|
Removing Barriers to Reliability by
N. Eric Matthews, P.E. Production Manager, Allen Steam Station,
Duke Energy, and Arne Skaalure, Project Manager, RMG
Effective planning and scheduling are foundational elements for
successful work management.
Well-defined and implemented planning and scheduling processes
ensure that a plant’s most important work will be done safely,
efficiently and at the right time. Duke Energy professionals
work diligently at improving their Midwest and Carolinas fleet’s
work processes through a Barrier Process. Work exceeding
Estimated vs. Actual Hours targets is flagged, categorized and
documented by technicians in the CMMS. These exceptions are
reviewed weekly at a Barrier Meeting and assigned to plant
personnel responsible for removing identified barriers. Barriers
such as incomplete planning, incorrect parts, poor communication
or coordination, scope creep, etc., result in unsafe situations,
a frustrated workforce, plus a 10 - 20% productivity loss. With
a clear focus on safety and asset reliability, Duke’s planning
and scheduling processes are sustainable and continuously
improving because the Barrier Process energizes the
Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle for reliability.
Introduction
Duke Power and Cinergy Corporation merged in 2006 to form Duke
Energy. Naturally, each organization brought its own respective
work processes, cultures and technologies to the new company. To
establish and clarify their new unified direction, personnel
from each legacy organization worked together in a variety teams
to formulate consistent processes across the fleet. The result
of taking the best from each legacy work process became the new
Duke Energy Generation Fleet Operating Model.
Duke Energy leadership expects their organization in total and
sites in particular to focus on continuous improvement to meet
the goal of reliable cost-effective electrical generation. The
Operating Manual’s introduction summarizes leadership’s charge
to employees: “Work process improvement should be so well
engrained that we refuse to let barriers reoccur and we have a
passion for bringing forth better ways of doing business.”
The Operating Model
Any process can be improved quickly, efficiently and effectively
to sustain reliable cost-effective performance—that is the
intentioned mantra of the Operating Model. Employees and
contractors are expected to contribute to continuous improvement
at every level with input, ideas, feedback and effort made
possible through the Operating Model’s policies, procedures and
processes.
The Operating Model has ten sections that embody the theme of
continuous improvement:
1. Introduction—addresses overall understanding of the Operating
Model’s purpose, scope and resource needs for successful
implementation.
2. Station Leadership Process—outlines Station management’s
responsibilities in business planning, measurement,
communication, training, performance expectations, visibility,
continuous improvement, risk management, recognition and
regulatory compliance.
3. Key Roles in Organization—identifies fifteen Station
positions and the processes for which each is responsible.
4. Operating the Unit—outlines the tools and processes that
Operations and Material Handling are to use for consistent
performance and utilization of resources.
5. Equipment Ownership Process—describes the roles and
responsibilities of designated Equipment Owners in sustaining
critical equipment availability and reliability.
6. Work Management—details the work process elements of
originating, planning, scheduling, executing and improving work.
7. Capital and O&M Budget and Finance—defines processes used to
manage station finances and projects.
8. Engineering and Technical Support—identifies seven matrixed
functions for station technical support
9. Measures Management—gives the framework for tracking and
trending information used to improve performance and the
processes.
10. Work Process Improvement and Sustainment—focuses on
Station-level efforts for improvement and self assessment.
Work Order Process Fundamentals Wheel
The work management process embedded in the Operating Model is
shown below in Figure 1.
This graphic depicts work process elements distilled from the
Operating Model in a clockwise sequence beginning with Work
Order Identification, the starting point of documenting work
needs in Maximo, Duke Energy’s CMMS (Computerized Maintenance
Management System).

Figure 1: Duke Energy Work Order Process Fundamental Wheel
Work Management Process
The detailed processes and tools within each one of the Work
Order Fundamentals (Figure 1) are not discussed in this paper.
However, outputs of those processes (such as planned Work
Orders, Weekly Schedules and work documentation) contribute to
the Barrier Process, this paper’s focus.
The Barrier Process
As work is completed (see Figure 1, box #6, Work Order Close
Out) the Barrier Process begins. Crafts identify any follow-up
work needed, return unused parts and materials or items needing
repair, communicate to Supervision that the work is complete,
and then the Crafts document work completion comments and
barriers electronically in Maximo.
With their documentation Crafts answer the question, “Did the
job go as planned?” This step is essential to the Barrier
Process. This input triggers information that helps avoid
repeated mistakes, minimize work delays and continuously improve
personnel productivity. Best of all, the information comes from
the people who perform the work and/or operate the equipment.
Completed work may not go as planned. Crafts identify reasons on
a Barrier Screen in Maximo by category with a detailed
description if needed. Optional categories listed are:
•
None (no barriers experienced, so this WO will not be on the
Barrier Report)
•
Red Tag (issues related to equipment Lock Out / Tag Out)
•
Material (the correct parts / materials / tools were not
available prior to completion)
•
Work Order Information (incorrect WO description or equipment
identification)
•
Pre-Job (issues related to inadequate pre-job briefing
discussions)
•
Scope Change (Job involved greater or fewer resources than
initially anticipated)
•
Reassignment (Crafts pulled off job to do other work deemed more
important at the time)
•
Other (issues that were a barrier but don’t fit the other
categories)
Work Orders subject to Barrier Process review include those
culled from these categories and WOs not in labor hour
compliance. That is, a completed WO with a ± 10% variance
between Estimated and Actual Labor Hours may have potential
barriers and will be reviewed for the variance’s cause(s) in the
Barrier Meeting (sometimes referred to as the Performance
Meeting).
The Barrier Meeting
Each generation site determines the time, content, attendees and
location of its weekly Barrier Meeting. Even though meeting
format and content may vary station-to-station, the one
consistent element across the fleet is that a weekly Barrier
Meeting is held to discuss obstacles impeding efficient and
effective work execution. Continuous improvement is expected.
The Production Manager is the owner of the Barrier Process. He
prints and reviews a Barrier Report weekly, validating those WOs
he feels warrant further review. At his discretion selected WOs
are displayed on a Barrier Impact Report which is reviewed at
the weekly Barrier Meeting.
At Duke’s Allen Steam Station (Belmont, NC), the plant on which
this example of the Barrier Process is based, the Barrier
Meeting is well-attended with participation from many functions.
A tight agenda, prepared handouts and informed, motivated
participants keep the meeting productive and results-oriented.
Attendees typically include:
•
Production Manager (responsible for Station work execution
processes)
•
Resource Manager (responsible for the planning, scheduling and
facilitation of work)
•
Engineering Manager (responsible for equipment ownership)
•
Production Supervisors (includes Operations, Maintenance and Lab
Supervisors)
•
Planners, Scheduler and Operations Coordinator
•
Material Handling Supervisors (fuels)
•
Equipment Owners (responsible for proactive strategies for
critical equipment reliability)
•
Stores personnel
•
Other involved stakeholders like Contractor Representatives,
Capital Projects,
Turnaround management, Engineering / Technical
The hour-long Barrier Meeting is facilitated and led by the
Production Manager, who also distributes an updated Action Items
List following the meeting. The agenda includes:
1. Safety discussion and Station-specific information
2. Review Weekly Schedule compliance from the previous week
3. Review PM compliance
4. Review individual WO compliance results (Estimated vs. Actual
Hours) by exception
5. Discuss barriers identified during work execution of those
WOs (documented by Craft in Maximo and identified by meeting
attendees)
6. Identify and assign new action items to resolve or mitigate
obstacles
7. Review and update previous week’s action items
If the identified barrier can be addressed quickly with the
people involved, then it is resolved and followed up on at
subsequent Barrier Meetings. If the barrier is more involved and
considered a Process Improvement issue, the item is assigned to
the Resource Manager and plugged into the Work Process
Improvement (WPI) Process. The WPI Process entails establishing
a Continuous Improvement Team chartered with goals, objectives
and key players who determine root causes, identify solutions
and implement actions. They problem solve for continuous
improvement.
Conclusion
The Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle for reliability is very much alive
at Duke Energy. The Operating Model’s guiding principles and
Station leadership’s work process discipline snap together for
improved reliability, availability and cost savings. Results are
seen not only at corporate and station management levels, but
more importantly, the results are experienced on the production
floor and in the maintenance shop. The people who identify,
plan, schedule and execute the work and give the feedback in the
Barrier Process are removing the obstacles that frustrate them.
They ultimately make the difference on the frontlines of
sustaining a continuous improvement culture.
|