Work-Management-Improvement-at-Burlington-Generating-Station

Objectives To develop a work coordination process at Burlington Generating Station as part of a methodology for organized preparation and performance of preventive and corrective mainten

Work Management Improvement at

Burlington Generating Station

Technical Report

EPRI Project Managers

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES

THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC (EPRI) NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM:

(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR

(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT.

ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT

ERIN Engineering and Research, Inc.

Copyright © 2001 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc All rights reserved.

This report was prepared by

ERIN Engineering and Research, Inc

1210 Ward Avenue, Suite 100

West Chester, PA 19380

Principal Investigator

M Scanlan

This report describes research sponsored by EPRI

The report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner:

Work Management Improvement at Burlington Generating Station, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2001.

1004591

to plant equipment to ensure maximum reliability

Background

The WCP was developed as Phase 3 of the overall effort to upgrade the maintenance program atthe Burlington Generating Station of Public Service Electric and Gas (PSEG) Phase 1 of theupgrade was a Streamlined Reliability Centered Maintenance (SRCM) effort to identify thecritical components that should be accessed routinely for preventive maintenance Phase 2 of themaintenance program upgrade consisted of task planning associated with the SRCM

requirements This task planning was done in Systems Applications Programs (SAP), the

corporate computerized maintenance management system at PSEG Phase 2 was approximately50% complete as of February 2000 Phase 3, the development and implementation of the newWCP, is detailed in this report

Objectives

To develop a work coordination process at Burlington Generating Station as part of a

methodology for organized preparation and performance of preventive and corrective

maintenance for outage and running periods

Approach

The project team developed the WCP with input from the station groups that would use theprocess, including maintenance, operations, stores, planning/scheduling and management Toensure an effective result and efficient development process, the team developed goals early onand revised the work coordination process document six times before final publication Therewere three major tasks: establish specific project goals, develop the work coordination process,and implement/refine the process Specific project goals included developing a process that waseasy to implement, would meet the needs of Operations and Maintenance, would use the SRCMresults, would address emergent work, and could be monitored with performance indicators In

an effort to train representatives on the techniques and to allow them to achieve success and tobuild upon that success, the team implemented process changes and a culture change as part ofthe project

Results

All three tasks—specific project goals, work coordination process development, and

implementation—were completed The level of support and acceptance of the new work

coordination process has been very high Station representatives have embraced the process anduse it daily to prepare for and complete maintenance Performance indicators display the success

of the preparation and implementation phases associated with the completion of maintenance

EPRI Perspective

This Guideline is part of EPRI’s development efforts under Target 69, Plant Maintenance

Optimization (PMO) The PMO mission is to lead the industry by developing and demonstratingproducts and services that will improve use of power plant maintenance resources and increaseprofitability for generation businesses This project was performed at a combined cycle

(combustion turbine/steam) power plant used for electricity generation Quantitative

improvements include several leading metrics which lead to bottom-line savings in commercialavailability, maintenance cost, plant efficiency, and inventory cost

Other process and people improvement projects are described in Maintenance Work

Management Improvement: Improving Culture and Work Process, 1998 (TR-109734) and

Maintenance Optimization Project at Merom, 1999 (TR-111897, V1 & V2) Other EPRI reports

related to this type of project are Maintenance Work Management Best Practices Guidelines:

Maintenance Assessment and Improvement, 1998 (TR-109968); Maintenance Work Management Practices Assessment, 1997 (TR-106430); Plant Maintenance Optimization, 1997 (TB-108949-

R1); Value-Based Maintenance Grid for Assessing Work Management, 1999 (TR-108937), and,

Best Practice Guideline for Maintenance Planning and Scheduling, 2000 (1000320).

Electric utility deregulation brings a greater need for power plant reliability and cost efficiency.The fossil generation plants of PSEG Power are addressing this challenge with programs togenerate electric power whenever required and at the lowest possible cost One such effort is theWork Coordination Process for Maintenance at Burlington Generating Station

Burlington Generating Station was the pilot power plant selected to implement this program.The reliability and cost-efficiency program has three phases Phase 1 was to review all the plantsystems and determine the importance the equipment Phase 2 was to use this information todevelop a preventive maintenance program Phase 3 was to implement a work coordinationprocess, the subject of this report

An unexpected outage at one of the PSEG base-load power plants can result in an immediateneed for replacement power Base-load stations run at all times to supply the routine electricityrequirements For replacement power, the lowest cost producer will be called upon to

supplement the base load plants Depending on the cost of production, the replacement powermay come from PSEG stations or be purchased from other companies The fossil generationgoal is to minimize the cost and maximize the reliability of PSEG fossil power production so thatPSEG stations are called upon to provide the replacement power

Similar to an immediate need for electricity from an unexpected outage, fossil power plants mayneed to generate power due to extreme whether conditions Generation requirements due toweather conditions can usually be planned in advance With today’s weather forecasting

capabilities, the PSEG trading organization can plan for extra power requirements and schedulefossil generation to meet these requirements

For both cases, immediate replacement power or extra demand due to weather conditions, PSEGFossil needs to be ready A program has been implemented within the fossil generation

department to maximize power plant reliability and cost efficiency The program is to ensurethat PSEG Power fossil plants are the most cost efficient and reliable plants in the system

The work coordination process supports higher level goals for station reliability and cost

efficiency This process is another tool used to reduce maintenance costs and increase

equipment reliability

3 DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES 3-1

Manpower Utilization 3-2

4 RESULTS 4-1

Task 1 – Specific Project Goals 4-1 Task 2 – Work Coordination Process 4-2 Task 3 – WCP Implementation 4-3 Preparation Performance Indicator 4-3 Maintenance Implementation Performance Indicator 4-4 Operations Implementation Performance Indicator 4-4 Overall Implementation Performance Indicator 4-5 Workweek 1 Results 4-6 Workweek 2 Results 4-6 Workweek 3 Results 4-7 Workweek 4 Results 4-7 Workweek 5 Results 4-7 Using SAP to Organize and Track 4-7 SAP Task Planning 4-8 SAP Scheduling 4-9 SAP Parts Ordering / Pre-staging 4-9 SAP Job Tracking 4-11 Lessons Learned 4-11

A BURLINGTON GENERATING STATION WORK COORDINATION PROCESS A-1

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3-1 BGS PM Tasks per Week 3-2 Figure 4-1 Preparation Performance Indicator 4-3 Figure 4-2 Maintenance Implementation Performance Indicator 4-4 Figure 4-3 Operations Implementation Performance Indicator 4-5 Figure 4-4 Overall Implementation Performance Indicator 4-6

INTRODUCTION

With concurrence from Public Service Electric & Gas (PSEG), EPRI developed the Work

Coordination Process for Burlington Generating Station The process is an organized

methodology to prepare for and perform maintenance activities The process was developed toreduce maintenance costs and increase plant reliability

The process was specifically developed for Burlington Generating Station (BGS), a combinedcycle (combustion turbine/steam) power plant used for electricity generation at PSEG TheWork Coordination Process (WCP) is used to coordinate both preventive maintenance (PM)tasks and corrective maintenance (CM) tasks and is used for outages and running periods The

PM tasks are being developed based upon the results from the Streamlined Reliability CenteredMaintenance (SRCM) effort The SRCM effort at BGS was recently completed as part of anEPRI tailored collaboration work scope

The WCP consists of a preparation phase and an implementation phase

During the preparation phase, representatives from specific work groups review the scope ofupcoming work This early review allows sufficient time for the Planning group to prepare workinstructions, for Stores to order parts and for Operations and Maintenance to prepare for

implementation The preparation phase starts six weeks before work is to be performed Thispreparation phase is critical in eliminating barriers that may prevent work from being done.There are two review meetings during the preparation phase The first meeting provides a

preliminary review of the work five weeks before implementation This meeting is used toidentify required parts, planning changes, manpower requirements, training issues, etc Thesecond meeting provides a final check to ensure that all preparations are complete This finalreview meeting occurs one week before implementation If preparations have not been

completed before this meeting, actions are taken to resolve any preparation requirements If thepreparation activities can not be completed, then as a last resort, jobs may be rescheduled

During the implementation phase, work groups complete the agreed upon tasks Since the workgroups participate in the preparation phase, they have assisted in removing barriers that couldprevent jobs from being performed The Operations and Maintenance work groups implementtheir activities in a self-directed manner If problems arise during the implementation, thenassistance from support personnel may be called upon These support personnel may includePlanning/Scheduling, Management, Stores, etc Work groups take the necessary actions toresolve unexpected barriers and complete the work as scheduled

The WCP was developed as Phase 3 of the overall effort to upgrade the maintenance program atBGS Phase 1 of the upgrade was the Streamlined Reliability Centered Maintenance (SRCM) effort

1-2

SRCM identified the critical components that should be accessed routinely for preventive

maintenance Phase 2 of the maintenance program upgrade was to perform the task planningassociated with the SRCM requirements Phase 2 is being performed at the station and as ofFebruary 2000 is approximately 50% complete Phase 3 for development and implementation ofthe WCP is detailed in this report

Phase 1 of the reliability and cost-efficiency program is the Streamlined Reliability CenteredMaintenance (SRCM) effort This effort identified the importance of the power plant equipment.Components that could prevent startup, negatively impact safety or the environment, cause ashutdown, etc were classified as critical These critical components were then examined closely

to determine the type and frequency of preventive maintenance that should be performed tomaximize plant reliability Phase 1 was completed in the summer of 1999

Phase 2 of the program is the PM task development This effort was to develop individual PMtasks based upon the results of the Phase 1 These PM tasks describe what work that must beperformed to ensure equipment reliability The frequency of the PM tasks is based upon thecriticality and failure frequency of the equipment Phase 2 was started in 1999 and will continue

in 2000 The task planning is expected to reach 2000 plans This scope of work was originallyperformed and is maintained in SAP SAP is the enterprise wide computer system for resourceplanning and tracking

Phase 3 of the program is the work coordination process This effort developed an organizedmethod to prepare for and implement work The work includes both preventive maintenance(pre-planned) and corrective maintenance (unexpected) The process is used to work on

equipment during the running season and will also be used for work during plant outages Thework coordination program is designed to balance the needs for generation and maintenance.The duration for Phase 3 at BGS was approximately five months

SCOPE OF WORK

The scope of this project consisted of three major tasks

• Establish Specific Project Goals

• Develop the Work Coordination Process

• Implement and Refine the Work Coordination Process

Task 1 – Specific Project Goals

The first part of this project was to establish specific project goals The goals were established toensure that actions taken for development and implementation are effective and efficient Theplant management personnel were available to support this effort The following specific projectgoals were established as part of Task 1

Goal Number 1 was to develop a process that was easy to implement The station work force issmall, consisting of one scheduler and one task planner An easy process was necessary toensure longevity

Goal Number 2 was to develop a process to meet two needs simultaneously The process mustsupport Operations’ need for maximum equipment availability and support the

Maintenance/Planning group need for access to plant equipment to ensure maximum reliability

Goal Number 3 was to use the results from the SRCM work that was performed earlier

Goal Number 4 was to develop a process with mechanisms for prioritizing emergent work andother corrective maintenance items

Goal Number 5 was to establish performance indicators to measure the effectiveness of theprocess and indicate where changes to the process may be necessary

Task 2 – Develop the Process

Task 2 was to develop the WCP in accordance with the goals established in Task 1 The specificsteps, responsibilities, timing and expectations were to be documented in the BGS-WCP

handbook

Scope of Work

2-2

The steps in the work coordination process were customized to the needs of the station Thework coordination process integrates required activities such as:

• Early identification of work scope to allow adequate preparation time,

• Detailed task planning of manpower, duration, parts, responsibility, etc., to support effectiveimplementation in the field,

• Scheduling to coordinate the performance of simultaneous tasks,

• Preparation including clearance writing, parts acquisition, training, etc

• Pre-staging to gather consumables, parts, procedures, equipment, etc

• Implementation so that the equipment is effectively maintained,

• Reviewing and prioritizing emergent work to ensure that Priority 1 jobs are worked

appropriately and that low priority jobs do not impact high priority jobs,

• A critique process for adjusting the process to achieve maximum effectiveness and

efficiency

A work coordination handbook was developed to explain the sequence of activities and who hasresponsibilities to perform those activities The handbook was made available to all stationpersonnel, selected offsite personnel from Stores, managers from other PSEG fossil stations, andoff-site outage support managers This wide distribution was done so all participants understandwhat actions are required by the work coordination process Actions must be performed with anawareness of the overall process The work coordination handbook is included as Appendix A

Task 3 – Process Implementation

Task 3 was to implement the WCP in accordance with the development work completed in theprevious task Refinements in the process were made as implementation progressed Additionalchanges can be made as part of the continuous improvement process

A major part of this project (~ 50%) was Task 3 This task was to implement the new workcoordination process and to make changes where necessary This task involves a culture changeand process change

The process change is to instruct company employees on the steps and timing required by thenew WCP Training was given to Planning, Plant Engineers and Scheduling personnel Thesepersonnel then instructed other station representatives The instruction taught personnel thedetails associated with the process Company personnel learned how to coordinate efforts toperform maintenance in a proactive manner and respond appropriately to emergent work

Training was also provided on how to use the computer system, SAP, for implementing theprocess

The culture change was to get people to believe that the process was valuable and that they couldimplement it This required a balance between the needs of Operations for equipment

availability and Maintenance/Planning for access to equipment for reliability The culture

Scope of Work

change required first and foremost communication and management support This

communication and support comes equally from Maintenance/Planning and Operations Theprocess could not have succeeded with separate agendas Both organizations pulled together toimplement the process in support of the overall plant goal of equipment availability when

required for generation With one agenda this effort will evolve into normal activities and theWCP will become a routine

DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES

In October and November of 1999, four draft revisions of the process were distributed for reviewand comment This was done to receive input from various workgroups as well as management

Preparation for the first workweek was started in the third week of November 1999 The start ofthe process was the identification of tasks for workweek 1 The first implementation week wasscheduled for the first week in January 2000

The process was started before the WCP document was formerly issued It was a high priority tostart the process based on the six-week lead-time required to prepare for each workweek It wasimportant to start the implementation phase in January 2000 due to the amount of work

scheduled for the entire year

The WCP document went through two more revisions in November and December during theearly preparation phase During this time, there were two minor changes, one relative to partsstaging and another relative to documentation methods The work groups responsible for theactivity, Stores and Operations respectively, suggested both changes This very positive signindicated that the process has longevity because station representatives are willing to improve theprocess

Revision 1 of the WCP was formally distributed on Jan 1, 2000 It was distributed to all sitepersonnel (~60 employees) including representatives from Stores It was also distributed to off-site outage support organization representatives (~6 managers) and will be sent to managers ofother PSEG fossil stations

The process was developed to implement preventive and corrective maintenance

Burlington Generating Station now has a clearly established process for the performance ofpreventive maintenance (PM) For PM tasks, the work groups understand how to identify thetasks, schedule them, perform the work, and status them as complete The process uses thecorporate computer system, SAP, for these tasks The BGS WCP does not require any paper to

be produced No schedules are printed or distributed Work groups use the computer system toplan, schedule and implement the work

The WCP has a defined process for identifying and prioritizing corrective maintenance A scopecontrol committee with representatives from Operations, Maintenance and Planning/Schedulinghas been established The committee meets daily to review and prioritize new work ordersgenerated since the last meeting The CM effort is to focus on backlog work and new work toschedule those jobs into daily work windows or outage windows

Development and Implementation Activities

3-2

Manpower Utilization

Figure 3-1 displays the number of PM tasks scheduled for each workweek This graph indicatesthat most PM tasks occur during the first 22 weeks of the year As indicated on the long-termschedule in Appendix A, the heavy running season starts around week 23 of the year Thebaseline PM tasks are organized so that most yearly maintenance is done before the high

equipment stress period, and when manpower is not consumed with plant operation BGS is aload following station

BGS - PM Tasks Per Week

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

BGS PM Tasks per Week

Operations shift manpower consists of two plant operators (336 man-hours per week), twotechnical operators (336 man-hours per week), one maintenance operator (168 man-hours perweek), two licensed operators (336 man-hours per week) and one shift operating supervisor (168man-hours per week) Counting only the plant operators, technical operators and maintenanceoperator, there are a total of 840 man-hours available each week to perform maintenance Onelicensed operator may be available to support maintenance depending on operating requirements

During the most demanding weeks, weeks 2, 4 and 14 in Figure 3-1, the manpower required tocomplete the PM tasks consumes 31%, 29% and 30% of the 840 manhours available Themanhours for licensed operators and the shift operating supervisor are not included in the

available number

Development and Implementation Activities

The PM baseline scheduling allows for approximately one-third of the Operations manpower to

be scheduled for PM tasks This reserves one-third of the Operations manpower for emergent /corrective maintenance and one-third for normal plant operations

RESULTS

All three tasks: specific project goals, WCP development, and Implementation were completed

Task 1 – Specific Project Goals

Goal Number 1, to develop a process that was easy to implement, was successfully completed.The existing processes and culture regarding the identification, scheduling, preparation andperformance of corrective and preventive maintenance tasks was studied Considerable time wasexpended in understanding the needs of involved work groups An incremental change wasmade to the process for managing work This incremental change was successful Work isscheduled by week The more detailed scheduling by day or by hour was purposely not pursuedfor routine work (preventive maintenance) Work groups have the flexibility to perform workwithin the week since PM tasks are typically not interdependent To organize and track thework, the existing computer sstem, SAP, was used Using SAP was another way to keep theprocess as simple as possible

Goal Number 2 to develop the WCP to meet two needs simultaneously, was successfully

completed The process supports Operations’ need for maximum equipment availability andsupports the Maintenance group need for access to plant equipment to ensure maximum

reliability The work coordination process balances both requirements to achieve optimumequipment availability The scope control committee is comprised of representatives fromMaintenance, Operations and Planning/Scheduling This committee reviews the new tasks from

a station perspective, not an individual group perspective, to determine the best time to do work

Goal Number 3, to use the results from the Streamlined Reliability Centered Maintenance

(SRCM) effort performed in 1999, was successfully completed The work coordination process

is a mechanism to schedule and implement the PM tasks that were created based upon the SRCMeffort The SRCM project identified that not all equipment is “Priority 1.” The WCP is used toaccess plant equipment on a routine basis in a preplanned and systematic manner and provides amechanism to implement SRCM results

Goal Number 4, to have a WCP with mechanisms for prioritizing emergent work and othercorrective maintenance items, was successfully implemented This goal was accomplished byincluding a scope control function as part of the normal work coordination process and by

including a long-range schedule in the work coordination process The scope control functionallows station representatives to identify the priority for new work The scope control committeeuses the long-range schedule as input into the decision of when to schedule work The longrange schedule identifies future opportunities to perform maintenance

4-2

Goal Number 5, to establish performance indicators, was successfully completed These

indicators guide changes to the process by identifying weak areas The performance indicators,included in this section under Task 3 – WCP Implementation, indicate the success of the project

Task 2 – Work Coordination Process

The Work Coordination Process was successfully developed in accordance with the goals for theproject The BGS WCP is included in its entirety as Appendix A to this report

Because work groups developed the process and are willing to improve it, the BGS work

coordination process is a success The Planning/Scheduling organization and management haveadopted the new coordination process Personnel from these organizations have been involvedfrom the beginning with development Their acceptance was an easy culture change Craftpersonnel are becoming more familiar with the process as implementation continues The

culture change for craft personnel will likely take longer than for management personnel

Early indications are positive Overall the level of support and acceptance of this new processhas been very high

Although all station personnel are involved with the routine implementation of the process,several individuals standout for their commitment to development Recognition is in order forthose representatives who had key roles in the development, training and culture change Thesuccess of the project could not have been achieved without the commitment and guidance ofthese knowledgeable personnel Their positions are identified to help guide development onfuture projects

Thomas Freck, Engineer – Maintenance and Planning/Scheduling, for his foresight regarding theneed for change, for his big picture thinking, willingness to participate in detailed reviews (CMbacklog), and especially for his willingness to allow the process to be developed by the

workgroups responsible for implementation

Joe Mosteller, Engineer – Operations, for his patience in helping us all communicate better andhis suggestions in making the documentation process simple

Paul Hunkele, Scheduler, for his guidance in navigating the culture change, for his willingness toembrace new challenges (chair the scope control committee, chair the scope review meetings,develop performance indicators), and for continued help in tying it all together

Scott Landrieu, Stores/Supply Chain, for recognizing the vital role of his support organization,suggested changes to involve Purchasing early if needed, changing the culture in his businessarea, and supporting the process when at first it appeared to not succeed

Frank Kalfrin, Planner, for his commitment and attention to detail, his perseverance despite themountain of task planning, his SAP computer expertise, and having the toughest skin in theworld

Task 3 – WCP Implementation

The WCP was developed into a standalone booklet and distributed to all site personnel Sitepersonnel included approximately 60 representatives from Administration, Management,

Maintenance and Operations The WCP booklet was also distributed to targeted offsite

management personnel including Stores, System Maintenance Division, Maplewood TestingServices, and Central Maintenance Shop These offsite organizations support station activitiesand are vital to the station’s success

Performance indicators for the first five weeks of the process are included here These

performance indicators show the early success of the project There are four indicators producedafter the completion of each workweek

Preparation Performance Indicator

The Preparation Performance Indicator, shown in Figure 4-1, measures the number of workorders that made it through the planning process It is a ratio of jobs at I-1 (end of preparation)compared to the number of jobs at I-6 (beginning of preparation) The station goal was 80% orbetter for each week

Work Week (Q1-2000)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Number Planned (I-6) 35 39 38 45 35 39 56 58 37 29 26 27 28 Number Scheduled (I-1) 25 40 37 45 30 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Preparation PI % 71% 103% 97% 100% 86% 108%

Preparation Performance Indicator

Number Planned (I-6)

Number Scheduled (I-1)

Preparation PI %

Figure 4-1

Preparation Performance Indicator

4-4

Maintenance Implementation Performance Indicator

The Maintenance Implementation Performance Indicator, shown in Figure 4-2, measures thenumber of work orders completed It is a ratio of jobs completed (SAP System status = TECO)compared to the number of jobs scheduled at I-1 (final scope review meeting) The station goalwas 80% or better for each week

Work Week (Q1-2000)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Number Scheduled (I-1) 5 2 4 1 1 4

Number Completed (I+1) 5 2 4 1 1

Number Scheduled (I-1)

Number Completed (I+1)

Maint Imp PI %

Figure 4-2

Maintenance Implementation Performance Indicator

Operations Implementation Performance Indicator

The Operations Implementation Performance Indicator, shown in Figure 4-3, measures thenumber of work orders completed It is a ratio of jobs completed (SAP System status = TECO)compared to the number of jobs scheduled at I-1 (final scope review meeting) The station goalwas 80% or better for each week

Work Week (Q1-2000)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Number Scheduled (I-1) 20 38 34 44 29 39

Number Completed (I+1) 16 36 19 33 35

Number Scheduled (I-1)

Number Completed (I+1)

Ops Imp PI %

Figure 4-3

Operations Implementation Performance Indicator

Overall Implementation Performance Indicator

At the start of the first quarter, there were a total of 476 PM work orders scheduled for Q1

-2000 The Overall Implementation Performance Indicator, Figure 4-4, displays the remainingnumber of PM work orders to be completed in this quarter compared to the original schedulednumber As planning of new PM tasks continues, the Actual Remaining number of tasks

increases This will not change the original Scheduled Remaining numbers The Actual

Remaining line indicates the PM tasks remaining after the completion of the week The goal is

to complete all scheduled and new PM tasks within the quarter

4-6

Work Week (Q1-2000) Start 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Sch Remaining 476 450 411 373 328 293 250 210 166 128 101 79 50 0 Actual Remaining 476 456 415 392 350 333

Overall PM Implementation Performance Indicator

equipment was unavailable for work The 18 jobs were removed as part of the preliminary scopereview meeting (I-5) so parts acquisition was not affected To compensate for the tasks that wereremoved from the workweek 1 scope, eight tasks were added to workweek 1 For the week, 80%

of the Operations jobs were completed and 100% of the Maintenance jobs were completed Four

of the tasks for Operations could not be completed due to equipment unavailability Theseadditional four tasks should have been removed along with the eighteen jobs removed during thepreparation phase Operations completed all tasks that could be completed Figure 4-4 indicatesthat actual remaining was slightly higher than scheduled remaining at the completion of Week 1

Workweek 2 Results

For workweek 2, 103% of the jobs made it through the six-week preparation phase An

additional job was added during the preparation phase Maintenance completed 100% of

scheduled tasks and Operations completed 95% (36/38) of scheduled tasks Two jobs could not

be completed due to frozen transducer lines Heaters were placed on these lines and the jobswere postponed

Operations was not able to perform some work due to extreme weather conditions that could not

be planned for A major lesson learned from the process is that the performance of transducercalibrations is difficult in cold weather Agreement has been reached to alter the PM baselineplanning so that these yearly tasks are scheduled in April instead of January

Workweek 4 Results

For workweek 4, 100% of the jobs made it through the six-week preparation phase

Maintenance completed 100% of scheduled work and Operations completed 75% of scheduledwork Operations was not able to perform some work due to extreme weather conditions thatcould not be planned for

The overall implementation indicator shows 392 jobs remaining at the beginning of week 4 and

390 jobs remaining at the end of week 4 This is because an additional ~40 jobs were added tothe quarter The additional jobs are due to an outage being planned for April

Workweek 5 Results

For workweek 5, 86% of the tasks made it through the six-week preparation phase Maintenancecompleted 100% of scheduled work and Operations completed 121% of scheduled work At thecompletion of week 5, Figure 4-4 indicates 333 jopbs remaining for the first quarter of 2000.That is compared to 293 jobs that were origiinally schedule to be outstanding at this time

Although it appears that overall implementation is behind schedule, this is not the case A total

of 41 jobs have been added since the scheduled remaining line was developed These jobs wereadded to weeks 9 through 13 Excluding the 41 jobs that were added would indicate that thereare 292 of the original jobs remaining Consideration is being given to revise the scheduledremaining line as tasks are added

Using SAP to Organize and Track

SAP, Systems Applications Programs, is the enterprise resource-planning program used byPSEG This application is used corporate wide for computerized maintenance management aswell as other corporate functions such as procurement, finances, scheduling, etc The workcoordination process was developed considering the capabilities of SAP The following

information is provided to explain how SAP is used at Burlington Generating Station as part ofthe work coordination process