Plant Equipment Packages: Are They a Credible Deterrent to War?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 1990-12 Plant equipment packages: are they a credible deterrent to war? Hennig, Robert J. Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/27598 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California AD-A24 6 523 THESIS PLANT EQUIPMENT PACKAGES: ARE THEY A CREDIBLE DETERRENT TO WAR? by LT Robert J. Hennig, SC, USN and LT Thomas A. Cusmina, SC, USN December, 1990 Thesis Advisor: Professor Thomas P. Moore Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited 92-04976 Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Ia. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION l b.RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS Unclassified 2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF REPORT Approved for public release; distribution isunlimited. 2b. DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE 4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) 5.MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) 6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6b. OFFICE SYMBOL 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION Naval Postgraduate School (If applicable) Naval Postgraduate School 6c. ADDRESS (City, State, andZIP Code) 7b ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) Monterey,CA 93943-6000 Monterey, CA 93943-5000 Ba. NAME OF FUNDING/SPONSORING 8b OFFICE SYMBOL 9.PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER ORGANIZATION (Ifapplicable) c.ADDRESS (Cthy, State, and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS Program Element NO ProlmeCto hbI No Work Umt AcCO, on 11. TITLE (include Security Clagification) Plant Equipment Packages: Are They A Credible Deterrent Tu War? 12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S) Hennig. Robert J.and Cusmina, Thomas A. 13a. TYPE OF REPORT 13b TIME COVERED 14 DATE OF REPORT (year, month, day) 15 PAGE COUNT Mastersr Thesis From To 1990 December 20 16 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION The views expressed in this thesis are those ofthe author and do not reflect the official policy or position ofthe Department of Defense or the US. Government. 17. COSATI CODES 18 SUBJECT TERMS (continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number) FIELD GROUP SUBGROUP Study of the management and viability ofplant equipment packages. Conclusions were drawn from the examination of the condition assessments on one type of industrial plant equipment in plant equipment packages. 19. ABSTRACT (continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number) The purpose of this thesis is to determine if plant equipment packages are a viable resource for industrial surge and mobilization. A plant equipment package is a Department of Defense term used to describe an approved complement of different pieces of controlled industrial plant equipment including special tools,, special test. equipment., and other plant equipment. These items are put together at a predetermined facility to form a production line to manufacture critical war material. Differences between Army and Navy plant equipment management were identified, and condition assessments of industrial plant equipment were examined through the study of Acme-Gridley lathes in Army plant equipment packages. 20. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 21 ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION M UNCLASSIOIEDLIMITED 1SAME MAS PORIOIC D USM Unclasified 2U. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b TELEPHONE (Include Area code) 22c OFFICE SYMBOL Professor Thomas P. Moore 408-646-2161 AS/Mr DD FORM 1473,84 MAR 83 APR edition may be used until exhausted SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE All other editions are obsolete Unclassified Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Plant Equipment Packages: Are They a Credible Deterrent to War? by Robert J. Hennig Lieutenant, Supply Corps, United States Navy B.A., Fordham University, 1980 and Thomas A. Cusmina Lieutenant, Supply Corps, United States Navy B.A., Rutgers University, 1978 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN MANAGEMENT from the NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL December 1990 Authors: Approved by: _ _ _-_ Mark I. Sturm, nd Reader Department of Administrative Sciences ii ABSTRACT The purpose of this thesis is to determine if plant equipment packages are a viable resource for industrial surge and mobilization. A plant equipment package is a Department of Defense term used to describe an approved complement of different pieces of controlled industrial plant equipment including special tools, special test equipment, and other plant equipment. These items are put together at a predetermined facility to form a production line to manufacture critical war material. Differences between Army and Navy plant equipment management were identified, and condition assessments of industrial plant equipment were examined through the study of Acme-Gridley lathes in Army plant equipment packages. Acoession For IS GR A&I DT C E;.[200 AvlAlp-qitO CCd9 SpGcal ,p/( TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........ .................. 1 II. BACKGROUND/HISTORY ......... ................ 6 A. INTRODUCTION .......... ................ 6 B. PLANT EQUIPMENT PACKAGE ....... ............ 6 C. INDUSTRIAL BASE ........ ................ 10 D. SURGE ......... .................... 11 E. MOBILIZATION ...... ................. 14 F. WORLD WAR I MOBILIZATION ... ........... 15 G. WORLD WAR II MOBILIZATION ... ........... 17 H. EVOLUTION OF PLANT EQUIPMENT PACKAGES .... .. 19 I. MACHINE TOOLS ....... ................. 20 J. PACKAGE PLANT TOOLS ..... ............. 22 K. PLANT EQUIPMENT PACKAGES ... ........... 24 L. CONCLUSION ....... .................. 25 III. PEP MANAGEMENT ...... ................. 27 A. INTRODUCTION ...... ................. 27 B. PEP TRENDS ....... .................. 27 C. MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW ..... .............. 30 D. MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTIONS ... ........... 33 iv E. ARMY MANAGEMENT ................ 37 F. PROBLEMS WITH IPE AGE .... ............. 42 G. AUDIT OF PEP READINESS .... ............ 44 H. NAVY MANAGEMENT ...... ................ 45 I. AGE OF NAVY IPE ...... ................ 48 J. CONCLUSIONS ........ ................. 49 IV. CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF INACTIVEINDUSTRIAL PLANT EQUIPMENT ......... ..................... 51 A. CONDITION ASSESSMENT .... ............. 52 B. ACME-GRIDLEY LATHES ..... .............. 54 C. CONDITION ASSESSMENTS OF ACME-GRIDLEY LATHES 59 D. TESTS BY RIVERBANK ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT . 62 E. MACHINE CAPABILITY ..... .............. 63 F. TEST RESULTS ...... ................. 67 G. REACTIVATION OF PEP-669 .... ............ 70 H. ARMY AUDIT OF PLANT EQUIPMENT PACKAGES . .. 71 I. ARMY AUDIT REPORT CONCLUSION .. ......... 73 J. CONCLUSION ....... .................. 73 V. CONDITION ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES ... .......... 76 A. PURPOSE OF CONDITION ASSESSMENTS . ....... 76 B. ARMY COMMANDS THAT DO CONDITION ASSESSMENTS . 77 C. BACKGROUND ....... .................. 78 D. CONDITION ASSESSMENTS OF ARMY EQUIPMENT . 79 v E. CRIB SURVEYS AT NI INDUSTRIES AND RIVERBANK AMMUNITION PLANT ......... .................... 80 F. ACME-GRIDLEY LATHES CONDITION ASSESSMENT COST 84 G. COST OF OPERATIONAL TESTING THE ACME-GRIDLEY LATHES ........ .................... 85 H. CURRENT CONDITION ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES . 87 I. COST OF REPAIR ...... ................ 88 J. COMPARISON ....... .................. 91 K. CONCLUSION ....... .................. 93 VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .. ......... 94 A. CONCLUSIONS ...... ................. 95 B. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... ................ 100 C. SUMM4ARY ......... ..................... 100 APPENDIX A. PEPS ........ ................... 101 APPENDIX B. NUMBER OF PEPS ..... .............. 130 APPENDIX C. CONDITION CODE DEFINITIONS .. ........ 131 APPENDIX D. ACME-GRIDLEY LATHES .... ............ 134 APPENDIX E. 81 mm MORTAR CASING .... ........... 141 APPENDIX F. VISUAL CHECK-OFF SHEET .... ........... 142 vi LIST OF REZEENCES .* 143 INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST..................148 vii I. INTRODUCTION This thesis is a study of plant equipment packages (PEPs) which are designed for use in times of national emergency (i.e., surge or mobilization). This study will investigate whether PEPs are a viable resource in times of industrial surge and mobilization. In order to draw conclusions on PEPs, assessments of the condition of inactive government-owned industrial plant equipment (IPE) in PEPs will be the focus of this study. In August 1990, President Bush ordered United States troops into Saudi Arabia in response to the overthrow of Kuwait by Iraq and the massing of Iraqi troops along the Saudi Arabian border. Appropriately dubbed "Operation Desert Shield," American troops took up defensive positions in Saudi Arabia to prevent a possible invasion by the Iraqi military. Americans prepared for a "long campaign," triggering concern in the press and the nation that United States forces could get involved in another Vietnam style conflict. In addition, there was concern over the ability to sustain military forces in the event of prolonged conventional conflict. Today's rapidly changing environment is decreasing the possibility of nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union (i.e. Glasnost, Perestroika), while increasing 1 the threat of low intensity conventional conflicts with third world nations. Recent events in the Persian Gulf (Iran/Iraq war, Kuwait invasion, hostage incidents, terrorism, etc...) highlight the need to maintain a defense industrial base for the manufacture of critical war material. Furthermore, sustainability of military forces in a threatening environment is the quintessential goal of our industrial base. Sustainability, in military terms, is the