Article and Photo

Submissions: Articles should

be about 500 words long; however,

C4IT, engineering, logistics and environmental specific articles can be up

to 2,000 words -- all acronyms must

be spelled out when first used. To

have your article considered for publication, photo(s) must accompany

each article. Articles can be submitted by DHL or other carrier in hard

copy and/or in Microsoft Word on a

3.5 disk, CD, or e-mailed electronically. Please submit original photographs and graphics. All slides,

photos, graphics and illustrations

should be in color where possible.

Please include by-line when submitting article. Let us know if you want

your photos and graphics returned to

you. Submit inquiries, letters, articles, and photographs to:

Editor, U.S. Coast Guard Engineering,

Electronics and Logistics Quarterly

CG HQ

CG-4, JR9-1130

1900 Half St., SW

Washington, DC 20593-0001

Phone: 202-475-5767

FAX: 202-267-4245

E-mail: Kerry.L.Freese@uscg.mil

Submission deadlines are as follows:

Summer 2009 - 03 April 2009

Fall 2009 - 03 July 2009

Winter 2010 - 03 October 2009

Spring 2010 - 03 January 2010

The U.S. Coast Guard Engineering,

Electronics and Logistics Quarterly

is published quarterly by the

Assistant Commandant for

Engineering and Logistics. This

publication is unofficial and not

authority for action. Views and opinions expressed are not 

necessarily those of the U.S.

Department of Homeland Security

or the U.S. Coast Guard. We

encourage readers to submit articles and letters to the editor.

Authors are encouraged to submit

articles through the Program

Representative. The U.S. Coast

Guard Engineering, Electronics and

Logistics Quarterly Editor and the

Engineering and Logistics

Directorate Management Board

retain final approval authority for the

publication or non-publication of all

article submissions. We will make

every effort to publish all submissions. We also reserve the right to

edit submissions for length, accuracy and grammar. All letters to the

editor must be signed along with

current address and telephone

number.

Spring 2009

Vol. 13, No. 47

ISSN: 1931-4051

U. S. Coast Guard

Engineering,

Electronics and

Logistics Quarterly

COMDTPUB P5700.2

RDML Thomas P. Ostebo

Assistant Commandant for

Engineering and Logistics

Mr. Kerry L. Freese

Managing Editor and

Publication Staff

You can visit us on the web at www.uscg.mil/hq/cg4/eelquarterly

On the Cover: Night view of LORAN Station Kodiak's

new LED lighting system.; read more on page 40.

All issues are available to Coast Guard personnel on

CG Central under “Magazine and Newsletter”
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 1

14

26

42

60

2 From the Assistant Commandant

4 Systems of Interest

8 Mast Stepping Ceremony Marks Latest Milestone for WAESCHE

10 Undergraduate Advanced Education Opportunity

12 What is NAVSEA & what do they do?

14 Risk-Based Mission Support for Shore Infrastructure Management

22 Neah Bay Breakwater, Station Neah Bay

26 Ahead of the Storm - CEU Hurricane Support

30 Ocean Sentry Mission Configuration Profiles

34 Taking the Mystery Out of the Civil PE

36 In Remebrance

38 87’ CPB Crews Benefit from Award Winning EPSS

40 LORAN Station Kodiak Reduces Electrical Usage by $30,000 a Year

42 The Four Cornerstones of Coast Guard Support

48 Logistics Transformation Standard Boat Rollout Planning and Deployment

52 Logistics Transformation Spotlight: The Asset Material Manager (AMM) and

the Field Terminal Operator (FTO)

56 Determining Depot Level Sparing with VMetric Readiness Based Sparing

Tool

60 Navy-Coast Guard Logistics Integration

64 Logistics Problems?

66 Landfill Gas Project Hits Milestone

68 REUPS - Renewable Energy Uninterruptible Power Supply
F

r

o

m

t

h

e

A

s

s

i

s

t

a

n

t

C

o

m

m

a

n

d

a

n

t

2 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

As we transition to the Coast Guard business model, the Product

Line Manager will become one of the most critical roles in the modernized Mission Support Organization. The Product Line Manager

will be responsible for the planning, budgeting, and execution of all

system support for their asset type. They will serve as the one-stop

support shopping point for field units in the modernized Coast

Guard.

A product line is a concept that originated in the private sector and is defined as

a group of closely related products with similar attributes. Product lines are used

by service organizations as a means of providing superior support to customers,

while internally capitalizing on the economies that come from grouping similar

products together. They are essential to the foundation of our new logistics support model.

Product lines are formed early in the life cycle of a program and initially reside

within the Asset Project Office (APO). Once a new capability or asset becomes

fully operational, the associated product line moves from the APO to the designated logistics or service center, continuing life cycle support until the asset is

retired. A product line is organized to meet all asset or capability needs. The

engineering branch responds to technical service requests, develops and maintains all maintenance procedures, maintains asset configuration data, approves

all parts for use, and conducts reliability analyses. The supply branch concerns

itself primarily with supporting the budgetary and supply management needs for

the asset, including spare parts provisioning and procurement services. The programmed depot maintenance branch of the product line plans and manages all

depot level maintenance activities, both in-house and commercial.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 3

Thomas Ostebo RDML, USCG

Assistant Commandant for

Engineering and Logistics

Our aviation program adopted the product line construct in the late 1990s and today the Aviation

Logistics Center employs product lines focused on their four mission areas: short range rescue,

long range rescue, medium range surveillance and long range surveillance. Each of our new

logistics and service centers will adopt the product line construct for product families within their

respective asset portfolios. Many will be familiar as previously identified Coast Guard asset

classes (e.g., WMEC) or types (e.g., small boats). On October 1, 2008, the Coast Guard established the Small Boat Product Line (SBPL); the first tangible step in applying proven aviation

processes to surface assets.

CAPT John Bragaw is the Small Boat Product Line Manager. In this capacity, he is solely

responsible for all engineering and logistics for all of the Coast Guard's 1,800 boats. On a dayto-day basis, John and his staff field calls from field engineers seeking technical advice on

engine failures, structural problems, and supply chain issues to name a few. In addition to the

interaction with the field, the Small Boat Product Line is overseeing the development of standardized maintenance procedure cards for all boat types, setting up repair and procurement contracts for small boat parts, and developing time compliance technical orders. The product line is

also developing process guides that will streamline maintenance and repair. Where in the recent

past a station EPO may have had to choose between the type desk, OEM, or a local marina, the

entire spectrum of mission support is now consolidated into one place ... the Small Boat Product

Line.

The Small Boat Product Line is making continual forward progress in boat reliability. Working

with the RB-S original equipment manufacturer (safe boat), the SBPL examined and modified

existing preventive and corrective maintenance procedures for RB-S collars, identifying potential

low-cost design improvements. To assist in this effort, safe boat will observe a select number of

collar replacements that occur in the field (following a failure), and provide recommendations to

the Coast Guard based on these repair activities and the observed condition of the collars and

mounting surfaces at failure. In this way, we can identify reasons for the large amount of collar

failures, and work to design a solution.

As I've noted, the Product Line Manager will play a critical role in the future of the Coast Guard.

For those of you looking for leadership opportunities in the Mission Support Organization, the

Product Line Manager is the penultimate position. The Product Line Manager will be directly

responsible for operational availability and cost effectiveness of the assets under them. They will

control large amounts of funding, significant workforces, and will have unlimited opportunities to

exercise leadership, engineering, logistics, acquisition, and business acumen. These will truly be

developmental positions for our future senior leaders.
4 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

CG ALC begins ALMIS DSS

Unit Dashboard Rollout

(Aviation Logistics Center)

In February 2009, the Asset Logistics Management Information System (ALMIS)

Decision Support Team began rolling out a series of upgrades to the Decision

Support System (DSS). Part of this upgrade includes dashboards that are designed

to support the Coast Guard's Logistics Transformation goal to achieve Total Asset

Visibility (TAV). TAV is the ability to provide timely and accurate information on key

performance indicators such as status, location, personnel, equipment, and supplies

essential for successful mission execution. The first two dashboards are the

Engineering and Operations dashboard and contain the following measures:

The Engineering Dashboard:

❍ Assigned Asset Availability

❍ Not Mission Capable Supply

❍ Not Mission Capable Maintenance

❍ Dispatch Reliability Index - Maintenance

❍ First time Fill Rate of Allowed Inventory

❍ Cannibalization Rate

The Operations Dashboard:

❍ Unable to Meet Readiness Requirement Hours by Asset

❍ Resource Utilization by Mission

❍ Actual and Allocated Resource Hours

❍ Dispatch Reliability Index

❍ Recurrent Training Status

Systems of Interest
SPEC CAFÉ

Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 5

For more information and the current status of future dashboard releases as well as

other ALMIS news, please visit the ALMIS Blog at http://cgweb.arsc.uscg.mil/alcblog/.

Ongoing Modernization: A Grassroots Activity

As the Coast Guard modernization moves forward, so do many parallel efforts initiated to facilitate this goal. One such example is the Maintenance and Logistics

Command's creation of a technical specification writing web-application called Spec

Café. This e-Tool has been jointly developed by the Specification Branches of the

Atlantic and Pacific Naval Engineering Divisions, with support of IT staff, as part of

the on-going process alignment between the Engineering Logistics Center and MLCs.

The Spec Café is an e-Tool used to generate specifications for Coast Guard cutter

and boat depot level maintenance and repair on the fly. The new tool is a more automated and advanced specification development process than the Boat Spec Café,

which was the 2004 Captain Niels P. Thomsen Innovation Award winner in the

Administration, Training, and Support category. The Spec Café greatly enhances the

specification developmental process by removing time-consuming manual steps, providing real-time generation of standardized documents, and the converging of cutter

and boat spec-writing processes via a Coast Guard intranet connection and webbrowser.

Organizationally there are many benefits to this standardization of vessel repair specifications, the development process and compilation tool. Standardization enables a

uniform methodology for managing depot level cutter and boat maintenance processes across organic services as well as hundreds of commercial contractors around the

world. The basic technical requirements and format of each specification is the same

whether the vessel repair is conducted by a Coast Guard Industrial activity in Alaska,

a private shipyard in Florida, or an international contractor supporting our PATFORSWA assets. The Spec Café also forcefully unifies and ensures ship-repair and specification documentation standards across projects and vessel product lines, in keeping with the evolving nature of Coast Guard modernization.

The Spec Café's is extremely user-friendly, with its data centrally located and managed to facilitate swift and easy updates. After accessing the Spec Café webpage,

the user simply selects a cutter or boat NAME, YEAR, & DOCK TYPE. This selection

immediately activates a menu of recurring work items particular to the platform

selected. The user selects work items from the menu, presses the generate-spec
6 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Systems of Interest

Yard Takes Skills "On the

Road" (Yard)

button -- and they're done; it's that simple. The entire process takes about 15 seconds to compile the detailed technical specification; a major improvement over minutes to hours for other applications. Better yet is the simplicity of almost instantaneous record updates!

Engineering personnel also have the ability to upload existing specifications for

deconstruction/reconstruction; i.e., the ability to add or delete a work item at a

moments notice. The Café is truly a dynamic integration of subject matter expert

knowledge that empowers those who assemble specifications to rapidly respond to

the demands of Coast Guard surface forces with high quality and accurate technical

specifications.

The Spec Café provides the Coast Guard's modernization efforts a highly effective

and standardized e-Tool that can be made available to any unit or product line personnel. That's what we call an ideal example of ongoing modernization at the grassroots level.

The Yard traveled to the west coast on September 21, 2008 to begin a two week critical repair on the newly commissioned Coast Guard Cutter BERTHOLF, homeported

in Alameda, California. The Engineering Logistics Center tasked the Yard with modifying the BERTHOLF's aviation fuel service system, a crucial fix for execution of the

cutter's operational missions.

In mid-August, the Yard received word that BERTHOLF was unable to deliver the correct fuel pressure when refueling helicopters due to pressure fluctuations in the JP-5

service system. Unfortunately, this prevented the cutter from attaining critical Coast

Guard and Navy helicopter deck certification.

Within eight weeks, the Yard, in partnership with the Engineering Logistics Center,

modified drawings; ordered parts and tools; assembled a road team; arranged for

cross-country travel; and then completed the needed modifications in 14 days. The

seven member Yard road team installed a JP-5 service pump, a new accumulator,

and a flow meter. The team returned to the Yard on October 4, 2008; "Mission

Complete."

The U.S. Coast Guard's first National Security Cutter BERTHOLF arrives in San

Francisco, California, on July 23, 2008. Homeported in Alameda, California, the

BERTHOLF will eventually replace the aging 378 foot cutter class as the Coast

Guard's long-range patrol asset. (USCG photo by Petty Officer Jonathan Cilley)
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 7

VIDEO: Logistics

Transformation: The Future

of Semper Paratus (LTPIO)

Pipefitter Supervisor Tyrone McNeill served as the leader

of the BERTHOLF road team. Other members included

Karoly Banlaki, Electric Shop; Darren Conrad, Welding

Shop; Charles Bare and Nelson Sapunar, Pipe Shop;

Tommy Minor, Rigging Shop, and Ronnie Applebee,

Machine Shop.

"Our skills can be tailored to fit almost any Coast Guard

need. We quickly realized the significance of the

BERTHOLF's modifications, so we shifted priorities to start

on the project right away," commented LCDR John

Whittemore, Deputy Project Manager. "This project highlights the Yard's unique value and demonstrates its ability

to provide the right resources, on target, under a very short

fuse."

"Service To The Fleet!"

The Logistics Transformation Program Integration Office (LTPIO) recently released its

new video, "Logistics Transformation: The Future of Semper Paratus". The video

highlights the logistics transformation efforts, especially as they apply to unit day to

day operations. It communicates how logistics transformation will improve efficiency and mission readiness

through the daily activities experienced in transformed

sectors. The video explains the new logistics business

model and the four cornerstones of that model:

Configuration Management, Total Asset Visibility, BiLevel Maintenance, and the Product Line. Also

demonstrated are the new IT tools, such as the

Electronic Asset Logbook, ALMIS, and color-coded

electronic forms. Finally, the video explains how the

new logistics model is the future of the Coast Guard

and how it will better support mission execution.

(Approximately 14 minutes.)

This video can be accessed at the following links:

Coast Guard Visual Imagery:

http://cgvi.uscg.mil/media/main.php?g2_itemId=460327

CG Central: Strategic Initiatives> Logistics

Transformation> A. LTPIO Overview> 00.**NEW**

Logistics Transformation: The Future of Semper

Paratus Video

YouTube, CG Channel:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u7ACBrku_o

Yard road team members Tommy Minor (left),

Rigging Shop, and Ronnie Applebee, (right),

Machine Shop, work on installation of the

BERTHOLF's JP-5 pump in the Cutter's homeport of Alameda, California.

Screen shots.
8 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Open Channels q u i c k h it s

The coins were

sealed into the

mast by Welding

Specialist Jimmy

L. Reed, a 32-year

Northrop

Grumman

employee from

Mobile, Ala.

(Left to right) CAPT

Lance Bardo,USCG,

Prospective

Commanding Officer

for NSC 2, and Mike

Duthu, U.S. Coast

Guard program manager, are shown holding

coins to be sealed into

the mast as part of a

time-honored custom

dating back to the

ancient Greeks.

U.S. Coast Guard Photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Jetta H. Disco.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 9

PASCAGOULA, Miss. – The mast stepping ceremony for National Security Cutter WAESCHE (WMSL-751) was

held Tuesday, November 4, 2008, at the Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding facility in Mississippi. The ceremony

marks the latest milestone for the second NSC.

Mast stepping ceremonies date back to the sailing ships of Greek mythology. Once the mast was placed into the

hull, it signified the shell truly becoming a ship. The Greeks were said to have marked this event by placing coins in

the step under the mast. It was thought that these coins would help the ship’s crew pay their way home should

they become shipwrecked.

“The placing of the coins into the mast signifies that we are one step closer to bringing this great ship to life and

placing her into service,” said CAPT Lance Bardo, Prospective Commanding Officer, WAESCHE. “As a representative of my entire crew, I’m proud to have played a small part in this tradition. We all look forward to sailing

WAESCHE very soon.”

The value of the coins placed in the mast represents a ship’s hull number; in the case of WAESCHE it is $7.51.

Each coin commemorates a significant date in the life of the ship, the military service, or its namesake, Admiral

Russell Randolph Waesche.

Silver Dollars:

1886 Presented by Ship’s Sponsor, Marilla Waesche Pivonka, for the date of January 7,

1886, representing RRW Sr.’s date of birth.

2003 Presented by Department of Homeland Security, commemorating the establishment

of the department on March 1, 2003.

2005 Presented by Integrated Coast Guard Systems LLC for the date of January 3, 2005,

the date upon which the joint venture signed the contract to begin construction of the

second National Security Cutter.

2006 Presented by President of Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Mike Petters, commemorating the Laying of the Keel of WAESCHE (WMSL 751) on September 11, 2006.

2007 Presented by USCG, commemorating the establishment of the USCG Acquisition Directorate on July 13,

2007.

2008 Presented by USCG Project Residence Office, commemorating the launch of NSC 2 which occurred on

July 11, 2008.

Fifty-cent:

1911 Presented by Prospective Commanding Officer, Captain Lance Bardo, USCG, representing

Admiral Waesche’s first command, the United States Revenue Cutter (USRC) Arcata.

1936 Presented on behalf of the Waesche family, June 14, 1936 represents Admiral Waesche’s

appointment to Commandant.

2007 Presented by United States Coast Guard in recognition of achieving the milestone of saving

1 million lives on August 4, 2007.

Penny:

1932 Presented by the Prospective Crew of WAESCHE (WMSL 751) representing Admiral Waesche’s

lead role reorganizing the field commands to make up the current day Coast Guard.

Mast Stepping Ceremony Marks

Latest Milestone for WAESCHE

Courtesy of Deepwater News Flash
10 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Open Channels

Undergraduate Advanced Education

Opportunity

Looking for a way to get finish your undergrad degree or

get started on one? Your work schedule is just not letting

you go to school off-duty? You know you need to take

that next step and get or finish that degree, but just can't

find the time? Well then, the Coast Guard may have a

program for you! 

The Coast Guard has three undergraduate programs for

Engineering, Electronics, and Technology just for enlisted.

✘ Advanced Computer, Engineering, and Technology

(ACET)

✘ Aviation Maintenance Technology (AMT)

✘ Damage Control Industrial Technology (DCIT)

The Advanced Computer, Engineering, and Technology

(ACET) Education Program prepares experienced, skilled

technicians for greater responsibilities in computers, electronics, and engineering systems design, maintenance,

and management. The

ACET program provides

up to two years for paid,

full-time undergraduate

study in computers, electronics, engineering, or

mechanical/marine technology. Participants start their

education where they left

off, earning either an

Associate or

Baccalaureate

degree in their

engineering/technology

field.

The ACET program is available to senior petty officers, E6 to E8, in the Electronics Technician (ET), Information

Systems Technician (IT), Electrician's Mate (EM),

Avionics Electrical Technician (AET) and Machinery

Technician (MK) ratings.

The Aviation Maintenance Technology Program prepares

experienced, skilled aviation technicians for greater

responsibilities in aviation maintenance management and

technology. The AMT program provides up to two years

for paid, full-time undergraduate study at Purdue

University, culminating in a Baccalaureate degree. The

AMT program is available to senior petty officers, E-5 to

E7, in the Avionics Electrical Technician (AET) and

Aviation Maintenance Technician (AMT) ratings.

The Damage Control Industrial Technology Program prepares experienced, high performing Damage Controlman

for greater responsibilities in Fire Science, Industrial or

Civil engineering, and vessel/facilities maintenance. The

DCIT program provides up to 24 months, paid, full-time

undergraduate study at select colleges. The DCIT program is available to senior petty officers, E-6 to E8, in the

Damage Controlman (DC) rating.

Selection is on a "best qualified" basis; the selection

panel weighs all the information in the application as well

as your permanent headquarters record. Specific application instructions and deadlines can be found in

ALCGENL 017/09. Separate program announcement

ALCOAST's also provide further details and requirements, they are released in mid to late February.

What Can I Study? The degree you pursue depends on

several factors; including your previous academic experience, rating/specialty, location, funding available, and

needs of the service. Personnel are required to pursue a

degree that aligns with the program and their rating.

These programs are strictly for undergraduate study,

members may pursue the degree levels listed below:

✘ Associate in Science (AS) 

✘ Associate in Applied Science (AAS) 

✘ Associate of Engineering (AE) 

✘ Bachelor of Science (BS)

The majors most commonly associated with each rating

are listed below. This list is only a guide, because

schools provide several variations to degree names and

concentration areas. Each proposal is individually

reviewed and approval is based on the factors listed earlier.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 11

Where Can I Go to School? There are no specified or pre-approved schools, except

for AMT. Most junior colleges and universities offer programs that will meet the Coast

Guard's needs. The college or university proposed must be accredited by a recognized

regional accreditation organization. It is also desired that the program be accredited by

the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). College selection is

not a free-for-all; needs of the service, cost, curriculum, location, previous history with

the school, and reputation all play a part in the final selection.

While in an advanced education program you are still on Active Duty and receive all

normal pay and benefits. Going to school is your full-time job, as such, you are

required to attend classes full-time, usually 12-15 term hours, every term classes are

offered -- this includes summers. Since going to school is your job, your grades are

your performance measure. Members participating in the advanced education programs are required to maintain academic proficiency. Members must successfully

complete all attempted classes and maintain the minimum GPA to remain in good academic standing at the institution.

How Do I Apply? Solicitations for all programs are normally publicized in late mid

February via ALCGENL and ALCOAST messages. The application deadline will be in

mid summer - the actual date depends on other board schedules and service needs -

make sure you read the solicitation message for the actual date. Panels convene

between July and September, with selection notification published shortly thereafter.

Detailed eligibility criteria and application process are included in the messages.

However, one requirement for all programs, that interested members should complete

now, is the SAT or ACT exams. The SAT/ACT is a requirement. Exam results must be

less then 5 years old and must be included with your application. Minimum service

obligation (payback) for participation in the program is three months per one month for

the first year and 1 month for 1 month thereafter.

All three programs are managed by the Office of Workforce Management for

Engineering, Logistics, & C4IT; Commandant (CG-481). For more information about

the programs, visit our Advanced Education site on CG Central under the Learning Tab

@Learning > CG Advanced Education Programs, look for CG-481 and the Program

Name in the resulting list. Or you may contact Ms Mary Fuata Mary.K.Fuata@uscg.mil,

the Advanced Education Manager or your Rating Force Master Chief.

Similar programs are available for Junior Officers (O1 - O3) who were formerly enlisted

and have not yet earned a Bachelor's degree and Chief Warrant Officers.

Announcements and solicitations for all programs are made in early spring via

ALCGOFF and ALCOAST messages, so keep an eye on the message boards. Or you

can go to CG Central under the Learning Tab @ Learning > CG Advanced Education

Programs.

Time to Start Planning for

Your Advanced Education

Application!

Look for the upcoming

ALCOAST outlining advanced

education opportunities sponsored by CG-4/CG-6 (it

should be out around March).

These include Aviation

Engineering, Aviation

Structure, Aviation Project

Management/Avionics,

Industrial Management, Civil

Engineering, Civil

Engineering with MBA, Ocean

Engineering, Naval

Engineering, Computers and

Electrical Engineering,

Information Technology, ACET

for Officers, and Naval

Engineering Technology.

These programs are a great

opportunity to expand your

professional competencies.

Also, following the ALCOAST,

keep your eyes out for a message from OPM explaining the

application process. As a

reminder, all of these programs require some form of

entrance exam (postgraduate

programs require a GRE,

ACET an SAT, etc.), so start

planning now to have these

tests completed by application

deadline. If you have questions about any of these programs, take a look on CG

Central: Learning > CG

Advanced Education

Programs.

Rating Degree Fields

AET Avionics Engineering/Technology, Electrical/Electronics Engineering/Technology or Computer

Engineering/Technology(hardware), Aeronautical Technology (in AMT program)

EM Electrical/Electronics Engineering/Technology, Engineering Technology or Electromechanical Engineering Technology

ET Electrical/Electronics Engineering/Technology, Computer Engineering/Technology (hardware), Engineering Technology,

or Electromechanical Engineering/Technology

IT Electronics Engineering/Technology, Computer Engineering/Technology, Computer Science, Network Engineering,

Telecommunications Engineering/Technology, or Information Systems/Technology

MK Mechanical Engineering/Technology, Engineering Technology, Electromechanical Engineering Technology,

Marine/Naval Engineering/Technology, or Industrial Engineering

AMT Aeronautical Technology

DC Fire Science, Industrial Technology, or Civil Engineering Technology
12 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly NAVSEA

What is NA What is NAVSEA

Engineer’s Digest
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 13

In my last article "There's a new CG-4, CG-9 NAVSEA 05 MOA in town,” I discussed establishment of a NAVSEA front door for Coast Guard requested engineering services, but exactly what

is behind this door?

The Naval Sea Systems command, referred to in most contexts as NAVSEA, is the largest of the

Navy's five systems commands. The NAVSEA organization has 33 activities in 16 states and is

host to a dedicated workforce of approximately 53,000 civilian, military, and reserve personnel.

NAVSEA engineers build, procure and maintain the vast fleet of Navy's ships and submarines as

well as all of these war fighter's combat systems. They manage in one way or another more

than 150 acquisition programs. Further, NAVSEA has the sole responsibility of establishing and

enforcing technical authority in ship and combat system design and operation. These technical

standards ensure ships and systems are engineered effectively, and that they operate safely and

reliably.

NAVSEA headquarters, located at the old Navy Yard in Washington, DC, is comprised of a command staff and eight directorates, plus five affiliated Program Executive Offices (PEOs). What is

remarkable about the execution of the organization's mission, visions and goals is that 95 percent of all people work in field activities, including Warfare Centers, Naval Shipyards, and

Supervisors of Shipbuilding. Each serves a unique and fundamental role in executing NAVSEA's

strategic business plan.

One of the eight functionally aligned directorates, the Naval Systems Engineering Directorate

(NAVSEA 05) provides risk-based engineering solutions for in-service platforms and systems

and for acquisition programs. This directorate is the independent Technical Authority in support

of the PEO's acquisition and in service fleet responsibilities. Their goal is improving fleet readiness and ensuring acquisition programs deliver assets that will sustain the long-term operational

objectives of the United State Navy and other Department of Defense (DoD) integrated components.

NAVSEA's five affiliated PEOs (Ships, Carriers, Subs, Littoral and Mine Warfare, and Integrated

Warfare Systems) are responsible for all aspects of life-cycle management of their assigned programs. PEOs report to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and

Acquisition for acquisition-related matters, and to the NAVSEA commander for planning and execution of in-service support. Team Ships, as they call themselves, comprised of PEO Ships and

the NAVSEA Naval Systems Engineering Directorate, has "cradle to grave" responsibility for all

non-nuclear surface ships, ensuring the most advanced technologies, weapons, and defensive

systems are acquired and sustained within cost, performance, and schedule parameters.

NAVSEA's field activities include nine warfare center divisions, the nation's four naval shipyards,

four supervisors of shipbuilding, and various subordinate support activities.

Everyday the Navy continues to team with the Coast Guard, as together we carry out the maritime defense strategy. Jointly we are looking ahead at ways to expand the capabilities of this

maritime joint force as it defends our coasts, protects global commerce, combats illicit activities,

and mitigates human suffering.

Look to future articles describing more about the NAVSEA organization and services available to

the Coast Guard. If you are potentially interested in using NAVSEA services, please see your

NAVSEA liaison LCDR Jay Main.

by LCDR Jay Main, NAVSEA Liaison

& what do they do?
14 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Engineer’s Digest

USCG photo by Senior Chief Timothy Santmyer.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 15

A Case for Change

In a constrained budget environment, gross inefficiencies occur when we prioritize the wrong

project; when a functional office space is renovated, while a mission-critical pier rots in the

water, when the cutter exterior is painted a

gleaming extra coat of white instead of repairing

the main diesel engine that continuously fails due

to unserviceable parts; or when functioning nonskid is renewed yet again, while the cooling supply to critical electronics is no longer supportable.

Coast Guard personnel rely on uninterrupted use

of facility systems to meet operational objectives.

Yet the maintenance of reliable shore facility systems remains discretionary. One person's choice

over here might unintentionally increase mission

risk over there. The inconsistent framework in

which scarce facility sustainment resources are

prioritized and allocated results in a cluttered,

inconsistent and somewhat indefensible array of

facility investments when viewed nationally over

time. Even worse, there is no systematic measure of the risks to mission performance by not

accomplishing all of the needed sustainment,

restoration or modernization requirements. In

the current process, there is no documented

incentive for engineers and facilities managers to

find the most cost-efficient, early interventions to

prevent system degradation and preserve functionality. There is no mechanism for engineering

leadership to pursue facilities management

objectives in a manner that is consistent, comprehensive, and auditable across the entire portfolio.

Risk-Based Mission Support for Shore

Infrastructure Management

The Shore Facilities Project Prioritization Process

Shore facilities system risks are long-term, unmeasured, and rarely considered as a risk to mission,

potentially resulting in significant vulnerabilities.

by CDR Jack Poling PE, TRACEN Cape May; CDR David Savatgy, CEU Juneau;

Richard Tremaglio TEC Inc., and Jeffrey Villnow TEC Inc.
16 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Engineer’s Digest

Adding to the need for change are the Chief Financial Officers Act and Executive Order 13327 Federal Real Property

Asset Management, both of which demand better accountability and stewardship in our Facilities Asset Management

(FAM) approach. Leadership recognizes these vulnerabilities and has charged the Civil Engineering Program with prioritizing FAM investments based on mission effectiveness at the lowest possible cost. Commandant Intent Action Order

(CIAO) 4, Logistics Organizational Alignment, calls for development and implementation of mission-focused support

structures, including FAM engineering and logistics business processes modeled after internal best practices currently

utilized in the aviation program. Toward that end, decision support tools and performance metrics have been developed

to evaluate the mission alignment of the shore plant, and the risks associated with changes in asset investment levels.

The Shore Facilities Project Prioritization Process - A New Paradigm

The Shore Facilities Project Prioritization (SFPP) process was developed to facilitate a mission-risk oriented shore infrastructure investment philosophy. It draws on best practices from methods developed by the Coast Guard's Aviation,

Electronics and Aids-to-Navigation programs; Department of Defense (DoD); National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA); and the Veteran's Health Administration. The SFPP process formalizes a number of traditional

Coast Guard Civil Engineering project prioritization concepts, as practiced in the current Planned Obligation Priority

(POP) process, and builds on the body of work referred to as the Regional Allocation Process (RAP) to emphasize

identification and efficient management of mission risks. With its transparent, auditable, risk-based decision framework,

the SFPP process is a tool that supports risk-based FAM decision making at an enterprise level. It complements the

POP approach but does not replace it.

The overall objectives of the SFPP process are to direct limited AFC43 resources to the most important investment

opportunities using risk-to-mission concepts, encourage sound engineering practices, and capture/communicate the

impacts of funding decisions to Coast Guard leadership in understandable terms. The SFPP provides decision makers

(i.e., POP Boards) with a full picture of all investment opportunities and their associated risk implications. Benefits of

the SFPP process include:

✔ Repeatable and auditable prioritization of candidate AFC43 investments across the enterprise;

✔ Improved mission focus for FAM decision makers;

✔ The ability to allocate funds based on risk-reduction instead of fair share;

✔ Comprehensive annual evaluation of the entire backlog in a way that supports requirements of the CFO Act and EO

13327;

✔ Data-supported methodology used to justify additional shore infrastructure budgetary resources; and

✔ Significant manpower savings in POP preparation time through the use of readily available risk-based metrics and

proxies.

SFPP Process - Leveraging Existing Metrics for Simplicity

The SFPP process builds on industry best practices and Coast Guard operational risk management decision making to

create a simple, flexible risk management approach for prioritizing investment opportunities. It leverages existing data

and metrics to the greatest extent possible, while minimizing the collection of "new" data specific to the process itself.

The process is flexible and allows straightforward substitution of new metrics as they become available in the future.

Although developed initially for the AFC43 funding stream, it is readily expandable to other programs' (i.e., AC&I, EC&R,

AFC41, AFC42, AFC45) use.

Simply put, effective management of mission risks related to shore infrastructure comes about by doing everything possible to ensure disruptive system failures never occur -- particularly in the most mission sensitive assets. In order to

accomplish this objective, the SFPP process:

✔ Identifies in relative terms the most important mission capabilities and enabling assets using auditable and repeatable Mission Alignment Metrics. The Mission Alignment Metrics determine how well aligned a particular shore asset

is with one or more essential Coast Guard mission capabilities.

✔ Assesses the likelihood and severity of a given facility system failure using a Severity Rating. This rating quantifies

the relative amount of building system level risk associated with a given investment opportunity such that the FAM

decision maker can begin to consider the implications of the cumulative system risk associated with the entire

AFC43 backlog.

✔ Combines the concepts of mission alignment and severity rating to evaluate the relative Mission Severity Risks

associated with FAM shore infrastructure investment decisions.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 17

✔ Provides a methodology for measuring "return on investment" as the relative amount of risk mitigated per FAM

dollar invested.

Mission Alignment Index

The key to improved mission-oriented facility asset management decision making is the methodology used to link shore

assets with mission requirements. The Coast Guard's ongoing work with the Mission Dependency Index (MDI) and

Mission Essentiality Index (MEI) was leveraged for this purpose.

In brief, the MDI is a tactical level perspective that measures

the relative importance of one facility to another. It does this

through a structured survey process that associates standardized "functional elements" with every Real Property Facility

(RPF) and evaluates each functional element's relationship to

the unit's mission readiness. A functional element is defined

as a dedicated physical space at a shore facility that has a definable, mission related function. Functional elements

may also be a critical infrastructure node or an item of mission critical equipment. Within the context of the MDI, a functional element represents the smallest portion of a shore asset for which an MDI rating is calculated.

The MEI complements the MDI concept with a strategic level perspective. Like MDI, MEI uses a structured survey

process to measure the relative importance of investing limited FAM dollars in alternative Mission Essential Capabilities

(MECs) and supporting facility infrastructure, or so-called Mission Essential Facilities (MEFs). MECs are organized

multi-mission systems; all Coast Guard Operation Facilities Codes (OPFACs) are grouped into one of eight MECs.

MEFs are specific facility categories; all USCG Facility Category Codes are grouped into one of six MEFs. Because the
18 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Engineer’s Digest

MDI and MEI surveys are structured and make use of standardized lists of functional elements, MECs and MEFs, the

surveys themselves are repeatable and auditable. The higher a facility's MDI and MEI ratings, the more closely aligned

it is with important Coast Guard Missions.

Severity Rating

Risk is defined by the combination of the Likelihood and Severity

of a specific event being realized. A framework of Likelihood

and Severity can be applied to FAM analyses subjectively using

the judgment of a panel of experts, or in a more objective fashion using data from tests, life-cycle maintenance data and other

sources. The SFPP process relies on a combination of subjective and objective methods to estimate the Likelihood and

Severity of disruptive building system failures to determine a

Severity Rating. It does this in a straightforward manner by

selecting simple proxy indicators of Likelihood and Severity for

use in a facility asset management setting from readily available

CG data. As better proxies are developed, they can replace old

metrics without the need to substantially revise the SFPP

process itself.

To effectively manage system risks across the enterprise, the

SFPP process must consider the differences between investment types and still maintain consistency in its approach to

identifying and analyzing risks. For example, different AFC43 investment types (as expressed via MACID codes) have

very different drivers and are therefore deserving of different Likelihood and Severity indicators when identifying the

risks associated with each. Despite the differences in investment types, the SFPP process' analytical consistency

allows measurement of total mission risk (in a relative sense), and direct comparison of the risk consequences of alternative enterprise-level investment strategies on a product line, geographic, or command basis.

Mission Severity Rating

In so much as the Mission Alignment Metrics (i.e., a combination of MDI and MEI ratings) provide an indication of the degree

of alignment between shore facility assets and important Coast

Guard missions, and the Severity Rating provides a measure of

the relative severity of a negative event associated with a building system or functional failure, the SFPP process still required

a methodology to more directly relate potential operational mission impacts to building system or functional failures.

Specifically, the combination of the MAI and severity ratings can

be used to provide an indication of the relative impact of a facility management decision on operational mission performance.

The more closely aligned an asset is with a mission requirement (as measured via relatively high MDI and MEI ratings),

and the more severe the potential system failure is perceived to

be (as measured via relatively high likelihood and severity ratings for system risk), the greater the potential impact on operational performance.

Mission Risk Mitigation as a Measure of Return on Investment

The final component of the SFPP process involves a cost-benefit analysis of competing investment opportunities, where

benefit is defined by the relative amount of risk mitigated by each competing investment opportunity. The CE Program

has adopted a definition of a successful shore facility investment strategy as one that minimizes risk to mission success

over time stemming from shore facilities. Accordingly, the process was designed to preferentially seek out investment

opportunities that mitigate the greatest amount of relative risk per dollar invested. It does this in a systematic way by

plotting each investment opportunity's Mission Severity Rating against its estimated costs.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 19

Although the process is intentionally focused on mitigation of

operational risk associated with the shore plant, it should be

remembered that the SFPP outcome is just a baseline investment strategy for consideration by the POP Board. Human

judgment and management of the SFPP results occur in the

POP Board, and during the evaluation of mission alignment.

This human interaction allows leadership to articulate other

non-operational mission priorities (e.g., projects designed to

improve morale and attract qualified officers) if desired such

that the entire shore plant can be managed from a holistic risk

perspective.

Mission Oriented FAM Investment Planning

Figure 1 illustrates example SFPP output for a single Coast

Guard District. In general, the projects within the blue oblong

circle are believed to be the most deserving of the POP Board's

scrutiny. That is, projects above and to the right of that band

(blue dots) are considered desirable high risk, low dollar projects that allow maximum "return on investment," while

those below and to the left (brown dots) offer less risk reduction per dollar spent and are therefore less desirable in a

constrained budget environment. Projects in the circled band fall within the range of the funding cut line, and are clearly

deserving of additional professional judgment by the POP Board. For any given investment alternative, the project's

vertical axis coordinate provides an indication of the relative amount of risk that can be "purchased" by completing the

project, and its horizontal axis coordinate (as measured from the right hand side of the graph) indicates the purchase

"price."

Taking this concept a step further, the relative risk that can be bought down for a dollar of investment can be summed

across all investment opportunities to provide an indication of the rate of risk mitigation possible in any given project

type, geographic area, product line, etc. Figure 2 displays an example of this calculation. In this case, available FAM

funds can be shown to "buy down" nearly 115 relative Mission Risk Units (MRUs), leaving an additional 17 MRUs on

the table. Furthermore, the slope of the line in this figure suggests that the funding allocated to mission reduction for

the group of candidate investments is about right.

SFPP Concept of Return on Investment

Figure 1. Example SFPP output illustrating most likely investment candidates (blue) and least

likely investment candidates (brown) based on FAM risk mitigation concepts.
20 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Engineer’s Digest

Figure 3. Using SFPP Output to Advocate for Additional Funds.

Figure 2. The Concept of Risk Buy Down.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 21

In comparison, Figure 3 illustrates a situation in which the SFPP output suggests that additional funding could substantially improve the "return on investment," or in other words, the reduction of risk. In this case, an additional 25% funding

has the potential of doubling the relative risk that can be bought down. FAM decision makers can now make an

informed, data-driven decision about where to place their limited dollars. More importantly, over time the program can

document changes in the capability of the shore plant to effectively support missions using risk concepts and this information can in turn be used to advocate for changes in funding levels.

Summary and Conclusions

The fundamental SFPP mission risk concepts and analytical approaches were developed by Civil Engineering (CE)

Program subject matter experts who began by identifying and evaluating best practices in the Coast Guard (CG), other

agencies and the private sector. The straightforward risk concepts of likelihood and severity were adapted for use in a

FAM setting by selecting simple proxy indicators for each from readily available CG data as much as possible. As better

proxies are developed, they can be dropped straight into the process and applied as-is rather than throwing the entire

process out and starting over.

The SFPP process recognizes that different FAM investment types have different drivers and are therefore deserving of

different likelihood and severity indicators. The simplicity of the process is further reflected in its ability to address these

differences while still maintaining consistency in its analysis of mission risks. This analytical consistency allows measurement of total mission risk, and direct comparison of alternative enterprise level investment strategies on a product

line, geographic, or other basis as may be defined in the future.

The SFPP process output is a straw man list of prioritized investments that can be used as a starting point for consideration by the POP Board (or equivalent) in the fully modernized CE organization. Application of the SFPP process to

test cases revealed the possibility of using the CG's shore facility inventory and valid AFC43 backlog as tools to advocate for additional resources.

As the risk-based SFPP process evolves, the SFPP IPT Team expects to see the desired outcome of achieving lower

and lower risk to mission.

SFPP IPT Plank Owners 

CDR Jack Poling

CDR Brenda Kerr

LCDR Pete Maldini

Mr. Gary Greene

Mr. William Shepherd

Ms. Marcia Yodichkas

US Coast Guard Photo.
Engineer’s Digest

22 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Station Neah Bay is a coastal Search and Rescue (SAR)station located at the northwestern tip of Washington

State, within the Makah Indian Nation Reservation. The

moorings at USCG Station Neah Bay are severely impacted

by wave conditions during the winter months (Oct. - Mar.) as

deep swells originating from the Pacific Ocean combine with

wind driven waves to produce a highly unstable environment.

A rubble mound breakwater, built and maintained by the US

Army Corps of Engineers, protects Neah Bay from direct

attack by ocean swell, however, Station Neah Bay has relocated further into the bay five times since it was established

in 1877. In the Station's present location, damage to the timber pier by high waves led to the construction of a new concrete pier in FY00.

Station Neah Bay operates two 47-foot motor life boats

(MLBs) and one 41-foot utility boat (UTB). However, unsafe

conditions still cause the CG to relocate these boats behind a

second rubble mound breakwater which protects the Makah

Indian Nation's Marina. Such movement of the CG's vessels

increase launch times, decrease operational readiness, and

preclude scheduling regular maintenance and repair work.

The Breakwater currently under construction has been

designed to significantly minimize the frequency with which

the station boats are relocated to the Makah marina.

In the summer of 2008, construction started on a new breakwater to protect the concrete floats and station vessels. The

new breakwater consists of steel soldier piles with precast

concrete panels, steel batter piles, a cast-in-place concrete

cap, sacrificial anodes and a submerged rubble mound base

that helps support the piles.

Neah Bay Breakwater,

Station Neah Bay

by Pooja Jain, Susan Tonkin, Mike Hemphill

(Moffatt & Nichol) Francis Brito, Mark

McAll, Debbie Chinn, and Jerry Johnson

(USCG)
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 23

Seattle-based engineering and planning firm,

Moffatt & Nichol, conducted a coastal study to

investigate the breakwater layout using the most

sophisticated available numerical models for

wave propagation. The waves at the pier include

deep ocean swell, with periods up to 20 seconds

that wrap around the Federal breakwater and

Waadah Island and propagate into the bay; and

wind-waves generated along the Strait of Juan de

Fuca propagate directly into the bay. Both wave

components can diffract around the ends of the

new breakwater, and if the breakwater is too

short, unstable wave conditions can occur in what

should be a nominally protected area.

The fully nonlinear Boussinesq Wave model

(Figure 1 shows example output) was used to

determine the best orientation and minimum

acceptable length to provide adequate protection

for the boats. The model also checked that

reflected waves would not increase erosion at

nearby clamming beds used by the Makah

Nation. A two-section design, 345 feet total

length, was developed as optimal: subsequent

analyses and budgetary constraints led to the

construction of a single section design, 224 feet

long, with the possibility of expanding the breakwater at a later date.

Four different breakwater configurations were

evaluated including: steel pile wall system, soldier

pile system with and without rubble mound, and

rubble mound system using 3D analysis for both

ambient and extreme wave conditions. The

design loads on the structure are governed by a

predicted extreme wave condition of 6.3 feet (significant wave height) with a 25-year return period.

The soldier pile system, with a submerged rubble

mound base, was chosen as an effective and

economical solution. The wave breaking surface

is provided by the vertical soldier piles spaced at

eight feet on center with precast concrete panels

between each soldier pile. The precast panels

facilitate fast and easy installation necessary with

the restricted in-water work window in the Pacific

Northwest. The cast-in-place concrete cap and

batter piles provide transverse rigidity. The submerged rubble mound with a crest elevation of -

10 feet MLLW provides significant advantages:

o Increased stiffness of the vertical breakwater.

o Reduced the length of soldier and batter

piles.

o Reduced wave load on the wall for the smaller ambient waves due to the reduced

exposed area.

Figure 1. Wave Study Output (MIKE 21). (The white

outline are the existing pier/moorings and the new

break water, the numbers are the significant wave

height in feet, based on a 100 year design analysis.)
Engineer’s Digest

24 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

The breakwater is exposed

to the constant cyclic loading under ambient and

extreme wave climate. The

design is therefore governed by fatigue damage

due to cyclic loading. The

structure is therefore

designed for 100 year

fatigue life (two times the

design life of the structure)

using an exponential wave

distribution with seven second wave period. Fatigue

design is based on "DNVRP-C203 Fatigue Design of

Offshore Structures"

methodology.

Further, coating on steel

piles and cathodic protection is provided to minimize

corrosion damage.

Provision for cathodic protection also enhances the

fatigue life of structure thus

leading to a more economical system for given 50

year design life.

As is typical for in-water

construction in the Pacific

Northwest, the construction

schedule and sequence is

heavily constrained by environmental in-water work

windows. In particular, inwater construction is limited

to the late summer through

winter (July 2008 to

December 2008) in Neah

Bay to protect endangered

species (such as migrating

salmon) as mandated by

the Endangered Species

Act. The in-water work window was particularly critical

given the adverse winter

wave and weather conditions in the area.

Construction of the breakwater commenced in July

2008 by Bergerson

Construction during the inwater work window. All pile

driving, rubble mound, concrete panel, and cathodic
protection installation was

conducted from a barge

using spud piles to hold

the barge in place in the

exposed environment. For

ease of pile driving accuracy templates were

installed prior to pile driving. Since the precast

panels slide between the

soldier piles, significant

quality control in locating

the piles was maintained.

The panels are installed

and grouted in place.

Finally, additional rubble

mound material was

placed to fill any gaps

between the bottom of the

panels and the top of the

rubble mound completing

the in-water construction

work.

The cast in place cap will be installed in February/March 2009 and the final appurtenances will be installed in April 2009. The contractor has made provisions to tie the pile

bents together to prevent any interim damage to the panels prior to the pile cap installation.

The breakwater construction is expected to be complete by April 2009, almost three

months ahead of schedule.

In-water construction complete (December 2008).

Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 25
Engineer’s Digest

26 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Despite a rather calm 2008 hurricane season in South Florida,

Civil Engineering Unit (CEU) Miami is still wading through the

surge of assessment, reconstruction, and repair work that

began when Hurricane Dolly collided with the Texas coast and

Tropical storm Fay meandered across the State of Florida. The

majority of the damage and resulting shore facility work, however, resulted from the one-two punch of Hurricanes Gustav

and Ike whom passed through the Caribbean and slammed into

the Gulf Coast. CEU Miami must brace for hurricane season

every year, not only preparing for their own possible evacuation

and reconstruction, but in preparation to support and rebuild the

numerous coastal Coast Guard units in Districts 7 and 8 that

often find themselves in the uncomfortable confines of the cone

of uncertainty of approaching storms. In this article you will

learn about the roles CEUs play in hurricane response and the

efforts that have been made, and are still ongoing, as a result

of the 2008 hurricane season.

CEU Miami's goal is to provide quick restoration of shore facilities ensuring operations can resume as close to normal as possible. One of the roles that the CEUs perform during hurricane

response efforts is embedding a liaison officer, under the

Logistics Chief, in the Area Command/District IMTs and the

Sector ICPs. This position is primarily a liaison role for the CEU

to understand the Incident Commander's needs and react

accordingly. The Area Command liaison role is generally filled

by an O5 or senior O4, while the Sector liaison is filled by an O4

or senior O3. The Area Command liaison officer is coordinating

repair response for the Area Commander and ensures capabilities are being directed where needed. At the Sector ICP, the

liaisons direct the Damage Assessment Teams (DAT) and

Repair Teams (RT) and coordinate information sharing between

the field, ICPs, and support units (MLC and CEUs). The primary facility status reporting document is the ICS Form 209.

Ahead of the Storm -

CEU Hurricane

Support

by CDR Wade Gesele, Executive Officer CEU Miami

&

LCDR Michael Kicklighter, Chief, Planning & Real Property CEU Miami
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 27

The DATs are two to four person teams from CEUs that

assess storm damage at CG units. The CEU responsible for the affected AOR typically provides the DAT.

However, other CEUs provide teams during particularly

busy periods or severe disasters, as was the case with

Hurricanes Gustav and Ike in 2008 and Katrina and

Rita in 2005. The DATs pre-position to their assigned

locations, usually one on each side of a Sector, ahead

of the storm and hunker down until it passes through,

then begin assessing damage as directed by the Sector

liaison officer. Meanwhile, the liaison is reporting the

findings from the DAT to the ICP and prioritizing the

assessments based on Sector and District needs. DATs

are equipped with satellite and cellular phones, wireless

broadband internet cards, and laptops to improve their

ability to communicate in storm ravaged areas. In addition to verbal reports over the phone, the computers are

used to upload photographs of the storm damage, while

on site or upon return to a hotel or ICP, so they can be

quickly shared with Coast Guard leadership. In many

cases, our first SITREP is a phone call and photos to

clearly show the damage since a picture is worth a

thousand words.

Repair Teams are typically comprised of Industrial personnel from ISCs and are sent out after the storm to

effect minor and/or temporary repairs with the goal of

minimizing the long term damage, repair minimally

damaged facilities, and help restore operational capabilities. Examples of the types of work RTs are capable of

and typically perform are drying in buildings with minor

roof and shell damage, installing portable generators,

and cleaning and drying out building interiors. The RTs

are typically self sustaining. The generators they use

may be leased by the unit/ICP or may be owned and

provided by the ISC. RTs generally receive their guidance from the Sector CEU liaison.

From CEU Miami's home office, engineers, environmental, and real property specialists and contracting officers

provide support to the field and ICPs. Although limited

by appropriation limitations and Federal Acquisition

Regulations, AFC-43 funds (Operating Expense funds

primarily managed at CEUs) can be used to procure

more detailed assessments (i.e., underwater inspections) and for debris removal. These funds may be

used for reconstruction, when the cost does not exceed

appropriation limits and availability. Once damage is

reported back to CEU Miami, engineers are reviewing

drawings and site plans and will be sent out to the field

when it is safe to start developing the major repair contracts.

Temporary facilities (i.e., berthing and messing trailer

rentals, generator rentals, etc.) requests are initiated on

an ICS-213RR and sent to the ICP logistics section.

Generally, these are funded by the Sectors or District.

CEUs are not authorized to procure such temporary

services with AFC-43 funds. However, the CEU liaison's work to stay apprised of any such actions so that

these efforts can be coordinated with any long term

solutions taken by CEUs or RTs. CEUs will typically

provide real property assistance in the event a unit must

temporarily relocate to a leased facility during reconstruction. For real property leases, the program manager for the unit is responsible for the funding.
Engineer’s Digest

28 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

The Real Deal:

Hurricane Ike developed in the Atlantic

Ocean, and upon passing through the

Caribbean, slammed into the Texas

Gulf Coast near Galveston, Texas,

where Sector Field Office Galveston is

located on the barrier island. Prior to

the storm, DAT teams were deployed

from CEU Miami, CEU Providence,

and CEU Cleveland along with RTs

from ISC Miami, St Louis, and New

Orleans, and CEU liaisons were

embedded in the Sector HoustonGalveston and New Orleans ICPs and

the D8 Area Command COOP site in

St. Louis, MO.

Though the damage was spread wide,

the majority of the damage to CG units

was in Sector Houston-Galveston. Two

DAT teams moved from San Antonio,

TX; one going first to Sector Corpus

Christi and working North and the second DAT heading straight to Sector

Houston-Galveston. As soon as

access was passable to Galveston

Island and SFO Galveston, the DAT

team arrived to find complete destruction of the Station waterfront, waterfront debris, and other debris scattered

throughout the premises, significant

damage to the galley and dental building and barracks, personal vehicles

slammed up against each other and

debris, and modular buildings and trailers completely detached from their

foundations.

The CEU liaison at Sector HoustonGalveston quickly coordinated the

Incident Commander's requirement to

establish the Big ATON Buoy Yard

(BABY) at SFO Galveston to get the

Houston ship channel open. CEU

Miami procured a contractor to quickly

assess the mooring capability of the

remaining large cutter piers and to

begin clearing debris. In addition, a

RT and a design team deployed to the

area quickly to restore operational

capabilities. CEU Miami kept a DAT

team member on site in SFO

Galveston for two-weeks to help coordinate the repair efforts. CEU Miami's

real property branch worked with the

SFO and the Army Corps of Engineers

Tropical Storm tracks for 2008.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 29

(ACOE) to secure a permit for use of

office space at the adjacent ACOE

facility allowing quicker return of personnel and savings millions of dollars

in interim facilities.

Currently, CEU design and construction teams are working on repair projects worth $20M in response to this

storm, and CEU planners are writing

plans for the execution of $300M of

supplemental funding earmarked for

reconstruction after hurricane Ike, to

include reconstruction of ANT Dulac,

Station Sabine, SFO Galveston, and

other projects in the AOR. The majority of the initial repair work should be

wrapping up just in time for the next

hurricane season, where CEU Miami

stands ready to respond ... again!

U.S. Coast Guard photo/Petty Officer 1st Class Alan Haraf.
30 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Engineer’s Digest

Ocean Sentry

Mission

Configuration

Profiles 

by LT John Pack

Aviation Training Center Mobile

The Coast Guard's newest aviation

asset is the HC-144A "Ocean Sentry."

It's a Medium Range Surveillance

Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MRS MPA)

that will replace the aging HU-25

Falcon Jet fleet. The Ocean Sentry is

a multi-mission aircraft able to be utilized in numerous operational arenas.

The HC-144A began their Operational

Assessment (OA) process on July 28,

2008 with completion forecasted later

this year. An initial step in the assessment is having aircrews transition the

aircraft through diverse configuration

profiles demonstrating the agility and

adaptability for successful mission

execution.

Photo courtesy of ICGS.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 31

As the new MRS MPA, the Mission System Palletized HC-144A will be a key

component to securing our homeland from terrorist attacks. Through heightened awareness, crews are able to detect, deter, and mitigate threats providing

protection to our citizens, critical infrastructure, and the economy of our nation

from acts of terrorism. For natural disaster or emergency situations, the HC144A can transport cargo to a disaster site or evacuate victims from a tragic situation. This can be accomplished through transforming the Ocean Sentry to

the troop transport or medical evacuation configurations.

HC-144A "Ocean Sentry" taxis out for training mission.

HC-144A "Ocean Sentry" Cockpit.

With the Mission System

Pallet (MSP) on board, aircrews are able to identify

threats, assess vulnerabilities, compile data, and

transmit information to

other Coast Guard units

through utilization of classified or unclassified networks coordinating threats

of terrorism and natural

disasters. The Coast

Guard is best known for its

Search and Rescue (SAR)

mission, and the HC144A's versatility serves

the public in that role as

well. A standard SAR crew

consists of a pilot, co-pilot,

mission system operator,

dropmaster, and basic aircrewman. The typical SAR

configuration includes 8500

pounds of fuel, providing

Ocean Sentry aircrews

about 7 hours flight time.
32 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Engineer’s Digest

The cargo transport configuration offers three different load options; palletized, rolled, and unpalletized. When the palletized configuration option

is utilized it's necessary to install the Cargo Handling System (CHS). This

uses roller trays, lateral guides, stops and latches aiding in loading and

securing loads. For unpalletized and rolled loads, the CHS is not utilized.

CWO Reed and Petty Officer Rice complete a drop of an ARSK 24.

When the troop transport configuration is employed, 38 passengers can be safely transported via folding cargo

style seating including safety belts and life vests for all passengers. The troop transport configuration utilizes two

aircrewmen and about 4100 pounds of fuel allowing crews to fly about 700 miles before reaching reserve fuel.

In the medical evacuation configuration two aeromedical pallets are installed. Each pallet facilitates six stretchers, three on each outboard side for a total of 12 stretchers. When either of these configurations are employed

the two aircrewmen sit in crew seats in the most aft portion of the aircraft keeping flight safety paramount.

Left to Right Petty Officer's Godsey, Colon, Acree, and Mayo unload a palletized HU-25 engine.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 33

ATC Mobile has been methodically transforming the HC-144 into an operational platform

in the interest of Homeland Security. We recognize and value the hard work, innovation,

and teamwork our people are putting forth striving toward the goal of operational excellence. A demanding yet rewarding task remaining in alignment with Admiral Allen's

promise that "We will ensure Coast Guard men and women are the best trained and

most versatile workforce in government, equipped with the most capable fleet of multimission ships, aircraft, boats, and command and control systems available."

HC-144A aircraft interior configured for troop transport.
34 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Engineer’s Digest

One of the most significant milestones in a civil engineer's career is earning a

Professional Engineering License -- gained by logging several years of relevant

experience and by passing the Principles and Practice of Engineering (PE) Exam.

The license symbolizes competence in the engineering field and shows that an

engineer has acquired a minimum, yet a significant amount of knowledge and

experience in the profession.

If you're considering taking the PE exam, there are many choices to make.

Answering these questions is important because navigating the path to a PE

license can be treacherous, but with some careful planning and plenty of effort you

can find success.

WHERE SHOULD YOU TAKE THE EXAM?

You aren't necessarily limited to taking the exam in the state where you currently

live and work. Many people choose to take the PE in their "home" state or somewhere that they intend to settle eventually. Just about all options are open because

many states do not require you to be a resident in order to take the exam and be

issued a license in that state. Also, all states have similar, but slightly different

requirements for exam eligibility, application procedures, and avenues to license

renewal, so it pays to be as informed as possible. All of this information can be

obtained from each state's licensing website, usually the state's Board of

Professional Engineers. Building a matrix of the states you are considering and the

criteria that are most important can be a useful tool to help you make your decision.

The PE exam is a national exam administered by the National Council of

Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCESS), so it's the same eight-hour

exam in all states (though some states require additional tests). Once you have

obtained your license in one state and get settled in another you can apply for reciprocity or comity in most states and obtain a PE license in that state without having

to re-take the exam. It's simply an administrative matter -- and a fee, of course.

Taking the Mystery

Out of the Civil PE by LT Matt Bournonville, PE, USCG FD&CC Pacific
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 35

HOW SHOULD YOU REVIEW?

There are many references widely available that are specifically designed for PE

exam preparation. Many people also enroll in a structured PE review course at a

local college or university. Regardless of your preparation strategy, the most

important thing is to stick to a well thought out study schedule.

If you've started to research the exam at all then you're aware that the scope of

material covered encompasses many different codes and standards. Few engineers personally own or even have access to all of them. One possible resource

is your place of work. If the office's professional library needs to be updated anyway then perhaps your unit will pay for the new codes and standards. You can

use those references and return them to the unit's library when you're finished.

Few of us have knowledge in all areas of expertise covered on the exam, but that

doesn't necessarily mean you're destined for failure. If you've never learned anything about seismic design, ground water flow, or traffic accident analysis then

decide early to skip these portions during your review and concentrate on the

areas where you can become very proficient.

Even if you skip some specific areas, you should still become very familiar with

the applicable codes and reference materials. Tab the important sections and

tables in each one. It will save a lot of time on the exam. For those subjects that

you're uncomfortable with, if nothing else, become familiar with the codes and the

important tables/sections within. That simple effort could easily buy you a couple

of correct answers on the exam.

WHAT ABOUT LOGISTICS?

If you choose to fly somewhere to take the exam you'll have some challenges

carrying all your books. Make sure you plan it out ... airline weight restrictions,

physically getting around with all that stuff by yourself, etc. A suitcase full of

books can quickly add up to the 70 pound "hard" limit observed by most airlines.

Also, consider staying in a hotel close to the exam site the night before. Find

where to park and the specific room where you'll take the test. Don't let there be

any surprises on exam morning.

Things to bring: ear plugs, watch, quiet snacks (if your state allows this), a lunch.

You won't have time to go out and get lunch so make sure you take it with you.

Plan to wear layered, comfortable clothing. This is important. You could be either

hot or cold very easily.

WHAT'S THE BEST EXAM STRATEGY?

The morning "breath" session of the exam is supposed to be comprised of shorter, easier questions compared to the afternoon session. Take advantage of this.

For most people, this is where they make or break their exam. Also, don't forget

to reserve time at the end of each session to go back and check your answers.

The questions in the afternoon "depth" section of the exam are much more difficult. Take a brief look at all of the questions and work the easier ones first.

Remember, you don't have to get a perfect score on the exam to pass so don't

get discouraged when you realize that your going to miss some of the questions.

Obtaining a PE license requires a great deal of planning and study. It can be

overwhelming at first, but perseverance is the key. Take comfort in knowing that

once you've achieved your goal of licensure it can be held for a lifetime, and you

should never have to take the eight-hour exam again. Good luck!
36 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Engineer’s Digest

U.S. Coast Guard photo/PA3 Luke Clayton.

In Remembrance
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 37

In November 2008, CG-41 (Office of Aeronautical

Engineering) held its annual Aeronautical Engineering

Officer's Conference in Washington, DC. Among the

highlights and yearly traditions of the conference is the

fundraiser. The event is an opportunity for the current

class of Student Engineering Officers to raise funds to

benefit a charitable cause. Last year's beneficiary was a

Washington, DC elementary school that received over

400 new books for its reading program. This year's

fundraiser took on a new meaning that hit home with

everyone. It was decided that the event would be used to

raise funds to support the families of the crew of CGNR

6505, the CGAS Barbers Point helicopter that was

involved in the recent fatal mishap with the loss of all four

crewmembers aboard.

The fundraising event kicked off with a silent auction, followed by the creative use of a make-shift bowling game

that required donations to participate. These two events

raised almost $2,000, which was just short of the previous EO Conference fundraising record of $2,258.

Following that announcement, the effort continued with an

impromptu live auction. Many of the participants donated

items won during the earlier silent auction to be auctioned

off once again. This spur of the moment fundraising

resulted in an incredible display of generosity and camaraderie as the engineers reached deep into their wallets

in support of the families of our fallen shipmates.

In the final tally, the students, Air Station Engineering

Officer's, and the Aviation Logistics Center and

Headquarters staffs donated more than $4,600 to the

Coast Guard Foundation's Fallen Heroes' fund to support

the educational needs of the families of the CGNR 6505

crew. The response to this special event highlighted in a

unique and spontaneous way the deep commitment of

the Coast Guard community to taking care of our own.

Aeronautical

Engineering

Officer Annual

Conference

Fundraiser Takes

on New Meaning

U.S. Coast Guard photo/PA3 Luke Clayton.
38 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

C4IT

During the late 1990s and early 2000, the Coast Guard

replaced its entire inventory of 82-foot patrol boats

(WPBs) with sixty-five 87-foot coastal patrol boats

(CPBs). With the acquisition of the new cutters, engineering crews faced not only a new workplace but also

significant changes in their job requirements. Even

though the new cutter was distinctive and significantly

more complex, the CPB was treated as a one-for-one

replacement for the original vessel in terms of maintaining the ten person crew size; the existing maintenance

infrastructure; and shore-side support facilities.

According to a Maintenance Analysis study conducted by

the Coast Guard's Office of Naval Engineering, the

amount of annual and corrective maintenance required

for systems aboard the CPB increased 582% over the

equipment on the original cutter.

In recognition of these challenges, CG-132, Office of

Training, Workforce Performance, and Development,

commissioned a front-end analysis (FEA) from the

Performance Technology Center at Training Center,

Yorktown. The analysis found that CPB crews

(Engineering Petty Officers, Machinery Technicians, and

Electrician Mates) could not perform unit or intermediate

level preventive and corrective maintenance on the

Kobelt steering system, MAN generator set, Ship Service

Diesel Generator (SSDG) switchboard, York HVAC, EDI

alarm panel, and EVAC vacuum toilet. This rendered the

by Brittany Noelle Davis, Performance Technology Center, TRACEN Yorktown, VA

LCDR Terence Williams (CG-452)

87' CPB Crews Benefit from

Award Winning EPSS
engineering capability inadequate to

maintain the cutter's operational requirements.

To correct this deficiency, the FEA provided stakeholders with a three-part recommendation package which included residential training, job aids with extensive

training, and stand-alone job aids. Of

these interventions, the first tool developed was an electronic performance support system (EPSS), designed to provide

step by step procedures for operating and

maintaining the six new systems. During

the development and review process of

the EPSS, stakeholders and subject matter experts were so impressed with the

potential of the product that they suggested implementing it as a stand-alone performance intervention in lieu of residential

training to see if the EPSS by itself could

provide technicians and operators with

the performance support needed to

accomplish tasks at their work-site.

In 2007, three years after the 87' CPB

EPSS was released to the field, the

Performance Technology Center conducted a formal evaluation to verify if, by itself

(absent the classroom training component), the EPSS was providing crews with

adequate performance support at the unit

level. The evaluation indicated that using

the EPSS, CPB engineers were able to

accomplish required job tasks that they

were previously unable to perform. In

addition to the increase in engineering

performance capacity, the evaluation

found that the EPSS provided an estimated 11:1 return on investment (ROI) to the

Coast Guard over traditional training. As

a result of positive feedback from users and the fiscal

benefits of the EPSS, CG-45 and CG-751 decided to

continue supporting the use and upkeep of EPSS.

With the help of experts from the MLCs, ELC, and several CPBs, the Performance Technology Center spent the

past several months bringing current EPSS content into

alignment with the present day condition of the cutters.

The updated EPSS is available to the field in electronic

and hardcopy format as of February (the revised EPSS is

available via the CG Intranet at

http://cgweb.tcyorktown.uscg.mil/PTC/CPB/). In addition

to the systems originally on the EPSS, the hydraulic

pump unit, Gyrocompass, and Autopilot systems will be

incorporated for release in the next version of the EPSS,

slated for completion in FY 2010.

In 2008, the International Society for Performance

Improvement recognized the 87' CPB Project as an outstanding performance intervention by presenting the

Coast Guard with an Award of Excellence. In addition,

the 87' CPB project was selected as a top ten nominee

for National Training and Simulation Association's

Governor's Award and has been nominated for the 2008

American Society for Performance Improvement (ASTD)

Excellence in Practice awards in the categories of

Learning Technologies and Performance Improvement.

Follow-up: The EPSS project was recently awarded two

citations, one in the Learning Strategies category and the

other in the Performance Improvement category from the

American Society of Training and Development.

Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 39
40 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

C4IT

Prior to September 2008, LORAN Station (Lorsta) Kodiak had an average monthly electrical bill of $15,000. The

majority of electrical consumption was from the LORAN Transmitter, the tower aircraft avoidance lighting, air conditioning units, and station lighting. Since converting the incandescent tower lights to Light Emitting Diodes

(LED's) the stations electrical bills now averages less than $11,000 a month.

During the Summer of 2007, Lorsta Kodiak was approached by Communication Station (Commsta) Kodiak’s Rigger

Shop with a prototype LED beacon from Austin Insulators. The top beacon of Lorsta Kodiak's 625' tower was replaced

with the "RF hardened" LED light and tested for one year with no malfunctions. In September 2008, the crew of

LORAN Station Kodiak, with assistance from ESU Kodiak, replaced the remaining beacon assembly and nine obstruction lights. New aluminum mounting brackets were manufactured by the station's crew for all nine obstruction lights too.

The transition from incandescent lights to the energy efficient LED's meant that the previous energy consumption of 1.8

kilowatt/per/hour (1300 kilowatt/per/month), was reduced to less than .36 kilowatt/per/hour (230 kilowatt/per/month); a

reduction by a factor of five. The installation of LED lights will result in man-hour savings too. Previous incandescent

LORAN Station Kodiak Reduces

Electrical Usage by $30,000 a Year

by ETC Thomas Sears, Lorsta Kodiak Alaska

Loran Station Kodiak Alaska.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 41

bulb life was rated at 8000 hours, (333 days) while the LED lights are rated at 100,000 hours, (11.4 years)

and are designed with redundant LED's in place.

The entire project was performed by CG personnel, with design and acquisition by Lorsta Kodiak and oversight from CEU Juneau and Commsta Kodiak’s Rigger Shop. The installation was completed by the crew of

Lorsta Kodiak with additional ESU Kodiak personnel assisting. Total project cost was $9000, with each beacon costing $2500.00, and each obstruction light costing $250.00.

Austin Insulators is just one of many manufacturers that now manufacture energy conservative lighting that

could be utilized at LORAN Stations, Communication Stations, and even on board ship. The savings to

LORAN Station Kodiak alone, will pay for the upgrade in little more than three months.

The light manufacturer is Austin Insulators at http://www.austin-insulators.com, the Beacon is the A-L864

and the Obstruction light is the A-L810.

A-L864 LED Beacon.

Installed A-L810 Obstruction Light.

Night view of LORAN Station Kodiak's new LED lighting system.
42 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

As the Chief of Staff of the

Coast Guard and the prospective Deputy Commandant for

Mission Support (DCMS) I'm

grateful to be able to address

the readers of the EELQ on The

Four Cornerstones of the

Commandant's Logistics

Transformation Program. The

Logistics Transformation

Program, combined with our

reorganization plans under

Coast Guard Modernization, will

provide the foundation for a new

way of conducting Coast Guard

support. As the prospective

DCMS, I'm excited to adopt and

implement this new business

model and turn Coast Guard

support into a better managed,

more responsive program to

serve the mission execution

demands of our service.

The Four

Cornerstones

of

Coast

Guard

Support

VADM Clifford I. Pearson

Configuration

Management

Total Asset

Visibility

Product

Lines

Bi-Level

Maintenance

by VADM Clifford I. Pearson, Chief of Staff of the Coast Guard
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 43

While still Chief of Staff in 2003-2004, Admiral Allen commissioned several study teams

to look at our stove-piped logistics information systems and how they could be better

integrated with our financial management systems. In mid-2005 the Logistics

Management Transformation Office (LMTO) briefed the Admiral with their analysis and

recommendations. Our diverse IT systems were a symptom of a larger problem; the

Coast Guard had no common approach to logistics management across our many

asset-based business lines. The LMTO recommended a common business model

(based on our own best-in-class aviation support program) supported by a common

logistics IT architecture. Following the recommendations of the LMTO, the Logistics

Transformation Program Integration Office (LTPIO) was formed within CG-4 and since

late 2005 has been carrying out the Commandant's mandate for a common business

model supported by a single IT architecture.

Since becoming Commandant, Admiral Allen has repeatedly communicated his four

"immutables" to his leadership team. These have come to be known as the Four

Cornerstones of Logistics Transformation, and as I write this article a series of five

ALCOAST messages are being released to communicate these foundational principles

to the entire Coast Guard. I want to take this opportunity to convey the Four

Cornerstones messages in a single article for our EELQ audience.

The four cornerstones of our new Logistics Business Model support architecture are;

❚ A service-wide commitment to Configuration Management (CM).

❚ Total Asset Visibility (TAV) across the Coast Guard enabled by an enterprise IT

system, 

❚ A bi-level support system consisting of only unit and depot maintenance levels,

and

❚ Product Lines to serve as a single point of contact for enterprise asset support.

A discussion of each of these cornerstones follows.

Configuration Management

Configuration management is defined as a process for establishing and maintaining

consistency of a product's performance, functional and physical attributes with its

requirements, design and operational information throughout its life. It is the discipline

through which we document, communicate and control the who, what, when, where,

why and how of our critical capabilities; assets, systems, units and people. Properly

applied, CM ensures that a baseline is established and that any changes to that baseline are properly documented, ensuring they are consistent and repeatable throughout

the life cycle of the capability and do not negatively impact capability.

There are five components of properly structured Configuration Management program;

Identification, Control, Status Accounting, Verification and Data Management. Each of

these is discussed in greater detail below, borrowing heavily from the DoD

Configuration Management Handbook, which is a primary Coast Guard reference;

❚ Configuration Identification - This activity provides the foundation for all of the

other CM functional activities. Facilitated by the documented CM process and by

open communications, this activity interacts with system engineering. It provides

approved configuration documentation to document the physical and functional

characteristics of the system/item, establishes baselines for configuration control,

creates records in the status accounting data base and provides documentation for

configuration verification and audit.

❚ Configuration Control - The configuration control process receives input from

Configuration Identification defining the current configuration baseline. It receives

Configuration

management is

defined as a

process for establishing and maintaining consistency

of a product's performance, functional and physical

attributes with its

requirements,

design and operational information

throughout its life.
44 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

and processes requests for engineering changes from technical, operational and

contract functions, and it also receives requests for modifications to fielded items

and facilities from field units. It provides for the review and approval/disapproval of

proposed of changes, and for the necessary authorization and direction for change

implementation by contractors and affected Government activities.

❚ Configuration Status Accounting (CSA) - All of the other CM activities provide

information to the status accounting data base as a by-product of transactions that

take place as the functions are performed. This activity provides the visibility into

status and configuration information concerning the product and its documentation.

The CSA information is maintained in a CM database that may include such information as the as-designed, as-built, as-delivered, or as-modified configuration of

any serial-numbered unit of the product as well as of any replaceable component

within the product. Other information, such as the current status of any change, the

history of any change, and the schedules for and status of configuration audits

(including the status of resultant action items) can also be accessed in the database.

❚ Configuration Verification and Audit - The Configuration Verification and Audit

process provides verification that (1) the product's performance requirements have

been achieved by the product design and (2) the product design has been accurately documented in the configuration documentation. This process is also applied to

verify the incorporation of approved engineering changes. Successful completion of

verification and audit activities results in a verified product and documentation set

that may be confidently considered a Product Baseline, as well as a validated

process that will maintain the continuing consistency of product to documentation.

❚ Configuration Data Management - Data management and particularly the management of digital data is an essential prerequisite to the performance of configuration management. Digital data is information prepared by electronic means and

made available to users by electronic data access, interchange, transfer, or on electronic/magnetic media. There is virtually no data today that does not fall into this

category. Configuration management of data is therefore part of data management

activity; and management of the configuration of a product configuration cannot be

accomplished without it.

To implement an enterprise configuration management discipline and create a culture

that values the process and results of configuration management, the Coast Guard has

established the first program office dedicated to Configuration Management. Formed in

2006 and working under the Assistant Commandant for Engineering and Logistics, CG444 is working in close cooperation with the Logistics Transformation Program to

improve CM practices throughout the Coast Guard. The CG-444 staff are presently

focused on establishing technical data standards which are a foundational component of

any functioning CM program. Under the Logistics Transformation Standard Boat Pilot, a

Standard Boat CCB has been established with representation from Coast Guard

Operations, Engineering and Safety programs. In the coming months and years as our

new Mission Support Organization takes form, the Configuration Management Program

Office will continue to work with other CG-4 offices, the Assistant Commandant for C4IT

(CG-6), the Assistant Commandant for Human Resources (CG-1), the Assistant

Commandant for Capability (CG-7) and our acquisition projects within the Assistant

Commandant for Acquisitions (CG-9) to establish and perpetuate a configuration management discipline throughout the Coast Guard.

Total Asset Visibility

Total Asset Visibility (TAV) is the ability to provide timely and accurate information on the

location, movement, status and identity of units, personnel, equipment and supplies,

Total Asset

Visibility (TAV) is

the ability to provide timely and

accurate information on the location, movement,

status and identity

of units, personnel,

equipment and

supplies, and have

the ability to act on

that information in

order to direct

resources in the

accomplishment of

mission objectives.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 45

and have the ability to act on that information in order to direct resources in the

accomplishment of mission objectives. TAV is a long standing but elusive objective for many military, government and private organizations. Achieving TAV

requires process and investment discipline. This includes (1) consistency in data

capture (who, what, when, where and why), (2) rigorous investment review to prevent redundant of conflicting solution implementation, and (3) the application of

common sense in determining what to track, as tracking any item has an inherent

cost in both manpower and information storage and maintenance.

The Coast Guard has benefited from limited TAV capability within many of its

logistics systems, allowing the redistribution of parts and supplies to meet the

operational needs of aircraft, vessels and other assets. However this capability

has never been complete and, because of the stovepiped nature of our current

systems, has never afforded an operational commander a complete picture of all

assets within their purview. The Logistics Transformation Program is working to

ensure a full suite of TAV capability for all asset types with the new Logistics

Business Model and its supporting IT system, CG-LIMS.

Product Lines

A Product Line is a construct that originated in the private sector and is defined

as a group of closely related products with similar attributes, technical or end-use

considerations. Product Lines are used by service organizations as a means of

providing superior support to end users (customers) while internally capitalizing

on the economies that come from grouping like products together.

Product Lines are essential to the foundation of our new Logistics support model.

Our aviation program adopted the Product Line construct in the late 90's and the

Aviation Logistics Center (formerly AR&SC) will have Product Lines focused on

our four major aircraft mission profiles; Short Range Rescue (SRR), Long Range

Rescue (LRR), Short Range Surveillance (SRS) and Long Range Surveillance

(LRS). Each of our new Logistics and Service Centers will adopt the product line

construct for product families within their respective asset portfolios. Many of

these will be familiar as previously identified Coast Guard asset classes (e.g.,

WMEC) or types (e.g., Standard Boats, ATON structures).

Product Lines are formed in the early stages of an acquisition project and initially

reside within the Acquisition Project Office (APO). As the acquisition project

comes to a close the Product Line transitions to the designated Logistics or

Service Center and continue to fulfill their responsibilities until the asset is retired

from Coast Guard service. The Product Line Engineering Branch develops and

maintains necessary unit (O level) and depot (D level) maintenance specifications, manages asset configuration throughout the life cycle of the asset, and

maintains the technical information for the asset. The Logistics Branch of the

Product Line concerns itself primarily with supporting the budgetary and supply

management needs for the asset, including spare parts provisioning and procurement services. The Programmed Depot Maintenance Branch plans and executes

all depot maintenance activities, both in-house and commercial, for the life of the

asset.

A key player in the centralized support model is the Product Line Manager to

whom the above named branches report. This individual is responsible for all of

the planning, budgeting and execution of asset support across the Coast Guard.

To the field this is the "face" of our new Mission Support Organization for an asset

type and the ultimate "touch point" for all service support. In addition the Product

Line Manager is also the Coast Guard's customer to work support issues with

original equipment manufacturers and other vendors providing support.

Product Line is a

construct that originated in the private sector and is

defined as a group

of closely related

products with similar attributes, technical or end-use

considerations.
Logistics

46 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

The most significant advantage of the Product Line approach is a single point of

contact and accountability for asset support throughout the asset's life cycle,

from induction to retirement. Field units are only responsible for operating and

maintaining the asset within Product Line guidelines using detailed operating guidance, maintenance procedures and supplies provided to them by the Product

Line. Gone are the days of an EPO calling a company in Europe for parts support! When executed properly this approach improves asset support while lowering costs and reducing the burden normally places on field units for support.

We have already created our first non-aviation Product Line, the Standard Boat

Product Line, which has been providing service for Standard Boats at our Pilot

Sectors of Baltimore and San Francisco, as well as Group Humboldt Bay and

Sector San Diego. The formation of additional Product Lines will occur as we form

our new Logistics and Service Centers and teach these personnel the new skills

and processes they will need to make our Coast Guard Logistics Business Model

a success.

Bi-Level Maintenance

The final cornerstone to discuss is the bi-level maintenance system. Within much

of the Coast Guard today it is not uncommon to see independent unit level (O

level), intermediate (I level) and depot (D level) support activities. Many of these

have evolved organically over time, with blurry lines of distinction among them and

wide variation from district to district and unit to unit. In contrast the Coast

Guard's aviation program employs only two levels of support, O level or unit level

(i.e., at the air station) and depot-level which entails support provided by the ALC

(formerly AR&SC) or other officially designated overhaul facility. Perhaps the most

visible indication that Coast Guard aviation is bi-level is evidenced by the fact that

there is no aviation maintenance component at either MLC, as there are for our

naval, C4IT and civil engineering programs.

Under a bi-level support system O level, or unit level, support are tasks and activities that a particular unit's crew has the capability, competency, capacity and

authorization to perform. Unit level maintenance support would normally consist

of inspecting, servicing, lubricating, adjusting and replacing components, minor

assemblies and subassemblies on equipment. Depot level support consists of

services that are the responsibility of Logistics Service Centers and will be performed by designated support activities which have more extensive facilities and

higher skilled/trained personnel than typically found at field units to conduct

repairs. Typical depot level support is performed on material, equipment, systems,

platforms or facilities requiring major overhaul or significant cross-program support.

Perhaps the most important element of our bi-level support system will be how it is

managed and controlled. The determination of whether or not a maintenance

action is unit or depot level is initially made during the acquisition phase of the

asset and is based on a maintenance review using formal, disciplined processes

such as reliability centered maintenance (RCM), failure mode effects and criticality

analysis (FMECA) and level of repair analysis (LORA). In some cases unit level

maintenance capabilities may need to be increased in order to support a new

asset and those increased capabilities will be planned for and provided by the

Asset Project Office (APO) and product line prior to asset deployment. This in

contrast to how asset support levels are often determined today with units undertaking depot level support responsibilities out of initiative, frustration with higher

level support programs, or to save the Coast Guard money over the perceived

high cost of repair contracts. Within our new bi-level system strict adherence to

maintenance responsibility and capability is essential to its success.

Under a bi-level

support system

O level, or unit

level, support are

tasks and activities

that a particular

unit's crew has the

capability, competency, capacity

and authorization

to perform.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 47

Summary

The four cornerstones discussed above are critical components of our new business

model, but they do not exist in isolation. In fact they are interdependent and each relies

on the other to make our new Logistics Business Model perform properly. The following

diagram is an attempt to show those interdependencies graphically. Configuration

Management and its five pillars are the foundation upon with all other support activities

are built and remain standing. Without the foundation the entire structure crumbles.

With an effective CM program, especially the data management component, we enable

a TAV capability which product line managers can use to develop, implement and manage our bi-level maintenance program to meet the demands of our operational commanders in support of mission execution.

It is essential that all Coast Guard personnel, operators and support staffs, embrace

these cornerstones. Acceptance begins with understanding and this article is an

attempt at increasing your understanding of what our new model requires of us. Some

of these changes will not be easily embraced. Coast Guard personnel have been

raised to thrive on the challenge of getting the job done under adverse conditions. For

mission execution that ethos will not change, but we must take a more disciplined

approach to our support responsibilities in order to ensure that the capability our missions require will be available every time, without question and at a reasonable cost in

both dollars and effort. It's only through a disciplined approach that embraces these

four cornerstones that we can meet these demands consistently.
48 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

Logistics Transformation Deployment Overview

In 2005 then VADM Allen established the Logistics

Transformation Program Integration Office (LTPIO) to

transform all Coast Guard logistics to the new Coast

Guard Bi-Level Mission Support Business Model for the

delivery of dependable, effective, and efficient support to

operators for mission execution. The primary objective

was to implement a common way of doing business

across all the Coast Guard support communities based

on centralized management and control with distributed

execution. Since becoming our Commandant, ADM Allen

as articulated the "four cornerstones" of this mission support model, which are: disciplined configuration management; total asset visibility of all operating assets, systems,

spares, and supplies; a bi-level maintenance system consisting of only depot and unit level maintenance; and a

single point of contact for asset support through establishment of asset Product Lines.

From late 2007 through the middle of 2008 the LTPIO

piloted its approach to transformation on standard boat

support at Sectors Baltimore and San Francisco. Lessons

learned from these deployments were used to create a

Transformation Playbook which was further refined during

the first District-wide deployments for all Sectors and

Groups within District 11. The Playbook is the primary

guidance document for Headquarters, District, and

Sector/Group staffs involved in the planning and execution of the Logistics Transformation Program, and as of

this writing the Playbook is being used to deploy the mission support model within D13. This article borrows heavily from the Transformation Playbook to provide an

overview of the Logistics Transformation process and the

timeline for all remaining Districts, Sectors, and Groups.

Deployment Process

Performing a standard boat transformation to all nine

Districts and their attached Sectors and Groups requires

an integrated strategy that develops and shares expertise

while effectively leveraging available resources at the

same time. The LTPIO approach integrates several key

elements to ensure a timely and successful transformation.

✘ Leverage District and Sector resources to coordinate

and orchestrate the transformation while Product Line

and LTPIO resources provide consultative support.

✘ Preposition transformation personnel to develop

expertise and then effectively spread to other Sectors,

building consensus and ownership of the transformation.

✘ The transformation will be conducted using a three

phase (Prepare/Transform/Support) approach to maximize learning, minimize risk, and ensure standardization of the new mission support model.

✘ Use of a transformation playbook as a "road map" for

conducting the transformation to ensure standardization of transformation activities and consistent outcomes across all Districts and Sectors.

The transformation of each District to the new mission

support model will occur Sector by Sector (or by Group,

as the case may be). A three phase approach, consisting

of Prepare, Transform, and Support phases, will be used

to transform each Sector. Districts, in concurrence with

the LTPIO, will determine the order of transformation for

their Sectors and whether they occur sequentially, in parallel or in a mixture of both.

During the Prepare phase, each Sector transformation

begins with the assignment of key personnel, execution of

the Sector communications plan, and creation of transformational support teams. These activities are followed by

various tasks required to conduct the Site Survey. Each

Sector is set up differently according to its infrastructure,

assets, and geography. Each will require various materials (inventory, shelving, cabinets, tools, printers, computers, furniture, etc.) to comply with the mission support

model. Therefore, a Site Survey will be conducted to

assess Sector and Sector field unit requirements. Once

requirements have been determined, identified materials

must be purchased, delivered, and installed (supported by

Sector and field units) before commencement of the actual transformation.

Simultaneously, the LTPIO will work with headquarters

and other associated parties to centralize funds and

establish new Sector policies and standard operating

instructions. Information technology staff will work to preLogistics Transformation Standard

Boat Rollout Planning and

Deployment

by Brooks Minnick (ctr), CG-44LT
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 49

pare the Asset Logistics Management Information

System (ALMIS) system for use by the Sector and its

field units. These tasks include generating user

accounts for all Sector personnel and enrolling Sector

and field unit assets into the appropriate systems.

Once the preparation work has been completed, the

actual Transform phase can begin. The schedule for the

transformation will be established by the District Project

Officer (described in the next section) with support of

the Sector Logistics Officer and Sector Engineering

Officer. Together, they will determine the target date for

transforming the Sector and all Sector field units. The

transformation itself will take three weeks:

✘ Week 1: Training for Sector/Group/Station/ANT

Command and Engineering Personnel.

✘ Week 2: Training for STA/ANT duty standers, auxiliarists, non-rates, and storekeepers. During this

week the Sector will "go live" using ALMIS and new

logistics model.

✘ Week 3: No formal classroom training. Conduct

shadowing support "over the shoulder" for all

Sector/STA/ANT personnel.

The Support phase begins at the conclusion of the

Sector transformation. Activities in this phase include

conducting inventory spot checks of Sector and field

unit parts inventories and a logistics compliance inspection within six months after the Sector transformation.

Figure 1 provides a graphical depiction of the deployment process.

Key Deployment Roles - LTPIO

The LTPIO is accountable to CG-4, DCMS, and the

Commandant for Logistics Transformation deployment

and is responsible for planning and execution of all

deployment activities. Several key positions are established within the LTPIO to assume this responsibility.

Figure 1. This Process Map graphically depicts the steps required to complete a Transformation. Zero

date is when inventory segmentation is executed (see top blue bar). All other dates are plus or minus

this date; expressed in days. The entity responsible for execution is listed in the leftmost column.
50 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

LTPIO Program Manager (PM) and Deputy Program

Manager (DPM) - The PM and DPM reside within

the Office of Logistics (CG-44) at Coast Guard

Headquarters and are responsible for the entire

Logistics Transformation Program, including deployment activities. They approve schedules, obtain and

allocate resources, including personnel and funding,

and oversee the Mission Support Business Model

and all of its key artifacts, including the

Transformation Playbook.

Project Officer (PO) - The PO is an LTPIO staff

member responsible for all field unit transformation

activities and is accountable to the PM and DPM for

its success. The PO monitors all transformation

activities via the transformation dashboard and

through direct communications with those involved

with each District rollout. Reporting to the PO are

the Project Assistants, Operations Liaison, and other

supporting LTPIO resources. In addition, individual

District Project Officers have a project reporting

chain of command back to the PO. The LTPIO PO

is an O-5.

Project Assistant (PA) - Project Assistants are typically contractor resources located at CG HQ and

assigned by the LTPIO to support the District Project

Officer. They are assigned by the LTPIO to provide

administrative, logistical, and project management

support. The PAs possess strong organizational

and project management skills. It is assumed that

PAs will be full-time contractor positions.

Operations Liaison (OL) - The OL is assigned by the

LTPIO and is primarily responsible for providing support to the PO. The OL is a subject matter expert

on boat maintenance. The OL may need to travel

from District to District leading and coordinating

transformation activities and resources. The OL is

the "go to" individual available to the PO for working

problems to resolution. The OL is also responsible

for educating and supporting individual District

Operations Liaisons, specifically with conducting the

Site Surveys.

Transition Liaison (TL) - The TL is an LTPIO

resource available at the discretion of the OL. The

TL will act as the Sector/Group EO's Coast Guard

Bi-Level Logistics Support Model Engineering

Subject Matter Expert (SME). The TL will be familiar

with the Aviation Model and also with the Surface

Community world of work. It is expected that the TL

will provide support to the Sector Engineering

Officer (EO) from initial site survey through initial

operating capability. The TL will also travel to field

units to assist with training and shadowing as

required.

Key Deployment Roles - District/Sector/Group

Execution of the Logistics Transformation Playbook for a

District and its Sectors and Groups requires the assignment of critical roles and responsibilities to various

District and Sector personnel. This section describes

those key positions in some detail.

District Project Officer (DPO) - The District project

officer is assigned by the District staff. The DPO

has responsibility for all District-related transformation efforts and accountability for its success. The

DPO provides status updates to the LTPIO Project

Officer on District transformation activities via the

transformation dashboard and through direct communication. Reporting to the DPO are LTPIO

Project Assistants (contractor staff), a District

Operations Liaison, a District Training Lead, and a

District IT Lead. An ideal DPO is a senior

Engineering Officer from a District air station. The

DPO will likely be a full-time position through completion of the District transformation.

District Operations Liaison (DOL) - The DOL is a

subject mater expert on boat maintenance and supports the DPO by acting as a liaison to the District

boat community and field units. The DOL must travel from Sector to Sector, unit to unit leading and

coordinating resources required during the training

and shadowing activities of the transformation. It is

suggested that the DOL be a military position at the

E-8 rating and a BM or MK. The DOL will be a fulltime position through completion of the District

transformation.

District Training Lead (DTL) - The DTL is a District

staff resource reporting to the DPO. The DTL is

responsible for coordinating all training activities and

training logistics required for a successful transformation. These include ALMIS account enrollment,

developing training schedules, determining Sector

training logistics, scheduling training resources,

coordinating the printing of training materials, and

delivery of training equipment. The DTL will work

closely with the LTPIO Project Assistant and Sector

Logistics Department Head. The DTL will likely be a

full-time position through completion of the District

transformation.

District IT Lead (DIL) - The DIL is a District telecommunications staff resource reporting to the DPO.

The DIL is responsible for ensuring that all network

drops, workstations, and fax/copier equipment identified during site surveys are properly installed, tested, and available for use prior to each unit's transformation training. It is expected that this role will be

filled through the execution of a Memorandum of
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 51

Understanding (MOU) with the District ESU.

Sector/STA/ANT Staff - While the District staff

assumes a leadership role for District-wide

implementation, much responsibility also falls

to key members of the Sector/Group staffs and

the command cadre of the Stations and ANTs.

The Sector Logistics Officer, Sector/Group

Engineer and Assistant Engineer, OIC, XPO,

and EPO all play significant roles in ensuring a

successful implementation within their respective commands.

FY09/FY10 Deployment Timeline (and Beyond)

Figure 2 provides a graphical representation of the

planned deployment schedule for the remaining

District deployments to be completed during

FY2009 and FY2010. At the time of this writing

this schedule is still being vetted and approved and

is therefore subject to change. District and Sector

staffs will receive formal communication from the

LTPIO months prior to their planned deployment to

establish a firm start date and initiate the

Preparation phase.

It is important to recognize that the deployment

discussed here only encompasses standard boats

operated and supported at Sectors and Groups.

Logistics Transformation ultimately extends to all

asset types operated throughout the Coast Guard.

Concurrent with this Transformation deployment

are efforts to establish Product Lines for cutters,

facilities (e.g., buildings), and major C4IT asset

classes. Deployment plans for these assets are

still in the early phases of planning and resourcing

and will be the subject of future articles like this

one.

Figure 2. This graphic depicts the planned deployment schedule as of early January 2009 and is subject to

approval/modification after consultation with OPCOM and the District Commanders.
52 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

As this article is being written new mission support

procedures for Sector-based Standard Boats are in

place at Sector Baltimore and all remaining Sectors,

Groups, and attached units within District 11.

Transformation training is underway for the Sectors

and Groups within District 13 and preparations have

begun to deploy our chosen mission support model to

the remaining Districts during FY09 and FY10 (see

additional EELQ article on Logistics Transformation

Rollouts in this issue, page 48).

With the implementation of this mission support model

new work procedures are established with an

increased emphasis on configuration, maintenance,

and supply management for the Sector/Group and its

field units. When viewed alongside previously established procedures, this more stringent requirement

appears to constitute more work for Sector, Station,

and ANT personnel. Not wanting to unduly burden the

very units we are trying to support, the Logistics

Transformation Program has provided contractor support for two critical responsibilities; supply management and maintenance data capture. These positions

are known as the Asset Materiel Manager (AMM) and

Field Terminal Operator (FTO) respectively and the

contract individuals filling these duties play an important, if largely behind the scene, role by helping to

ensure a smooth deployment of the new mission support procedures for all Sector/Group personnel.

The AMM

While inventory accuracy for CFO reporting has

become increasingly important to the Coast Guard

over the last five years, most would acknowledge that

Sector/Group Engineering supply management was

not a responsibility that received any additional manpower support. In fact, this responsibility was typically

assigned as a collateral duty to a junior MK in the

Engineering shop who was responsible for obtaining

supplies and maintaining inventory accuracy in

CMplus or TAIT. With the new mission support model

in place, increased importance is placed on unit inventories and how they are stored and managed. This

includes secured storage areas (e.g., lockable cages)

by Brooks Minnick (ctr), CG-44LT
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 53

containing new Vidmar storage units. In addition, this segregated inventory is

maintained within the supply management system of ALMIS (Asset Logistics

Management Information System), requiring specialized training and an

increased emphasis on data management. A key aspect of the ALMIS supply

system is the ability to "push" parts to units when they are needed based on

preset stocking levels without requiring the unit to request them. As these

materials arrive the AMM is the individual responsible for managing these new

supplies, interacting regularly with Sector/Group storekeepers and Aviation

Logistics Command (ALC) and ELC supply personnel to maintain proper stocking levels. The AMM is also responsible for pulling, collecting, and issuing

parts for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance tasks, returning "carcasses"

for repairable components to the source of supply, and performing research to

obtain needed materials from other commands whenever needed.

Sector Baltimore AMM, contractor Ray Yorro from Vector CSP, is shown maintaining the Sector Baltimore boat parts inventory. Ray has been the SECBALT

AMM for 13 months. The box in the foreground contains parts Yorro collected

for deployment to a boat staging area for the January 20th Inauguration

Security Detail in Washington, DC.

The FTO

Complimenting the work of the AMM for supply management are the duties of

the Field Terminal Operator (FTO) for maintenance management. A key aspect

of our mission support model is that ALL maintenance activity be captured and

recorded, including parts used and labor hours consumed. It's only by capturing this maintenance data across our entire enterprise that we can begin to see

trends in asset performance, reliability and cost, and address minor issues

before they become major ones. The FTO is responsible for recording completed maintenance information within the maintenance management component

of ALMIS, which is being used to support all of our transformed units. Unit

maintenance technicians record basic maintenance information on a MPC

Ray Yorro
54 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

cover sheet, and after EPO review, simply fax or scan and

email that sheet to the FTO located at the Sector who inputs

the information into ALMIS. This insulates unit technicians

from having to learn this part of ALMIS, saves valuable time

from having to perform data entry on a daily basis, and

ensures all data is captured and entered accurately including

parts consumption, labor and all quality assurance checks

conducted. This information in turn updates the unit

Maintenance Due List, or MDL, which is the unit's maintenance schedule.

An example of a completed MPC Cover Sheet which the FTO files and records within ALMIS.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 55

Sector Baltimore FTO Rob Dent (photo above)

of Vector CSP files and records maintenance

completion information from MPC Cover

Sheets he receives from field units via email.

Rob has been the SECBALT FTO since he left

active duty at Station Curtis Bay as an MK3 in

August of 2008.

The Future of AMM and FTO Duties

While the most expedient means to provide

AMM and FTO services during Transformation

stand-up was to hire contract personnel, these

duties may eventually be assigned to Sector

unit personnel, either military or newly established civilian positions. For instance, within

Coast Guard aviation the AMM is often staffed

by a government civil servant while the FTO

position is frequently contracted for. As ongoing staffing studies look at the workload

changes imposed by our new mission support

model, such as reduced demand for local procurement capability because of centrally managed inventories and a "push" supply system, it

may be possible to reprogram currently

assigned personnel. For the time being, the

Logistics Transformation Program is committed

to deploying our new mission support model

without an undue burden on units, and providing contracted AMM and FTO services is a part

of that commitment.
56 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

Determining

Depot Level

Sparing with

VMetric

Readiness

Based Sparing

Tool

by LCDR Bradley C. Cook, ELC

U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Erik Swanson.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 57

To meet Chief Financial Officer Act requirements

and Logistics Transformation initiatives, the Coast

Guard is adopting a demand based support philosophy

for legacy assets. For Engineering Changes for which

the Engineering Logistics Center (ELC) has determined

that depot level stocking is necessary, the number of initial spares is determined using the VMetric Readiness

Based Sparing tool. Gone are the days of "standard"

10% sparing; actual demand history, mean-timebetween-failures (MTBF), and total population are

applied to predict accurate, lean sparing.

In a 1997 report by the Coast Guard's Research and

Development Center, the VMetric program "showed the

theory behind the model closely follows that of the Coast

Guard aviation spare parts logistics system and provides

significant performance improvements. VMetric stock

levels provided the same aircraft availability as historical

levels with a 34% to 54% reduction in stock position.

VMetric improved availability when funding levels for

spares remained unchanged" (http://www.stormingmedia.us/39/3959/A395933.html). Thus, the use of the

VMetric tool aligns with logistics transformation initiatives.

ELC's Electronic Systems Branch (ELC-021) has six

trained VMetric users who work with System Support

Agents (SSAs), such as the Telecommunications and

Information Systems Command and the Command and

Control Engineering Center, to determine system stock

to reach a desired Operational Availability (Ao). ELC-021

also uses VMetric to perform annual updates for supported systems to ensure that the appropriate stock levels

are maintained at ELC.

Prior to beginning the analysis, users must validate the

system's current configuration, location, and equipment

population, using FLS Cubes or CG PART website (see

Fall 2008 Issue of EE&LQ, p 30). This is the foundation

for further analysis and ensures the best possible projection of required sparing. Any new parts, additions to, or

deletions from the system configuration must be identified at this time. The parts list includes repairable and

select consumable ($500.00 and over) items stocked at

the ELC, excluding Other Government Agency-stocked

repairable and consumable items. The user collects

Repair Cycle Time (RCT) data (if available), Procurement

Lead Time (PLT), on-hand quantities, historical demand

quantities, parts quantities per equipment, Mean-TimeBetween-Failures (MTBF), and ELC's current stocking

level for the system (if applicable). Individual component

reliability contributes to overall system reliability: System

Operational Availability is calculated based on compo-
58 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

nent MTBF, Order Ship Time (OST), RCT, system configuration, PLT, and other factors. The Ao calculation does

not include initial spares or VMetric produced buys.

The user inputs the data into a standardized Excel template and uploads it into the VMetric program. The

spreadsheet contains many of the fields required for the

application to work. The spreadsheet also establishes

the maintenance structure used to build the relationship

between parts and equipment and the system.

Instructional notes are provided on the second sheet of

the spreadsheet. After reviewing the data within VMetric,

the user conducts three "runs": A Baseline run; a Desired

Ao run; and a Cost Effective run.

The purpose of the Baseline run is to capture the current

operational availability achievable with known equipment

populations, actual demand history, current repair cycle

time, and updated ELC stock and field unit on board

repair part (OBRP) quantities. The Baseline run serves

to validate whether initial depot level sparing efforts, SSA

donated stock and CGHQ funded increases are sufficient

to meet the operational community's stated availability

requirement.

The Desired Ao run attempts to achieve the desired Ao

with known equipment populations, actual demand history, current repair cycle time, and updated ELC stock and

field unit OBRP quantities. This unconstrained run indicates what additional sparing would be required, and

indicates the appropriate staging points for all support

stock. The comparative results reveal deltas between the

baseline state and desired state. The data can then be

used to support additional funding requests, alter depot

level sparing, and give the SSA and/or ELC a better definition of overall system Ao.

The Cost Effective run identifies the most cost-effective

solution to achieve the highest practical operational availability using known equipment populations, actual

demand history, current repair cycle time, and updated

ELC stock and field unit OBRP quantities. The results of
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 59

the Desired Ao run are used to identify the

Ao achievable closest to the point of diminishing returns. When the model is constrained by the desired Ao and by setting

the model not to allow field sparing, the

results identify additional depot level sparing that would be required for a "Depot

Level Reparable Ao." The results support

additional funding requests by modifying

depot level stocking levels. This action

maximizes Ao and parts availability and

minimizes backorders and unnecessary

low-demand stock items. Since Ao may be

less than the stated requirement, other factors that improve equipment reliability may

be required, such as recapitalization,

changes in support or maintenance philosophy, or upgrades to individual component

parts via field change or system engineering change. These recommendations are

made in the final report by the user and forwarded to the appropriate SSA.

After reviewing the results of all runs, the

user schedules an ELC-021 peer review.

Branch members scrutinize the runs and

financial recommendations, which are considered for future budget development.

In addition to determining applicable and

effective preventative maintenance, capturing data and measures to review and validate initial support decisions, ELC

embraces technology like VMetric to strive

for continuous improvement in the services

we deliver to our customers and to the

fleet. We seek to maximize parts availability and to minimize the rate and quantity of

backorders. Maintaining the correct depot

level sparing is cost effective and paramount to achieving a balance between

stewardship of funds and fleet readiness.
60 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

Navy-Coast Guard Logistics

Integration

by Randy Hodge, RGS Associates Inc.

U.S. Navy Photo.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 61

Introduction

"Although our forces can surge when necessary to respond to crises,

trust and cooperation cannot be surged" -- A Cooperative Strategy for

21st Century Seapower. The increasing importance of Navy and Coast

Guard interdependency across the full spectrum of maritime operations

and the continued need to optimize our logistics processes requires NavyCoast Guard Logistics Integration (N-CGLI). N-CGLI, a strategic initiative

formally endorsed by the Services' Logistics Chiefs, provides the basis for

coordinating Coast Guard and Navy efforts to enhance cooperation and

integration of logistics operations between the two Services in support of

the concepts of the National Fleet Policy and the National Strategy for

Maritime Security.

N-CGLI Charter

The N-CGLI Senior Working Group (SWG) was chartered in late 2006 as an official and continuing

forum to foster new initiatives to attain greater efficiencies and to achieve increasingly effective logistics

operations by leveraging and/or integrating current and future logistics capabilities where it makes

sense. The N-CGLI SWG group is comprised of senior leaders and subject matter experts from the

Navy and Coast Guard who are empowered to develop specific solutions and approaches and to make

recommendations to OPNAV N4 and CG-4 on issues discussed. The group is co-chaired by the

Director, Supply, Ordnance and Logistics Operations Division (OPNAV/N41) and the Assistant

Commandant for Engineering and Logistics (CG-4), with OPNAV/N413 and CG-441 serving as their

direct representatives. Additionally, the N-CGLI SWG consists of representatives from the following

commands/offices: NAVSUP, USFF, CG-6, MLCLANT, and MLCPAC. Additional expertise is sourced on

an ad hoc basis. The senior working group meets quarterly, or more frequently as required, to accomplish the goals and objectives directed by the co-chairs. There are currently six specific initiatives ongoing in various stages of concept exploration and/or development as described in the following paragraphs.

Contingency Planning and Execution

Coast Guard forces must be able to operate as part of a joint task force thousands of miles from our

shores, and naval forces must be able to respond to operational tasking close to home when necessary

to secure our nation and support civil authorities. Accordingly, we are exploiting opportunities at the

operational level to integrate contingency/exercise planning and execution in support of homeland

defense, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief logistics operations. This effort is perhaps best

exemplified by a formal USFF N41/MLCLANT Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) which explains the

uniqueness of cooperative relationships in support of homeland defense and defines cooperative

actions at the operational and tactical level. A strong working relationship, established in advance, may

be the key to success in responding to an emergency situation in the future. The MOA calls for a collaborative review of all applicable plans and joint deliberate/contingency planning when circumstances

dictate; joint training on a routine basis and joint participation in a national exercise at least annually;

continuous communication and information sharing, liaison officer exchanges, and quarterly meetings

to address ongoing joint efforts.

Material Expediting

The Navy's Priority Material Office (PMO) expedites and tracks high priority requisitions for submarines,

surface ships, and select other Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard units. By mission, PMO is dedi-
62 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Logistics

cated to global cradle-to-grave expediting and tracking of all Issue Priority Group-1 (IPG-1) requisitions

for their customers. Through the N-CGLI forum, we are expanding the use of PMO in support of

deployed USCG elements with a high degree of success. Most recently, PMO provided support for

USCGC DALLAS' operations in the Gulf of Guinea and USCGC MORGENTHAU's deployment as part

of CTF-73 CARAT-SECAT in SE Asia. PMO is poised to support USCGC BOUTWELL's deployment to

CENTCOM (Jan-Apr '09) and USCGC GALLATIN's deployment to Africa in spring '09. Initiative champions are assessing lessons learned from recent deployments in order to leverage best practices/procedures and the efficiencies available to USCG activities via PMO. Technical procedures are being developed that will guide units through the material expediting process using PMO's Integrated Supply

Information System (ISIS).

Reparable Retrograde

The Advanced Traceability and Control/electronic Retrograde Management System (ATAC/eRMS) is the

Navy's program for tracking and expediting Depot Level Reparable (DLR) components in the repair and

supply pipeline. Initiative champions are exploring concepts for expanding the use of ATAC/eRMS within USCG units. To date, ATAC/eRMS has been deployed to 37 sites (27 cutters/10 ashore sites) to provide a means of increasing visibility and control of Navy-managed DLRs in the supply chain per the

tenets of OPNAVINST 4000.79B, Policy for U.S. Navy Support of the U.S. Coast Guard. Initiative champions are assessing the need for a formal USN/USCG policy specifically addressing ATAC/eRMS use in

support of Navy-type Navy-owned (NTNO) assets and exploring concepts for the potential adoption of

ATAC/eRMS as the USCG standard for the management of DLRs.

Force Deployment Planning and Execution (FDP&E)

Navy and Coast Guard deployment support organizations are aligning FDP&E processes, procedures,

and activities between the Naval Operational Logistics Support Center (NOLSC), MLCLANT, and the

Coast Guard's Deployment Operations Group (DOG). The priority of effort is on defining support relationships; developing FDP&E policy and applicable tactics, techniques and procedures; developing a

unit movement system implementation and training strategy; and developing force deployment data

constructs and requirements for eventual upload into appropriate plans.

Riverine Operations Support

This effort is focused on reviewing and assessing existing Coast Guard maintenance and logistics support tactics, techniques, and procedures for applicability to Navy Riverine Group and/or Special Boat

Unit operations. Champions are also assessing the potential for leveraging Defense Logistics Agency

support of spares for common boats/equipment and are synchronizing efforts with ongoing Navy-Coast

Guard Warfighter Talks action items and related Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC) N3/5

efforts.

Supply/Logistics Collaboration

Perhaps the most promising N-CGLI initiative involves decentralized leveraging of support capabilities

at the local level. Functional and regional [co-located] Navy and Coast Guard logistics support sites

were tasked during 2008 to identify any existing relationships; conduct reciprocal command visits to

review/assess missions, tasks, and functions in order to unveil ongoing/potential opportunities for crossservicing, integration, and/or interoperability; and to provide feedback for consideration of further expansion. Numerous such visits have taken place and champions at the Service and local levels are reviewing the identified opportunities to holistically assess mission support requirements and workload in

order to determine next steps for the N-CGLI constituency. Solid examples of this collaboration effort

involve: Fleet and Industrial Support Center (FISC) Norfolk / Integrated Support Center (ISC)

Portsmouth and MLCLANT, FISC Jacksonville / ISCs Miami and New Orleans, FISC San Diego / ISC

San Pedro, CG Engineering Logistics Center (ELC) Baltimore / Navy Inventory Control Point (NAVICP)

Mechanicsburg, and FISC Puget Sound / ISC Seattle. Potential opportunities for cross-servicing that

have been discussed range from the more traditional supply and logistics functions to some rather
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 63

localized support activities such as migrant ops/mass migration planning, husbanding contract support

in austere ports, and maritime force protection support.

Pathway to Integration

N-CGLI will promote the integration of Service logistics processes, resources, and information to

enhance synergy and reduce both redundancies and costs in order to optimize the use of limited

resources to provide maximum capability to supported commanders. Further logistics integration topics

exhibiting a high potential for realizing one or more of the following qualities are always welcome for

consideration: improved logistics responsiveness and agility, improved combat support readiness,

reduced logistics workload afloat/ashore, and cost savings/avoidances that can be recapitalized within

Service logistics processes. Through this shared vision, Navy and Coast Guard logisticians will set the

standard for Service integration by moving beyond interoperability to a level of interdependence that

maximizes readiness and sustainability through the most effective and efficient use of our logistics

resources.

Mr. Art Walz is the Chief, Logistics Program and Industrial Management Division

(CG-441) and is the Coast Guard's N-CGLI Action Officer. (202-475-5655 / Email:

Arthur.J.Walz@uscg.mil).

Commander Kerry Pearson, SC, USN, serves as Assistant Branch Head, Logistics Operations &

Policy - Programs (OPNAV N413P) and is the Navy's N-CGLI Action Officer. (703-604-9949/DSN: 664-

9926 / Email: kerry.pearson@Navy.mil).

Mr. Randy Hodge (RGS Associates Inc.) is a support contractor for OPNAV N41. He retired from the

Marine Corps in 2005 after serving 24 years on active duty in various supply and logistics officer billets.

(Email: Randy.Hodge@RGSinc.com). Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer Jetta H. Disco.
Logistics

64 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Ever wonder what the challenges are that the US Air Force faces when it comes to getting replacement parts for new versions of a legacy aircraft? How about the US Navy

and their challenges with a new service-wide asset management application? Ever

wonder what the U.S. Army does when combat boots for desert-wear go out of stock? How

about what the U.S. Marine Corps does when faced with the closing of a major supply

depot? If you are one that thinks these challenges are ordinary and hardly merit concern

by senior service leadership, you'd be wrong. They do, and representatives from the various Department of Defense (DoD) services met for a week in November 2008 to discuss

how to respond to these and other logistics challenges.

The meeting was held at a University of North Carolina complex near the main campus in

Chapel Hill and was attended by U.S. Coast Guard managers, as well as folks from various

logistics, supply, and acquisition agencies of the Federal Government. The course is called

The Advanced Program in Logistics and Technology.

To ensure that the exchange of ideas is productive, the conference is arranged as a series

of learning events by expert professionals from academia and industry that facilitates the

discussion around thought-provoking speakers and lecturers. There are classes in Dynamic

Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness, Supply Chain Management, Technology and

Organizational Innovations, Global Business Competitiveness, Organizational

Transformation,

Product Life Cycle

for Design and

Maintenance, and

several others that

focus on logistics

management solutions. Each attendee

submits a problem

statement from some

aspect of their organization prior to convening and several

get selected for group discussion and "group-think" resolution. The entire program is a

learning event, and by the time the attendees depart, if they didn't have remedies for their

organizational challenges, then at least they had a host of new ideas upon which to draw.

This same scenario plays out with different participants four times a year.

Established by the Department of Defense (DoD) in 2002, the Center of Excellence in

Logistics and Technology, often abbreviated as LOGTECH, is hosted by the Kenan-Flagler

School of Business, adjacent to the UNC Campus, home of the 2007 ACC Men's and

Women's basketball champion "Tarheels." It's a five-day program filled with compelling

speakers, learned scholars, and about 50 active duty and civilian students and their private

sector counterparts.

What results is a masters-level exchange of ideas that stimulates the mind and enhances a

universal appreciation for the issues facing our sister services. Six members of the US

Coast Guard attended the November convening and inter-mingled with officers and senior

civilians from the U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines.

To remediate distractions and to enhance the experience, comfort, and convenience are

vigilantly addressed by staff and faculty. An impeccably appointed student resident facility

named McLean Hall, is positioned footsteps away from a state-of-the-art learning facility.

Equally close, is the DuBose House where Five-Star cuisine is served buffet style in a formal dining setting three times each day, where attendees are subjected to the most attentive wait staff imaginable. The savory meals often compete with staff and curriculum for the

most noteworthy aspect of an overwhelmingly impressive experience.

Logistics Problems?

by CDR Marc P. Lebeau, CG-481
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 65

Although the program is packed with day-long activities, working groups, and reading assignments,

there is still evening time to venture over to the UNC campus via bike/walking trails for some sightseeing or perhaps a quick workout in the exercise facility located in McLean Hall.

For more information on the program, check out their website:

http://www.logtech.org/logtech/default.aspx.

To apply, you must obtain your Command's approval and have your Training Officer submit an ETR in

Direct Access, Course Code 502099. CG-4 selects attendees for each session. If selected, you will

be notified 4 - 6 weeks prior to the convening. O-4, O-5, and O-6 are eligible, along with civilians

GS-13 and above. For more information, contact CDR Marc Lebeau (202) 475-5764 or Mr. Richard

Kramer (202) 475-5736.
66 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Gr 

e en Coast Guarde nvironmental

The largest renewable energy project in Coast

Guard history hit major milestones just before

Thanksgiving this year [2008]. During the weeks

leading up to the holiday, we saw the completion of

the steam line replacement that had much of the

Yard campus ripped up throughout the summer

and fall. This portion represented almost

$1,000,000 in capital improvements to the Yard's

aging infrastructure, as almost a mile of underground piping was dug up and replaced.

The four methane powered generators were

recently placed into the new co-generation plant

building. Each generator will be able to generate

one megawatt of electricity and will be powered by

the methane captured from the Baltimore City

owned Quarantine Road Landfill just to the north

of the Yard campus.

Baltimore City is moving forward with the construction of the collection system at the landfill with

most of the wells already in place and preparations

are moving quickly toward acceptance of the collection equipment in January.

Landfill Gas Project Hits Milestone

by CDR John Slaughter, Yard Chief Facilities Engineering

Reprinted by permission of the Yard News

The one mile long methane pipeline from the Yard

to the landfill has also been installed and is ready

to go. Progress continues at a rapid pace pushing

toward the target of operational testing in February

2009 with a ribbon cutting tentatively planned for

April 22, 2009 (Earth Day).

This project is the largest construction project to

occur at the Yard since the shiplift was installed in

the late 1990s. It is also the largest Energy

Savings Performance Contract in the Coast Guard

with a 15 year price tag of $41 million that will

include contractor maintenance and operation of

the co-generation plant. The entire amount of the

contract will be paid from the savings generated by

self-generation of electricity as opposed to purchasing it from the commercial power grid. When

the project is complete later this winter, the Yard

will become the first Coast Guard facility 100%

powered by a renewable energy source and the

first co-generation plant (electricity and steam) in

the State of Maryland. The initiative will also meet

the renewable energy requirements of the entire

Department of Homeland Security through the

year 2012.

Construction of the landfill gas co-generation plant building

is underway! Operation of the landfill gas project will be the

equivalent of removing over 33,000 cars from the road in

greenhouse gas reduction.

An interior shot of the co-generation plant building and the recently installed methane powered generators gives a peek of the project that will take the Yard "off the energy grid" for nearly all of its

electric and steam power needs for the next 15 years.
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 67

Academy Receives the White House

Electronic Recycling Award
68 • Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly

Intro The cacophony of beeping uninterruptible power supplies (UPS) is a thing of the past for Electronics Support

Detachment Southwest Harbor. After decades of regular power interruptions and frequent, lengthy power outages, they

have replaced 18 UPSs with an alternative, renewable energy source consisting of a 900 watt wind turbine and a solar

panel array, capable of generating an additional 800 watts.

Problem The problem stems from an uneven electrical grid supply. ESD Southwest Harbor is located on an island

at the end of the utility company's grid network, contributing to fluctuations in line voltage. The weather is also extreme

-- high winds, heavy snowfall, freezing rain and sub zero temperatures all contribute to frequent loss of commercial

power. To protect data and prevent damage to sensitive Command, Control, Communications, Computer and

Information Technology (C4IT) Systems, it is necessary to install a UPS for each piece of equipment. The ESD found

the average life cycle of a small UPS to be two to four years. In the past ten years, the ESD has disposed of more than

45 units, mostly due to battery failure.

Solution During one fierce storm, and the accompanying power outage, three civilian employees were looking out

their window at the wind swept sea. Robert Parker, ESD's supervisor, commented, "We need to put up a wind turbine

and make our own power." While in the background, another failed UPS beeped in agreement.

Renewable energy is not new to the Coast Guard. Solar panels light our Aids to Navigation (ATON), wave action produces the sound on bell buoys and wind once powered all of our ships. These systems have been working throughout

the Coast Guard for decades. By using existing technology and drawing on their AtoN experience, ESD personnel

researched, designed and installed an alternative energy system that fit their needs.

REUPS System ESD began examining their electricity demand, identifying power generating sources, and looking

at cost. They needed reliability. The system they designed consists of a 900 watt, Whisper 100 wind turbine, 800 watts

of solar panels, a Xantrex XW4024 hybrid power inverter and Trojan T-105 batteries. This hybrid system combines

power produced by wind and by the sun, efficiently matching it to the shop’s needs and economically replacing 18 individual UPS units.

-- REUPS --

Renewable Energy Uninterruptible Power

Supply

by Robert Parker, Andy Mays, and Sam Chisholm, ESD Southwest Harbor

Gr 

e en Coast Guarde nvironmental
Spring 2009 - EE&L Quarterly • 69

Benefits There are many benefits to the REUPS system. Reliability is one of the most important. Power outages,

power surges and standby generator exercises produce spikes that can damage computers and sensitive electronic

equipment. This harmful potential has been eliminated with the REUPS system. Depending on the load, the Xantrex

inverter applies the power being generated directly to the equipment, to the batteries for storage, or to resistive coils for

heat. It can also be set up to put electricity back into the grid. The ESD has matched their energy demand with the

REUPS power generating capability. When demand exceeds the power generated, stored electricity is drawn from the

batteries. The Xantrex inverter also has a feature that allows "grid shaving." In the unlikely event that the system doesn't meet the power demand, electricity can be drawn from the electrical grid. As it is currently configured, the system

features dedicated AC wall outlets ("green outlets") tied solely to the REUPS system.

Replacing individual UPSs with REUPS yields several benefits. It removes hazardous materials from office spaces as

well as eliminating environmental and monetary costs of hazardous waste disposal. The battery bank in the REUPS

system is easily expandable for storing a larger quantity of renewable power. They also have a lifespan of 10 to 15

years and a well defined recycling process.

REUPS currently produces 278 kilowatts of clean, renewable power each month. This is 26% of ESD's electrical consumption. This exceeds the goal of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 for all federal agencies to derive at least 7.5% of

their electricity consumption from renewable sources. The system generates its own renewable energy, significantly offsetting commercial power consumption and lessening the demand on back up generators during power outages.

The REUPS project has not only provided a practical solution to ESD's commercial power problems, but has also set

the stage for the Coast Guard's C4IT community to innovate towards environmental excellence. It has also provided a

holistic view of energy management to several Coast Guard communities directly involved with the project.

By incorporating the past, ESD Southwest Harbor coupled the Coast Guard's historical use of renewable energy with

recent technology to solve a significant problem. The REUPS system is reliable, cost efficient, and environmentally

friendly. This system, producing clean power, replaces fossil fuel generated electricity thus reducing the Coast Guard's

"carbon wake."