DoD FSRM, BUILDER SMS and the LEGACY of Wasteful Politics

Zero credible cost visibility and inability to enable cost management…   another instance of Government attempt to compete with the private sector and lack of capable and continuous accountable leadership.

DoD hasn’t achieved a clean audit since independent audits were initiated in 2017.

DoD FSRM BUILDER SMS and the LEGACY of Wasteful Politics
DoD FSRM, Builder SMS, Continued Examples of Lack of Governance, Accountability, and Leadership

We determined that the risk assessment and control environment components of federal internal control were significant to this objective, including the underlying principles that management should identify risks to achieving defined objectives, estimate their significance, and design responses to risks that are contained within the defined risk tolerances; as well as that management should assign responsibility to achieve the entity’s objectives, evaluate performance, and hold individuals accountable for their internal control responsibilities. Because we found the components’ facility condition data were unreliable due to missing and inaccurate entries, as noted above, we were unable to analyze the relationship between facility sustainment funding and facility condition.

We previously reported in 2018 on these unreliable data and made 15 SMS is a tool for asset life-cycle management that produces multi-year condition trends and investment requirements. There are specialized SMS modules, such as BUILDER (buildings), RAILER (rails), ROOFER (roofs), and PAVER (pavements). Modules are in development for utilities, fuels, water retention structures (e.g., dams and levees), and
shorefront assets. recommendations focused at improving the quality of data; however, as of September 2021, DOD had not yet implemented our recommendations.     (2022 GAO Report GAO-22-104481)

 

 

1975: Initial research began on airfield pavement management techniques
1977: PAVER is released
1983: Initial development of ROOFER
1984: Initial development of RAILER
1988: RAILER released
1989: ROOFER released
1990: Initial development of BUILDER
1995: ROOFER version 2.1 released
1996: Tri-Service Master Plan for all Engineering Management Systems (EMS)
modules (Air Force to fund PAVER enhancements, Army to fund RAILER
enhancements, and Navy to fund [future] BUILDER enhancements)
2000: BUILDER 2.0 released and first version commercially available
2003: NAVY funds development of BUILDER 3.0 (web-based with single instance for
entire component)
2005: Navy selects commercial tool for facility assessments in lieu of continuing with
BUILDER
2006: USMC begins pilot tests of BUILDER
2007: BUILDER 3.0 released (first enterprise ready web based SMS version)
2007: Army issues AR 420-1 specifying PAVER and RAILER as the data standard for
condition assessments of those specific infrastructures
2008: (November 25) OSD issues policy memo for linear segmentation of real property
[Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment)
Memorandum: Revised Implementation Goals for Linear Segment Data Elements
of the Real Property Inventory Requirements (RPIR)]
2008: USMC begins full implementation of BUILDER at all USMC installations
2009: Navy abandons commercial tool and adopts BUILDER
2010: USAF performs first pilot tests of BUILDER for STRATCOM at 11 installations
2010: DLA approves use of BUILDER for facility condition assessments
A-2
2010: NIST completed inspections in Gaithersburg, MD to calculate facility backlog
and condition inspections
2011: Airforce implements BUILDER for about 60 million square feet
2011: NIST learns the BUILDER software, but doesn’t continue with additional work
2012: Army conducts BUILDER pilots (Fort Hood, Fort Carson, Letterkenny Army
Depot, and Sierra Army Depot)
2012: MEDCOM conducts BUILDER pilots to investigate adoption as Tri-Care
Management Activity (TMA) standard
2012: NIST expands pilot site contract to Gaithersburg, MD and Boulder, CO for 4
years
2012: National Academy of Sciences (NAS) releases Predicting Outcomes of
Investments in Maintenance and Repair of Federal Facilities recommending
Federal agencies adopt the BUILDER methodology
2012: NIST rotates campuses for the next 3 years to complete outstanding work
2013: STPI study identifies BUILDER as a promising tool to evaluate facility condition
for Federal laboratories1
2013: NNSA adopts BUILDER
2013: September 10 USD establishes SMS as the only DOD standardized facility
inspection and condition assessment tool [Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Installations and Environment) Memorandum: Standardizing Facility Condition
Assessment]
2013: ODNI adopts BUILDER and formed the BUILDER Board for implementation
2013: DHA conducts two pilots (Fort Bragg and Walter Reed)
2013: USDA completes first pilot (Beltsville, MD)
2014: VFA, Inc. v. U.S.; private interest sued the United States as a “bid protest to
challenge the decision of the Department of Defense (“DOD”) to standardize its
facility condition assessment needs through the Sustainment Management System
(“SMS”)”2
2014: NNSA implements BUILDER with two pilots (Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory and Pantex Plant)
1 S. V. Howieson, V. Peña, S. S. Shipp, K. A. Koopman, J. A. Scott, and C. T. Clavin. A Study of Facilities
and Infrastructure Planning, Prioritization, and Assessment at Federal Security Laboratories (Revised), IDA
Paper P-4916 (Alexandria, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses, 2013),
https://www.ida.org/idamedia/Corporate/Files/Publications/STPIPubs/ida-p-4916.ashx.
2 United States Court of Federal Claims, “VFA, Inc. v. The United States: Bid Protest; DOD’s Sustainment
Management System; Subject Matter Jurisdiction; Standardization Decision; Distributed Solutions;
Definition of Procurement,” Filed October 21, 2014, https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgibin/
show_public_doc?2014cv0173-62-0.
A-3
2014: USDA contracted with ALPHA Facility Solutions for two pilots (Grand Forks,
ND and Kearneysville, WV)
2015: NIST wrote new contract that continues to use VFA database, refresh database
every 3 years, and complete a more enhanced condition assessment in larger
businesses…..

 

(Source:  2017, Herrera, G. Stokes, C, Pena, V. Howieson, S. A Review of the BUILDER Application for Assessing Federal Laboratory Facilities)

DoD FSRM, BUILDER SMS and the LEGACY of Wasteful Politics continue unabated with no end in site. 

Robust solutions have existed and governemnt continues its legacy of environmental and financial waste.

 

 

“At most organizations, the bottleneck is at the top of the bottle.”– Peter Drucker.

“Eighty-five percent of the reasons for failure are deficiencies in the systems and process rather than the employee. The role of management is to change the process rather than badgering individuals to do better.”
— W. Edwards Deming

 

Lack of robust process is the #1 cause of financial and environmental waste with respect to lifecycle management of built structures (facilities and horizontal physical infrastructure).

Real property owner capacity, commitment, and accountability are fundamental requirements.