PMP Charter Portfolio Sample Redacted

1
Enclosure (1)
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND HEADQUARTERS
WASHINGTON NAVY YARD, DC 20376
NAVSEASYSCOM
5216
Ser NXX/XX
From: Program Manager (PM), MAAC Ships, NAVSEA 21, PMS-407
COMNAVSEASYSCOM
Subj: LHD MAINTENANCE AND MODERNIZATION PROGRAM (MMP) PROGRAM
MANAGEMENT PLAN (PMP)
Ref: (a) SECNAVINST M-5216.5
(b) NAVSEA TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION TS9090-310E
(c) NAVSEA TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDANCE, SHIP CHANGE
DOCUMENT (SCD) TS9090-400A
(d) NAVSEA TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS, SHIP ALTERATIONS
PREPARATION TS9090-600A
(e) JOINT FLEET MAINTENANCE MANUAL (JFMM),
COMUSFLTFORCOMINST 4790.3, Rev C
(f) COMLHDRON LHD-1 Class Maintenance and Modernization
Baseline Requirements, 30 Sep 2010
(g) LHD-1 Class Execution Plan (CEP)
(h) SURFMEPP Technical Foundation Paper for LHD-1 WASP
Class
(i) RDML Creevy, USN, brief, “Use of PMI Standards for
Ship Maintenance Management”, 27 Jan 15
Encl: (1) Landing, Helicopter Dock (LHD-1), WASP Class
Maintenance and Modernization Program (MMP) Program
Management Plan (PMP) dtd 18 Sep 14
1. Purpose. The WASP Class Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships
are key elements that make up the primary element of the U.S.
Navy’s/USMC’s Amphibious and Expeditionary force. These ships
are facing issues of obsolescence in regards to the currently
installed Combat Systems suites, as described in reference (d);

2
Enclosure (1)
and as well as Hull, Mechanical and Electrical (HM&E) equipment.
The uniqueness of the steam propulsion of the LHD-1 Class
requires significant attention in major engineering maintenance,
overhaul and upgrade.
a. Facts. The following facts impact LHD-1 Class commonality
and maintenance duration, and in turn play a significant role
towards the class reaching expected service life.
(1) The Legacy Combat Systems (ACDS Blk 1 and 0) are
unable to maintain pace with the high threat environment. The
follow on to ACDS is SSDS MK II (CAPSTONE), which is the Program
of Record (POR). CAPSTONE installation requires a significant
maintenance period. SSDS MK II is currently installed in LHD-7
and LHD-8. A modified version of SSDS MK II (minus NSSM
integration) is installed on LHD-1. Other programs that are non
HM&E in nature include the following Programs of Record (POR),
which are considered major components of the LHD MMP: CANES (PMW
750), Joint Strike Fighter (JSF, PMS-470) and major HM&E
Installs (including, but not limited to, the following:
Propulsion Management Program (PMP), Propulsion Auxiliary
Control System (PACS), Brushless Generators and HES-C).
(2) Intentions. The LHD Mid-Life Project Management Team
(PMT) has been created to identify, coordinate, manage and
address LHD-1 Class issues associated with Maintenance Drivers,
Obsolescence, Training and Legacy Equipment. The PMT is also
chartered to facilitate the integration of major modernization,
to include, but not limited to: CAPSTONE, CANES, JSF and HM&E
Modernization. Due to the complexity of scheduling and
budgeting, the PMT is chartered with facilitating the execution
of modernization across the LHD Mid-Life Period. Coordination
with key stakeholders (SURFMEPP, TYCOM, USMC, etc…) is critical
in achieving a successful Mid-Life Period.
(3) Procedures. The project will integrate improved combat
systems technology solutions and robust maintenance and
engineering improvements in order to establish a more vigorous
WASP class warship, extending the product life of each ship as
dictated by the Director, Expeditionary Warfare (OPNAV N95).
(4) Mission. The LHD Program Maintenance and Modernization
Team (PMT), as created and directed by PMS-470, will undertake

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

4
Enclosure (1)
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

5
Enclosure (1)
Enclosure (1)
LHD Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization
Program (MMP)
Program Management Plan (PMP)

6
Enclosure (1)
Enclosure (1)
TABLE OF CHANGES AND DRAFTS
CHANGE / DRAFT DATE SUBMITTED RECIPIENTS CHANGE/UPDATE BY
DRAFT #1 NOV 2011 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
DRAFT #2 FEB 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
DRAFT #3 MAR 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
DRAFT #4 APR 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)
ADDED
APR 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
DRAFT #5 MAY 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
DRAFT #6 AUG 2012 ALION PM, PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
OPNAV N95 LTR DRAFT “LHD MID-
LIFE MMP” OBJECTIVES ADDED AND
PMP UPDATED (LTR DTD 06 SEP 12)
SEP 2012 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
UPDATED STAFFING PLAN OCT 2012 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
UPDATED USS BONHOMME RICHARD
(LHD 2) TO FDNF
NOV 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
FIRST ML AVAIL TO 07/13/16 NOV 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED ESC BRIEF TO COMM MATIRX NOV 2012 PMS 470, LHD PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED INTEGRATED SURVEYS TO PPS
SECTION
DEC 2012 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED NAB TO COMM MATRIX DEC 2012 PMT, NAB MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED THERMAL MANAGEMENT TO
COMM MATRIX
DEC 2012 PMT, SYNDICATES, THERMAL
MANAGEMENT GROUP
MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED CORROSION SYNDICATE TO
COMM MATRIX
DEC 2012 PMT, SYNDICATES, THERMAL
MANAGEMENT GROUP
MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED ANNUAL STRATEGIC
PLANNING CONFERENCE TO COMM
MATRIX
JAN 2013 PMT, SYNDICATES MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
UPDATED PMP JAN 2013 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED LESSONS LEARNED
MANAGEMENT PLAN (LLMP)
FEB 2013 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED MID-LIFE JFMM / CNO
TYPICAL AVAIL PLANNING
MILESTONES, ANNEX G
APR 2013 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
REMOVED CIRCULAR NAVSEA CREST JUL 2013 PMS 470, PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
UPDATED STAFFING PLAN AUG 2013 PMT MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
DRAFT #10 AUG 2013 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED CAPT (S) CRONE, USN,
SIGNATURE BLOCK
AUG 2013 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED “SUBJECT TO CONTINUOUS
CHANGE” TO SUMMARY BUDGET
TITLE
AUG 2013 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA
ADDED “MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING (MOU)” AS THE
FIRST SECTION OF THE PMP.
SEP 2014 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA, PMP
UPDATED SUMMARY MILESTONE
SCHEDULE, ADDED SCD FIELDING
PLAN, ADDED PRELIMINARY BUDGET
SEP 2014 PMT, PMS-470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA, PMP
UPDATED LIST OF TABLES AND LIST
OF FIGURES
SEP 2014 PMT, PMS-470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA, PMP
UPDATED LHD MMP ORGANIZATION
CHARTS (TYCOM, PMS-470)
SEP 2014 PMT, PMS 470 MICHAEL A. ESPARZA, PMP

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PLAN (PMP)
7
Enclosure (1)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 1
TABLE OF CHANGES AND DRAFTS 6
PROGRAM CHARTER, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9
PROGRAM PURPOSE/JUSTIFICATION 9
BUSINESS NEED/CASE 9
BUSINESS OBJECTIVES 10
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 11
THE USMC AND THE LHD MID-LIFE PROGRAM 11
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND SUCCESS CRITERIA 12
LHD MID-LIFE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM AND MID-LIFE ORGANIZATION 15
PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS/CONSTRAINTS 18
ASSUMPTIONS 20
ACTIONS PRIOR TO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITY EXECUTION: SHIP’S INSTALLATION DRAWING (SID) AND
SHIP CHANGE DOCUMENT (SCD) 21
ACTIONS PRIOR TO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITY EXECUTION: LHD-1/LHD-5 PPS/IS 25
PROGRAM PRELIMINARY SCOPE STATEMENT 25
LHD MID-LIFE SCD GUIDELINES 26
PROGRAM RISKS 27
PROGRAM PILLARS 28
PROGRAM SYNDICATES 32
SUMMARY MILESTONE SCHEDULE 29-30
SUMMARY MID-LIFE FIELDING PLAN 31-33
SUMMARY MID-LIFE BUDGET 34
PROGRAM APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS/PMR’S SUBMISSION 36
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. PROGRAM PILLARS 11
FIGURE 2. LHD MID-LIFE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART 15
FIGURE 3. LHD MID-LIFE PMT, CORE 18
FIGURE 4. PROGRESSIVE MAINTENANCE WITHIN MID-LIFE, USS KEARSARGE (LHD 3) EXAMPLE 19

8
Enclosure (1)
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. LIST OF WASP CLASS SHIPS THAT WILL UNDERGO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITIES 10
TABLE 2. SUMMARY MILESTONE SCHEDULE OF LHD 1-7 MID LIFE AVAILS START TO FINISH 21
TABLE 3. LHD MID-LIFE PERIOD SCDS 21-23
TABLE 4. LISTING OF TOP 25 MAINTENANCE DRIVERS 24
TABLE 5. LHD MID-LIFE BASELINE SUMMARY MILESTONES 29-30
TABLE 6. SUMMARY BASELINE SCD FIELDING PLAN 31-33
TABLE 7. LHD MID-LIFE NOTIONAL BUDGET FY 14, OMN/OPN, FY 15-25 34-35
LIST OF ANNEXES
ANNEX A - RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP) 37
ANNEX B – LHD MID-LIFE STAFFING PLAN 45
ANNEX C – COMMUNICATIONS PLAN 52
ANNEX D – LESSONS LEARNED MANAGEMENT PLAN 59
ANNEX E – JOINT FLEET MAINTENANCE MANUAL MILESTONES 63
ANNEX F- COMBAT SYSTEMS INTERFACE PLAN (WARFARE SYSTEMS INTERFACE DIAGRAMS) 69
ANNEX G-HM&E INTEGRATION PLAN 74

9
Enclosure (1)
PROGRAM CHARTER, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The WASP Class Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships are national assets that make up the primary elements
the U.S. Navy’s / USMC’s Amphibious and Expeditionary force. These ships are facing issues of obsolescence
in regards to the currently installed Combat Systems suites and Engineering HM&E equipment. This situation
results in the Amphibious Big Deck ships being unable to adequately operate and fight at peak efficiency.
The LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT) has been established to address, identify and integrate
solutions to correct the combat systems and Hull Maintenance and Electrical (HM&E) issues onboard the
WASP class ships, and to modernize the ships in order to better be able to respond to assigned national
tasking. While the SSDS MK II CAPSTONE install is a cornerstone to LHD Mid-Life, the project also
encompasses various major HM&E maintenance and modernization jobs, aviation improvements for aviation
support of expected airframes, and significant upgrades to major auxiliary systems that are intended to
increase combat readiness.
The project will integrate improved combat systems technology solutions and robust maintenance and
engineering improvements in order to establish a more vigorous WASP class warship, extending the product
life of each ship as dictated by national security requirements and the Director, Expeditionary Warfare
(OPNAV N95).
PROGRAM PURPOSE/JUSTIFICATION
The purpose of the LHD Mid-Life Program is to combine the efforts of the various stakeholders and primary
decision makers of the Program (the Program Sponsor being PMS 470) and present a uniform means of
execution to the major elements of the maintenance and modernization efforts for the WASP Class ships;
thereby extending the product lifecycle of each ship in the class to 40 years and beyond; improving the
combat readiness of America’s Amphibious and Expeditionary force. These ships are facing issues
Business Need/Case
The business objectives for this program are in direct support of the PMS-470. Accordingly, LHD-ML
requirements are intended to transform the Navy's integrated warfare investment strategy into
affordable enabling systems through: synchronized modernization and depot level maintenance of
existing capabilities, and the installation of new operational capabilities to meet validated needs. LHD-
ML program requirements shall improve Hull Maintenance and Engineering (HM&E) system control,
reliability, availability and survivability; integrate new aviation and combat system capability; and enable
LHD-1 Class ships to meet full Expected Service Life (ESL) of 40 years with creditable combat relevance,

10
Enclosure (1)
at lower Total Ownership Cost (TOC). Further, expected fiscal pressures and increased investment
consequence of LHD-ML’s scope and complexity makes critical the mid-life availability effective
execution within allocated resources. As framed within the CNO’s Sailing Directions, “We will address
economic change by being effective and efficient. We will innovate to: Sustain our fleet capability
through effective maintenance [and] timely modernization.”
This document is intended to be the source document to be referred to by all stakeholders as the primary
reference in the execution of the program. The Engineering Integration Plan (EIP), so called to differentiate
the document from this Program Management Plan (PMP), is a very specific and detailed engineering plan
that contains all the engineering tasks, schedules, technical requirements and testing plans for LHD Mid-Life,
and is a critical part and sub-plan of this PMP; and will be written by the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) at
NSWCCD-SSES and submitted via the appropriate chains of command for approval. The Combat Systems
Interface Plan (CSIP) is also a very specific and detailed engineering plan that contains all the combat systems
engineering tasks, schedules, requirements and Systems Operational Verification Tests (SOVTs) no later than
(NLT) 12 months prior to the first targeted Mid-Life Availability start date. It must be noted, however, that the
PMT will set regular due dates into the POAM where NSWCCD-SSES and NSWC PHD will be required to submit
draft portions of the EIP and CSIP respectively, so that the Program Manager can deconflict and synchronize
the various operational, engineering and combat systems schedules and maintain the program on track. Thus,
the twelve months prior to date is merely a formality, as NSWCCD-SSES and NSWC PHD will have been
submitting working copies of the EIP and CSIP to the PMT as soon as the work required starts to become
identified and defined. In the event of a conflict between the PMP, EIP or CSIP, the PMP will be considered
the primary document, and the matter referred to the Executive Steering Committee (ESC), for further
adjudication to the appropriate members of the Chain of Command. Table 1 presents those ships that will be
undergoing the Mid-Life Availability, with homeport included.
Ship (WASP Class) Homeport
USS WASP (LHD 1) Norfolk, VA
USS ESSEX (LHD 2) San Diego, CA
USS KEARSARGE (LHD 3) Norfolk, VA
USS BOXER (LHD 4) San Diego, CA
USS BATAAN (LHD 5) Norfolk, VA
USS BONHOMME RICHARD (LHD 6) Sasebo, JA
USS IWO JIMA (LHD 7) Mayport, FL
USS MAKIN ISLAND (LHD 8) San Diego, CA
Table 1. Ships of the WASP Class to undergo LHD Mid-Life starting in FY-16 with USS ESSEX (LHD 2). Source: Naval Register of Ships,
INTERNET, available at http://www.nvr.navy.mil/
Business Objectives
• Develop annual balanced, optimized, integrated and funded Maintenance and Modernization Execution
Plans for shipyards and Regional Maintenance Center (RMCs).
• Execute the Maintenance and Modernization Execution Plan with accountability for results using metrics.

11
Enclosure (1)
• Apply Continuous Process Improvements to reduce maintenance Life Cycle costs.
• Apply Risk Mitigation Strategies, by using Risk RADAR; by using the formal application of Risk
Identification Methods, creation of a Risk Register, and periodic review of the register by the Risk
Management Board (RMB). Specifics of the Risk Management Strategy will be contained in the Risk
Management Plan (RMP), Annex A, of this PMP.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The LHD Mid-Life Program will ensure 40 years ship service life. More specifically, it will meet the
organizational and Strategic Business Plan needs of the Program Sponsor, PMS 470, and fulfill the mission
requirements of the U.S. Navy. Combat readiness will be improved utilizing improved technology in the form
of combat systems and engineering upgrades in order to maximize operational employability and ship service
life. Mid-Life actions will be executed in accordance with the LHD Program Management Plan (PMP), which is
the guiding document in the management and execution of the LHD Mid-Life program. All the HM&E and
combat systems work (identified by the seven Pillars of Mid-Life, figure 1, below: Main Propulsion, Amphibious
Systems, Auxiliaries, C5I, Environmental, Habitability and Maintenance1
) will in turn be governed and executed
in accordance with the Engineering
Integration Plan (EIP), and the Combat
Systems Interface Plan (CSIP). The entire plan
(referred to collectively as the PMP) is
intended to be an evolving document,
referred to periodically, and maintained for
audit, record and lessons learned purposes.
The PMP is designed to manage WASP Class
ships during their Mid-Life period; to
accomplish the Mid-Life objectives, while
allowing the other ships of the class to deploy,
operate, and train.
The United States Marine Corps (USMC) and the LHD Mid-Life Program
As the main battery of the world’s greatest expeditionary force, the USMC holds a large stake in the
successful execution and outcome of the LHD Mid-Life Program. Each Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU)
1 Robert P. Irelan, “Pillars and Syndicates” 25 Aug 2011, Power Point Brief, American Systems, INTERNET, available at https://extranet.americansystems.com

12
Enclosure (1)
deploys self-sufficiently, with the ability to maintain itself for an extended period of time. Their mode of
transport and habitability, their means of sustenance, exercise and planning all depend on one thing: an
able ship that is properly maintained, sufficiently modernized, and able to embark/debark approved USMC
equipment and gear in an expeditious manner.
Headquarters, Marine Corps (HQMC) addressed those areas of the Mid-Life Program that were of interest
to the Marine Corps2
, specifically the Vehicle Stowage Areas (VSAs) of the Assault Ships. Upon
investigation of the Vehicle Stowage Areas (VSAs) of three LHDs, it was found that numerous lights and fire
sprinkler heads had been bent by USMC vehicles and rolling stock during embark, debark and stowage
maneuvers. Initial analysis revealed that that the damage was significant – and could have resulted in
safety related issues.
Initial recommendations received from the Marine Corps called for the use of recessed lighting and piping
systems, the installation of more fresh water and air connections (recessed appropriately would contribute
to efficient use of stowage space and facilitate greater movement and increased efficiency in AMW
Operations) and more electrical connections could be used in the upper VSA to power mobile loaded 20ft
Maintenance Vans.
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND SUCCESS CRITERIA
A program is a process or collection of related projects organized to gain benefits from the projects
collectively; in this case, all the ships of the WASP Class. LHDs 1-8 are individual projects which will serve as
templates for each successive project; and together the projects make up the LHD Mid-Life Program. The
objectives which mutually support the milestones and deliverables for this program have been initially
identified. It must be understood that a program this complex is one of progressive elaboration: early on in
the program, change will be high. This will wane as the program (and each project) nears completion.
Keeping that firmly in mind, in order to achieve success with the LHD Mid-Life Program, the following
objectives must be met within the designated time and budget allocations, while maintaining the mission
scope. The following represent general LHD-ML program requirements executed through the efficiency of
single duration Mid-Life Period, informed by a detailed availability analysis) which includes synchronized
maintenance and modernization objectives by NNSY and SURFMEPP, and supported by an effective
contracting strategy. Please note funding challenges may cause these requirements to be prioritized.
a. Aviation
(1) Pri-Fly Reconfiguration
2 Headquarters, Marine Corps, Seabasing Integration Division “LHD VISITS – USS WASP, USS KEARSARGE, USS IWO JIMA [sic]” 30 Sep 11

13
Enclosure (1)
(2) MV-22 Shop Modifications
(3) MV 22 Topside Modifications
(4) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Integration
b. Propulsion
(1) Install Power Management Platform
(2) Install Propulsion Auxiliary Control System
(3) Boiler System Improvements
(4) Machinery Control Improvements to include a prognostic Machinery Monitoring System
c. Survivability
(1) Weight and Moment Compensation
(2) Install Fuel Oil Compensation System
(3) Damage Control Upgrades
d. C4I/C5I/IC
(1) Install SSDS MK II Capstone
(2) Install SPS 48-G
(3) Install CANES
(4) Install ESSM
(5) Address IC obsolescence issues

14
Enclosure (1)
(6) Incorporate Navy Amphibious Baseline
e. Logistics - Steam Plant/Steam System component obsolescence resolution and new system NTSPs
f. Assault
(1) Replace LCPL with RHIB Davit
(2) Remove Monorail System
(3) Ballast/Deballast System Improvements
(4) Address Maintenance driver issues associated with Folding Vehicle Ramp, Stern Gate,
Aircraft Elevators, and Side Port Doors
g. Maintenance: Ensuring maintenance backlog and fleet maintenance burdens are reduced within
resource constraints.
h. Planning - Develop a comprehensive LHD-ML acquisition strategy that collaboratively aligns Fleet
Scheduling with a fully developed Mid-Life Availability Plan that includes: Organizational Roles &
Responsibilities:
(1) Management: Program management including oversight, metrics, communication,
scheduling products: Advanced Planning / Production schedule
(2) Planning, Estimating & Advance Planning Products: Automated Work Requests, Work
Packages, Schedules, Late Adds, Package Locks, Ship Checks, Assessments, Ship's Force
Assessments
(3) Design Products: Availability Analysis, Legacy System Integration, shipboard distributed
systems impact analysis
(4) Material / Tools: Information, information systems, facilities, or tools

15
Enclosure (1)
(5) Technical Instructions: Technical manuals, policies, milestones Ship Install Drawings (SIDs),
Liaison / Reverse Liaison Action Reports (LAR, RLAR)
(6) Contracts & Funding: Contracting vehicle requirements, Award Fee Board Contracting
Products: Technical Review, Definitization, CFR, RCCs, Work Specs
(7) Testing: Pre-Installation Testing and Check-Out (PITCO) and Post-Installation Integrated
Testing
LHD MID-LIFE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM (PMT) AND MID-LIFE ORGANIZATION
The Program Management Team (PMT) for LHD M-L consists of personnel working to support the program at
various levels. These personnel are then confirmed as resources by the working level program manager in
accordance with the PMR’s directions, orders, this plan, and other directives that will serve to bring the
project in on budget, on time, and within scope. This program is different from other Mid-Life programs (LSD,
for example), in that it is being managed, from start to finish, as a program, and each hull, as a project,3
as far
as it is practicable within the constraints and margins that exist within Navy culture and the Acquisition
community.
For each member of the team, it is vitally important to know the cultural climate, enterprise environmental
factors and the organizational structure they are working in; in order to adapt quickly and minimize stress,
learn the basic fundamentals of the job they are assigned, and to immediately start contributing ideas to the
LHD Mid-Life Process.
LHD Mid-Life Program Organization
3 “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide)”, 5th Edition, Project Management Institute, 2004

16
Enclosure (1)
ADM Jonathan Greenert, USN
Chief of Naval Operations
(CNO)
N00
VADM Bill Burke, USN
Deputy CNO for Warfare
Systems
N9
MGEN Robert S. “Whaler” Walsh, USMC,
Director, Expeditionary Warfare N95
CAPT Erik Ross, USN,
Amphibious Warfare,
N953
CAPT Tim Crone, USN
PMS 470
Program Manager
SEA 21/Surface Warfare
Directorate
Mr. Bradley Smith
PMS 470
Deputy Program
Manager
Mr. William Boozer
PMS 470
Senior Class Manager
Mr. Harry Search
PMS 470RC2
LHA/LHD/LPD4/LCC
Class Manager
Mr. Dan Allen
Assistant, Military
Analyst
Mr. Christopher Cundiff
PMS 470RBC2A
LHA/LHD/LPD4/LCC
Deputy Class Manager
Ms. Majorie Winston
PMS 470
Class Manager
Mr. Robert Irelan
Program Manager’s
Representative
(PMR)
LHD Mid-Life Lead
Mr. Michael Gwinn
LHD MMP Chief Engineer
Project Manager
Mr. Michael A. Esparza
PMP
Project Manager/C5I
Mr. Fred Wilhelm
Waterfront
Operations Officer
Ms. Jennifer Deardon
Sharepoint Site
Admin
VADM Thomas S. Rowden, USN
COMNAVSURPAC
(CNSP)
N00
CAPT Wiliam J. Parker III, USN
Chief of Staff (CoS)
N01
Mr. L. Stone
Deputy ACOS
Engineering Readiness
N43A
LCDR Nathan Beach, USN
CNSP Type Desk Officer
N43E
Mr. Wally Porter
CNSP Type Desk
N43E
Mr. Ryan Benoit
LHD 2 Port Engineer
Mr. Don Gabriel
LHD 2 Program
Manager
Mr. Matt Davis
LHD 4 Port Engineer
Mr. Jerry Knau
LHD 4 Program
Manager
Mr. Jerry Selph
LHD 6 Port Engineer
Mr. Don Owens
LHD 6 Program
Manager
Mr. Todd Stubblefield
LHD 8 Port Engineer
Mr. Andy Sellers
LHD 8 Program
Manager
Mr. John Nasshan
LHD 2/4 CS Port
Engineer
Mr. Gary Judd
LHD 6 CS Port
Engineer
Mr. Scott Hess
LHD 8 CS Port
Engineer
RADM Pete A. Gumataotao. USN
COMNAVSURFLANT
(CNSL)
N00
RDML Brian LaRoche, USN
Deputy Commander
N00D
CAPT Douglas Nashold, USN
N01
CAPT William “Rick” Tate, USN
ACOS Material Readiness
N43
CAPT , William Henderson, USN
Deputy ACOS, N43A
CDR C. Wiilams, USN
Amphib Type Desk
Manager N43EA1
Mr. Larry Favor
Amphib Type Desk
Mr. Time Spence
LHD 1 Port Engineer
Mr. Modestine Sivels
LHD 1 Program
Manager
Mr. Chuck Murphy
LHD 3 Port Engineer
Mr. Kevin Bolen
LHD 3 Program
Manager
Mr. Tom Bourgelas
LHD 5 Port Engineer
Mr. Todd Sandhoff
LHD 5 Program
Manager
Mr. Chris Stern
LHD 7 Port Engineer
Mr. Leon Carver
LHD 7 Program
Manager
Mr. David Close
LHD 1/7 CS Port
Engineer
Mr. John Lassiter
LHD 3/5 CS Port
Engineeer
Program Sponsor Group (PSG)
Mr. Jess Matudio
ESG-2 Liaison PMR
Mr. Jim Wheeler
Japan PMS 470 PMR
Mr. Steve Severs
NASSCO LHD PM
Mr. Dave Muise
PMS 470 CS PMR
Mr. Mark Hochstetler
PMS 470 PMR
Mr. Bill Wood
BAE Project
Manager
Class Management Team (CMT)
LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT)
Ms. Sharon Mcilnay
PMS 470
Waest Coast Class
Manager
RADM Christopher J. Paul, USN
Deputy Commander
CAPT Ron Cook, USN
ACOS, N43
Mr. Bob Flynn
PMS 470 CS PMR
ESG-2
Figure 2. LHD Mid-Life Organization by Stakeholder Group. Source: LHD Mid-Life PMT, Michael A. Esparza, PMP
The LHD Mid-Life Program Organization Stakeholder groups (fig. 3). The efforts, resources, skills and
specialties necessary to execute the Mid-Life package are significant; thus, the number of specialized
organizations involved and personnel. All of these groups work in collaboration with one another to
achieve the end objective: a fully modernized and maintained amphibious assault warship, that has kept
paced with the threat, continued to evolve with the Marine Corps, and has an expected product life cycle
of 50 years. When adjudication is required on a matter that cannot be worked out between the
stakeholders themselves, the matter will be referred to the PMT, so that the PMR can promptly notify the
Program Manager, PMS 470, as soon as practicable, preferably in writing, of the nature of the dispute, the
issue at hand, and the impact of non-resolution. The Program Manager, in this case PMS 470, will refer
the matter to the appropriate agencies and members of the Chain of Command for resolution, within a
reasonable amount of time. PMS 470 will also notify the PMT if work must cease or can continue while the
issue is being resolved.
The Program Sponsor Group (OPNAV N95) handles the financials of the WASP Class ships, and ensures
that the PMT is executing the proper actions to ensure that the mission objective is being met. The PSG

17
Enclosure (1)
also represents the WASP Class ships to the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO’s) Staff, N95, Director of
Expeditionary Warfare.
The Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT) is a cadre of Amphibious Warfare professionals selected
to manage the day-to-day operations of the Mid-life Program. The PMT takes care of LHD Mid-Life
business 24/7 – this is the PMT’s primary duty. The Team Lead, known as the Program Manager’s
Representative (PMR), reports to the LHD Class Manager, Program Manager, PMS 470.
The Class Management Team (PMS-470) Group. A group of professionals/ship-type experts who are
adept in engineering (both CS and HM&E), Ship Class maintenance, budget, finance, logistics and other
duties specific to a class. They are familiar with the long term ship life cycle maintenance philosophies and
methodologies for docking, undocking, Board of Inspection and Survey (INSURV) preparation and follow
up. They interact with the LHD PMT on a routine basis.
Engineering Group, NSWCCD-SSES. Naval Surface Warfare Center, Caderock Division - Ship System
Engineering Station, Philadelphia, PA. The Navy's primary technical expertise and facilities for both naval
machinery research and development and naval machinery life cycle engineering. A Primary stakeholder
in the LHD Mid-Life effort, the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) at SSES will be drafting, reviewing and
submitting for approval to the appropriate authorities within the Chain of Command the Engineering
Integration Plan (EIP). Once approved, SSES will present the EIP to the PMT, who will authorize its
execution, and report commencement to the PSG.
Engineering Group, NSWC PHD. Naval Surface Warfare Center, Port Hueneme Division, California. The
mission of NSWC PHD is to Integrate, Test, Evaluate and Provide Life-Cycle Engineering and Logistics for
Surface Warfare Systems. NSWC PHD will be responsible for drafting, reviewing and submitting for
approval to the appropriate authorities within the Chain of Command the Combat Systems Interface Plan
(CSIP). Once approved, NSWC PHD will present the approved CSIP to the PMT, who will authorize its
execution, and report commencement to the PSG.
Engineering Group, SURFMEPP. Surface Maintenance and Engineering Planning Program, provides
centralized Surface Ship lifecycle maintenance engineering, class management and modernization
planning, and management of maintenance strategies aligned with and responsive to National, Fleet,
Surface Type Commanders, and NAVSEA needs and priorities. SURFMEPP develops and issues several core
lifecycle planning, budgeting, and work package execution documents designed to achieve the expected
service life for non-nuclear surface ships.
Type Commanders (TYCOM), East and West. Commander, Naval Surface Forces, Atlantic
(COMNAVSURFLANT) and Commander, Naval Surface Forces (COMNAVSURFOR) are the Type

18
Enclosure (1)
Commanders (TYCOMS) for the east and west coast, respectively. The commanders are in the
administrative chain of command of each ship of the surface force; and the Type Commanders are
responsible for the manning, training, equipping and maintaining of each unit under their command. In
daily interactions with the LHD Mid-Life Program, the Type Commander will share operational and
scheduling information, provide technical expertise and recommendations via the Type Desk and, most
importantly, provide access to their assigned U.S. Navy Port Engineers.
Integrators Group. This is the group of organizations whose primary responsibility is to ensure that there
is a seamless integration of warfare and combat systems into presently existing systems and combat
suites. The groups that readily come to mind are COMSPAWARSYSCENLANT, NAVAIR 1.2, SPAWAR PMW
750, PEO C4I and PEO IWS 10.0.
LHD Mid-Life Core Program Management Team (PMT) (fig. 4) can be considered the commissioning team of
the LHD Mid-Life program. They are considered the “Core” of the LHD Mid-life Team because they have been
involved with the program since its inception, and have laid the foundations, processes and philosophies of
the Mid-Life program; in conjunction with the Fleet, the Program Sponsor, and the Class Managers. The core
team consists of six positions:
Robert P. Irelan
LHD Mid-Life Hull Manager
Program Manager’s Representative (PMR)
Team Lead
Fred Wilhelm
Waterfront Operations
Manager
Michael A. Esparza, PMP
Program/Project Manager
C5I Officer
Jennifer Deardon
Sharepoint Administrative Support
(Part Time)
LHD MID-LIFE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM (PMT)
Michael Gwinn
Program/Project Manager
Figure 3. LHD Mid-Life Core PMT. Source: LHD Mid-Life PMT, Michael A. Esparza, PMP
LHD Hull Manager, Program Manager’s Representative (PMR). Robert P. Irelan
Waterfront Fleet Representative (Fleet Rep). Fred Wilhelm.
LHD MMP Chief Engineer (Hull, Mechanical and Electrical (HM&E). Michael Gwinn.
Senior Combat Systems Engineer/Project Manager (SCSE). Michael A. Esparza, PMP.
Sharepoint Site Administrative Support (Part Time). Jennifer Deardon.
PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

19
Enclosure (1)
This program must meet the following requirements in order to achieve success.
1. Each LHD Mid-Life Period (which includes the Pre, Mid-Life and Post Avails) must be executed on
schedule and on budget.
2. Mid-Life periods must be implemented without disruption to scheduled operations and
deployments. At this point, it must be noted that the program is also designed to be flexible and open
to adjustment when necessary. The Program Sponsor has indicated4
that all the engineering work
need not be executed within just one Window of Opportunity (WOO)/Availability, but can be spread
out between two or more; and that the preceding and follow on Continuous Maintenance Availabilities
(CMAVs) and regularly scheduled Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Phased Maintenance Availabilities
(PMAs) could absorb some of the Mid-Life work, if adequately planned; and time, scope and cost allow
(see figure 5). In the context of LHD Mid-Life, this known as Progressive Maintenance, as it progresses
the maintenance effort towards fulfilling the objective of a fully maintained and modernized assault
ship, capable of reaching a 40 year service life. Requirements may be added as necessary, with
Program Sponsor approval, as the program, and each project, moves forward.
ID Task Name Start Finish Duration
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1
1 PMA96d3/12/201410/30/2013PMA
2 PMA96d6/22/20162/10/2016PMA
3 PMA96d1/16/20199/5/2018PMA
4 DPMA181d7/14/202111/4/2020DPMA
Q2
2019 2020 2021
Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
Figure 4, Progressive Maintenance within LHD Mid-Life MMP Periods (EXAMPLE). Source: Program Manager, LHD Mid-Life PMT, Michael
A. Esparza, PMP. Ship: USS KEARSARGE (LHD 3). Progressive Maintenance. In regards to the scheduling of the Mid-Life Availability, the 2016
PMA marks the availability in which the PMT has focused much of its planning effort. Notice, however, the CNO availabilities circled: the CNO
avail in FY-14 and FY-18. If all the Mid-Life work required can be allocated between all three of these availabilities, and time, scope and
budget allow, the PMR may task the Program Manager of the PMT to schedule the work accordingly, and spread Mid-Life SCDs and work
among the various CNOs availabilities – in this case, the CNO availabilities in FY 14, FY 16 and FY 18. Thus, the maintenance is progressed
towards the Mid-Life goal.
Constraints
The following set of initial constraints pertains to the LHD Mid-Life Program. Again, as the planning stage
continues to unfold, the Program Management Team (PMT) will continue to identify constraints. Each
constraint will be documented and planned for, and communicated up and down the chain of command.
By using Rolling-Wave Planning, the PMT will conduct iterations of planning the work, and then execute
the work – and will continue to identify program elements, such as requirements and constraints.
4 CAPT Michael R. Graham, USN, meeting, PMS 470 and PMR, Waterfront Fleet Representative (Fleet Rep) and Program Manager (PM), 19 Oct 2011, Washington
DC, NAVSEA Headquarters.

20
Enclosure (1)
1. The LHD Mid-Life Program was originally to consist of one LHD Mid-Life Modernization Availability
per year.5
The LHD Mid-Life MMP was going to focus on ONE AVAILABILITY, which was specifically
referred to as the “Mid-Life Avail.” Based on the dynamic and ever changing nature of budgets,
funding, schedule fluctuations and Global Force Management (GFM) issues, the paradigm was changed
by the LHD Hull Manager from just “One” availability to do all the Mid-Life Maintenance and
Modernization, to what is now referred to as the “LHD Mid-Life Period”; which will typically consist of
the Pre, Mid-Life and Post availabilities.
2. Each Mid-Life Period must be consistent with fleet scheduling and operational requirements;
however, in the event that operations do cause a cancellation of a Pre, Mid-Life and Post Availability,
the situation must be documented via record message traffic from the Type Commander (TYCOM), info
NAVSEA 21/PMS 470 at a minimum.
3. LHD Mid-Life Program Availability duration. The program standard shall be to use the minimum of
nine months availability, in accordance with the current Industrial Contract regime in effect (MSMO or
MACMO). A duration analysis is required (and shall be conducted prior to the execution of the first
LHD Mid-Life Availability in FY-16). Docking shall be integrated, when feasible, with Docking
Maintenance Cycle (DPMA); with the assumption being a nine year Docking Cycle, as recommended by
the Surface Maintenance Engineering Planning Program (SURFMEPP).
Assumptions
The following is a list of assumptions identified during the initial stage of planning. The assumptions list will
continue to grow as progressive elaboration takes place. It will be refined and corrected and each
individual assumption will be addressed.
1. This program has the full support of the program sponsor, who in this case is the Program
Manager for PMS 470. In addition it has the full support of the Program Manager’s
Representative (PMR), stakeholders, and all departments.
2. The purpose of this program has already been communicated to the major stakeholders.
3. The initial core Program Management Team (PMT) has been identified.
4. Initial funding for the program supports execution.
5 While keeping in mind that the engineering requirements can be spread throughout the Mid-Life Period.

22
Enclosure (1)
ACTIONS PRIOR TO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITY EXECUTION: SHIP’S INSTALLATION DRAWINGS (SIDS) AND SHIP
CHANGE DOCUMENTS (SCDS).
One of the critical action items that will impact the overall mission of the LHD MMP, is the development of
SHIPALT drawings. The LHD PMT in coordination with the PSG and delegated assigned personnel (Norfolk
Naval Shipyard and NAVSEA 05), will be overall responsible for the development of SIDs for the LHD Mid-Life
Program. SHIPALT drawings are those drawings which are utilized by a shipyard or other activity for the
accomplishment of all non-nuclear SHIPALT work. These drawings provide a record of ship configuration after
SHIPALT accomplishment. These drawings are used by Ship's Force in maintenance and casualty control,
utilized by material support activities in determining support requirements, and used by NAVSEA to maintain
system and compartment configuration control. All of the required Ship Change Documents (SCD) drawings
are identified in the Navy Data Environment (NDE) as part of the Navy Modernization Process (NMP). The LHD
PMT has identified all SCDs from NDE that are applicable to the LHD Mid-Life period for modernization of the
LHD-1 WASP Class ships. These drawings include, as required, system drawings and diagrams, arrangement
drawings, structural drawings, manufacturing drawings, assembly and detail drawings, removal drawings,
temporary access/egress drawings, cabling sheets and special drawings and shall meet all requirements as
noted in Ref (x) 3.2.1. In nearly all instances, SIDs will be developed using a CAD application. This provides
significant benefits in efficiency and accuracy, as well as reusability. When CAD files are generated they must
follow a consistent set of CAD Standards with regards to layers, line weights, line fonts, and standard library
parts inserted.
Process. The Planning Yard for each ship class, as designated by NAVSEA SL720-AA-MAN-010, is the
engineering design agent for assigned specific classes of ships. Responsibilities assigned to the Planning Yard
in support of SHIPALT drawings include the all of the requirements as noted in ref (x) 3.3.1.
The Planning Yard and NAVSEA Engineering Directorate representative(s) shall accomplish the development of
SIDs utilizing the outline process noted below as per ref (x).
1. Determine lead ship design (performed prior to or after actual drawing preparation, but must be
conducted on applicable ships prior to issuance of the drawing) to support specific availabilities.
2. Determine drawing adequacy and applicability to follow ships of a class (performed prior to or after
actual drawing preparation, but must be conducted on applicable ships prior to issuance of the
drawing) to support specific availabilities.
3. Conduct proofing (validation) of SHIPALT drawings (performed as part of proofing of SHIPALT design
for SHIPALT records (SARs) which require proofing after SHIPALT accomplishment on the first ship to
receive the SHIPALT).

26
Enclosure (1)

27
Enclosure (1)
ACTIONS CONDUCTED PRIOR TO MID-LIFE AVAILABILITY EXECUTION: PRELIMINARY PROGRAM SURVEY (PPS)
AND INTEGRATED SURVEYS (IS), USS WASP (LHD-1) AND USS BATAAN (LHD-5)
The LHD Mid-Life Program initially required some preliminary action prior to the relevant hull’s Mid-Life
Availability start date. The most important of these actions was to be the LHD Mid-Life Preliminary Program
Survey (PPS) and the execution of various Integrated Surveys (IS). The surveys were intended to:
1. Establish a baseline of required Mid-Life work to include, but not be limited to, major distributive
systems (both HM&E and C5I).
2. Provide a snapshot to the LHD PMT, PMS 470, NSWCCD-SSES and NSWC PHD of those systems
requiring the focus of the maintenance and the modernization effort.
3. Allow decision makers, such as PMS 470 and the LHD ML PMT, to continually rank and prioritize the
maintenance actions Ship Change Documents (SCDs) in support of initial requirements and financial
decisions, prior to the execution of the ship’s scheduled Mid-Life availability.
4. Allow for the follow on of additional Integrated Surveys (IS), including, but not limited to the
following:
a. Interior Communications (IC) Survey
b. Thermal Management Survey
c. Electrical Power
d. Electrical Distribution
e. Weight and Moment
However, due to budget constraints and fiscal challenges, the PPS is no longer a viable methodology for
ascertaining ship’s current material condition prior to the LHD Mid-Life Period.
PRELIMINARY SCOPE STATEMENT
The LHD Mid-Life program will include planning, scheduling and delivery of a complete Mid-Life Maintenance
and Modernization period. The primary governing document for each ships Maintenance and Modernization
package is the PMP. The primary document for all engineering work is the EIP, written by NSWCCD-SSES
Engineers specifically for the LHD Mid-Life Program. The primary document for all Combat Systems work is
the CSEMP, written by Combat Systems Engineers specifically for the LHD Mid-Life program. All efforts will be

28
Enclosure (1)
managed by the PMT. All program and project work will be the primary focus of daily operations and all
required items will be communicated via the regularly scheduled LHD Mid-Life teleconferences and meetings.
Ship Change Documents (SCDs) and planned alterations will be managed in accordance with the following
guidelines.
LHD Mid-Life Ship Change Documentation (SCD) Guidelines6
Ship Change Documents (SCDs), both Fleet and Program, will be the primary means of executing the work
for the LHD Mid-Life Program, and they will be executed in accordance with the Joint Fleet Maintenance
Manual (OPNAV 4790.3) and NAVSEA TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDANCE, SHIP CHANGE DOCUMENT
(SCD) TS9090-400A and all other applicable directives and instructions. The LHD Mid-Life SCD submitters
shall be PMS 470 LHD Team Representatives for Program ALTs and Commander, Naval Surface Forces,
Pacific and Atlantic (COMNAVSURFPAC and LANT) N43 and N46 representatives for fleet ALTs. LHD Mid-
Life SCD development decisions shall be agreed upon by fleet and OPNAV representatives prior to being
approved in the Navy Data Environment-Navy Modernization (NDE-NM) database. The specific guidelines
for SCD development are as follows7
:
1. Proposals need to include the “Problem” definition specifically delineated in the description section
of the SCD, and the submitter must articulate how the SCD provides a solution to the “Problem”.
2. The following issues need to be addressed by the submitter and/or the SCD, and associated
parties, in the appropriate cases:
a. Which organization will provide the IS/WAS Configuration Diagram? Have they been made
aware?
b. What is the maintenance impact of the SCD, both internal and external to the ship, and what
plans are in place for accomplishment? What are the costs associated, and has the SCD been
budgeted properly?
c. Identify/Describe Interface impacts and any significant cascading effects (i.e. creation of
other system(s) impacts).
6 Harry T. Search, “LHD M-L SCD Documentation Guidelines” 19 Sep 11, Memorandum, INTERNET, available at https://extranet.americansystems.com
7 Harry T. Search , “Guidelines”

29
Enclosure (1)
d. Survivability.
e. Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) plan and costs:
(1) Spare parts and parts support
(2) Commonality ID and cannibalization procedures
(3) Obsolescence Planning
(4) Long Lead Time Material (LLTM) Requirements
(5) Hardware and Software support and costs
(6) Technical Refresh plan
f. Training strategy and plans (Training Gap Analysis)
(7) Ship’s Force Operations and Maintenance Training (Initial and Life-Cycle)
(8) Training for Shore Based Support
g. Total Ownership Costs (TOC) and Return on Investment (ROI) estimates (for attachment to
SCD)
h. Risk Assessments. It should be noted that the Risk Register of this PMP will contain a
numerical file of all reported risks to the program and project, along with the mitigation
strategy put in place for each risk; or whether the risk was accepted or not. Regardless, the
existence of the Risk Register is a requirement in the practice of Program and Project
Management; it does not alleviate the submitter of the SCD of conducting a thorough risk
analysis of the SCD they are about to put into the system.
PROGRAM RISKS
The following risks for the LHD Mid-Life project have been identified. The PMT will determine and employ the
necessary risk mitigation/avoidance strategies as appropriate to minimize the likelihood of these risks. As
mentioned before in this PMP, It should be noted that the Risk Register of this document will contain a
numerical file of all reported risks to the program and project, along with the mitigation strategy put in place

30
Enclosure (1)
for each risk; or whether the risk was accepted or not. The following risks have been identified in the initial
planning phase. For more information on Risk Management, please refer to the Risk Management Plan (RMP),
Annex A.
1. Potential disruption to LHD operations/Deployment during Mid-Life execution in the event of growth
work, causing an extension of the Mid-Life Availability.
2. Lack of funding/late approval of POM funding and sourcing, impacting execution of the mid-life
package; causing a cascading effect throughout the FY15-18 Mid-Life Period Availability schedule.
PROGRAM PILLARS 8
The LHD Mid-Life Program and each project (each
individual hull is considered a project) is based on a
“Pillar” format that is intended to ensure completeness
and integration, particularly with the required training to
sustain and use the maintenance and modernization
work items and ensure operator efficiency. In addition,
the format ensures that the Integrated Logistics Support
(ILS) is robust enough to support the maintenance and
modernization improvements that are a part of the LHD
Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization program. The
Pillars (again, Figure 1, left) will be used in the
preliminary identification of work items, and the creation
and definition of SCDs and ALTs. Those work items will be grouped under the following Pillars:
1. Main Propulsion
2. Amphibious Systems (those maintenance and modernization improvements dealing specifically with
Amphibious and Expeditionary Operations).
3. Auxiliaries and Attendant Auxiliary Systems.
4. Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Combat Systems and Intelligence (C5I)
5. Environmental Systems and Support
8 Robert P. Irelan, “Pillars and Syndicates”

31
Enclosure (1)
6. Habitability
7. Maintenance (Condition, Phased, Preventative, and Emergent based)
PROGRAM SYNDICATES9
Program Syndicates (groups of individuals or organizations combined to promote common interests within the
program and each project) have been formed in support of each of the following areas:
1. LHD MMP Syndicate. This group collects the respective inputs of each fleet stakeholder and ensures
that the “voice of the Fleet” is heard and justified recommendations are included within the LHD Mid-Life
Program. It is utilized in order to ensure that primary decision makers/management reviews and analyzes
recommendations and inputs regarding LHD program specifics and structure. It also includes review of C5I
Systems, reviews inputs and recommendations from C5I Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) regarding LHD
specific C5I systems, upgrades and modernizations; including the removal of legacy systems as they are
phased out/rendered obsolete by emerging/new technologies and systems. In addition, the LHD MMP
Syndicate addresses related to the Aviation department and mission of the WASP Class ships; with
emphasis on the integration of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program and the MV-22 Osprey. Finally, the
syndicate addresses the issues that pertain to the training continuum instituted by the LHD Mid-Life
Program, not only with new systems, but also with the maintenance requirements that accompany the
major maintenance and modernization upgrades.
NOTIONAL SUMMARY MILESTONE SCHEDULE AND INITIAL SUMMARY FIELDING PLAN
The Program Summary Milestone Schedule is presented below. The notional schedule will be subject to
numerous changes; but provides the process in tracking the dynamic nature of the LHD MMP Schedule. As the
requirements are more clearly defined, this schedule will be modified. Any changes will be communicated in
accordance with the program communications plan, and via status meetings and TELCONs scheduled by the
Program Manager’s Representative (PMR).
9 Robert P. Irelan, “Pillars and Syndicates”

38
Enclosure (1)
PROGRAM APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS
Success for the LHD Mid-Life project will be achieved when WASP Class Ships (LHDs 1-8) are fully outfitted,
maintained and modernized with the Mid-Life program; and ships are capable of achieving the expected 40
year service life, within the time, scope and cost constraints indicated in this charter. Additionally, this
measure of success must include satisfactory ship checks and sea trials, and acceptance by the Program
Sponsor, PMS 470.
PROGRAM SPONSORS
Success will be determined by the Program Sponsor, CAPT Crone, USN; Program Manager for PMS 470, who
will also authorize completion of the program. Mr. Harry T. Search, PMS 470R, the LHA/LHD/LPD 4/LCC Class
Manager, is also a duly designated Program Sponsor and is authorized to make Program Sponsor decisions and
approval actions in regard to the LHD Mid-Life Program.
PROGRAM MANAGER’S REPRESENTATIVE (PMR)
Mr. Robert P. Irelan is named the Program Manager’s Representative (PMR) for the duration of the LHD Mid-
Life Program. Mr. Irelan’ s responsibility is to manage all resources, project tasks, scheduling,
communications, and operations; and chair executive level meetings regarding the LHD Mid-Life project for
the Program Sponsor(s). His team will be as assigned by the PMS 470; and will be continually refined as the
project matures and as outlined in the Staffing Plan. Any additional funding and assignment of resources must
be requested through NAVSEA 21/PMS 470.
Submitted:
__________________________________________ Date: ______________________
Mr. Robert P. Irelan
Program Manager’s Representative (PMR)
NAVSEA 21/PMS-470
LHD Mid-Life Hull Manager

40
Annex A - Risk Management Plan (RMP)
Program (MMP)
Annex A
Risk Management Plan (RMP)

41
INTRODUCTION
Purpose
The purpose of this Risk Management Plan (RMP), Annex A, is to document policies and procedures for
identifying and handling uncommon causes of project variation; i.e. risk. Risk should be thought of as the
possibility of suffering a negative impact to the project, whether it is decreased quality, increased cost,
delayed completion, loss of a key team member, or project failure.
Intended Audience
The intended audiences for this Risk Management Plan (RMP) are all members and major stakeholders
involved in the LHD Mid-Life Program. As such it includes all members of the LHD Mid-Life Organizational
Structure. Each stakeholder has a say in the Risk Management of the program, and shall be duly
represented. See figure 1.
Figure 1. Those Organizations and Stakeholders that have a stake in the Risk Management Plan (RMP).
RISK MANAGEMENT APPROACH
The overall Risk Management Approach follows the standard Risk Management Model (RMM) as shown in the
following diagram:
Risk Identification
During Risk Identification, the sources of risk, potential risk events,
and symptoms of risk are identified.
Risk Analysis
During Risk Analysis, the value of opportunities to pursue vs. the
threats to avoid, and the opportunities to ignore vs. the threats to
accept are assessed.
Response Planning
During Response Planning, Risk Management and Contingency
Plans are developed.
Risk Monitoring and Control
During Risk Monitoring and Control, corrective action plans are developed, implemented, and monitored.

42
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Program Manger’s Representative (PMR)
The Program Manager’s Representative (PMR) is responsible for approval of the RMP, leads and
participates in the Risk Management Process, and takes ownership of risk mitigation/contingency planning
and execution. The PMR is ultimately responsible for the final decision on risk actions in coordination with
PMS 470.
Program Risk Management Board (RMB)
LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team members shall meet as the Risk Management Board (RMB)
once quarterly and participate in the Risk Identification Process; and discuss risk monitoring and mitigation
activities at team meetings. The Board Chair shall be the LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT)
Leader; the RMB will consist of the PMT Engineer, C5I, Waterfront Manager (Fleet Rep), Administration
Lead (Secretary), PMS 470 and other stakeholders as deemed necessary by the PMR and/or PMS 470. The
RMB will populate the Risk Register, recommend risk mitigation strategies, and retire risks that have
passed or are no longer a threat. Formal minutes shall be taken of the quarterly meetings, and distributed;
with an archive file maintained for the life of the LHD Mid-Life Program. The primary method of
maintaining the LHD Mid-Life Risk Management Program is the Risk RADAR Enterprise database, which will
be kept up to date by the PMT Risk Manager, assisted by the Sharepoint Site Administrator. For the PMT,
the Risk Manager (RM) is designated as Michael A. Esparza, the assistant RM is designated as Jennifer
Deardon.
Risk Manager (RM)
The Risk Manager (RM), hereby designated as the Senior Combat Systems Engineer, is responsible for
ensuring identified risks are being managed per the Risk Management Plan (RMP). The RM also assists in
identifying new risks and/or proposing mitigation strategies and contingency plans, along with proposing
improvements to the Risk Management Plan and Processes.
Program Sponsors
PMS 470 participates in Risk Identification and risk activities as necessary. Program Sponsors also receive
escalated risks and assist with mitigation and contingency actions for escalated risks.
Program Stakeholders
Stakeholders assist in monitoring risk action effectiveness and participate in risk escalation, as necessary.

43
RISK IDENTIFICATION
Background
During Risk Identification, potential sources of risk and potential risk events are developed. Pre-defined
risk categories provide a structure which helps ensure that a systematic process is followed to identify
risks. Risk categories will be tailored over time, as specific projects demand (additions to risk categories
should be maintained in this document for use in future projects). After identifying and categorizing the
risk event, it is entered into the risk register.
Sources
Risk identification shall be done throughout the life-cycle of the LHD MMP, with an emphasis on the ID of
risk early on so proper response planning and monitoring can occur. The following should be considered
as tools and techniques for risk identification:
• Analysis of high-level deliverables
• Analysis of the WBS and LHD MMP
• Analysis of scope change requests
• Analysis of program assumptions
• Project team input (which can take the form of interviews, brainstorming sessions, and/or Delphi
technique)
• Stakeholder and sponsor input
• Formal risk identification sessions
• Previous lessons learned
• QA audits and reviews
• Performance and status reports
• Diagramming techniques such as cause and effect diagrams, process or system flows, and influence
diagrams.
Documentation
All identified risks should be documented and entered into the Risk Register on Risk RADAR. During risk
identification, the following information is required for documentation:
• Risk category
• Risk trigger
• Potential outcome
• Raised By
• Date Raised
• Source
The risk trigger is the event that would need to happen in order for the potential outcome to occur. Risk
triggers are usually expressed with some sort of dependency, or qualifier. An example of a risk trigger
might be a resource on the project leaves. This might easily be accounted for by utilizing other resources,

44
but if a resource with key skills or knowledge leaves then the project may be significantly impacted. This
approach is suggested in order to clarify the thought process of identifying risks. When the risk trigger
occurs, the risk is no longer a risk, but has materialized into a problem/issue that needs resolution.
RISK ANALYSIS
Background
After a risk or group of risks has been identified and documented, risk analysis should be performed.
During risk analysis, each potential risk event is analyzed for:
• The probability that the risk will occur
• The impact of the risk if it occurs
Risk probabilities and Risk impact definitions are defined in the Appendix. Impacts can be assessed against
project cost, schedule, scope, and/or quality. If the risk event affects more than one dimension and the
scores are different, the higher impact definition should be utilized.
Once the appropriate risk impact and probability are selected, the risk score can be determined. The risk
probability and impact matrix is shown in the Appendix. The matrix shows the combination of impact and
probability that in turn yield a risk priority (shown by the red, yellow, and green colored shadings).
Risk priority is utilized during response planning and risk monitoring/control. It is critical to understand the
priority for each risk as it allows the project team to properly understand the relative importance of each
risk. Risk impact analysis can be qualitative or quantitative.
Qualitative Analysis
Qualitative analysis is a quicker and usually more cost-effective way to analyze risks (as opposed to
quantitative analysis). Analysis should be performed with the goal of gathering data on:
• The likelihood of the risk occurring
• The qualitative impact on the project
• The quality of the risk data being utilized
Quantitative Analysis
Quantitative analysis utilizes techniques such as simulation and decision tree analysis to provide data on:
• The impact to cost or schedule for risks
• The probability of meeting project cost and/or schedule targets
• Realistic project targets on cost, schedule, and/or scope
Qualitative analysis should occur prior to conducting quantitative analysis. Not every risk needs to go
through quantitative analysis. If quantitative analysis is to be used, then this section should contain
information on:

45
• Defined criteria for which risks go through quantitative analysis
• Technique(s) to be utilized
• Expected outputs of quantitative analysis
Documentation
The results of risk analysis should be documented in the Risk Register. The following information shall be
entered in the Register:
• Risk impact
• Risk probability
• Risk matrix score – computed by the Risk Register spreadsheet after impact and probability are
entered
• Risk priority – computed by the Risk Register spreadsheet after impact and probability are entered
• Qualitative impact – descriptive comments about the potential risk impact
RESPONSE PLANNING
Background
During Response Planning, strategies and plans are developed to minimize the effects of the risk to a point
where the risk can be controlled and managed. Higher priority risks should receive more attention during
Response Planning than lower priority risks, and every risk threat should be assigned an owner.
Risk Strategies
There are several methods for responding to risks:
Avoid
Risk avoidance involves changing aspects of the overall Program Management Plan (PMP) to eliminate the
threat, isolating project objectives from the risk’s impact, or relaxing the objectives that are in threat (e.g.
extending the schedule or reducing the scope). Risks that are identified early in the project can be avoided
by clarifying requirements, obtaining more information, improving communications, or obtaining
expertise.
Transfer
Risk transference involves shifting the negative impact of a threat (and ownership of the response) to a
third party. Risk transference does not eliminate a threat; it simply makes another party responsible for
managing it.
Mitigate

46
Risk mitigation involves reducing the probability and/or the impact of risk threat to an acceptable level.
Taking early and pro-active action against a risk is often more effective than attempting to repair the
damage a realized risk has caused. Developing contingency plans are examples of risk mitigation.
Accept
Acceptance is often taken as a risk strategy since it is very difficult to plan responses for every identified
risk. Risk acceptance should normally only be taken for low-priority risks. Risk acceptance can be passive,
where no action is taken at all, or active. The most common active approach to risk acceptance is to
develop a cost and/or schedule reserve to accommodate known (or unknown) threats.
Documentation
The results of response planning should be documented in the Risk Register. The following information
shall be entered in the Register:
• Response strategy (avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept)
• Response notes (description of plan) – if a mitigation approach is taken, specific trigger points that
require aspects of the contingency plan to be executed should be documented
• Risk owner
RISK MONITORING AND CONTROL
Background
Planned risk responses should be executed as required over the life-cycle of the project, but the project
should also be continuously monitored for new and changing risks. During risk monitoring and control the
following tasks are performed:
• Identify, analyze, and plan for new risks
• Keep track of identified risks and monitor trigger conditions
• Review project performance information (such as progress/status reports, issues, and corrective
actions)
• Re-analyze existing risks to see if the probability, impact, or proper response plan has changed
• Review the execution of risk responses and analyze their effectiveness
• Ensure proper risk management policies and procedures are being utilized
Timing
Discuss how often the risk monitoring and control process will occur over the lifetime of the project.
Documentation
The results of risk monitoring and control should be documented in the Risk Register. The following
information shall be entered in the Register:

47
• Status – valid statuses are:
o Identified – Risk documented, but analysis not performed
o Analysis Complete – Risk analysis done, but response planning not performed
o Planning Complete – Response planning complete
o Triggered – Risk trigger has occurred and threat has been realized
o Resolved – Realized risk has been contained
o Retired – Identified risk no longer requires active monitoring (e.g. risk trigger has passed)
• Trigger Date – if the risk has been triggered
• Notes

48
Annex B - Staffing Plan
Program
Annex B
Staffing Plan

49
INTRODUCTION
The Staffing Plan (SP), Annex B, of the PMP, is an important part of the LHD Mid-life Maintenance and
Modernization Program. The SP is a tool which will aid in the Program Management Team (PMT) in the
management of this program’s (and each individual hull’s project) human resource activities throughout the
program until formal closure. The SP plan includes:
1. Roles and responsibilities of team members throughout the Program
2. Program organization charts
The purpose of the SP is to achieve program success by ensuring that the appropriate human resources are
acquired with the necessary skills, resources are trained if any gaps in skills are identified, team building
strategies are clearly defined, and team activities are effectively managed.
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The roles and responsibilities for the LHD Mid-life Maintenance and Modernization Program are essential to
project success. All team members must clearly understand their roles and responsibilities in order to
successfully perform their portion of the project. For the LHD Mid-life Maintenance and Modernization
Program, the following project team roles and responsibilities have been established:
Program Manager’s Representative (PMR), LHD Hull Manager (1 position): responsible for the overall
success of the LHD Mid-Life Program. The PMR must authorize and approve all project expenditures, via
the PMS 470 approval process for direct program cost items, and indirect cost/overhead items, via the
company (American Systems). The PMR is also responsible for approving that work activities meet
established acceptability criteria and fall within acceptable variances. The PMR will be responsible for
reporting project status in accordance with the communications management plan. The PMR will provide
evaluation input to Line Managers on the performance of all project team members; and communicate
their performance to Line Managers. The PMR is also responsible for acquiring human resources for the
project through coordination with PMS 470 and functional managers. The PMR must possess the following
skills: leadership/management, budgeting, scheduling, and effective communication.

50
LHD MMP Hull, Mechanical and Electrical, Project Manager (1 position): responsible for identifying,
gathering and reporting to the Program Office (PMS 470) the appropriate Ship Change Documents (SCDs)
for upcoming changes in the Hull, Mechanical, and Engineering (HM&E) for ships in the LHD-1 Class as
required for the LHD Mid-Life and Modernization Program. In support of such, the SPE is responsible for
(not all inclusive):
1. Project Management
2. Maintains Active SCD Master Database
3. NDE/NMD Liaison
4. Engineering Integration Plan (EIP)
5. NSWCCD-SSES Liaison
6. NAVSEA 04/05 Liaison
7. TYCOM Liaison (SURFLANT/SURFPAC)
8. Budget Schedules and Analysis
9. PMS 470 Briefing Support
10. LHD Mid-Life Program Syndicate
11. Risk Management Board
12. ESC Member
13. PESC Member
14. Obsolescence/Lesson Learned Tracking
LHD Mid-Life Fleet Representative (Fleet Rep) and Availability Coordinator, (1 position). Responsible for
ensuring Fleet requirements and desires are evaluated and included in the Mid Life process. Provide and
receive updates from CNSL, CNSP, ESG 2, ESG 3, LHD PE’s, and LHD PMR’s on the latest LHD issues and Mid
Life plans. Additionally, responsible to work with SURFMEPP to monitor ICMP tasks and Ship Sheets
ensuring deconfliction with Mid Life objectives. LHD ML rep to the Corrosion KSN responsible to
incorporate their initiatives in LHD ML planning, as well as, provide input on LHD ML corrosion
issues. Additionally responsible for:
1. LHD Maintenance Drivers
2. Alion Technical Reports (Company, Task 3)
3. PMS 470 briefing support
4. LHD ML Fleet Syndicate
5. LHD ML Corrosion Syndicate
6. Participate in LHD monthly Avail Planning meetings
7. LHD ML availability coordinator (monitoring LHD ML avails)
8. Risk Management Board Rep
9. ESC member
Project Management Professional (PMP)/C5I Officer (1 position): responsible for identifying, gathering
and reporting to the PMR and Program Office the appropriate Ship Change Documents (SCDs) for
upcoming changes in the LHD hulls Combat Systems Configuration Suites for the LHD Mid-Life and
Modernization Program. As such, they will be primarily concerned with the CAPSTONE install (Ship Self
Defense Systems, Mk II), the CANES upgrade, and switch out of obsolete and legacy C5I Systems when
transitioning to SSDS Mk II. In addition, the SCSE is responsible for:

51
1. Program Management Plan (PMP)
a. Risk Management Plan (RMP)
b. Staffing Plan (SP) Plan
c. Communications (COMMS) Management Plan
2. Project Manager/Schedules Officer (Project Charts, Hulls 1-8)
3. Alion Technical Reports (Company, Task 3 Assignment)
4. Combat Systems Interface Plan (CSIP)
5. COMSPAWARSYSCOM Liaison
6. PEO IWS 10 Liaison
7. Naval Amphibious Baseline (NAB) Adjutant
8. Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) Integrated Planning Team (IPT) Project Manager
9. Amphibious Warfare Command and Control (AMW C2) OPNAV N95 Action Officer
10. TSRA Liaison / C5I Surveys
11. Internal Communications (IC) Surveys
The PMP/C5I Officer is responsible for all Combat Systems SCD tracking, changes and associated System
Operational Verification Tests (SOVTs), and testing of the upgraded software. The SCSE will be responsible
for timely status reporting to the PMR as required by the communications management plan. The SCSE
may not authorize any project expenditures nor allocate any resources without PMR approval. SCSE’s
performance will be managed by the PMR and communicated to SCSE’s Line Manager. SCSE must be
proficient in C5I Processes, Project Management Planning (PMP) and methodology, familiar with the Navy
3M system, have a working knowledge of the Fiscal Year Defense Plan (FYDP) process, the Regional
Maintenance Center (RMC) process, and a basic knowledge of the Navy Acquisitions program.

52
Sharepoint Admin (1 position): Responsible for the all the administrative and general support of the LHD
Mid-Life PMT. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:
1. Communications set-up and management (Conference, teleconference and Video Teleconference).
2. Act as the Secretary during Mid-Life meetings, responsible for notes, minutes and the tracking of
action items.
3. Maintain the LHD Mid-Life PMT MS Sharepoint site; assign new users access, and post those
documents as directed by the members of the PMT.
4. Maintain an up to date Point of Contact (POC) List of LHD Mid-Life stakeholders and principals.
5. As the primary assistant of the Risk Management Program (RMP) and primary assistant to the Risk
Manager (RM), maintaining the Risk RADAR laptop, keeping its database current in accordance with
the Risk Management Plan (RMP), and printing the available reports as required.
6. File correspondence, make back up electronic files of primary documents, and keep a tickler file of
recurring reports.
Line Managers/Functional Managers. While not part of the project team, functional managers are
responsible for providing resources for the project in accordance with the project staffing plan. Functional
managers are responsible for working with the PM to determine skill sets required and approving resource
assignments. Functional managers are also responsible for conducting performance appraisals of assigned
resources based, in part, on the PM’s feedback regarding project performance.
PROJECT ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS
RESPONSIBLE, ACCOUNTABLE, CONSULT, INFORM (RACI) CHART
The following RACI chart shows the relationship between project tasks and team members. Any proposed
changes to project responsibilities must be reviewed and approved by the LHD Mid-Life Project Management
Team (PMT) Lead. Changes will be proposed in accordance with the project’s change control process. As
changes are made all project documents will be updated and redistributed accordingly.

53
PMT Lead
PMR
SPE Fleet Rep SCSE Admin
Lead
LHD Mid-Life
Requirements
Gathering
A R R R I
Risk
Management
A R R R R
Fleet
Stakeholder
Representation
A R R R I
Engineering /
SCD
Management
A R R R I
Budget
Schedules and
Analysis
A C C C I
Syndicates A R R R R
Executive
Steering
Committee
(ESC)
A R R R C
Key:
R – Responsible for completing the work
A – Accountable for ensuring task completion/sign off
C – Consulted before any decisions are made
I – Informed of when an action/decision has been made

54
ADM Jonathan Greenert, USN
Chief of Naval Operations
(CNO)
N00
VADM Bill Burke, USN
Deputy CNO for Warfare
Systems
N9
MGEN Robert S. “Whaler” Walsh, USMC,
Director, Expeditionary Warfare N95
CAPT Erik Ross, USN,
Amphibious Warfare,
N953
CAPT Tim Crone, USN
PMS 470
Program Manager
SEA 21/Surface Warfare
Directorate
Mr. Bradley Smith
PMS 470
Deputy Program
Manager
Mr. William Boozer
PMS 470
Senior Class Manager
Mr. Harry Search
PMS 470RC2
LHA/LHD/LPD4/LCC
Class Manager
Mr. Dan Allen
Assistant, Military
Analyst
Mr. Christopher Cundiff
PMS 470RBC2A
LHA/LHD/LPD4/LCC
Deputy Class Manager
Ms. Majorie Winston
PMS 470
Class Manager
Mr. Robert Irelan
Program Manager’s
Representative
(PMR)
LHD Mid-Life Lead
Mr. Michael Gwinn
Project Manager
Mr. Michael A. Esparza
PMP
Project Manager/C5I
Mr. Fred Wilhelm
Waterfront
Operations Officer
Ms. Jennifer Deardon
Sharepoint Site
Admin
VADM Thomas S. Rowden, USN
COMNAVSURPAC
(CNSP)
N00
CAPT Wiliam J. Parker III, USN
N01
Mr. L. Stone
Deputy ACOS
Engineering Readiness
N43A
LCDR Nathan Beach, USN
CNSP Type Desk Officer
N43E
Mr. Wally Porter
CNSP Type Desk
N43E
Mr. Ryan Benoit
LHD 2 Port Engineer
Mr. Don Gabriel
LHD 2 Program
Manager
Mr. Matt Davis
LHD 4 Port Engineer
Mr. Jerry Knau
LHD 4 Program
Manager
Mr. Jerry Selph
LHD 6 Port Engineer
Mr. Don Owens
LHD 6 Program
Manager
Mr. Todd Stubblefield
LHD 8 Port Engineer
Mr. Andy Sellers
LHD 8 Program
Manager
Mr. John Nasshan
LHD 2/4 CS Port
Engineer
Mr. Gary Judd
LHD 6 CS Port
Engineer
Mr. Scott Hess
LHD 8 CS Port
Engineer
RADM Pete A. Gumataotao. USN
COMNAVSURFLANT
(CNSL)
N00
RDML Brian LaRoche, USN
Deputy Commander
N00D
CAPT Douglas Nashold, USN
N01
CAPT William “Rick” Tate, USN
ACOS Material Readiness
N43
CAPT , William Henderson, USN
Deputy ACOS, N43A
CDR C. Wiilams, USN
Amphib Type Desk
Manager N43EA1
Mr. Larry Favor
Amphib Type Desk
Mr. Time Spence
LHD 1 Port Engineer
Mr. Modestine Sivels
LHD 1 Program
Manager
Mr. Chuck Murphy
LHD 3 Port Engineer
Mr. Kevin Bolen
LHD 3 Program
Manager
Mr. Tom Bourgelas
LHD 5 Port Engineer
Mr. Todd Sandhoff
LHD 5 Program
Manager
Mr. Chris Stern
LHD 7 Port Engineer
Mr. Leon Carver
LHD 7 Program
Manager
Mr. David Close
LHD 1/7 CS Port
Engineer
Mr. John Lassiter
LHD 3/5 CS Port
Engineeer
Program Sponsor Group (PSG)
Mr. Jess Matudio
ESG-2 Liaison PMR
Mr. Jim Wheeler
Japan PMS 470 PMR
Mr. Steve Severs
NASSCO LHD PM
Mr. Dave Muise
PMS 470 CS PMR
Mr. Mark Hochstetler
PMS 470 PMR
Mr. Bill Wood
BAE Project
Manager
Class Management Team (CMT)
LHD Mid-Life Program Management Team (PMT)
Ms. Sharon Mcilnay
PMS 470
Waest Coast Class
Manager
RADM Christopher J. Paul, USN
Deputy Commander
CAPT Ron Cook, USN
ACOS, N43
Mr. Bob Flynn
PMS 470 CS PMR
ESG-2
Figure 1. LHD Mid-Life Organization by Stakeholder Group. Source: LHD Mid-Life PMT, Michael A. Esparza, PMP
LHD Program Execution Management Team (PEMT)
Each LHD Maintenance and Modernization Period shall be managed by a Program Execution Management
Team (PEMT), which shall monitor the progress of the designated availability using the Program Management
principle s as set forth by the Project Management Institute, International Standards Organization (ISO) 9001
Quality Assurance Certification and Earned Value Management (EVM) processes as directed by NAVSEA 21.
The PEMT shall meet primarily by teleconference at least monthly; more often as the LHD Program Hull
manager deems necessary. Formal minutes shall be taken and distributed 1 week post conference. The Chair
of the PEMT shall be the LHD Hull Manager (Robert P. Irelan), with the Program Management Team (PMT) in
full support. Expected deliverables shall consist of, but not be limited to: Microsoft Project Sheets with tasks,
milestones and durations; formal minutes with digital audio recording, and Microsoft PPT Briefs with the
requisite information concerning the status of the specific availability, and any other correspondence deemed
necessary by the PEMT Chair, the LHD Class Manager or PMS-470.

55
Annex C - Communication Plan (COMMPLAN)
Program
Annex C
Communications Plan (COMMPLAN)

56
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Communications Management Plan (COMMPLAN), Annex C, is to define the
communication requirements for the LHD Mid-Life Program and how information will be distributed. The
COMMPLAN defines the following:
• What information will be communicated—to include the level of detail and format
• How the information will be communicated—in meetings, email, telephone, video teleconference, etc.
• When information will be distributed—the frequency of program communications both formal and
informal
• Who is responsible for communicating program information
• Communication requirements for all program stakeholders
• How any sensitive or confidential information is communicated and who must authorize this
• Any standard templates, formats, or documents the program must use for communicating
• An escalation process for resolving any communication-based conflicts or issues
This COMMPLAN sets the communications framework for this program. It will serve as a guide for
communications throughout the life of the program and will be updated as communication needs change.
This plan identifies and defines the roles of persons involved in this project. It also includes a communications
matrix which maps the communication requirements of this project. An in-depth guide for conducting
meetings details the communications rules and how the meetings will be conducted, ensuring successful
meetings. A program team directory is included to provide contact information for all stakeholders directly
involved in the program.
COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT APPROACH
The Program Manager’s Representative (PMR) will take a proactive role in ensuring effective communications
on this program. The communications requirements are documented in the Communications Matrix
presented in this document. The Communications Matrix will be used as the guide for what information to
communicate, who is to do the communicating, when to communicate it and to whom to communicate.
As with most program plans, updates or changes may be required as the project progresses or changes are
approved. Changes or updates may be required due to changes in personnel, scope, budget, or other reasons.
Additionally, updates may be required as the program matures and additional requirements are needed. The
PMR is responsible for managing all proposed and approved changes to the COMMPLAN. Once the change is
approved, the PMR will update the plan and supporting documentation and will distribute the updates to the
PMT and all stakeholders.

57
COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT CONSTRAINTS
All program communication activities will occur within the program’s approved budget, schedule, and
resource allocations. The PMR is responsible for ensuring that communication activities are performed by the
PMT and without external resources which will result in exceeding the authorized budget. Communication
activities will occur in accordance with the frequencies detailed in the Communication Matrix in order to
ensure the project adheres to schedule constraints. Any deviation of these timelines must be approved by the
project sponsor, PMS 470.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS
As part of identifying all project stakeholders, the PMR will communicate with each stakeholder in order to
determine their preferred frequency and method of communication. This feedback will be maintained by the
PMR . Standard project communications will occur in accordance with the Communication Matrix; however,
depending on the identified stakeholder communication requirements, individual communication is
acceptable and within the constraints outlined for the LHD Mid-Life Maintenance and Modernization Program
(MMP).
ROLES
Project Sponsor (PMS 470)
PMS 470 is the sponsor of the program and has authorized the program by signing the PMP. This person is
responsible for the funding of the project and is ultimately responsible for its success. Since the Program
Sponsor is at the executive level, communications should be presented in summary format unless the Program
Sponsor requests more detailed communications.
Program Manager’s Representative’s (PMR)
The Program Manager oversees the LHD MMP at the portfolio level and manages most of the resources
assigned to the project. The PMR is responsible for overall program success, and as such they require more
detailed communications, as directed. In addition, the PMR has overall responsibility for the execution of the
project. The PMR manages day to day resources, provides program guidance and monitors and reports on the
program metrics as defined in the PMP. As the person responsible for the execution of the project, the PMR is
the primary communicator for the project; distributing information according to this COMMPLAN.

58
Program Management Team (PMT)
The PMT is comprised of all persons who have a role performing work on the project. The PMT needs to have
a clear understanding of the work to be completed and the framework in which the MMP is to be executed.
Since the PMT is responsible for completing the work for the program, they played a key role in creating the
PMP, including defining its schedule and work packages. The PMT requires a detailed level of communications
which is achieved through day to day interactions with the PMR and other team members along with weekly
team meetings.
Executive Steering Committee (ESC)
The Executive Steering Committee (ESC) includes management representing the departments which make up
the organization. The ESC provides strategic oversight for changes which impact the overall MMP. The
purpose of the ESC is to ensure that changes within the program are effected in such a way that it benefits the
program as a whole. The ESC requires communication on matters which will change the scope of the program
and its deliverables.
Project Management Team (PMT) Directory
The following table presents contact information for all persons identified in this communications
management plan. The email addresses and phone numbers in this table will be used to communicate with
these people.
Role Name Title Org/Dep Email Phone
Program
Sponsor (PS)
CAPT Ted Zobel, USN PMS 407 NAVSEA 21 Timothy.crone@navy.mil 202-781-3876
LHD Class
Manager
Matthew Kane PMS 407 PMS 407 harry.search@navy.mil 202-781-0842
PMR Robert P. Irelan PMR PMT robert.irelan@americansystems.com 757-548-0708
X3016
PMT Fleet Ops Fred Wilhelm FLEET PMT fwilhelm@thorsolutions.us 757- 286-4108
PMT Engineer Michael Gwinn LHD MMP
HM&E
PMT Michael.gwinn@americansystems.com 757-548-0408
X3016
PMT C5I, PMP Michael A. Esparza,
PMP
SCSE PMT michael.esparza@americansystems.com 757-548-0708
X3037
PMT Admin Jennifer Deardon Sharepoint PMT jennifer.deardon@americansystems.com 757-548-0708
X3030

59
Communication Methods and Technologies
The PMT will determine, in accordance with NAVSEA 21/PMS 470 policy, the communication methods and
technologies based on several factors to include: stakeholder communication requirements, available
technologies (internal and external), and organizational policies and standards.
The LHD PMT maintains a SharePoint platform which all program elements use to provide updates, archive
various reports, and conduct project communications. This platform enables senior management, as well as
stakeholders with compatible technology, to access project data and communications at any point in time.
SharePoint also provides the ability for stakeholders and program team members to collaborate on the MMP
work and communication. Access to the SharePoint will be controlled with a username and password.
Stakeholders will be issued a unique username and password in order to access the SharePoint site. The PMR
is responsible for ensuring all MMP communications and documentation is copied to the SharePoint site. All
LHD PMT communication and documentation, in addition to being maintained on the SharePoint platform, will
be archived on the American Systems server.

60
COMMUNICATIONS MATRIX
The following table identifies the communications requirements for this project.
Communication
Type
Objective of Communication Medium Frequency Audience Owner Deliverable Format
LHD Program
Management Team
(PMT) Issues
Assessment Group
(IAG)
Review Status
Report issues and actions
within the MMP and assess
the status of the program
and portfolio
Face to Face
Conference Call
Weekly: every
Monday, from
1000-1130
PMT PMR Agenda
Minutes
Issues and Actions
Tracker
Issues and Actions
Tracker posted to
Sharepoint site
Issues and Actions
Tracker
disseminated to
stakeholders with
monthly syndicate
invite
LHD PMT Risk
Review Board (RRB)
Review, approve and report
on the current state of risk
within of the MMP
Face to Face
Conference Call
Monthly (3rd
Monday of
every month ,
1230-1330)
PMT PMR
SPE
SCSE
FLEET REP
Risk RADAR
Reports, last official
copy and draft copy
being reviewed
Soft official copy
archived on project
on project
Sharepoint site
Naval Amphibious
Baseline (NAB)
Review status of the NAB
Program
Face to Face
Conference Call
Monthly (3rd
Tuesday of
every month,
1300-1400)
SCSE, NAB SCSE Agenda
Slide Updates
Meeting Minutes
Hard Copy
Soft copy archived
on project
SharePoint site
LHD MMP Monthly
Syndicate
Review status of the Fleet,
Program and C5I Pillars of
the MMP
Face to Face
Conference Call
Monthly (3rd
Wednesday of
every month,
1200-1500)
Stakeholders PMR
SPE
SCSE
FLEET REP
Agenda
Slide Updates
Meeting Minutes
Hard Copy
Soft Copy archived
on project
sharepoint site
email
Executive Steering
Committee (ESC)
Report on the status of the
program to Program Sponsor
(PMS 470), LHD Class
Manager
Face to Face
Conference Call
Quarterly
(Next
scheduled for
May 13
(Q3FY13))
Executive
Management
PMR Agenda
Program Binder
Slide Updates
Email
Hard Copy
Soft copy archived
on project
SharePoint site
NAB/LHD Strategic
Planning Summits
Formal NAB/LHD ML Status Face to Face Every Six
Months
Stakeholders PMR, PMS 470 Formal Reports As Assigned

61
Annex D – Lessons Learned Management Plan
GUIDELINES FOR MEETINGS
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Agenda will be distributed 5 business days in advance of the meeting. The Agenda should identify the
presenter for each topic along with a time limit for that topic. The first item in the agenda should be a review
of action items from the previous meeting.
Meeting Minutes
Meeting minutes will be distributed within 2 business days following the meeting. Meeting minutes will
include the status of all items from the agenda along with new action item.
Action Items
Action Items are recorded in both the meeting agenda and minutes. Action items will include both the action
item along with the owner of the action item. Meetings will start with a review of the status of all action items
from previous meetings and end with a review of all new action items resulting from the meeting. The review
of the new action items will include identifying the owner for each action item.
Meeting Chair Person
The Chair Person is responsible for distributing the meeting agenda, facilitating the meeting and distributing
the meeting minutes. The Chair Person will ensure that the meeting starts and ends on time and that all
presenters adhere to their allocated time frames.
COMMUNICATION STANDARDS
For this project, The LHD PMT will utilize standard organizational formats and templates for all formal project
communications. Formal project communications are detailed in the project’s communication matrix and
include:
Executive Steering Committee (ESC) – The LHD PMT will utilize NAVSEA 21/PMS 470 approved/standard
templates for meeting agenda and meeting minutes. Additionally, any slides presented will use the NAVESEA
21/PMS 470 standard slideshow template. Informal project communications should be professional and
effective but there is no standard template or format that must be used.

62
Program (MMP)
Annex D
Lessons Learned Management Plan (LLMP)

63
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Lessons Learned Management Plan Annex D for the LHD Mid-Life Maintenance and
Modernization Program (MMP) is to capture the program’s lessons learned in a formal document for use by
other program managers on similar future projects, create an archive of lessons learned to rebuild actions
taken during the execution of the program, and to provide a history of action for the purposes of formal audit.
This document may be used as part of new project/program planning for similar projects/programs in order to
determine what problems occurred and how those problems were handled and may be avoided in the future.
Additionally, this document details what went well with the program and why; so that other program
managers may capitalize on these actions. Program managers may also use this document to determine who
the program team members were in order to solicit feedback for planning their projects/programs in the
future. This document will be formally communicated with the organization and will become a part of the
organizational assets and archives.
• LESSONS LEARNED APPROACH
The lessons learned from the LHD Mid-Life MMP are compiled from program journal entries throughout the
program lifecycle. Lessons learned will also be gathered from both realized and unrealized risks in the
program risk register as well as through interviews with program team members and other stakeholders as
necessary. The lessons learned from this program are to be used as references for future programs and
contain an adequate level of detail so that other program managers may have enough information on which
to help base their program plans. The lessons learned in this document are categorized by program
knowledge area. These knowledge areas consist of the following:
Procurement Management Interface Management (C5I)
Risk Management Integration Management
Quality Management Schedule Management
Cost Management Scope Management
Staffing Plan Communications Plan (COMMPLAN)
Program Management Installation and SCD Management

64
LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE LSD MID-LIFE PROGRAM
The following chart lists the lessons learned for the LHD Mid-Life MMP. These lessons are categorized by
project knowledge area and descriptions, impacts, and recommendations are provided for consideration on
similar/future new MM projects. It is important to note that not only failures or shortcomings are included
but successes as well.
Category Issue Name Problem/Success Impact Recommendation
Procurement
Management
Risk Management
Quality Management
Cost Management
Staffing Plan
Program Management Avail Lessons
Learned
Not shared between the
MSMOs and executed
Duplication of ineffective
practices and lack of best
practices
Lessons Learned
conferences after each
ML Avail
C5I Interface
Management
Integration
Management
Integrated
execution plan
required
An integrated execution
plan was not built
Multiple plans were
executed in parallel or at
the same time; resulting in
duplication of effort or
work stoppage due to
resource conflicts
LHD Mid-Life develop a
sequenced EMP and
CSEMP; ICW NSWCCD-
SSES and NSWC PHD
Schedule
Management
Scope Management Corrosion/Material
Conditions
Unsatisfactory
corrosion/material
condition issues negatively
impacted the LSD ML avail
schedule
Schedule was increased in
duration to accommodate
growth work; increasing
cost and decreasing Ao
LHD ML adopted the
“Progressive
Maintenance” Strategy
COMMPLAN Relationship with
NSSA maintenance
team required
development
LSD ML did not have a
regular “drumbeat” with
the NSSA maintenance
team that allowed them to
consider key maintenance
information
Scope Creep, growth work
and late communications.
Establish, early on, a
regular comms
drumbeat with NSSA
and include CAPSTONE
status meeting in COMM
Matrix
Install/SCD
Management
Fleet SCDs LSD Mid-Life did not
incorporate Fleet SCDs
into planning process
Work Package delays; late
production start dates
Incorporate Fleet SCDs
into the planning
process (the years prior
to the avail).

PMP Charter Portfolio Sample Redacted

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to PMP Charter Portfolio Sample Redacted

Similar to PMP Charter Portfolio Sample Redacted (20)

PMP Charter Portfolio Sample Redacted