the steaming press - sailorbob 2.0 • index page steaming press page 2 team diesel: intake air...
TRANSCRIPT
Table of Contents:
NOTE FROM THE CO 1
TEAM DIESEL 2
DC NOTE 3
TEAM GT 4
TEAM STEAM 5
PROGRAM OF QTR 6
ISIC SAFE TO STEAM 7
ASSESSMENTS
TEAM LCS 8
SAFETY 9
ONE LESS HIT 10
EMERGENCY AHEAD 11
PITCH
REPETITIVE 12
EXERCISE (RE)
CONTACTS 14
This is our first newsletter issue of
2014. We hope your year is off to a
good start.
If you haven’t done so already,
please visit our website for updated
material checksheets and all of the
latest information:
NOTE THAT THIS LINK HAS
CHANGED-so save it in your
favorites
https://cpf.portal.navy.mil/sites/cnsp/
engasmpac/default.aspx
Welcome Engineering Readers! We look forward to keeping the lines
of communication open while
maintaining a seamless standard
across all ATG regions.
As always, we appreciate any
inputs, feedback, questions, or
concerns from our readers at any
time.
Contact: LT Berry Buxton, EAP
assessor, [email protected]
with any future newsletter topics or
questions.
As always, please enjoy the reading
and go forth, full steam ahead!
A Note from the Commanding Officer . . .
Greetings PACFLT Engineers,
Been a busy 2014 so far – lots of movement and an unusual number of ships trying to
break away from the maintenance phase. That being said, we have unfortunately had
four ships fail to achieve minimum equipment at LOA – two with clear paths and two
with outright failures – and we are only in the second month of the year. I can’t
emphasize enough how important it is to demand a clean PCD without exceptions.
Ships that are struggling still had work going on major equipment at LOA – not a recipe
for success. You need time with ATG to at least conduct all material checks to identify
issues and hold the contractor accountable.
Expect the revised MOB-E Tab O to be approved in the next couple weeks. There will
be a significant adjustment on how we assess Firefighting. “Conditional” certs will no
longer be an option for a failed MSFD during EOC. If the MSFD is “not effective” then
the ship will fail to certify and the scope of the supplemental EOC will ultimately be
determined by COMATGPAC and the TYCOM. Similarly, a “not effective” MSFD at
LOA may cause the light-off recommendation to be held in abeyance until remedial
training is conducted and a satisfactory MSFD is demonstrated to an EAP qualified
assessor. Two other major changes include new 1.0 mock LOA go-no-go guidance for
ATG and a 6-month statute of limitations between the 1.1 completion and the 1.4 EOC
– if the period exceeds 6-months, EAP will conduct a 1.4 Material Validation (MV).
My team has put together what I think is the best newsletter yet – please take the time
to read through it. We have carefully selected pertinent topics/issues that could help
you get ahead of the game by catching some of this stuff early. I ask that you
personally key on three of the articles; Prog of the Qtr (Elect Plant Redund), ISIC
STS, and RE Periods.
Best of luck and never hesitate to call me directly or drop by our office!
EAP Newsletter
Quarter 1, CY 2014 THE STEAMING PRESS Engineering Assessments Pacific
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 2
TEAM DIESEL: INTAKE AIR FILTER INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS
Reference (a): S9233-MMO-010 Main Propulsion Diesel Engine, LSD-41 CLASS SHIPS; VOL 1 Reference (b): 2513/003 U-1
By LT Felizia Chavez [email protected]
Although an unscheduled PMS check, inspection of air intakes are critical to the optimal performance of
diesel engines and should be closely tracked with respect to engine hours and routinely inspected while
operating. References (a) and (b) delineate the inspection criteria and guidelines for intake air filter
elements, filter housing, and filter element retaining clips and hardware. Poor material condition of filter
housing and elements is a common discrepancy during MOB-E assessments, and special attention should
be paid to correct these discrepancies when preparing for light-off.
Filter cleaning should occur when air intake system differential pressure reaches 6.5 +/- .5” water. Inspect
intake air filter elements for dirt debris, damage and deterioration. Ensure the filter is sound with no holes.
Ensure filter frame is not damaged or corroded. Ensure filter frame gaskets are not damaged and do not
have gaps that will allow dirt to bypass the filter. Remove and clean filter elements as required. Replace
damaged or corroded filters and filters with damaged gaskets. Furthermore, the material condition of the
filter housing should be inspected for damage, corrosion, deterioration and a proper seal between with the
filter gaskets. If intake filters are removed to conduct cleaning or corrosion control ensure no debris is
allowed to enter the intake piping.
If these detailed inspection and routine steps are taken on a regular basis, the diesel engine will run better
and experience a longer service life.
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 3
Damage Control Notes: FLASH HOOD, LSS AND FES UPDATES
References: (a) NSTM 077 (Flash Hood Guidance) (b) CNSF MSG DTG 091741ZJAN14 (Firefighter Ladder Safety System (LSS) guidance)
By LCDR Grant Riedl , EAP Damage Control Deputy, [email protected]
The Firefighter Ladder Safety System (LSS) provides continuous fall protection for
firefighters when climbing or descending machinery space escape trunk ladders during
vertical entry firefighting or during training exercises. The equipment components are a bolt-
on alteration installed on existing ladder rungs in main and auxiliary machinery space
escape trunks. The Firefighter Extraction System (FES) provides rescue lifting capability to
remove injured or exhausted firefighters from the bottom of escape trunks during vertical
entry firefighting and training exercises.
Due to the lack of sufficient weight-testing PMS coverage and training, CNSF released
reference (b) suspending all training using this system until appropriate weight-testing
coverage has been developed and training implemented. Specifically, it states, “ALL
APPLICABLE COMNAVSURFOR SHIPS SHALL IMMEDIATELY SUSPEND ALL
PRACTICAL ONBOARD TRAINING ON THE FES AND LES UNTIL THE ACTIONS
LISTED IN PARA 5 ARE COMPLETE.” Specific actions to be implemented include:
- PMS that covers inspections, weight test and replacement of system components.
- Personnel Qualification Standards in damage control PQS 43119 series.
- Reconstruction of net training for targeted audience incorporating an overview presentation
with follow on practical application.
- ISEA provided training to afloat training commands.
- Afloat Training Group develop and implement training requirements in the FRTP.
Please ensure that your command reviews the msg and implements the change in your
damage control training.
During recent assessments, there have been questions
about authorized anti-flash hoods for both general
quarters (GQ) and Condition II DC for main space
firefighting. According to NSTM 077-5.1.1.a, the anti-
flash hood is grey in color and is a straight tube shape.
The hood is manufactured from two layers of Kevlar/FR
Rayon. There have been instances where ATG and EAP
alike have found tan anti-flash hoods on ships during an
assessment made of Rayon/PBI. The guidance from
SURFPAC N43(DCCM Geer) is the tan anti-flash hood
can still be worn for GQ until it is no longer serviceable.
DCAs should implement a plan to phase out the old tan
hoods and replace them with the new GQ anti-flash hood
(NSN 4210-01-493-4694). If you have ordered the new
anti-flash gear and received the older tan gear, contact
DCCM Geer at [email protected].
Flash Hood Update
Changes to Firefighter Ladder Safety System (LSS) Use Guidance
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 4
TEAM GAS TURBINE: GAS TURBINE INTAKE AND UPTAKE INSPECTIONS
References: (a) SURFMEPP DDG51 CLASS GAS TURBINE INTAKE AND UPTAKE INSPECTION HANDBOOK (b) 2513 AP-1
By LCDR Donald E. Lee II, EAP Gas Turbine Deputy, [email protected]
Intakes, uptakes and exhausts of gas turbine
ships are critical components of a gas turbine
propulsion plant. While they are difficult to inspect
and maintain while underway, careful attention
and diligence to standards must be observed.
Recent MOB-E assessments have revealed that
maintenance and upkeep of these areas have not
been performed adequately. To ensure proper
operation of main engines and gas turbine
generators, intakes and uptakes must be
maintained. The following are tips to ensure
success in the appearance and structural integrity
of the intakes and uptakes:
- Daily cleanliness and corrosion inspections of the dirty sides and uptakes should be performed. Ensure
all standing water is removed and that the deck drains are in place secured by all fasteners and are
operating correctly. Pay particular attention to flaking paint and rust as these may lead to bigger problems
if allowed to persist. Also, do not allow items to be stored in these areas.
- Perform freshwater wash downs of dirty side intakes upon entering port and weekly while inport. This will
prevent salt deposits from forming and causing a degradation of paint systems. Ensure agglomerators are
free from dirt and debris. Keep them as clean as possible and replace if necessary.
- Clean sides should be inspected upon entering port. During this inspection, pay attention to flaking paint
and rust. Inspect for water intrusion as this may indicate blow-in door gasket leakage. Ensure you
perform a light leak test. This is also a great indicator of blow-in door gasket problems.
All anti-icing bleed air piping must be clean, corrosion free, and free of all paint that may block the air
holes.
If entering an extended availability, develop a thorough inspection and restoration plan. Start early as
these areas often foster growth work. Assemble “tiger teams” from engineering department to perform
preservation and painting to ensure intakes and uptakes are ready to support a successful light off.
Maintenance of these areas must garner attention from leadership and be a department priority.
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 5
Team Steam: Boiler Water/Feedwater (BW/FW) Test and
Treatment Supply Update
REF: NAVSURFWARCEN SHIPSYSENGSTA PHILADELPHIA PA Message DTG 061500ZJAN14
By LT Dan Ponce [email protected]
- Carbohydrazide (NSN 6810-01-583-1070) is now being supplied by Great Lakes Toll Services, INC,
(CAGE 6WAX6) and is received in new packaging. Stock obtained from the previous supplier may be used
until expended.
- Specifies the authorized lots for various stock chemicals and shelf life extension guidance, if applicable.
- Updated open purchase information for dissolved oxygen test kits, carbohydrazide test reagents, and
other various equipment no longer supported by the Naval Stock system.
Ships should ensure that this message is utilized when conducting the next monthly inventory to ensure that
the correct and adequate amounts of authorized test and treatment chemicals are onboard to ensure safe
and unrestricted operations of ship’s boilers.
Adequate supplies of material for testing and treatment of
feedwater and boiler water must be maintained, stored
properly, and have remaining shelf life. Stock solutions,
indicators, and standards are subject to deterioration during
storage. For
this reason various shelf lives have been imposed on these
materials to minimize errors in testing boiler water and
feedwater.
Section 28 and Section 32 of the NSTM 220 Vol2 Rev10
contains the supply information for BW/FW and Aux/Waste
Heat Boilers, respectively. Recently, NSWCCD-SSES
Philadelphia, PA provided additional detailed supply
support information with regard to test and treatment
chemicals. Ship’s Oil Kings, SGPI’s and supply personnel
shall review and maintain this message until NSTM 220 is
updated.
Some important highlights of the message are:
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 6
PROGRAM OF THE QUARTER: ELECTRICAL PLANT REDUNDANCY
REQUIREMENTS
Reference: COMNAVSURFOR MSG DTG 190000Z APR 13
By CDR Ben Allbritton, EAP XO, [email protected]
EOSS operates under several basic assumptions and optimal plant alignments. Deviation from
these plant alignments places the overall combat effectiveness of the ship in jeopardy due to
unforeseen catastrophic causalities or battle damage. Reference (a) provides clear TYCOM
guidance on the requirement for electrical plant redundancy and highlights a dramatic case where
a ship was not able to perform its warfighting mission due to a catastrophic complete loss of power
after routinely operating in single generator operations.
A ship that routinely operates in single generator operations risks losing vital electrical loads such
as lube oil service pumps jeopardizing the main reduction gear (MRG). Even a few minutes of
lost lube oil pressure could result in wiped bearings, lengthy shipyard repairs, and a significant
operational impact within an AOR. In addition, several other factors such as faulty UPS batteries,
other existing generator casualties, and incorrect watchstander actions may impede timely
restoration of the electrical plant.
For the electrical plant, more than one electrical generator – whether it is a steam-driven SSTG,
diesel, or gas turbine generator – must be online in accordance with the EOSS Optimum
Generator Combinations (OGC) chart in order to provide the necessary redundancy to cover vital
loads both in the propulsion plant and combat systems. Single generator operations are
considered a transitory condition normally experienced when shifting between shore and ship
power or when recovering from a generator casualty. It is not meant to be used in achieving fuel
economy or a permanent state after suffering casualty. During some recent assessments, ship’s
force believed that starting a standby generator was not required if a single generator had the KW
and amperage capacity to accommodate the load. If the material condition of the plant supports, a
standby generator should be immediately started and placed online in accordance with EOCC to
regain the redundancy in the electrical plant.
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 7
ISIC SAFE TO STEAM ASSESSMENTS
Reference: ATGPACINST 3502.1 Tab O
By CAPT Mark Lakamp, Senior Assessor, [email protected]
Recently, EAP has been seeing an increase in Safe to Start (STS) messages from ISICs. Many of
these messages have stated the purpose of the hot plant testing authorized by the STS is “in
support of LOA preparations” or “in support of EPCC dance rehearsal.” Getting a head start on
LOA or MOB-E 1.1B preps is not the purpose for hot plant testing authorized by a STS message.
Per Tab O:
Provisions exist for the operation of equipment during a ship’s maintenance period
prior to LOA, where limited, temporary operation is absolutely necessary to
complete equipment installation and operational testing. In this case, a ship may
operate propulsion and electrical systems.
To clarify, hot plant testing is only authorized following an STS assessment when operational
testing is necessary to complete the installation of new equipment, such as an engine change out
or overhaul. STS authorized hot plant testing should be a rare exception, not a means to give
ships a chance to operate equipment prior to LOA or test overall plant operations. LOAs provide
the TYCOM confidence that a ship is ready to safely light off and operate the engineering plant for
dock trials and sea trials. The holistic approach an LOA provides with in-depth assessment of
general space condition, installed and portable damage control equipment, fire-fighting capability,
demonstration of safety checks and operating parameters and a thorough review of SOH and
management programs can not be duplicated by an ISIC STS assessment. ISICs who authorize
light off of main engines and generators above and beyond what is absolutely necessary to
complete overhaul or installation are assuming risk they are not authorized by the TYCOM to
assume.
ISICs with questions about whether a STS authorization is appropriate should feel free to contact
one of the EAP Senior Assessors at any time.
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 8
Team LCS: Engineering Control Systems (ECS) Beware!
By LCDR Jeff Ferguson, EAP LCS Deputy, [email protected]
As engineering plants become increasingly automated,
engineering departments should recognize that they have an
additional crewmember with them. It goes by a number of names:
Machinery Control System (MCS), Engineering Control System
(ECS), or another name the contracting agency decides to name
it. Additionally, there are subsystem software packages that feed
into the MCS/ECS architecture. In some cases, these systems
are making decisions on how to operate your plant without your
approval or understanding. It is imperative that our level of
knowledge regarding system operations include the decision
process that the computers use to operate the plant without
operator action so we are not surprised by these actions. EOOWs
especially need to be fluent in the intricacies of plant automation to
prevent loss of situational awareness and loss of plant control.
During the course of recent assessments, EAP has identified some interesting details regarding these
systems. As engines procured for Navy use become “smarter,” the local control systems have
implemented dynamic safety set points at the local operating panel. This means that alarm set points for
the engine change based on engine speed or loading. Several parameters were identified in the LCS-2
ECS that did not follow these dynamic ranges but were a set value based on an arbitrary engine speed.
This could result in an engine shutdown without warning or remote indication of cause. On the other end of
the spectrum, the engine could be in “alarm” continuously at the remote station causing the operators to
take actions not required by the actual engine status. Until these discrepancies are corrected,
watchstander level of knowledge is the mitigating factor.
Another example was provided during dynamic electric plant testing on LHD class MCS. During dead bus
recovery, the system was expected to close circuit breakers to the energized bus (the test divides the
electric plant into a port and starboard bus). Unfortunately these breakers failed to close.
The point is not that the systems are not performing as designed, but that we as operators toned to become
more educated on these types of systems and how they are supposed to work. Level of knowledge is a
fundamental engineering principle, and as our systems get smarter, so must we. While the technical
community and their automation systems are making operations easier through the use of Human Machine
Interfaces, it requires the operators to spend the time to ensure the human remains in overall control. Get
the technical authorities on the line, demand training, institutionalize the knowledge… get smart.
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 9
Electrical Safety Note: Inspecting Fuse Blocks
REF: (a) NSTM 300 Revision 9 Section 2.5.3.1 (b) NSTM 320 Revision 6 Section 1.7.4
By LT Berry L. Buxton [email protected]
On a recent assessment, an issue with mismatched Load Center Breaker Fuse Blocks was discovered on
one ship, specifically:
- 40AMP trip element had 50-100 AMP fuse block installed
- 10AMP trip element had 15-25 AMP fuse block installed
-25AMP trip element had 50-100 AMP fuse block installed
The ship had 39 breakers with trip elements that were incorrect. To conventional engineers, this is a
classic case of “over fusing” which carries the risk of wiring insulation break down and class C fire. Despite
specific guidance in NSTM 300 and 320 stating to never replace with a higher fuse current rating than the
circuit its protecting, some ISEA representatives may contend that the fuses will still provide the required
instantaneous current interruption to protect the breaker.
Establishing and maintaining a consistent standard is the most important element in successfully preventing
a class C fire, personal injury and equipment damage due to improper equipment configuration.
In all cases of electrical safety, good engineering practice should ensure that all installed fuses match label
plates that are installed for breakers so that ships force can properly identify whether or not the correct
fuses have been installed. Prudently following the NSTM guidance will remove all guess work and mitigate
the dangers of over fusing. When in doubt, follow the black and white guidance!
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 10
One Less Hit: Locking the shaft on cruisers
REF: (a)S9241-AE-MMA-010 MAIN PROPULSION REDUCTION GEAR ASSEMBLIES FOR CG-47 CLASS SHIPS (b) EOSS EOP MLUSU (c) ATGPACINST 3502.1 Tab O
By LCDR Kirk Ochalek, EAP Operations Officer, [email protected]
NOTE: “If turning gear clutch shifting lever cannot be moved to the "engaged" position, back off clutch
shifting lever 1/2 inch and, using wrench, rotate turning gear motor shaft 1/8 to 1/4 turn. Attempt to
engage clutch shifting lever, repeat until turning gear is "ENGAGED".
CAUTION: DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ENGAGE THE LOCK WHILE ROTATING THE TURNING GEAR
MOTOR SHAFT OR GEAR TEETH DAMAGE WILL RESULT.
CAUTION: IF TURNING GEAR SHIFTING LEVER CANNOT BE ENGAGED, THE TURNING GEAR
TEETH MAY BE BUTTED. DO NOT FORCED ENGAGEMENT OR ATTEMPT TO ROTATE TURNING
GEAR MOTOR SHAFT WHEN THE CLUTCH TEETH ARE BUTTED.
The most common deficiencies noted have been watchstanders rotating the turning gear motor greater
than a quarter turn or, more seriously, applying pressure to the clutch shifting lever while simultaneously
rotating the turning gear shaft. This risks the damage of associated gear teeth and a hazard to personnel.
Verbatim procedural compliance should be reinforced during all engineering training events. The
procedures have been written to protect both watchstanders and equipment.
If there are any engineering training team related questions, the team here at EAP is standing by to
provide assistance and guidance. Further information can be found on our website:
https://www.portal.navy.mil/comnavsurfor/engasmpac/default.aspx
Sail safe!
During MOB-E 1.4 certification, ships are
required to lock each shaft. We evaluate the
conduct of EOP MLUSU in conjunction with
any drill requiring the shaft to be locked. For
cruisers, one of the most common
deficiencies noted throughout 2013 was a
failure to exercise verbatim compliance with
MLUSU.
Step 4 in MLUSU, section 1 states: “Place a
wrench on the turning gear motor shaft and
position the motor shaft at the center of its
backlash position”. The follow-on note and
cautions are often overlooked. These are:
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 11
Testing Emergency Ahead Pitch
REF: (a) CNSF MSG DTG 241853Z JAN 2014 (b) MIP Series 2451
By LCDR Kirk Ochalek, EAP Operations Officer, [email protected]
In January, a joint CNSP/CNSL message (reference (a))was released to address controllable pitch
propeller (CPP) system oil distribution box failures stemming from the demonstration of setting
emergency ahead pitch in preparation for and during the conduct of assessments and inspections.
NSWCCD-SSES is working on guidance including development of an ICMP mandatory task for
assessment of emergency ahead pitch capability to mitigate unnecessary damge due to excessive
testing..
Until that guidance is available, , ships will only conduct the full MRC in accordance with the specified
periodicity, normally 18-months, or when troubleshooting to address a noticed increase in time required to
change propeller pitch.
Maintenance personnel are now only able to attempt to fully perform this PMS once within the required
periodicity. If they are unable to complete it in the first attempt, the ship must obtain technical assistance
from their local RMC prior to re-attempting.
EOSS procedures MSEAH and SEAH are reserved for actual casualties. Ships shall not set emergency
ahead pitch unless called for in their MRC.
In support of material certification events (i.e. TYCOM LOA, MOB-E 1.1A, or MOB-E 1.4MV), ships will
only demonstrate the following portions of their applicable MRC:
For FFG-7 class ships: Conduct 2451/18M-4 (MRC A0 8HEG N) through step 1A(9)
For CG 52-66: Conduct 2451/18M-5 (MRC 40 6PAD N) through step 1L
For CG 67-73, DDG-51 and LPD-17 class ships: Conduct 2451/18M-2 (MRC 11 8QWT N) through step
1N
For LSD 41 class ships: Conduct 2451/18M-3 (MRC A9 6UYA N) through step 1M
For MCM-1 class ships: Conduct 2451/18M-1 (MRC 63 8BRK N) through step 1N
For LHD 8: Conduct 2451/U-3 (MRC 59 E4KG N) through step M.
The demonstrations for TMI, INSURV or EAP do not remove or relieve the ship of the requirement to
perform the full scope of their applicable MRC in accordance with their scheduled requirements.
If there are any questions, the team here at EAP is standing by to provide assistance and guidance.
Further information can be found on our website:
https://www.portal.navy.mil/comnavsurfor/engasmpac/default.aspx
Sail Safe!
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 12
Repetitive Exercise (RE) Periodicities
REF: (a) EDORM (CNSPINST 3540.3B),. 23 Jul 2013 (b) SFEM (CNSPINST 3500.11), 17 Sep 2013
By Mark Morrell, ATGPAC Director of Eng Training, [email protected]
The revised EDORM (Ref A) provides a more comprehensive standard for MOB-E evolutions and drill
proficiency while ensuring the full spectrum of evolutions and drills are conducted within a reasonable
periodicity. The revised MOB-E evolutions and drill requirements are listed in the SFEM (Ref B) as
Repetitive Exercises (RE) 01 thru 05 in addition to RE06 (Respond to Main Space Fire-Agent Good) and
RE-07 (Respond to Main Space Fire-Agent Bad). MOBE-RE01-RE07 are provided in the table below:
Note 7 = Ships must update training accomplishment in TORIS at a minimum of every 30 days.
Note 8 = Routine / Infrequent evolutions and CAT I, CAT II, CAT III drills are defined in Appendix C and D of Tab O.
For MOBE-RE01-RE05 there are two periodicities, which may be confusing. There is the frequency for
conducting the evolutions/drills (90, 180, or 365 days) and the frequency for reporting the percent
completed in TORIS (every 30 days minimum). The frequency for successfully completing MOBE-RE06
is 90 days and MOBE-RE07 is 365 days, which is the same as the reporting requirement for TORIS.
The clock starts for all REs from the date of MOB-E certification. To help remove any confusion between
the two periodicities/frequencies, the following example for RE01 is provided to illustrate how they apply:
On March 1, USS Ship certifies in MOB-E. In 90 days (by May 30), every qualified Cond III watchstander
will be required to effectively complete all Routine Evolutions for their assigned watch station listed in
Tab-O. The first report in TORIS will be required nlt March 31. Let’s say that the ship has completed
33% of the required Routine Evolutions and reports 33% for RE01 in TORIS on March 29. The next
TORIS report for RE01 will be due within 30 days, nlt April 28 for this example. To continue, the ship has
completed 70 % of its Routine Evs by April 28 and then reports 70% for RE01 in TORIS. On May 28,
100% of the Routine Evs are completed effectively and reported. Now lets say that none of the evolutions
conducted during the period from March 2 to March 29 (about 33% of the total required Evs) have been
completed within 90 days of when they were last conducted and it’s 27 Jun with a report due. The ship
will be at about 66% and will report 66% for RE01 in TORIS on 27 Jun. The ship will continue to report
the status of RE01 every 30 days throughout Sustainment until it enters the Maintenance Phase and then
begins a new Basic Phase.
NR EXERCISE NAME AMPLIFICATION FREQ Notes
01 Report completion
percentage of Routine
Evolutions
Every qualified COND III watch stander effectively
complete all routine evolutions applicable to
their assigned watch station.
90 7,8
02 Report completion
percentage of Infrequent
Evolutions
Every qualified COND III watch stander effectively
complete all infrequent evolutions applicable to
their assigned watch station.
180 7,8
03 Report completion
percentage of CAT I
Drills
Each of two qualified COND III watch teams
effectively complete all Cat I drills.
90 7,8
04 Report completion
percentage of CAT II
Drills
Each of two qualified COND III watch teams
effectively complete all Cat II drills.
180 7,8
05 Report completion
percentage of CAT III
Drills
Each of two qualified COND III watch teams
effectively complete all Cat III drills.
365 7,8
06 Respond To Main Space
Fire (Agent Good) Min 2 COND III Watch Sections and Repair 5
Requires Good Agent
90
07 Respond To Main Space
Fire (Agent Bad) Min 2 COND III Watch Sections and Repair 5
Requires Bad Agent
365
THE STEAMING PRESS
Page 13
Repetitive Exercise (RE) Periodicities - continued
REF: (a) EDORM (CNSPINST 3540.3B),. 23 Jul 2013 (b) SFEM (CNSPINST 3500.11), 17 Sep 2013
By Mark Morrell, ATGPAC Director of Eng Training, [email protected]
The process and logic illustrated in the above example for RE01 will apply similarly for RE02 thru RE05.
The ship is simply reporting a snapshot in time every 30 days of the percentage of required
evolutions/drills that have been successfully completed within periodicity. The ship can use any method
to track watch stander evolutions and watch team drill completion, but ATGPAC/EAP has made available
a MOBE RE Tracking Excel spreadsheet tool to assist the ship’s. The spreadsheet automatically
calculates the completion percentages for the Traino to report in TORIS every 30 days.
Hopefully this clears up any confusion with periodicities. If you have any further questions about MOBE
RE requirements, please feel free to contact Mr. Mark Morrell.
All of these references and tools are available on the ATG Toolbox at:
https://atg.ncdc.navy.mil/TOOLBOX/PRIVATE/INDEX.HTM
Engineering
Assessments Pacific
3455 Sturtevant Street, St 1
San Diego, CA 92136-5069
Phone:
(619) 556-6981
DSN: 526-6981
Steam Deputy:
LT Daniel Ponce [email protected]
Diesel Deputy:
LCDR Josh Duggan [email protected]
Gas Turbine Deputy:
LCDR Donald Lee [email protected]
Damage Control Deputy:
LCDR Grant Riedl [email protected]
LCS Deputy:
LCDR Jeff Ferguson [email protected]
Operations Officer:
LCDR Kirk Ochalek [email protected]
Senior Assessors:
CAPT Mark Lakamp [email protected]
CAPT Anthony Anglin [email protected]
CDR Benjamin Allbritton – XO [email protected]
CAPT Michael Talaga – CO [email protected]
Engineering Assessments Pacific Deputies
We’re on the Web!
See us at:
www.portal.navy.mil/comnavsurfor/engasmpac