Sustain the Mission Project (SMP) Overviewproceedings.ndia.org/JSEM2006/Wednesday/Fittipaldi.pdf ·...

22 March 2006 1Sustain the Mission — Secure the Future

Sustain the Mission Project (SMP) Overview

John J. Fittipaldi, CEP Senior Fellow

Army Environmental Policy Institute (AEPI)

2006 Joint Services Environmental Management ConferenceDenver, Colorado

22 March 2006


SMP Background

• Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff establish Army-wide Sustainability Policy with the initiation of the Army Strategy for the Environment (ASE) - signed October 1, 2004

• ASE Goals1. Foster a sustainability ethic 2. Strengthen Army operational capability 3. Meet current and future training, testing, and other mission

requirements4. Minimize impacts and total ownership costs 5. Enhance well-being 6. Drive innovation


SMP Background, cont.

Key Findings from AEPI’s Resource Architecture for the Environmental Strategy (RAES)(2005) Study:

• Strengthening operational capability and improving readiness are the two most important ASE Goals in terms of military value

• Existing Army tools and databases can be leveraged to support the ASE goals

• Tangible near-term successes from ASE implementation are key

• Work within existing Army processes—transform as the Army transforms


Purpose of SMP

To identify and facilitate opportunities to resource activities that implement Army Strategy for the Environment (ASE) goals.

– develop and demonstrate sustainability cost (and benefit) methodologies

– support integration among Army offices in support of ASE

– conduct workshop on sustainability analysis tools


Sustainability:Sustaining Army Missions Over Time

Operational CapabilityReadiness

Energy Savings

Pollution Reduction

Army Decision Makers should evaluate operational, energy, environmental and financial sustainability in the near and long term.

Payback

+

_

Decision MakerNear Term Long Term

Cost Avoidance/ Savings

Sustainability Threshold


What kinds of changes in capability is the Army looking for?

• Mobility• Lethality• Maneuverability• Weight Reduction• Deployment• Communications• Information Processing• Sustainable• Availability• Maintainability

• Storage• Perishability• Replacement• Affordability• Survivability• Protection• Stealth• Detection• Simplicity• Productivity

Any change that improves capability in:


What does Sustainability mean?

Sustainability (ASE): …simultaneously meeting current as well as future mission requirements worldwide, safeguarding human health, improves quality of life, and enhances the natural environment.

Sustainability (DoD): See military capability.

Military capability: (DoD) The ability to achieve a specified wartime objective (win a war or battle, destroy a target set). It includes four major components….a. force structure--Numbers, size, and composition of the units that comprise US defense forces; b. modernization--Technical sophistication of forces, units, weapon systems, and equipments. c. unit readiness--The ability to provide capabilities required by the combatant commanders to execute their assigned missions. This is derived from the ability of each unit to deliver the outputs for which it was designed. d.sustainability--The ability to maintain the necessary level and duration of operational activity to achieve military objectives. Sustainability is a function of providing for and maintaining those levels of ready forces, materiel, and consumables necessary to support military effort. (From DoD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms)


Overview of Requirements and Resource Processes

Change inForceStructure

-TAA- ACP/ Modularity

ValidateRequirements

PrioritizeRequirements

ProgramFunding

Decisions

CombatantCommanders

MACOM/PEOs

Army Doctrine (TRADOC)QDR

Strategic Planning Guidance (SPG)The Army Plan (TAP)

ACSIM

G3 HQDA G3-DAMO-CIR

PEGs

G3/G8

Identify TotalForce

Structure&

RelatedRequirements

(e.g. sustainment)

G3, G4ASA-ALTDASA-CE


Scope of SMP Cost Analysis

• Develop Methodology for assessing the full life-cycle costs of energy and water in the training base and contingency operations to sustain Army missions.

• Demonstrate SMP Cost Methodology for a case study unit in training and contingency operation scenarios using existing Army databases/processes.

• The Army installation: Existing methodologies identified for assessing the costs of energy and water.


Energy and Water Resources are Critical to Army Sustainability

• BRAC 05 revealed that the most critical sustainability factors were energy, water (and land) (out of 100+ factors)

• Energy and water/wastewater make up about 40% of DOD baseops costs– $3.261 billion for energy (35%)– $.462 billion for water/wastewater (5%)

• About 56 million gallons of fuel are consumed by US forces per month in the Iraq theater

The ultimate weapon runs on water; everything else runs on fuel


Costs to Sustain Training:

– Energy and Water Cost Methodology– SBCT at Fort Lewis


Scope of Cost Analysis for Unit Training

DESC sells fuel to unit at the installation

Energy

Water

Fuelconsumed by unit

Unit purchases bottled water

Potable waterconsumed by unit

Garrison purchases potable water services

Unit receives, maintains, trains with mobile water support systems

Unit receives, maintains, trains with fuel support systems

Unit purifies naturally occurring water resources


Energy Costs in Unit TrainingCase study: 3rd SBCT 2nd ID, Fort Lewis (2002 training)

DESC sells fuel to unit at the installation

(annual consumption: 462,048 gallons)

Unit receives, maintains, trains with fuel support systems

Annual fuel cost: $924,096.33 ($2.00/gallon)

Annualized capital cost: $307,948.77

Annualized repairs/spares: $78,275.99

All costs expressedin 2006 dollars

Full annual ownership cost:

$1,310,321.09($2.84/gallon)

($327.66/soldier)


Water Costs in Unit TrainingCase study: 3rd SBCT 2nd ID, Fort Lewis (2002 training)

Unit purchases bottled water(70% of annual consumption: 3,238,996 gallons)

Garrison purchases potable water services(20% of annual consumption: 925,427 gallons)

Unit receives, maintains, trains with mobile water support systems

All costs expressedin 2006 dollars

Annual cost: $12,444,848.01

Annual cost: $893.24

Annualized capital cost: $65,743.94

Annualized repairs/spares: $35,334.37

Unit purifies naturally occurring water resources(10% of annual consumption: 462,714 gallons)

Annual cost: $0.00

Full annual ownership cost (4,627,137gallons):

$12,546,819.56 ($2.71/gallon)

($3,137.49/soldier)


Observations

• SMP Costing provides a baseline for evaluating the value added of investments in Army sustainability

• Comparison of $/soldier across domains

$327.66

$3,137.49

Training Base: Ft.

Lewis

$327.66

$7,439.69

Contingency Operations

$69.70Heating/Cooling

$294.45Electrical Services

Energy

$40.32Water

Garrison (From SBC)


Concluding Remarks

• SMP developed and demonstrated a cost/benefit methodology using existing Army databases and processes for evaluating key naturalresources (energy and water) required to sustain: – contingency operations (Strengthen Operational Capability) – unit training (Meet current and future training, testing, and other

mission requirements)• Using existing Army databases, metrics and processes; costs (and

benefits) of energy and water resources can be integrated withinand across garrison, training base, and operational missions in support of sustainability analysis (Minimize impacts and total ownership costs)

• Energy & Water Cost Factors developed in SMP will be used in theArmy Contingency Operations Cost Model (ACM) and FORCES Cost Model, which are distributed Army-wide.


Acknowledgements

• Concurrent Technologies CorporationMr. Dave EadyMs. Anne Kaltenhauser

• Energy and Security GroupMr. Steve Siegel Ms. Kris StroupMs. Thayer Tomlinson, Ms. Heather Webb, and Mr. Steve Bell

Sustain the Mission Project (SMP) Overviewproceedings.ndia.org/JSEM2006/Wednesday/Fittipaldi.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of Sustain the Mission Project (SMP) Overviewproceedings.ndia.org/JSEM2006/Wednesday/Fittipaldi.pdf ·...