# Presentation: 769048

## Navy Organization &M&V Strategies

**Daniel T. Magro**
**Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center**

**Federal Utility Partnership **
**Working Group Meeting**
**October 15****th****, 2004**

## Navy Organization

**Commander, Navy Installations**
-  Established 01 October, 2003
**Naval Facilities Engineering Command**
-   Establishes transformation plan 19 July, 2004
-   Creates “FECs”         (Facilities Engineering Commands)
**Projects Development Team**

## Commander, Navy Installations (CNI)

- Navy’s single installation management claimant (IMC)
- Core responsibility is to provide a ***unified*** ***program, policy**** ****and funding*** to manage and oversee shore installation support to the fleet.
- CNI will be the ***budget ***submitting office for installation support and the Navy POC for ***installation policy and program execution**** *support.
- CNI structured by regions

## Commander, Navy Installations (CNI)

**Commander, Navy Installations (CNI)**

## Naval Facilities Engineering Command

**“****TRANSFORMATION”**
**Current structure includes**
- Engineering Field Divisions (EFD)
- Public Works Centers (PWC)
- Public Works Departments (PWD)
- Officers in Charge of Construction (OICC)
**Transformed NAVFAC will include**
- Facilities Engineering Commands (FECs)
- Aligned with CNI Regions
- FEC Commanding Officers will be “double-hatted” as Region Engineers

## Facilities Engineering Commands

- Will consist of **EFDs, PWCs, PWDs**, and **OICCs**
- Will be the Marine Corps, Regional Commanders, and other clients a **single “touch point”** for all NAVFAC products and services
**Phased in over a two year period**
**FECs already established:**
- NAVFAC Midwest  (July 8th)
- NAVFAC Washington (July 23rd)
- NAVFAC Mid-Atlantic (July 30th)
- NAVFAC Far East (July 30th)

## NAVFAC Global Delivery SystemTransformation in Progress

**NAVFAC Global Delivery System****Transformation in Progress**

**NAVFAC**
**HQ**

**NAVFAC**
**LANT**

**NAVFAC**
**PAC**

**NAVFAC**
**Mid-Atlantic**

**NAVFAC**
**Northeast**

**NAVFAC**
**Southeast**

**NAVFAC**
**Midwest**

**NAVFAC**
**Southwest**

**NAVFAC**
**Northwest**

**NAVFAC**
**Europe**

**NAVFAC**
**Washington**

**NAVFAC**
**Hawaii**

**NAVFAC**
**Guam**

**NAVFAC**
**Far East**

**Echelon II**

**Echelon III**
**(5 commands)**

**Echelon IV**
**(11 commands)**

**NFESC**

**NCC**

**NFLC**

**PWO of PW/ROICC (Installation)**
**OPCON**
**to**
**Installation**
**CO**

**CO of FEC**
**OPCON to**
**Regional Commander**

**CDR of FEC**
**OPCON to**
**Fleet Commander**
**and CNI**

- Specialty Centers

**(98 PW/ROICC Teams)**

## Projects Development Team

**Current structure includes:**
-  NFESC
-  EFDs
-  PWCs
-  PWDs
-  Regions
**Future Structure (?):**
- The projects development team, following the lead from CNI and NAVFAC will be looking to streamline the process, standardize our business processes and eliminate as much redundancy as possible.
- The main goal of our restructuring will be to simplify your interactions with the Navy and standardize your experiences with our team.

## Navy M&V Strategies

**NAVY Strategy: **
**UESC and M&V**

## Navy M&V Strategy

- Currently, there is no policy in the Navy regarding the use of Measurement and Verification (M&V) in association with Utility Energy Service Contracts (UESC)
- The plan was to make M&V a requirement in all UESCs beginning in October 2004
- Stand up of CNI / transformation of NAVFAC “muddied the waters” as to who would issue the policy.

## Navy M&V Strategies

- With CNI fully established and managing the day-to-day installation functions – look for guidance to be issued in the near future.
- Best guess?  May be as early as tomorrow, or more likely, beginning next fiscal year.
- Currently no discussions about requiring performance guarantees in UESCs

## Navy M&V Strategy  -  Why?

- Why incorporate M&V?  Especially if there is no performance guarantee associated with the M&V?
-   Verify that estimated savings are being acheived
-   Provide a check on our accuracy / performance
-   Provide feedback on poor performance
- Were we overly optimistic?
- Are we (Navy) not properly maintaining the equipment?
- Are we (Navy) not properly operating the equipment?
- Is the installed equipment faulty?

## Navy M&V - The $64,000 question

-  “So,” you ask, “What’s in it for me?”
-  Benefits
-   Validation of performance
- There is a perception growing that we are not receiving the full estimated value from projects.
- ESPC contracts face the same perception – but using M&V they can demonstrate performance.

## Navy M&V - The $64,000 question

-  Benefits  (continued)
- Improved partnerships
- Fully utilizing your expertise in utilities and energy to help improve business can only help to strengthen partnerships.
-   Increased opportunity for   future partnerships.
- If CNI can “see” demonstrated performance, then one more hurdle in the process will be removed.

## QUESTIONS?