NAVY - CRANE CENTER BRAC Discussion

Similar documents
NAVY WEIGHT HANDLING PROGRAM FOR SHORE ACTIVITIES

OPNAVINST N46 24 Apr Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS, AND TASKS OF NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND

Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS, AND TASKS OF THE BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL

Subj: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NUCLEAR WEAPONS RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITIES

Chapter 15 Special Categories of Personnel

Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS, AND TASKS OF THE NAVAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND


Subj: DEFENSE CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE PERSONNEL SYSTEM (DCIPS)

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION. SUBJECT: DoD Program for Stability of Civilian Employment

Department of Defense

Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General

Subj: IDENTIFICATION OF MAJOR PROGRAM MANAGER EQUIVALENT BILLETS

Subj: HEALTH FACILITY PLANNING AND PROJECT OFFICER PROGRAM

w 2521 CLARK STREET, SUITE 600

OPNAVINST N46 21 Apr Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS, AND TASKS OF COMMANDER, NAVY INSTALLATIONS COMMAND

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC

DCN: ANDUM FOR ACTING UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (ACQUISITION, TECHNOLOGY AND LOGISTICS)

U.S. Army Audit Agency

Department of Defense

Subj: SECRETARY OF THE NAVY SAFETY EXCELLENCE AWARDS

DOD INVENTORY OF CONTRACTED SERVICES. Actions Needed to Help Ensure Inventory Data Are Complete and Accurate

OPNAVINST C N4 31 May 2012

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS (DON COOP) PROGRAM

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

DOD INSTRUCTION DOD LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE (LLRW) PROGRAM

Subj: MISSIONS, FUNCTIONS, AND TASKS OF UNITED STATES FLEET FORCES COMMAND

REQUIRED OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY LEVELS FOR NAVY INSTALLATIONS AND ACTIVITIES

Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS AND TASKS OF DIRECTOR, STRATEGIC SYSTEMS PROGRAMS, WASHINGTON NAVY YARD, WASHINGTON, DC

NAVY CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS PROGRAM AND POLICY

Department of Defense

July 12,2005. The Honorable Samuel K. Skinner Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission 2521 South Clark Street, Suite 600 Arlington, VA 22202

SECNAVINST F DNS Dec 2005

Picatinny BRAC 05 Information Briefing for ICAP

Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS, AND TASKS OF NAVY PAY AND PERSONNEL SUPPORT CENTER

Defense Logistics Agency INSTRUCTION

Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS, AND TASKS OF NAVAL SPECIAL WARFARE COMMAND

Subj: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY (DON) PERSONNEL SECURITY PROGRAM (PSP) INSTRUCTION

SECRETARY OF THE NAVY AWARDS FOR ACHIEVEMENT IN SAFETY ASHORE. (1) SECNAVAward for Achievement in Safety Ashore Scoring Mattix

* D5 77 L DOD 5 A3 2 D *

Subj: ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE TO THE COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS

OPNAVINST A N Oct 2014

DCN: 8451 TABLE OF CONTENTS{PRIVATE } INTRODUCTION COBRA v.5.60 ALGORITHM MANUAL 3

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY (FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND COMPTROLLER) 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC

OPNAVINST DNS 25 Apr Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS AND TASKS OF COMMANDER, NAVAL SUPPLY SYSTEMS COMMAND

CONVERSION OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS FROM CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE TO PERFORMANCE BY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES (SEC. 938)

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

a. Reference (a) and the provisions of this instruction will be implemented by OPNAV and all activities under the command of CNO.

The Honorable Anthony Principi BRAC Commission Polk Building, Suites 600 and South Clark Street Arlington, VA Dear Chairman Principi:

Subj: COMMAND INSPECTION SCHEDULE FOR ACTIVITIES UNDER THE FUNCTIONAL CONTROL OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

Subj: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY (DON) INFORMATION SECURITY PROGRAM (ISP) INSTRUCTION

Defense Logistics Agency Instruction

Advance Questions for Buddie J. Penn Nominee for Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Installations and Environment

P E N N SY LVA N I A M I L I TA R Y I N S TA L L AT I O N S // I M PACT S

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON, D.C

SECNAVINST R 3 Jan 17. (b) The General Counsel (GC) of the Navy;

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY COMMANDER NAVY RESERVE FORCES COMMAND 1915 FORRESTAL DRIVE NORFOLK VIRGINIA

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

BRAC 2005 Issues. Briefing to the Infrastructure Steering Group. December 12, 2003

Report No. D July 25, Guam Medical Plans Do Not Ensure Active Duty Family Members Will Have Adequate Access To Dental Care

GAO. DEFENSE ACQUISITION INFRASTRUCTURE Changes in RDT&E Laboratories and Centers. Briefing Report to Congressional Requesters.

Subj: TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND SECURITY ASSISTANCE REVIEW BOARD

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

NAVY CRANE CENTER ONLINE TRAINING. NCC=Navy Crane Center NKO=Navy Knowledge Online NeL=Navy elearning ILE=Integrated Learning Environment

Department of Defense

ANNUAL NAVAL INSPECTOR GENERAL (NAVINSGEN) SAFETY AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH (SOH) OVERSIGHT INSPECTION SUMMARY REPORT FOR FY12

CNICINST N4 26 Jul Subj: OVERSEAS DRINKING WATER OPERATION AND OPERATOR REQUIREMENTS

OPNAVINST D N09F May 20, Subj: MISSION AND FUNCTIONS OF NAVAL SAFETY CENTER (NSC)

SECNAVINST E CH-1 DUSN (M) 15 Sep 17

UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS MARINE CORPS INSTALLATIONS EAST PSC BOX CAMP LEJEUNE NC

SECNAVINST E OUSN 17 May 12 SECNAV INSTRUCTION E. From: Secretary of the Navy

Subj: PUBLIC AFFAIRS-VISUAL INFORMATION TRAINING WITH INDUSTRY PROGRAM

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

Criterion Six Economic Impact DON-0115 NMCRC Madison

(1) Marine Corps Ground Safety Awards (2) Ground Safety Award Activity Groupings (3) Ground Safety Awards Nomination Format and Criteria

OPNAVINST N2/N6 19 Aug 2014

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION. Continuation of Commissioned Officers on Active Duty and on the Reserve Active Status List

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY. Naval Audit Service. Audit Report. Navy Reserve Southwest Region Annual Training and Active Duty for Training Orders

MEMORANDUM FOR ACTING UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (ACQUISITION, TECHNOLOGY AND LOGISTICS)

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

Subj: ASSIGNMENT OF RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITIES IN THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY

Subj: PROVISION OF DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY DOCUMENTARY MATERIAL

OPNAVINST D N Mar 2010

CLOSE HOLD. Deliberative Document For Discussion Purposes Only Do Not Release Under FOIA

OPNAVINST G N09P 17 Jul Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS, AND TASKS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION AND SURVEY

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE. SUBJECT: The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment Program

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS 2000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON, DC

MILPERSMAN ACTIVE COMPONENT (AC), MPN-FUNDED, DEFINITE RECALL PROGRAM FOR OFFICERS

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BUREAU OF MEDICINE AND SURGERY 7700 ARLINGTON BOULEVARD FALLS CHURCH VA 22042

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

Chapter 3 Analytical Process

SECNAVINST A OI-5 5 January Subj: FLEET HOMETOWN NEWS PROGRAM POLICY AND PROCEDURES

OPNAVINST G N13F 13 MAY 2011 OPNAV INSTRUCTION G. From: Chief of Naval Operations. Subj: FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY BONUS PROGRAM

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON, D.C

Subj: OVERSIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM

U.S. ARMY AUDIT AGENCY AUDIT PLANS FOR BRAC 2005

Subj: CHAPLAINS RELIGIOUS ENRICHMENT DEVELOPMENT OPERATION

Transcription:

DCN 6952 NAVY - CRANE CENTER BRAC Discussion Military Value: Items 1-4 The Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) selection criteria requires the impact on current and future mission capabilities as well as operational readiness to be evaluated for installations on the recommended BRAC list. If the Navy Crane Center (NCC) were moved from Lester, PA to tht: Norfolk Naval Shipyard, scenario DON-01 54, instead of being moved to the Philadelphia Naval Business Center (PNBC), scenario DON-01 60, there would be a great impact on future mission capabilities and operation readiness to perform the Navy Crane Center's mission. SECNAV Instruction 1 1260.2, dated 10 September 1997, officially established the Navy Crane Center as the center of expertise for the safe and reliable operation of Navy weight handling equipment. Based on this instruction, the Navy Crane Center is responsible for policy, training, compliance, inservice technical support, and acquisition for all weight handling equipment throughout the Navy. Our vision statement is, "We are the organization of choice for weight handling program solutions. Vv'e are leaders who offer and deliver timely and effective weight handling program soli~tions." If the Navy Crane Center is moved fi-om Lester, PA to the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, much of the advanced technical knowledge and experience that makes the Navy Crane Center the center of expertise for weight handling program solutions will be lost. The Cost of Base Realignment Actions (COBRA) models indicate that 41 of the 55 people employed by the Navy Crane Center in L.ester, PA will move to Norfolk. This is an unrealistically high number. We understand that the COBRA model uses the same criteria for all installations on the recommended BRAC list. The reality is that approximately 1 0-1 5 people will actually move with1 the organization. The remainder will retire, get another job, or be Reduction in Force (RIF) separated because they decline the offer of a position in a different commuting area. This would create a large gap in the ability of the Navy Crane Center to accomplish its mission. New people would have to be hired to perform the functions of those that did :not relocate. The time required for the organization to regain the expertise that would. be lost could be significant. A recent article in the GOVEXEC.com daily briefing dated June 21,2005 by David McGlinchey discusses this topic. The article is titled, "Government Reform chairman says base-closing plan could cause brain drain." The artic'le indicates that most people are more tied to their area/location than to their jobs and the BRAC commissioners need to factor this in. If the Navy Crane Center were moved to the Philadelphia Naval Business Center, the organization would remain in tact and the mission capabilities and operational readiness would not be affected.

Other Considerations: Item 5 Criterion five states that the HIWC commission is to consider, "The extent and timing of potential costs and savings, i11c:luding the number of years, beginning with the date of completion of the closure or realignment, for the savings to exceed the costs." To this extent, two scenarios were an-alyzed. One to move the Navy Crane Center from Lester, PA to the Norfolk Naval Shipyard (DON-01 54) and the other to move it to the Philadelphia Naval Business Center (DON-0160). Enclosure (3) to the Department of the Navy's Infrastructure Analysis Team (DON A1T)memorandum for the DON Analysis Group (DAG) dated 4 Februau-y 2005 contains slides dated 10 January 2005 that provide the financial information for :scenarios DON-01 54 and DON-0160. Paragraph 6 through 9 of the DON AIT memoranclum provides narrative discussion about the scenarios. Scenario DON-01 54 shows that the one-time cost to move the Navy Crane Center from Lester, PA to Norfolk Naval ;Shipyard is $3.781 million with a return on investment of 5 years. A significant part of the one-time cost is a Military Construction (MILCON) project for $1.13 million that would be required to bring the target building up to office standards. More recent COBRA reports show the MILCON costs to be $2.15 1 million. This increases the one-time c~o:jts to $4.802 million and extends the return on investment to 6 years. Scenario DON-0 160 shows that the one-time cost to move the Navy Crane Center from Lester, PA to the Philadelphia Naval Business Center is $973,000 with a return on investment of 2 years. This is approximately $4 million less than moving to Norfolk and provides return on investment 4 years sooner. The concluding slide states, "While DON-0160 is better financially, NAVFAC [Navy Crane Center's parent command] would prefer to be located in Norfolk." A note is included that says that the Navy Crane Center already has a detachment of 14 people in Norfolk. Paragraph 9 of the ll~epartment of the Navy's Infrastructure Analysis Team memorandum for the DON Analysis Group (DAG) dated 4 February 2005 states that, "CDR Clarke and CDR Flather informed the DAG that NCC has indicated a preference to relocate to Norfolk rather than PNBC in order to achieve operational synergies." Preferences and operational synergies are not included in the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) memorandum dated January 4,2005 that provides the 2005 Base Closure and Realignment Selection Criteria. The objective of BRAC is to close or realign installations in the most cost effective manner possible. By recommending to relocate the Navy Crane Center to Norfolk Naval Shipyard (scenario DON-0 154), the Navy Crane Center, NAVFAC, the DON Analysis Group, and the DON Infrastructure Analysis Team have disregarded the 2005 base closure and realignment selection criteria set forth by the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics).

Operational synergy is not wo~th $4 million of tax payer money. As stated on the concluding slide mentioned above, the Navy Crane Center already has a detachment of 14 people located in the Norfblk Naval Shipyard. This office includes in-service engineering personnel, local site representatives, and an audit team. These 14 people provide any operational synergy necessary for the installations in the Norfolk area. The Navy Crane Center provides services to over 200 Navy activities throughout the world. Navy Crane Center headquarte:rs located in Lester, PA as well as other field offices throughout the country provide services to all Navy activities. Our focus should not be just one shipyard. SECNAV Instruction 1 1260.2, dated 10 September 1997 states, "All Navy weight handling equipment must be p-operly operated, maintained, inspected, tested, and certified. Personnel involved in the weight handling program must be properly trained and qualified. To achieve these objectives, program policies must be established and consistently applied througholut the Navy shore establishment. Centralized oversight and technical control are required to ensure program compliance." The Navy Crane Center provides this centralized oversight and technical control in an independent manner. Locating the Navy Crane Center headquarters within one shipyard would destroy this independence. Having the N<avy Crane Center in Norfolk Naval Shipyard would not provide operational synergy, it would create a conflict of interest and cause one shipyard to have influence over decisions made by the Navy Crane Center. If the Navy Crane Center is located at the Philadelphia Naval Business Center there would be no conflict of interest. Items 6,7, and 8 Neither scenario DON-0154 nor DON-0160 would have a significant economic or environmental impact on the existing or receiving communities. Also, the infrastructure at both PNBC and Norfolk Naval Shipyard could support the additional personnel.

NAVY C RANE CENTER NAVY WEIGHT HANDLING PROGRAM ASHORE JULY 2005

SECNAVINST 11 260.2 4 Navy Weight Handling Program for Shore Activities,.LU*U,V-"-x--mmm-~&blYLYXTYILIYI I -"I lu I luxtyiliyi *YI I *YI I -- *.-.To Establish and Maintain a Safe and Effective Weight Handling Program.Assigns Responsibility for Direction and Oversight Through NAVFAC's Navy Crane Center - Policy - Training - CompliancelSafety.Audit Activities investigate Crane Accidents Communicate Lessons Learned - In-Service Technical Support - Acquisition

Navy Crane Center Mission Statement.We Lead the Navy's Shore Activity Weight Handling Program by Providing Engineering, Acquisition, Technical Support, Training, and Evaluation Services.Our Goal is to Achieve Safe and Reliable Weight Handling Programs Throughout the Navy

Navy Crane Center Organization DIRECTOR, NAVY CRANE CENTER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR1 DIRECTOR, ACQUISITION DIRECTOR, FIELD SUPPORT OPERATIONS SUPPORT t I NAYSEA COUNSEL 08 / LIAISON PROJ MGT & QA CRANE CONTRACTS DESIGN ENGINEERING I I SAFETY

= u Z C [XI m [XI 0 > a 0

Navy Crane Center Demographics @79 FTE; total aboard Navy Crane Center - ALL civilians (previous military position of Executive Director converted to civilian position in March 2005) - 55 aboard at NCC Headquarters Lester, PA @Average age of workforce - 49.4 for the 79 FTE - 50.8 for the 55 FTE at NCC Headquarters @Number eligible to retire - 45 of the 79 FTE (includes 22 eligible for Optional Retirement) - 31 of the 55 FTE at NCC HQ (includes 17 eligible for Opt Retirement)

V) C m 0 a =I m 'TI r m rn --I x F u - Z rn V) V)