHD of those systems requiring the focus of the maintenance and the modernization effort.

3. Allow decision makers, such as PMS 470 and the LHD ML PMT, to continually rank and prioritize the maintenance actions Ship Change Documents (SCDs) in support of initial requirements and financial decisions, prior to the execution of the ship’s scheduled Mid-Life availability.

4. Allow for the follow on of additional Integrated Surveys (IS), including, but not limited to the following:

a. Interior Communications (IC) Survey

b. Thermal Management Survey

c. Electrical Power

d. Electrical Distribution

e. Weight and Moment

However, due to budget constraints and fiscal challenges, the PPS is no longer a viable methodology for ascertaining ship’s current material condition prior to the LHD Mid-Life Period.

PRELIMINARY SCOPE STATEMENT

The LHD Mid-Life program will include planning, scheduling and delivery of a complete Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization period. The primary governing document for each ships Maintenance and Modernization package is the PMP. The primary document for all engineering work is the EIP, written by NSWCCD-SSES Engineers specifically for the LHD Mid-Life Program. The primary document for all Combat Systems work is the CSEMP, written by Combat Systems Engineers specifically for the LHD Mid-Life program. All efforts will be


28 Enclosure (1)

managed by the PMT. All program and project work will be the primary focus of daily operations and all required items will be communicated via the regularly scheduled LHD Mid-Life teleconferences and meetings. Ship Change Documents (SCDs) and planned alterations will be managed in accordance with the following guidelines.

LHD Mid-Life Ship Change Documentation (SCD) Guidelines6 Ship Change Documents (SCDs), both Fleet and Program, will be the primary means of executing the work for the LHD Mid-Life Program, and they will be executed in accordance with the Joint Fleet Maintenance Manual (OPNAV 4790.3) and NAVSEA TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDANCE, SHIP CHANGE DOCUMENT (SCD) TS9090-400A and all other applicable directives and instructions. The LHD Mid-Life SCD submitters shall be PMS 470 LHD Team Representatives for Program ALTs and Commander, Naval Surface Forces, Pacific and Atlantic (COMNAVSURFPAC and LANT) N43 and N46 representatives for fleet ALTs. LHD Mid-Life SCD development decisions shall be agreed upon by fleet and OPNAV representatives prior to being approved in the Navy Data Environment-Navy Modernization (NDE-NM) database. The specific guidelines for SCD development are as follows7:

1. Proposals need to include the “Problem” definition specifically delineated in the description section of the SCD, and the submitter must articulate how the SCD provides a solution to the “Problem”.

2. The following issues need to be addressed by the submitter and/or the SCD, and associated parties, in the appropriate cases:

a. Which organization will provide the IS/WAS Configuration Diagram? Have they been made aware?

b. What is the maintenance impact of the SCD, both internal and external to the ship, and what plans are in place for accomplishment? What are the costs associated, and has the SCD been budgeted properly?

c. Identify/Describe Interface impacts and any significant cascading effects (i.e. creation of other system(s) impacts).

6 Harry T. Search, “LHD M-L SCD Documentation Guidelines” 19 Sep 11, Memorandum, INTERNET, available at https://extranet.americansystems.com 7 Harry T. Search , “Guidelines”


29 Enclosure (1)

d. Survivability.

e. Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) plan and costs:

(1) Spare parts and parts support

(2) Commonality ID and cannibalization procedures

(3) Obsolescence Planning

(4) Long Lead Time Material (LLTM) Requirements

(5) Hardware and Software support and costs

(6) Technical Refresh plan

f. Training strategy and plans (Training Gap Analysis)

(7) Ship’s Force Operations and Maintenance Training (Initial and Life-Cycle)

(8) Training for Shore Based Support

g. Total Ownership Costs (TOC) and Return on Investment (ROI) estimates (for attachment to SCD)

h. Risk Assessments. It should be noted that the Risk Register of this PMP will contain a numerical file of all reported risks to the program and project, along with the mitigation strategy put in place for each risk; or whether the risk was accepted or not. Regardless, the existence of the Risk Register is a requirement in the practice of Program and Project Management; it does not alleviate the submitter of the SCD of conducting a thorough risk analysis of the SCD they are about to put into the system.

PROGRAM RISKS The following risks for the LHD Mid-Life project have been identified. The PMT will determine and employ the necessary risk mitigation/avoidance strategies as appropriate to minimize the likelihood of these risks. As mentioned before in this PMP, It should be noted that the Risk Register of this document will contain a numerical file of all reported risks to the program and project, along with the mitigation strategy put in place


30 Enclosure (1)

for each risk; or whether the risk was accepted or not. The following risks have been identified in the initial planning phase. For more information on Risk Management, please refer to the Risk Management Plan (RMP), Annex A.

1. Potential disruption to LHD operations/Deployment during Mid-Life execution in the event of growth work, causing an extension of the Mid-Life Availability.

2. Lack of funding/late approval of POM funding and sourcing, impacting execution of the mid-life package; causing a cascading effect throughout the FY15-18 Mid-Life Period Availability schedule.

PROGRAM PILLARS 8

The LHD Mid-Life Program and each project (each individual hull is considered a project) is based on a “Pillar” format that is intended to ensure completeness and integration, particularly with the required training to sustain and use the maintenance and modernization work items and ensure operator efficiency. In addition, the format ensures that the Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) is robust enough to support the maintenance and modernization improvements that are a part of the LHD Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization program. The Pillars (again, Figure 1, left) will be used in the preliminary identification of work items, and the creation

and definition of SCDs and ALTs. Those work items will be grouped under the following Pillars: 1. Main Propulsion

2. Amphibious Systems (those maintenance and modernization improvements dealing specifically with Amphibious and Expeditionary Operations).

3. Auxiliaries and Attendant Auxiliary Systems.

4. Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Combat Systems and Intelligence (C5I)

5. Environmental Systems and Support

8 Robert P. Irelan, “Pillars and Syndicates”


31 Enclosure (1)

6. Habitability

7. Maintenance (Condition, Phased, Preventative, and Emergent based)

PROGRAM SYNDICATES9

Program Syndicates (groups of individuals or organizations combined to promote common interests within the program and each project) have been formed in support of each of the following areas:

1. LHD MMP Syndicate. This group collects the respective inputs of each fleet stakeholder and ensures that the “voice of the Fleet” is heard and justified recommendations are included within the LHD Mid-Life Program. It is utilized in order to ensure that primary decision makers/management reviews and analyzes recommendations and inputs regarding LHD program specifics and structure. It also includes review of C5I Systems, reviews inputs and recommendations from C5I Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) regarding LHD specific C5I systems, upgrades and modernizations; including the removal of legacy systems as they are phased out/rendered obsolete by emerging/new technologies and systems. In addition, the LHD MMP Syndicate addresses related to the Aviation department and mission of the WASP Class ships; with emphasis on the integration of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program and the MV-22 Osprey. Finally, the syndicate addresses the issues that pertain to the training continuum instituted by the LHD Mid-Life Program, not only with new systems, but also with the maintenance requirements that accompany the major maintenance and modernization upgrades.

NOTIONAL SUMMARY MILESTONE SCHEDULE AND INITIAL SUMMARY FIELDING PLAN The Program Summary Milestone Schedule is presented below. The notional schedule will be subject to numerous changes; but provides the process in tracking the dynamic nature of the LHD MMP Schedule. As the requirements are more clearly defined, this schedule will be modified. Any changes will be communicated in accordance with the program communications plan, and via status meetings and TELCONs scheduled by the Program Manager’s Representative (PMR).

9 Robert P. Irelan, “Pillars and Syndicates”


38 Enclosure (1)

PROGRAM APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS Success for the LHD Mid-Life project will be achieved when WASP Class Ships (LHDs 1-8) are fully outfitted, maintained and modernized with the Mid-Life program; and ships are capable of achieving the expected 40 year service life, within the time, scope and cost constraints indicated in this charter. Additionally, this measure of success must include satisfactory ship checks and sea trials, and acceptance by the Program Sponsor, PMS 470. PROGRAM SPONSORS Success will be determined by the Program Sponsor, CAPT Crone, USN; Program Manager for PMS 470, who will also authorize completion of the program. Mr. Harry T. Search, PMS 470R, the LHA/LHD/LPD 4/LCC Class Manager, is also a duly designated Program Sponsor and is authorized to make Program Sponsor decisions and approval actions in regard to the LHD Mid-Life Program. PROGRAM MANAGER’S REPRESENTATIVE (PMR) Mr. Robert P. Irelan is named the Program Manager’s Representative (PMR) for the duration of the LHD Mid-Life Program. Mr. Irelan’ s responsibility is to manage all resources, project tasks, scheduling, communications, and operations; and chair executive level meetings regarding the LHD Mid-Life project for the Program Sponsor(s). His team will be as assigned by the PMS 470; and will be continually refined as the project matures and as outlined in the Staffing Plan. Any additional funding and assignment of resources must be requested through NAVSEA 21/PMS 470. Submitted: __________________________________________ Date: ______________________ Mr. Robert P. Irelan Program Manager’s Representative (PMR) NAVSEA 21/PMS-470 LHD Mid-Life Hull Manager

40 Annex A - Risk Management Plan (RMP)


Annex A Risk Management Plan (RMP)


INTRODUCTION

Purpose

The purpose of this Risk Management Plan (RMP), Annex A, is to document policies and procedures for identifying and handling uncommon causes of project variation; i.e. risk. Risk should be thought of as the possibility of suffering a negative impact to the project, whether it is decreased quality, increased cost, delayed completion, loss of a key team member, or project failure.

Intended Audience

The intended audiences for this Risk Management Plan (RMP) are all members and major stakeholders involved in the LHD Mid-Life Program. As such it includes all members of the LHD Mid-Life Organizational Structure. Each stakeholder has a say in the Risk Management of the program, and shall be duly represented. See figure 1. Figure 1. Those Organizations and Stakeholders that have a stake in the Risk Management Plan (RMP).

RISK MANAGEMENT APPROACH The overall Risk Management Approach follows the standard Risk Management Model (RMM) as shown in the

following diagram: Risk Identification During Risk Identification, the sources of risk, potential risk events, and symptoms of risk are identified. Risk Analysis During Risk Analysis, the value of opportunities to pursue vs. the threats to avoid, and the opportunities to ignore vs. the threats to accept are assessed. Response Planning During Response Planning, Risk Management and Contingency Plans are developed. Risk Monitoring and Control

During Risk Monitoring and Control, corrective action plans are developed, implemented, and monitored.


ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Program Manger’s Representative (PMR)

The Program Manager’s Representative (PMR) is responsible for approval of the RMP, leads and participates in the Risk Management Process, and takes ownership of risk mitigation/contingency planning and execution. The PMR is ultimately responsible for the final decision on risk actions in coordination with PMS 470.

Program Risk Management Board (RMB)

LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team members shall meet as the Risk Management Board (RMB) once quarterly and participate in the Risk Identification Process; and discuss risk monitoring and mitigation activities at team meetings. The Board Chair shall be the LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT) Leader; the RMB will consist of the PMT Engineer, C5I, Waterfront Manager (Fleet Rep), Administration Lead (Secretary), PMS 470 and other stakeholders as deemed necessary by the PMR and/or PMS 470. The RMB will populate the Risk Register, recommend risk mitigation strategies, and retire risks that have passed or are no longer a threat. Formal minutes shall be taken of the quarterly meetings, and distributed; with an archive file maintained for the life of the LHD Mid-Life Program. The primary method of maintaining the LHD Mid-Life Risk Management Program is the Risk RADAR Enterprise database, which will be kept up to date by the PMT Risk Manager, assisted by the Sharepoint Site Administrator. For the PMT, the Risk Manager (RM) is designated as Michael A. Esparza, the assistant RM is designated as Jennifer Deardon.

Risk Manager (RM)

The Risk Manager (RM), hereby designated as the Senior Combat Systems Engineer, is responsible for ensuring identified risks are being managed per the Risk Management Plan (RMP). The RM also assists in identifying new risks and/or proposing mitigation strategies and contingency plans, along with proposing improvements to the Risk Management Plan and Processes.

Program Sponsors

PMS 470 participates in Risk Identification and risk activities as necessary. Program Sponsors also receive escalated risks and assist with mitigation and contingency actions for escalated risks.

Program Stakeholders Stakeholders assist in monitoring risk action effectiveness and participate in risk escalation, as necessary.


RISK IDENTIFICATION

Background During Risk Identification, potential sources of risk and potential risk events are developed. Pre-defined risk categories provide a structure which helps ensure that a systematic process is followed to identify risks. Risk categories will be tailored over time, as specific projects demand (additions to risk categories should be maintained in this document for use in future projects). After identifying and categorizing the risk event, it is entered into the risk register.

Sources

Risk identification shall be done throughout the life-cycle of the LHD MMP, with an emphasis on the ID of risk early on so proper response planning and monitoring can occur. The following should be considered as tools and techniques for risk identification:

• Analysis of high-level deliverables • Analysis of the WBS and LHD MMP • Analysis of scope change requests • Analysis of program assumptions • Project team input (which can take the form of interviews, brainstorming sessions, and/or Delphi

technique) • Stakeholder and sponsor input • Formal risk identification sessions • Previous lessons learned • QA audits and reviews • Performance and status reports • Diagramming techniques such as cause and effect diagrams, process or system flows, and influence

diagrams.

Documentation

All identified risks should be documented and entered into the Risk Register on Risk RADAR. During risk identification, the following information is required for documentation: • Risk category • Risk trigger • Potential outcome • Raised By • Date Raised • Source

The risk trigger is the event that would need to happen in order for the potential outcome to occur. Risk triggers are usually expressed with some sort of dependency, or qualifier. An example of a risk trigger might be a resource on the project leaves. This might easily be accounted for by utilizing other resources,


but if a resource with key skills or knowledge leaves then the project may be significantly impacted. This approach is suggested in order to clarify the thought process of identifying risks. When the risk trigger occurs, the risk is no longer a risk, but has materialized into a problem/issue that needs resolution.

RISK ANALYSIS

Background

After a risk or group of risks has been identified and documented, risk analysis should be performed. During risk analysis, each potential risk event is analyzed for:

• The probability that the risk will occur • The impact of the risk if it occurs

Risk probabilities and Risk impact definitions are defined in the Appendix. Impacts can be assessed against project cost, schedule, scope, and/or quality. If the risk event affects more than one dimension and the scores are different, the higher impact definition should be utilized.

Once the appropriate risk impact and probability are selected, the risk score can be determined. The risk probability and impact matrix is shown in the Appendix. The matrix shows the combination of impact and probability that in turn yield a risk priority (shown by the red, yellow, and green colored shadings). Risk priority is utilized during response planning and risk monitoring/control. It is critical to understand the priority for each risk as it allows the project team to properly understand the relative importance of each risk. Risk impact analysis can be qualitative or quantitative.

Qualitative Analysis

Qualitative analysis is a quicker and usually more cost-effective way to analyze risks (as opposed to quantitative analysis). Analysis should be performed with the goal of gathering data on: • The likelihood of the risk occurring • The qualitative impact on the project • The quality of the risk data being utilized

Quantitative Analysis

Quantitative analysis utilizes techniques such as simulation and decision tree analysis to provide data on:

• The impact to cost or schedule for risks • The probability of meeting project cost and/or schedule targets • Realistic project targets on cost, schedule, and/or scope

Qualitative analysis should occur prior to conducting quantitative analysis. Not every risk needs to go through quantitative analysis. If quantitative analysis is to be used, then this section should contain information on:


• Defined criteria for which risks go through quantitative analysis • Technique(s) to be utilized • Expected outputs of quantitative analysis

Documentation

The results of risk analysis should be documented in the Risk Register. The following information shall be entered in the Register:

• Risk impact • Risk probability • Risk matrix score – computed by the Risk Register spreadsheet after impact and probability are

entered • Risk priority – computed by the Risk Register spreadsheet after impact and probability are entered • Qualitative impact – descriptive comments about the potential risk impact

RESPONSE PLANNING

Background

During Response Planning, strategies and plans are developed to minimize the effects of the risk to a point where the risk can be controlled and managed. Higher priority risks should receive more attention during Response Planning than lower priority risks, and every risk threat should be assigned an owner.

Risk Strategies

There are several methods for responding to risks:

Avoid

Risk avoidance involves changing aspects of the overall Program Management Plan (PMP) to eliminate the threat, isolating project objectives from the risk’s impact, or relaxing the objectives that are in threat (e.g. extending the schedule or reducing the scope). Risks that are identified early in the project can be avoided by clarifying requirements, obtaining more information, improving communications, or obtaining expertise. Transfer

Risk transference involves shifting the negative impact of a threat (and ownership of the response) to a third party. Risk transference does not eliminate a threat; it simply makes another party responsible for managing it.

Mitigate


Risk mitigation involves reducing the probability and/or the impact of risk threat to an acceptable level. Taking early and pro-active action against a risk is often more effective than attempting to repair the damage a realized risk has caused. Developing contingency plans are examples of risk mitigation.

Accept

Acceptance is often taken as a risk strategy since it is very difficult to plan responses for every identified risk. Risk acceptance should normally only be taken for low-priority risks. Risk acceptance can be passive, where no action is taken at all, or active. The most common active approach to risk acceptance is to develop a cost and/or schedule reserve to accommodate known (or unknown) threats.

Documentation

The results of response planning should be documented in the Risk Register. The following information shall be entered in the Register:

• Response strategy (avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept) • Response notes (description of plan) – if a mitigation approach is taken, specific trigger points that

require aspects of the contingency plan to be executed should be documented • Risk owner

RISK MONITORING AND CONTROL

Background Planned risk responses should be executed as required over the life-cycle of the project, but the project should also be continuously monitored for new and changing risks. During risk monitoring and control the following tasks are performed:

• Identify, analyze, and plan for new risks • Keep track of identified risks and monitor trigger conditions • Review project performance information (such as progress/status reports, issues, and corrective

actions) • Re-analyze existing risks to see if the probability, impact, or proper response plan has changed • Review the execution of risk responses and analyze their effectiveness • Ensure proper risk management policies and procedures are being utilized

Timing

Discuss how often the risk monitoring and control process will occur over the lifetime of the project.

Documentation

The results of risk monitoring and control should be documented in the Risk Register. The following information shall be entered in the Register:


• Status – valid statuses are:

o Identified – Risk documented, but analysis not performed o Analysis Complete – Risk analysis done, but response planning not performed o Planning Complete – Response planning complete o Triggered – Risk trigger has occurred and threat has been realized o Resolved – Realized risk has been contained o Retired – Identified risk no longer requires active monitoring (e.g. risk trigger has passed)

• Trigger Date – if the risk has been triggered • Notes

48 Annex B - Staffing Plan

LHD Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization Program Annex B

Staffing Plan


INTRODUCTION The Staffing Plan (SP), Annex B, of the PMP, is an important part of the LHD Mid-life Maintenance and Modernization Program. The SP is a tool which will aid in the Program Management Team (PMT) in the management of this program’s (and each individual hull’s project) human resource activities throughout the program until formal closure. The SP plan includes:

1. Roles and responsibilities of team members throughout the Program 2. Program organization charts

The purpose of the SP is to achieve program success by ensuring that the appropriate human resources are acquired with the necessary skills, resources are trained if any gaps in skills are identified, team building strategies are clearly defined, and team activities are effectively managed. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES The roles and responsibilities for the LHD Mid-life Maintenance and Modernization Program are essential to project success. All team members must clearly understand their roles and responsibilities in order to successfully perform their portion of the project. For the LHD Mid-life Maintenance and Modernization Program, the following project team roles and responsibilities have been established:

Program Manager’s Representative (PMR), LHD Hull Manager (1 position): responsible for the overall success of the LHD Mid-Life Program. The PMR must authorize and approve all project expenditures, via the PMS 470 approval process for direct program cost items, and indirect cost/overhead items, via the company (American Systems). The PMR is also responsible for approving that work activities meet established acceptability criteria and fall within acceptable variances. The PMR will be responsible for reporting project status in accordance with the communications management plan. The PMR will provide evaluation input to Line Managers on the performance of all project team members; and communicate their performance to Line Managers. The PMR is also responsible for acquiring human resources for the project through coordination with PMS 470 and functional managers. The PMR must possess the following skills: leadership/management, budgeting, scheduling, and effective communication.


LHD MMP Hull, Mechanical and Electrical, Project Manager (1 position): responsible for identifying, gathering and reporting to the Program Office (PMS 470) the appropriate Ship Change Documents (SCDs) for upcoming changes in the Hull, Mechanical, and Engineering (HM&E) for ships in the LHD-1 Class as required for the LHD Mid-Life and Modernization Program. In support of such, the SPE is responsible for (not all inclusive):

1. Project Management 2. Maintains Active SCD Master Database 3. NDE/NMD Liaison 4. Engineering Integration Plan (EIP) 5. NSWCCD-SSES Liaison 6. NAVSEA 04/05 Liaison 7. TYCOM Liaison (SURFLANT/SURFPAC) 8. Budget Schedules and Analysis 9. PMS 470 Briefing Support 10. LHD Mid-Life Program Syndicate 11. Risk Management Board 12. ESC Member 13. PESC Member 14. Obsolescence/Lesson Learned Tracking

LHD Mid-Life Fleet Representative (Fleet Rep) and Availability Coordinator, (1 position). Responsible for ensuring Fleet requirements and desires are evaluated and included in the Mid Life process. Provide and receive updates from CNSL, CNSP, ESG 2, ESG 3, LHD PE’s, and LHD PMR’s on the latest LHD issues and Mid Life plans. Additionally, responsible to work with SURFMEPP to monitor ICMP tasks and Ship Sheets ensuring deconfliction with Mid Life objectives. LHD ML rep to the Corrosion KSN responsible to incorporate their initiatives in LHD ML planning, as well as, provide input on LHD ML corrosion issues. Additionally responsible for:

1. LHD Maintenance Drivers 2. Alion Technical Reports (Company, Task 3) 3. PMS 470 briefing support 4. LHD ML Fleet Syndicate 5. LHD ML Corrosion Syndicate 6. Participate in LHD monthly Avail Planning meetings 7. LHD ML availability coordinator (monitoring LHD ML avails) 8. Risk Management Board Rep 9. ESC member

Project Management Professional (PMP)/C5I Officer (1 position): responsible for identifying, gathering and reporting to the PMR and Program Office the appropriate Ship Change Documents (SCDs) for upcoming changes in the LHD hulls Combat Systems Configuration Suites for the LHD Mid-Life and Modernization Program. As such, they will be primarily concerned with the CAPSTONE install (Ship Self Defense Systems, Mk II), the CANES upgrade, and switch out of obsolete and legacy C5I Systems when transitioning to SSDS Mk II. In addition, the SCSE is responsible for:


1. Program Management Plan (PMP) a. Risk Management Plan (RMP) b. Staffing Plan (SP) Plan c. Communications (COMMS) Management Plan

2. Project Manager/Schedules Officer (Project Charts, Hulls 1-8) 3. Alion Technical Reports (Company, Task 3 Assignment) 4. Combat Systems Interface Plan (CSIP) 5. COMSPAWARSYSCOM Liaison 6. PEO IWS 10 Liaison 7. Naval Amphibious Baseline (NAB) Adjutant 8. Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) Integrated Planning Team (IPT) Project Manager 9. Amphibious Warfare Command and Control (AMW C2) OPNAV N95 Action Officer 10. TSRA Liaison / C5I Surveys 11. Internal Communications (IC) Surveys

The PMP/C5I Officer is responsible for all Combat Systems SCD tracking, changes and associated System Operational Verification Tests (SOVTs), and testing of the upgraded software. The SCSE will be responsible for timely status reporting to the PMR as required by the communications management plan. The SCSE may not authorize any project expenditures nor allocate any resources without PMR approval. SCSE’s performance will be managed by the PMR and communicated to SCSE’s Line Manager. SCSE must be proficient in C5I Processes, Project Management Planning (PMP) and methodology, familiar with the Navy 3M system, have a working knowledge of the Fiscal Year Defense Plan (FYDP) process, the Regional Maintenance Center (RMC) process, and a basic knowledge of the Navy Acquisitions program.


Sharepoint Admin (1 position): Responsible for the all the administrative and general support of the LHD Mid-Life PMT. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:

1. Communications set-up and management (Conference, teleconference and Video Teleconference). 2. Act as the Secretary during Mid-Life meetings, responsible for notes, minutes and the tracking of action items. 3. Maintain the LHD Mid-Life PMT MS Sharepoint site; assign new users access, and post those documents as directed by the members of the PMT. 4. Maintain an up to date Point of Contact (POC) List of LHD Mid-Life stakeholders and principals. 5. As the primary assistant of the Risk Management Program (RMP) and primary assistant to the Risk Manager (RM), maintaining the Risk RADAR laptop, keeping its database current in accordance with the Risk Management Plan (RMP), and printing the available reports as required. 6. File correspondence, make back up electronic files of primary documents, and keep a tickler file of recurring reports.

Line Managers/Functional Managers. While not part of the project team, functional managers are responsible for providing resources for the project in accordance with the project staffing plan. Functional managers are responsible for working with the PM to determine skill sets required and approving resource assignments. Functional managers are also responsible for conducting performance appraisals of assigned resources based, in part, on the PM’s feedback regarding project performance.

PROJECT ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS RESPONSIBLE, ACCOUNTABLE, CONSULT, INFORM (RACI) CHART The following RACI chart shows the relationship between project tasks and team members. Any proposed changes to project responsibilities must be reviewed and approved by the LHD Mid-Life Project Management Team (PMT) Lead. Changes will be proposed in accordance with the project’s change control process. As changes are made all project documents will be updated and redistributed accordingly.


PMT Lead PMR

SPE Fleet Rep SCSE Admin Lead

LHD Mid-Life Requirements Gathering

A R R R I

Risk Management

A R R R R

Fleet Stakeholder Representation

A R R R I

Engineering / SCD Management

A R R R I

Budget Schedules and Analysis

A C C C I

Syndicates A R R R R Executive Steering Committee (ESC)

A R R R C

Key: R – Responsible for completing the work

A – Accountable for ensuring task completion/sign off C – Consulted before any decisions are made

I – Informed of when an action/decision has been made


ADM Jonathan Greenert, USNChief of Naval Operations

(CNO)N00

VADM Bill Burke, USNDeputy CNO for Warfare

SystemsN9

MGEN Robert S. “Whaler” Walsh, USMC, Director, Expeditionary Warfare N95

CAPT Erik Ross, USN, Amphibious Warfare,

N953

CAPT Tim Crone, USNPMS 470

Program ManagerSEA 21/Surface Warfare

Directorate

Mr. Bradley SmithPMS 470

Deputy Program Manager

Mr. William BoozerPMS 470

Senior Class Manager

Mr. Harry SearchPMS 470RC2

LHA/LHD/LPD4/LCCClass Manager

Mr. Dan AllenAssistant, Military

Analyst

Mr. Christopher CundiffPMS 470RBC2A

LHA/LHD/LPD4/LCCDeputy Class Manager

Ms. Majorie WinstonPMS 470

Class Manager

Mr. Robert IrelanProgram Manager’s

Representative (PMR)

LHD Mid-Life Lead

Mr. Michael GwinnLHD MMP Chief Engineer

Project Manager

Mr. Michael A. Esparza PMP

Project Manager/C5I

Mr. Fred WilhelmWaterfront

Operations Officer

Ms. Jennifer DeardonSharepoint Site

Admin

VADM Thomas S. Rowden, USNCOMNAVSURPAC

(CNSP)N00

CAPT Wiliam J. Parker III, USNChief of Staff (CoS)

N01

Mr. L. StoneDeputy ACOS

Engineering ReadinessN43A

LCDR Nathan Beach, USNCNSP Type Desk Officer

N43E

Mr. Wally PorterCNSP Type Desk

N43E

Mr. Ryan BenoitLHD 2 Port Engineer

Mr. Don Gabriel LHD 2 Program Manager

Mr. Matt DavisLHD 4 Port Engineer

Mr. Jerry KnauLHD 4 Program Manager

Mr. Jerry SelphLHD 6 Port Engineer

Mr. Don OwensLHD 6 Program Manager

Mr. Todd StubblefieldLHD 8 Port Engineer

Mr. Andy SellersLHD 8 Program Manager

Mr. John NasshanLHD 2/4 CS Port Engineer

Mr. Gary JuddLHD 6 CS Port Engineer

Mr. Scott HessLHD 8 CS Port Engineer

RADM Pete A. Gumataotao. USNCOMNAVSURFLANT

(CNSL)N00

RDML Brian LaRoche, USNDeputy Commander

N00D

CAPT Douglas Nashold, USNChief of Staff (CoS)

N01

CAPT William “Rick” Tate, USNACOS Material Readiness

N43

CAPT , William Henderson, USNDeputy ACOS, N43A

CDR C. Wiilams, USNAmphib Type Desk Manager N43EA1

Mr. Larry FavorAmphib Type Desk

Mr. Time SpenceLHD 1 Port Engineer

Mr. Modestine SivelsLHD 1 Program Manager

Mr. Chuck MurphyLHD 3 Port Engineer

Mr. Kevin BolenLHD 3 Program Manager

Mr. Tom BourgelasLHD 5 Port Engineer

Mr. Todd SandhoffLHD 5 Program Manager

Mr. Chris SternLHD 7 Port Engineer

Mr. Leon CarverLHD 7 Program Manager

Mr. David CloseLHD 1/7 CS Port Engineer

Mr. John LassiterLHD 3/5 CS Port Engineeer

Program Sponsor Group (PSG)

Mr. Jess MatudioESG-2 Liaison PMR

Mr. Jim WheelerJapan PMS 470 PMR

Mr. Steve SeversNASSCO LHD PM

Mr. Dave MuisePMS 470 CS PMR

Mr. Mark HochstetlerPMS 470 PMR

Mr. Bill WoodBAE Project

Manager

Class Management Team (CMT)LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT)

Ms. Sharon McilnayPMS 470

Waest Coast Class Manager

RADM Christopher J. Paul, USNDeputy Commander

CAPT Ron Cook, USNACOS, N43

Mr. Bob FlynnPMS 470 CS PMR

ESG-2

Figure 1. LHD Mid-Life Organization by Stakeholder Group. Source: LHD Mid-Life PMT, Michael A. Esparza, PMP LHD Program Execution Management Team (PEMT) Each LHD Maintenance and Modernization Period shall be managed by a Program Execution Management Team (PEMT), which shall monitor the progress of the designated availability using the Program Management principle s as set forth by the Project Management Institute, International Standards Organization (ISO) 9001 Quality Assurance Certification and Earned Value Management (EVM) processes as directed by NAVSEA 21. The PEMT shall meet primarily by teleconference at least monthly; more often as the LHD Program Hull manager deems necessary. Formal minutes shall be taken and distributed 1 week post conference. The Chair of the PEMT shall be the LHD Hull Manager (Robert P. Irelan), with the Program Management Team (PMT) in full support. Expected deliverables shall consist of, but not be limited to: Microsoft Project Sheets with tasks, milestones and durations; formal minutes with digital audio recording, and Microsoft PPT Briefs with the requisite information concerning the status of the specific availability, and any other correspondence deemed necessary by the PEMT Chair, the LHD Class Manager or PMS-470.

55 Annex C - Communication Plan (COMMPLAN)

LHD Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization Program Annex C

Communications Plan (COMMPLAN)


INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Communications Management Plan (COMMPLAN), Annex C, is to define the communication requirements for the LHD Mid-Life Program and how information will be distributed. The COMMPLAN defines the following:

• What information will be communicated—to include the level of detail and format • How the information will be communicated—in meetings, email, telephone, video teleconference, etc. • When information will be distributed—the frequency of program communications both formal and

informal • Who is responsible for communicating program information • Communication requirements for all program stakeholders • How any sensitive or confidential information is communicated and who must authorize this • Any standard templates, formats, or documents the program must use for communicating • An escalation process for resolving any communication-based conflicts or issues

This COMMPLAN sets the communications framework for this program. It will serve as a guide for communications throughout the life of the program and will be updated as communication needs change. This plan identifies and defines the roles of persons involved in this project. It also includes a communications matrix which maps the communication requirements of this project. An in-depth guide for conducting meetings details the communications rules and how the meetings will be conducted, ensuring successful meetings. A program team directory is included to provide contact information for all stakeholders directly involved in the program. COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT APPROACH The Program Manager’s Representative (PMR) will take a proactive role in ensuring effective communications on this program. The communications requirements are documented in the Communications Matrix presented in this document. The Communications Matrix will be used as the guide for what information to communicate, who is to do the communicating, when to communicate it and to whom to communicate. As with most program plans, updates or changes may be required as the project progresses or changes are approved. Changes or updates may be required due to changes in personnel, scope, budget, or other reasons. Additionally, updates may be required as the program matures and additional requirements are needed. The PMR is responsible for managing all proposed and approved changes to the COMMPLAN. Once the change is approved, the PMR will update the plan and supporting documentation and will distribute the updates to the PMT and all stakeholders.


COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT CONSTRAINTS

All program communication activities will occur within the program’s approved budget, schedule, and resource allocations. The PMR is responsible for ensuring that communication activities are performed by the PMT and without external resources which will result in exceeding the authorized budget. Communication activities will occur in accordance with the frequencies detailed in the Communication Matrix in order to ensure the project adheres to schedule constraints. Any deviation of these timelines must be approved by the project sponsor, PMS 470. STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS As part of identifying all project stakeholders, the PMR will communicate with each stakeholder in order to determine their preferred frequency and method of communication. This feedback will be maintained by the PMR . Standard project communications will occur in accordance with the Communication Matrix; however, depending on the identified stakeholder communication requirements, individual communication is acceptable and within the constraints outlined for the LHD Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization Program (MMP). ROLES Project Sponsor (PMS 470) PMS 470 is the sponsor of the program and has authorized the program by signing the PMP. This person is responsible for the funding of the project and is ultimately responsible for its success. Since the Program Sponsor is at the executive level, communications should be presented in summary format unless the Program Sponsor requests more detailed communications. Program Manager’s Representative’s (PMR) The Program Manager oversees the LHD MMP at the portfolio level and manages most of the resources assigned to the project. The PMR is responsible for overall program success, and as such they require more detailed communications, as directed. In addition, the PMR has overall responsibility for the execution of the project. The PMR manages day to day resources, provides program guidance and monitors and reports on the program metrics as defined in the PMP. As the person responsible for the execution of the project, the PMR is the primary communicator for the project; distributing information according to this COMMPLAN.


Program Management Team (PMT) The PMT is comprised of all persons who have a role performing work on the project. The PMT needs to have a clear understanding of the work to be completed and the framework in which the MMP is to be executed. Since the PMT is responsible for completing the work for the program, they played a key role in creating the PMP, including defining its schedule and work packages. The PMT requires a detailed level of communications which is achieved through day to day interactions with the PMR and other team members along with weekly team meetings. Executive Steering Committee (ESC) The Executive Steering Committee (ESC) includes management representing the departments which make up the organization. The ESC provides strategic oversight for changes which impact the overall MMP. The purpose of the ESC is to ensure that changes within the program are effected in such a way that it benefits the program as a whole. The ESC requires communication on matters which will change the scope of the program and its deliverables. Project Management Team (PMT) Directory The following table presents contact information for all persons identified in this communications management plan. The email addresses and phone numbers in this table will be used to communicate with these people. Role Name Title Org/Dep Email Phone Program Sponsor (PS)

CAPT Ted Zobel, USN PMS 407 NAVSEA 21 [email protected] 202-781-3876

LHD Class Manager

Matthew Kane PMS 407 PMS 407 [email protected] 202-781-0842

PMR Robert P. Irelan PMR PMT [email protected] 757-548-0708 X3016

PMT Fleet Ops Fred Wilhelm FLEET PMT [email protected] 757- 286-4108 PMT Engineer Michael Gwinn LHD MMP

HM&E PMT [email protected] 757-548-0408

X3016 PMT C5I, PMP Michael A. Esparza,

PMP SCSE PMT [email protected] 757-548-0708

X3037 PMT Admin Jennifer Deardon Sharepoint PMT [email protected] 757-548-0708

X3030

mailto:[email protected]








Communication Methods and Technologies The PMT will determine, in accordance with NAVSEA 21/PMS 470 policy, the communication methods and technologies based on several factors to include: stakeholder communication requirements, available technologies (internal and external), and organizational policies and standards. The LHD PMT maintains a SharePoint platform which all program elements use to provide updates, archive various reports, and conduct project communications. This platform enables senior management, as well as stakeholders with compatible technology, to access project data and communications at any point in time. SharePoint also provides the ability for stakeholders and program team members to collaborate on the MMP work and communication. Access to the SharePoint will be controlled with a username and password. Stakeholders will be issued a unique username and password in order to access the SharePoint site. The PMR is responsible for ensuring all MMP communications and documentation is copied to the SharePoint site. All LHD PMT communication and documentation, in addition to being maintained on the SharePoint platform, will be archived on the American Systems server.


COMMUNICATIONS MATRIX The following table identifies the communications requirements for this project.

Communication Type

Objective of Communication Medium Frequency Audience Owner Deliverable Format

LHD Program Management Team (PMT) Issues Assessment Group (IAG)

Review Status Report issues and actions within the MMP and assess the status of the program and portfolio

Face to Face Conference Call

Weekly: every Monday, from 1000-1130

PMT PMR Agenda Minutes Issues and Actions Tracker

Issues and Actions Tracker posted to Sharepoint site Issues and Actions Tracker disseminated to stakeholders with monthly syndicate invite

LHD PMT Risk Review Board (RRB)

Review, approve and report on the current state of risk within of the MMP


Monthly (3rd Monday of every month , 1230-1330)

PMT PMR SPE SCSE FLEET REP

Risk RADAR Reports, last official copy and draft copy being reviewed

Soft official copy archived on project on project Sharepoint site

Naval Amphibious Baseline (NAB)

Review status of the NAB Program


Monthly (3rd Tuesday of every month, 1300-1400)

SCSE, NAB SCSE Agenda Slide Updates Meeting Minutes

Hard Copy Soft copy archived on project SharePoint site

LHD MMP Monthly Syndicate

Review status of the Fleet, Program and C5I Pillars of the MMP


Monthly (3rd Wednesday of every month, 1200-1500)

Stakeholders PMR SPE SCSE FLEET REP

Agenda Slide Updates Meeting Minutes

Hard Copy Soft Copy archived on project sharepoint site email

Executive Steering Committee (ESC)

Report on the status of the program to Program Sponsor (PMS 470), LHD Class Manager


Quarterly (Next scheduled for May 13 (Q3FY13))

Executive Management

PMR Agenda Program Binder Slide Updates Email

Hard Copy Soft copy archived on project SharePoint site

NAB/LHD Strategic Planning Summits

Formal NAB/LHD ML Status Face to Face Every Six Months

Stakeholders PMR, PMS 470 Formal Reports As Assigned


61 Annex D – Lessons Learned Management Plan

GUIDELINES FOR MEETINGS Meeting Agenda Meeting Agenda will be distributed 5 business days in advance of the meeting. The Agenda should identify the presenter for each topic along with a time limit for that topic. The first item in the agenda should be a review of action items from the previous meeting. Meeting Minutes Meeting minutes will be distributed within 2 business days following the meeting. Meeting minutes will include the status of all items from the agenda along with new action item. Action Items Action Items are recorded in both the meeting agenda and minutes. Action items will include both the action item along with the owner of the action item. Meetings will start with a review of the status of all action items from previous meetings and end with a review of all new action items resulting from the meeting. The review of the new action items will include identifying the owner for each action item. Meeting Chair Person The Chair Person is responsible for distributing the meeting agenda, facilitating the meeting and distributing the meeting minutes. The Chair Person will ensure that the meeting starts and ends on time and that all presenters adhere to their allocated time frames. COMMUNICATION STANDARDS For this project, The LHD PMT will utilize standard organizational formats and templates for all formal project communications. Formal project communications are detailed in the project’s communication matrix and include: Executive Steering Committee (ESC) – The LHD PMT will utilize NAVSEA 21/PMS 470 approved/standard templates for meeting agenda and meeting minutes. Additionally, any slides presented will use the NAVESEA 21/PMS 470 standard slideshow template. Informal project communications should be professional and effective but there is no standard template or format that must be used.




Annex D Lessons Learned Management Plan (LLMP)


INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Lessons Learned Management Plan Annex D for the LHD Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization Program (MMP) is to capture the program’s lessons learned in a formal document for use by other program managers on similar future projects, create an archive of lessons learned to rebuild actions taken during the execution of the program, and to provide a history of action for the purposes of formal audit. This document may be used as part of new project/program planning for similar projects/programs in order to determine what problems occurred and how those problems were handled and may be avoided in the future. Additionally, this document details what went well with the program and why; so that other program managers may capitalize on these actions. Program managers may also use this document to determine who the program team members were in order to solicit feedback for planning their projects/programs in the future. This document will be formally communicated with the organization and will become a part of the organizational assets and archives.

• LESSONS LEARNED APPROACH The lessons learned from the LHD Mid-Life MMP are compiled from program journal entries throughout the program lifecycle. Lessons learned will also be gathered from both realized and unrealized risks in the program risk register as well as through interviews with program team members and other stakeholders as necessary. The lessons learned from this program are to be used as references for future programs and contain an adequate level of detail so that other program managers may have enough information on which to help base their program plans. The lessons learned in this document are categorized by program knowledge area. These knowledge areas consist of the following: Procurement Management Interface Management (C5I) Risk Management Integration Management Quality Management Schedule Management Cost Management Scope Management Staffing Plan Communications Plan (COMMPLAN) Program Management Installation and SCD Management


LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE LSD MID-LIFE PROGRAM The following chart lists the lessons learned for the LHD Mid-Life MMP. These lessons are categorized by project knowledge area and descriptions, impacts, and recommendations are provided for consideration on similar/future new MM projects. It is important to note that not only failures or shortcomings are included but successes as well. Category Issue Name Problem/Success Impact Recommendation Procurement Management

Risk Management Quality Management Cost Management Staffing Plan Program Management Avail Lessons

Learned Not shared between the MSMOs and executed

Duplication of ineffective practices and lack of best practices

Lessons Learned conferences after each ML Avail

C5I Interface Management

Integration Management

Integrated execution plan required

An integrated execution plan was not built

Multiple plans were executed in parallel or at the same time; resulting in duplication of effort or work stoppage due to resource conflicts

LHD Mid-Life develop a sequenced EMP and CSEMP; ICW NSWCCD-SSES and NSWC PHD

Schedule Management

Scope Management Corrosion/Material Conditions

Unsatisfactory corrosion/material condition issues negatively impacted the LSD ML avail schedule

Schedule was increased in duration to accommodate growth work; increasing cost and decreasing Ao

LHD ML adopted the “Progressive Maintenance” Strategy

COMMPLAN Relationship with NSSA maintenance team required development

LSD ML did not have a regular “drumbeat” with the NSSA maintenance team that allowed them to consider key maintenance information

Scope Creep, growth work and late communications.

Establish, early on, a regular comms drumbeat with NSSA and include CAPSTONE status meeting in COMM Matrix

Install/SCD Management

Fleet SCDs LSD Mid-Life did not incorporate Fleet SCDs into planning process

Work Package delays; late production start dates

Incorporate Fleet SCDs into the planning process (the years prior to the avail).

Date post:	08-Feb-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	michael-a-esparza-pmp-dmbm
View:	136 times
Download:	1 times