Rob Wolborsky

Smaller footprint for Navy data centers will bring big savings

Service plans to shutter many centers while improving performance and cutting costs

Rob Wolborsky is the chief technology officer of the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR). Last year, he was appointed director of the Navy data center consolidation task force. Wolborsky, who joined SPAWAR in 1996 as a commercial satellite communications lead engineer, quickly put together a team that will help the Navy modernize its data centers, improving security and efficiency while closing nearly half of those facilities.

Defense Systems Contributing Editor Terry Costlow spoke with Wolborsky before a speech he gave at AFCEA West 2012 that addressed the Navy’s efforts to save money by closing data centers. Wolborsky discussed SPAWAR’s plans for data center consolidation and how enterprise architecture and manpower reductions influence that strategy.

DS: Could you give us an update on the goals you’re pursuing?

Wolborsky: Our initial focus is to understand what we have. We have a lot of information on our databases and a high-level understanding of our assets. But we don’t have a detailed, comprehensive understanding of what we have and what we’re running. We need to have a handle on this for our consolidation efforts to move forward.


Related coverage:

Navy adds structure to networks


One reason we want to consolidate is that we’ll save money by being more efficient. We expect to see over $1.4 billion in cuts, so all resource sponsors have to be more efficient.

The second is that we have data all over the place in facilities that have varying levels of capability and security. We’d rather have it in fortresses where we can protect it. The data in these centers is critical to the Navy; we need to treat it as such.

A third is that we’ll have a more robust operation that can provide continuity of operation. We want to ensure that when there is a disaster, we can respond as necessary.

DS: How are you moving forward with plans to close inefficient facilities?

Wolborsky: We’ve put together 10 teams, all from SPAWAR, to go out to designated data centers. There are 120 data centers that support the Navy and Marines. The teams will go out to give us an understanding of what it costs to run the centers. We have done 30 assessments, seeing what’s there and what the costs are. In parallel, we’ll see what’s being done at three SPAWAR sites. For all these analyses, we’ve built cost models so we truly understand what we’re saving. 

This year, our target is to set up a metric for closing sites. We’re planning to close 58 of them. We’re looking at closing 18 to 22 sites this year, mostly the smaller ones. There are many of these small facilities. These sites have anywhere from five to 1,000 servers.

It’s hard to say what the total payoff will be. The savings over 58 sites could be hundreds of millions of dollars. There are a lot of other cost savings opportunities. We have a lot of applications that overlap, and we’ve got a lot of legacy network that can be retired without really curtailing our ability to perform efficiently.

DS: One issue that’s highlighted as a problem for these data centers is that they run as many as 20 different operating systems. Is there an effort to reduce the number of variants?

Wolborsky: We want as few operating environments as possible. We’re working with groups to help them consolidate on that front, too. There are standards that these operating entities can adopt. I’m not responsible for that aspect; I’m managing the transition to fewer data centers.

DS: There’s always going to be skepticism when the Defense Department talks about reducing manpower and facilities. In fact, some earlier data center consolidation efforts have yielded little. What’s been put into place to ensure that your efforts will bring real reductions?

Wolborsky: What’s different now, versus the past, is that now everybody is aligned with a move to an enterprise architecture. They know that IT has blossomed the past several years, and that we need to improve our continuity operations and disaster recovery plans.

The other thing is that VADM [Kendall] Card has given us resources to address the enterprise issue for the Navy. I’m resourced for this, which is something that wasn’t done in the past. We have funds to invest this year and next year. The motivation for these operating entities to work with us now is much higher. If they don’t work with us, they may find themselves on the list of facilities that will be cut.

Another things they didn’t have in the past was the ability to build a government IT workforce. I’m building a team within this task force.

We’re letting those with IT experience in the Navy run IT and letting other resource sponsors run their IT. We’re providing a significant amount of funding to support IT for each of the resource sponsors while we’re consolidating.

DS: What are the biggest obstacles you’re facing?

Wolborsky: Wow, that’s difficult. One of the biggest is the ability of my staff to ramp up fast enough. There are also risks and challenges in ramping up our staff. At all the sites, there will be dramatic manpower reductions. We have to staff up to support SPAWAR's three data centers and the enterprise. Overall, we will have way more people taken off the payroll than we’ll be adding.

Reader Comments

Sun, Aug 12, 2012 Optional South East

The whole NEDC Task force is joke. SPAWAR (besides NOLA) doesn't run datacenters. They closed the best run datacenter, SPAWAR PNS and now are trying to close the second best datacenter, NETPDTC. Its a farse, a sham. SPAWAR years ago decided to outsource thier IT to NMCI / EDS. They are now trying to regain creditability by taking the enterprise services. IMHO, SPAWAR should be brac'd and IT hosting should transfer to DISA or the AirForce. Sorry Navy, you gave up IT years ago, your cisco WAN engineers don't know how to run data centers.

Mon, Apr 16, 2012 Cutee

Having been the recipient of one of these 10 teams, I can assure you it wasn't a pleasant experience even through we had been trying to move applications prior to this latest effort.

The team didn't know anything about the architecture that would be built and the "hotwash" telcon confirmed that the folks back home at SPAWAR didn't know either. The only thing they seemed to be able to offer was that they would patch operating systems. Application patching, and common services (database hosting, sharepoint hosting, etc.) will be left to the "donating" activity. In other words, there will be negative cost savings since the same site people will still be required, only they will have to do more work remotely with costly delays and loss of efficiency. Since the majority of our servers are already in a blade/virtualized environment all the "savings" have already been squeezed out.

Yet, the big gaping wound here is that Netwarcom / C10F hasn't liked or approved of the hosting environment leaving donating activities with unaccreditable systems.

Mon, Apr 16, 2012

I think this article is a little misleading. It does improve security of some networks and it "might" save the Navy money in general but a lot of the cost os being levied on the commands to move. For example, our command is being charged to use these facilities and the cost os almost double what we pay for services now and we will get less resources than we currently have. Additionally, DOD long ago mandated security standards and if servers don't meet them they are shut down so the notion that we have a bynch of unsecured data centers isn't accurate.

Mon, Apr 16, 2012 Ensign Pulver

So why did they (SPAWAR) build a new data center in Charleston with BRAC money unknown to anyone when DISA has excess unused capacity - Hmmmm.

Sun, Apr 15, 2012

Wonder what was the process to select the members of these 10 teams - who (who is the prime?) got the contract to do that?

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above