An Roinn Cosanta Óglaigh na hÉireann Department of Defence Defence Forces

4.9 Conclusions and Recommendations

The Steering Committee note that many of the recommendations arising in this chapter are currently being addressed.

• 
  Recording of time spent on maintenance
  
• 
  Development of standard times
  
• 
  Triggering of inventory requisitions
  
• 
  Auditable maintenance trail
  

The Steering Committee note that further devolution of costs to end user cost centres is being addressed in the context of Phase II of MIF. Once operational, this will alleviate difficulties encountered in identifying costs on a ship-by-ship basis.¹⁸

• 
  The Naval Service should continue to refine the current civilian job card system to clearly identify specific works undertaken thus facilitating the identification of time spent and associated costs on specific maintenance jobs. The job card system should also be piloted and extended to FSG and WEU in order to align maintenance processes under one system. Work in this area should commence immediately.
  

• 
  The Steering Committee recommend, that major PPM routines are isolated and that standard times are introduced for each of these routines. Utilising manufacturers, USCG and other suitable comparative data can identify standard times for the major service routines. Furthermore, a formal system to monitor performance against standard times should be established. Work in this area should commence immediately.
  

• 
  The Steering Committee recommend that every effort be made to aggregate orders and reduce the number of inappropriate smaller orders of inventory in order to fully exploit the economies of scale achievable in ordering inventory.
  

• 
  Notional budgets for each ship should be developed with a system to monitor outturn against assigned budgets. The notional budgets for each of the vessels should be apportioned to the individual vessels with performance monitored by OC PIMM. This should be piloted in the interim on a manual basis until EAM is fully implemented. Work in this area should commence immediately.
  

• 
  The Steering Committee recommends that the Naval Service critically review management of FSG and WEU staff resources to ensure maximum availability for maintenance tasks and to improve utilisation of FSG staff resources for extended maintenance tasks. The Committee acknowledges that on occasion, operational requirements may supersede planning guidelines but believe that their technical skills and capabilities need to be primarily directed towards maintenance activities. Work in this area should commence immediately.
  

• 
  The Steering Committee recommends that a Preventative Maintenance Manual be developed for each vessel. This manual should include a detailed list of maintenance activities on a ship-by-ship basis outlining the number of personnel required to conduct the work, necessary parts and consumables, frequency and an estimate on how long the job should take.
  

• 
  The Steering Committee recommends that the Naval Service should continue to investigate, identify and implement the most cost effective and efficient means of vessel maintenance available.
  

5. Effectiveness of Maintenance

This chapter addresses the following term of reference:

4. Examine the extent that Naval Service vessel maintenance objectives have been achieved, and comment on effectiveness.
The effectiveness of Naval Service vessel maintenance is determined by the degree to which the overall objective of Naval Service vessel maintenance is met. That objective as outlined in Chapter 2 is:
“to preserve Naval Service vessels in a determined state or condition, or to restore Naval Service vessels to a determined state or condition, in order to meet operational readiness and deployment targets.”
Two approaches were taken in evaluating effectiveness:

1. 
   The overall performance of the maintenance function was examined to see if the objectives of meeting operational readiness and deployment targets were achieved and;
   

2. 
   The maintenance management function was examined to determine whether the process was effective.
   

5.1 Maintenance Performance

5.1.1 International Standards

As outlined in Chapter 2, Irish Naval Vessels are maintained throughout their life with a view to ensuring a level of safety and environmental protection that is at least equivalent to civilian standards such as SOLAS and MARPOL. That objective has been achieved through the successful compliance of the Naval Service with regular inspections by Classification Society representatives. This has provided impartial assurance of the commitment of the Naval Service to maintaining safety, environmental protection and overall ship worthiness.

5.1.2 Operational Readiness and Deployment Targets

As stated in Chapter 2, the Defence Forces’ Annual Plan 2008 requires that the Naval Service fleet is operational or at a readiness level of 8 hours notice or less 90% of the time each year. Table 5.1 shows that this target has been achieved for the last three years of the period under review. This target was not in operation for 2003.

Table 5.1 Percentage of Time Operational or Available at 8 Hours Notice

Year	Total Weeks in Refit for all vessels	% of Time	% of Time Operational or available at 8 hours notice
2003	47	11.3	88.7
2004	39	9.4	90.6
2005	35	8.4	91.6
2006	39	9.4	90.6

5.1.3 Deployment Targets

As stated in Chapter 2, there has been a phased increase in Naval Service ship patrol day output, with current patrol day output more than 50% higher than the 1999 output.

The Naval Service Implementation Plan (2000) set a target of allocating 90% of annual patrol days to fishery protection activity. The performance of the Naval Service in this regard is outlined in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2 Breakdown of Naval Service Patrol Days 2003 - 2006

Year	Fishery Patrol Days	Non-fishery Patrol Days	Total
2003	1353	143	1496
2004	1488	80	1568
2005	1599	82	1681
2006	1540	118	165819

5.1.4 Unscheduled Maintenance

Fleet days lost due to unscheduled maintenance represent a very small proportion of the overall days achieved as shown in the table below Table 5.3.

Table 5.3 Fleet Days Lost Due to Unscheduled Maintenance

Year	Days Planned	Days lost due to unscheduled maintenance
2003	1511	27 (1.8%)
2004	1600	12 (0.75%)
2005	1680	10 (0.59%)
2006	1680	9 (0.54%)

Download 496.54 Kb.

Share with your friends: