The Navy Has Not Systematically Evaluated the Feasibility and Cost-Effectiveness of Rotational Crewing for Surface Ships

Although the Navy’s senior leadership has initiated a change in how the  Navy can operate in the future by demonstrating that rotational crewing is  a feasible alternative to traditional 6-month ship deployments, the Navy  has not systematically evaluated the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of all  rotational crewing options for its current and future classes of surface  ships. The Navy is missing an opportunity to collect data and more objectively  assess the impact of extended deployments on ship condition. Navy Has Not Provided Effective Guidance or Capitalized on Lessons Learned from Rotational Crewing Experiences

The Navy has done some planning in support of rotational crewing on  surface ships, such as for the Sea Swap demonstration project, but  because the concept is evolving as an alternative, the service has not  provided effective guidance during implementation on all ships to ensure  proper oversight and accountability. Furthermore, the Navy has not  systematically leveraged lessons learned to effectively support rotational  crewing. Effective guidance and sharing of lessons learned are key  management tools to overcome challenges associated with  institutionalizing change and facilitating efficient operations. The Navy has  well-established crew rotation policies and procedures for ballistic missile  submarines for use as best practices that include appropriately  documenting the ship’s condition and using advanced teams to help  prepare for crew turnover and help ensure accountability. As a result, the  Navy unnecessarily risks repeating past mistakes that could decrease  warfighting effectiveness and crew morale. Navy Conducted Some Planning in Support of Rotational Crewing

Because rotating crews aboard surface ships on extended deployments  differs from the traditional 6-month ship deployment, it is important that  planning be effective to increase institutional knowledge and gain  acceptance for implementing the change. Maintenance Strategies for Alternative Crewing and Potential Impacts Have Not Been Fully Assessed

The impact of ship maintenance on the implementation of rotational  crewing has not been fully assessed. Navy  destroyers and patrol coastal ships using rotational crews on extended  deployments have faced maintenance challenges to ensure the mission  capability of ships while overseas. Therefore, while the Navy used rotational  crews to keep ships on station for up to 24 months, in the absence of a  careful analysis of alternative maintenance strategies, the Navy runs the  risk that some maintenance approaches will degrade the long-term  condition of ships, diminish crew morale, and discourage crew support for  using the practice. Normally, most ship maintenance and repair is completed  between 6-month deployments. Higgins’ ship material  condition after a 17-month deployment to be comparable to the  U.S.S. Successfully overcoming issues that could  impede using this alternative and to gain support for implementing this  change require knowledge of the various rotational options and their  impact on operational requirements, ship condition, and crew morale. For example, the Navy has  not established the analytical framework to evaluate all rotational crewing  options and related costs.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Navy has traditionally maintained overseas presence by deploying ships for 6 months. Rotating crews aboard ships that remain deployed for longer periods is an alternative the Navy could pursue to increase the utilization of ships. Senior Navy officials have also cited crew rotations as a way to reduce part of the Navy's plans for a larger force structure and reportedly free billions of dollars for other priorities. On its own initiative, GAO examined the Navy's efforts to evaluate and implement several rotational crewing options and the impacts of ship maintenance on extended rotational crewing deployments.

What GAO Found

The Navy has initiated change by demonstrating that rotating crews aboard surface ships on extended deployments may be a feasible alternative to traditional 6-month ship deployments. To effectively institutionalize and implement change, best practices show that a comprehensive analytical framework provides useful information to decision makers. However, the Navy has not established such an analytical framework--consisting of formal measurable goals, objectives, and metrics--that could be used to assess the feasibility of various rotational crewing options and determine their impact on operational requirements, ship condition, and crew morale. Further, the Navy has not systematically collected or developed accurate cost data to perform complete cost-effective analyses. Absent such information, the Navy may not know the full impact of rotating crews on surface ships, the extent to which the various options should be implemented, or whether it is getting maximum return on investment. Because rotating crews on surface ships is evolving as an alternative, the Navy has not provided effective guidance when implementing the practice and has not systematically leveraged lessons learned. Effective guidance and sharing of lessons learned are key tools used to institutionalize change and facilitate efficient operations. While the Navy has well-established crew rotation policies and procedures for ballistic missile submarines that include appropriately documenting a ship's condition and turnover procedures for accountability, it has not provided comparable guidance to surface ships. As a result, the Navy unnecessarily risks repeating mistakes that could decrease warfighting effectiveness and crew morale. Furthermore, the impact of ship maintenance on the implementation of rotational crewing has not been fully assessed. Effective maintenance strategies help ensure ships can perform their missions without adverse impacts on crew morale. It is a challenge to ensure the mission capability of ships that are deployed for longer periods because most maintenance and repair is usually completed between 6-month deployments. While rotating crews has enabled the Navy to keep ships deployed for up to 24 months, the service has not fully examined all issues related to the best maintenance strategies that could affect a ship's condition and crew's morale. Absent effective strategies, the Navy risks degrading long-term ship condition and discouraging crew support for rotational crewing.