IMC-2016 Learning Session - 43:18 
by Paul Durko, CNS Y-12

In 2012, Production Facilities Department (PFD) and Maintenance Programs and Engineering generated recommendations to improve the manner in which maintenance history is collected in the field and documented in the plant’s Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS).

While EFCOG Contractor Guide 2012-001, Rev 0, May 18, 2012 discusses and provides direction for Feedback and Improvement in Chapter 15, Y-12 saw the need to expand beyond the intent of the process: Organizational WP&C processes/procedures provide for soliciting feedback from workers and support personnel regarding the quality of all stages of the WP&C process, not just the Post-job Brief.

Workers and support personnel are encouraged to communicate information for improving thework or WP&C process governing procedures, or reducing hazards or environmental impacts.

WSs evaluate in-progress work and feedback provided from workers and take appropriate action. A follow-up discussion takes place with any individuals who provided the information for closure. Additionally, Work Planners and Work Control Management continuously evaluate the work control process, including the performance of work, and recommend improvements to individual work packages or the WP&C process. (EFCOG Contractor Guide 2012-001, Rev 0, May 18, 2012)

Expansion beyond the intent of the process in this case means utilization of the in-field data to provide a functional building block of a Reliability-Based Maintenance Culture. This data will provide the ability to build legacy asset Bills of Material (BOM), provide a tracking mechanism for additional Structures, Systems, and Components (SSC) deficiencies identified during maintenance activities, and allow maintenance to determine effectiveness of Proactive Maintenance activities already deployed.While this process is seen as 70-80% efficient, the best outcome with possibility of high yield efficiency gains is the craft buy-in/co-ownership of the process.