The M&TE calibration lab aims to improve visibility and planning of equipment calibration needs by linking them to the plant maintenance schedule. Currently, calibration needs are unplanned and reactive. The proposal aims to assign all M&TE to logical groups, include calibration needs in all work orders, and identify needs by T-7, T-1 and T-0 weeks to enable proactive calibration planning. Key indicators of improvement include increasing the percentage of work orders and discretionary calibrations that are planned in advance.

1. Application of A3 in the Nuclear Industry
“A3 Problem Solving Method”
Pilot Team: M&TE Calibration Lab
Team Sensei: Todd McCann
Team: Cal Lab Manager, Cal Lab Supervisor and 3 Lab Technicians
Teaching: A3 Proposal, Status and Final Summary, ISHIKAWA,
Standardized Work Sheets, Nemawashi, Jishuken, Hansei,
Hoken Development, Yokoten, Makigami, PDCA, SDCA

2. Core Foundational Practices of Toyota
Focus: Teaching M&TE Lab the discipline of A3
A3 Background
JISHUKEN
Translation: A Theme of Self Study
The self study improvement projects are linked to business goals, driven and performed
by teams of managers.
Use A3 for recording data, describing problem,
problem solving, sharing of work efforts with others
(Note: Genchi Genbutsu = Go See at the Gemba the Materials, Machines and
Environment where work is performed for Yourself. Primary Activity for Jishuken)
+
YOKOTEN
Translation: Across everywhere. Horizontal Deployment
How plant related activities and/or countermeasures are communicated
Work Groups GO SEE other’s improvements
NOT Best Practice or Benchmark sharing, Better Yet, Problem Solving Sharing
And COPYING of IDEAS
Most Often Applied PEER TO PEER
No need to Re-invent the Wheel share your ideas with others!

3. Team Learning: 3 types of A3-T
• Proposal NO OVERHEAD PROJECTORS ALLOWED
ALL WHITE BOARD WORK
• Status
• Final Report HIGH TOUCH > NO TECH > LOW TECH
With Many Examples

4. Proposal Teaching: Use of A3 and assembly of data for problem solving
One Point Lesson: Step 1 - Standard A3 format to : “PROPOSE IMPROVEMENT”
STEP 1of 3 PROPOSAL STANDARD FORMAT
1. Propose
2. Status
THEME: Describe the PROBLEM being addressed. The theme SHOULD NOT advocate a SOLUTION WHO: YOUR NAME
3. Final Summary WHEN: CREATION DATE
Note: Approach theme development by applying 5 Why’s - HU Tool “Questioning Attitude” & Ref. Causal Analysis Handbook
PURPOSE OF PROPOSAL A3
I. BACKGROUND: (WHAT) Describe any pertinent information IV. DETAILED PLAN TO CLOSE GAP: The Creator describes activities
GAP
essential to understanding the extent of the condition and in an outline form. Action Item List.
PROPOSAL importance of the problem to the local work group and then to the A. WHAT actions need to be performed, not the outcome
enterprise. (Items that may be included might be how the problem B. WHEN the actions should be started and completed
• Create a single page document by which was discovered, why the problem is important to current goals, work C. WHO is responsible for getting the activity done on time.
one can expose & convey the message
groups affected, technical issues, process issues, behavior issues &
of proposed improvement between The outline should be at a very detailed level of critical activities that are
Management & the Individual (s) who are
organizational issues created by presence of the problem.) “Literal
required to improve the process. The detailed activities should be aligned
proposing the improvement. Simplicity Representation”.
to achieving the Target Condition. WHAT START COMPLETE WHO
• Use words to tell the story of the II. CURRENT CONDITION: “Most Important” Creator draws a
CONDITION
Performance GAP you desire to improve. diagram “Visual Representation” of Current Condition & Problems
Literal Representation in flow of process as it actually occurs, not by assumption. Creator
must “GO SEE” Current Condition when assumptions are made &
• Diagram conditions through the use of validate through direct observation. Quantify condition with data, V. INDICATORS / MEASUREMENTS OF IMPROVEMENT:
IMPROVEMENT
icons and images to pictorially describe “Quantified Graphical Representation”, to expose the extent of The Creator develops indicators that are specific, controllable and
the Performance Gap. Visual the condition as a baseline. The diagram and graphically
Representation
measurable to provide evidence that improvement toward Target Condition
represented data will focus the creator & the reviewing audience on is being achieved. The indicators are displayed on Team Performance
the Problem NOT the People involved with the problem. Deep Lean Board in Continuous improvement section. e.g. Safety, Cost, Quality,
• Use Data in graphical form to empirically
Analysis is performed at this step. Creator should be reflecting Delivery
describe the Performance GAP.
Quantified Graphical Representation.
deeply for the problems true origin and true causes. Safety Cost Quality Delivery/ Cycle Time
Rejects / Defects /
4 $350 $300 100% 200
85%
Hundreds of Dollars
3 $300 150
Incidents
3 80% 65% 150
Minutes
Rework
2 $250 $200 50% 100
C o nt ro l Current Condition 2 $200
60%
100
R OOM $150 40% 50
1 $100 50
0 $100 20%
• Use proposal to communicate and gain
0 $50 0% 0
100 $-
80 Current Status Target Current Status Target Current Status Target
Current Status Target
80 IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT
Cycle Times
IMPROVEMENT
SWAMP RAT
support and consensus with related Fuel
Ret r i eved
f r om Cor e
Fuel M oved t o
Upender
C/ T = V ar i es Upender Upender r ai sed
B r i dge Cr ane
(st ar t pos. wi t h
upender
i nt er l ock cl ear
T ool l ower ed
and at t ached t o Hoi st r ai sed t o M ove br i dge
M ove Fuel
60
40
20
35
GO SEE
20
groups (Stakeholders) & Management
Upender +Fuel A ssembl y t o
(T i me due t o di st ance Fuel l oaded l ower ed t o i n t o V er t . enabl ed) moved Fuel +Fuel FULL UP cr ane past Upender
move t o Fuel Speci f i ed Fuel
dependant on of Fuel t o i nt o Upender Hor z. f or i nFuel B l dg over Upender + r emoved f r om P OSI T I ON wi t h Upender Cl ear Lower s t o Hor z.
B l dg. P ool pos.
Fuel Locat i on Upender " OW" movement t o Fuel Upender t o Ful l Fuel I nt er l ock pos.
i n RX OW or or " NOW"
3 Fuel P ool ST A R T I N G up I nt er l ock
*
0
NOW moves)
* 4 5 6 P OI NT
9 10 12
move* 8
*
1 2 A B C
for improvement. Interaction
7
Activity
VI. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: The Creator develops a high level plan of
PLAN
III. ANALYSIS TO TARGET CONDITION: The Target Condition
CONDITION OUTCOMES required to achieve Target Condition.
will diagrammatically & graphically display the specific The plan should link directly to the Detailed Plan to Close the GAP. A
“Countermeasure” to be put in place to create improvement. Simple GANTT chart can satisfy this requirement as long the audience can
Creator draws a clear and concise diagram of Target condition to clearly see the progression of your outcomes to activities. Apply
Stepwise Learning: contrast to the Current Condition with supporting empirical data. MILESTONE THINKING HERE.
Next Lesson Visual Representation + Quantified Graphical Representation
Step 2. STATUS C o nt r o l
R OOM
Target Condition
100
80
Cycle Time
SWAMP RAT
60 50
40
Fuel Fuel M ov ed t o
B r i dge Cr ane
(s t ar t pos . wi t h
20
Ret r i ev ed Upender
C/ T = V ar i es Upender
upender T ool l ower ed
M ov e Fuel
20 5
f r om Cor e Upender +Fuel i nt er l oc k c l ear and at t ac hed t o Hoi s t r ai s ed t o M ov e br i dge
l ower ed t o A s s embl y t o
(T i me due t o di s t anc e mov e t o Fuel Fuel +Fuel FULL UP c r ane pas t
enabl ed) mov ed
dependant on of Fuel t o Hor z . f or
B l dg. ov er Upender + r emov ed f r om P OSI T I ON wi t h Upender Cl ear
Spec i f i ed Fuel
P ool pos .
0
Upender " OW" mov ement t o
Fuel Loc at i on Fuel Upender t o Ful l Fuel I nt er l oc k pos .
i n RX OW or or " NOW" Fuel P ool
4 ST A R T I N G up I nt er l oc k
*
A B C
3 7 8 9
NOW mov es )
mov e* * P OI NT
6
*
1 2 Activity
5

5. Example of M&TE Lab A3
Theme: Proposal for Improvement
Problem: Torque wrench calibrations workload is not levelized across the year
Team Instruction:
All A3's must be created in Pencil FIRST and then place into electronic format
When owner has developed the insurance (hoken) of the improvement

6. M&TE Lab Supervisor and Sr. Lab Tech receive Recognition
Waste Eliminator Award!
PROBLEM: 4000 M&TE Items M&TE in Work Order Process
by Calibration Discipline Shaw Site Services Metrology
M&TE needs are not identified in the Plant Maintenance
1200 1100
Schedule. Zero Visibility! 1000 STATUS 09/22/09
M&TE 1000
Visibility Roger Adams Wade Jacobs
800
x6471 x6958
550 550
600
I. BACKGROUND: 400 400 V. INDICATORS/MEASURES OF IMPROVEMENT:
400
Planning and scheduling of plant maintenance is dependent upon several factors:
qualified personnel, tools, parts, materials, M&TE, etc. PRSIM provided limited M&TE 200
M&TE Item Number Conversion 2009 Work Orders with M&TE
look-ahead information (i.e. a work week schedule requires a torque wrench but did not 0 5000 (Values to be determined)
provide the type or range). M&TE is not presently tied to the maintenance schedule 80
Dime Elec Pres Torq Temp Misc
resulting in reduced M&TE calibration planning effectiveness, emergent calibrations, 70
4000
and delayed plant work activities. Maximo interface is not currently available. Disciplines
60
3000
50
III. TARGET CONDITION: 40
2000
A. Full visibility of M&TE needs for operation and outage work orders
II. CURRENT CONDITION 30
B. All M&TE assigned to logical parent-tool groups (item numbers) 1000
20
A. Typically, M&TE personnel are made aware of M&TE needs when the worker C. Affected procedures revised for improved processes 10
checks out M&TE on the way to the plant to perform a task
D. Implement the improvement through standard schedule process, naturally 0 0
B. M&TE needs are not scheduled or planned in Maximo populating the system Start Status Target Discretionary Emergent Scheduled
C. Zero visibility of M&TE demand = <100% service level E. Include improvement initiative into standardized process for work order generation
D. Service level is indeterminate, lacking measures for: and revisions
1. Scheduled work orders Revised Work Orders
F. M&TE included in all repetitive 2010 work orders requiring M&TE (Values to be determined)
2. Emergent work G. M&TE included in all 2011 outage work orders 120
3. Discretionary work H. Standardized M&TE look-ahead process
100
E. Zero visibility of M&TE demand in the T-15 schedule results in: I. M&TE needs identified in T-7 week
1. Reactionary response v. Proactive countermeasures J. M&TE needs prepared by T-1 week 80
2. Ripple effects K. M&TE issued to user during T-0 week
60
a. Imposes non-standard conditions L. Develop more sophisticated eye for real demand levels to implement planned
b. Lost time – waiting, rescheduling plant work, and shuffled work and assets calibrations and seek further improvement opportunities 40
c. Expediting offsite calibrations requires additional money
20
3. Waste Target Plant Maintenance Schedule with M&TE
a. Excess Inventory 0
Start Status Target
b. Over-processing
c. Waiting
T-14 T-7
T-15 through T-7 through T-1 T-0
T-8 T-1
Work Order M&TE Work Prepare Forecasted User Picks Up
Help!
Current Plant Maintenance Schedule with M&TE Planning Week Query M&TE M&TE Ready M&TE
IV. DETAILED PLAN TO CLOSE THE GAP
T-14 T-7 Task Start Target Who VI. UNRESOLVED ISSUES
T-15 through T-7 through T-1 T-0
Complete
T-8 T-1 Review Maximo M&TE inventory for item
number tool-parent relationships
11/08
12/08
M&TE A. Measures
1. Work Orders per year
Complete
Edit Maximo Inventory tool-parent relationships 12/08 M&TE
Work Order Worker checks out M&TE 0109 2. Work Orders requiring M&TE per year
Planning
Complete 3. Progress of Work Order changes
Prepare critical M&TE list 02/09 M&TE
M&TE personnel made aware of M&TE need 02/09
4. Cost per hour for delayed plant work
Train Planning personnel on steps to include
03/09
Complete
Planning 1. Operation
M&TE in work order planning 03/09
2. Outage
Revise work order job plans as an in- Continuing
process continuous improvement
03/09
Process
Planning 5. Planned M&TE vs. Actual M&TE
Compare planned M&TE to actual M&TE 10/09 12/09 M&TE
Train M&TE personnel in T-15 work order
01/10 02/10 M&TE
process as relates to M&TE calibrations

7. A3 article written in
The Peak Review

8. Questions
Desire to Learn more?
• Todd McCann
leansavant@sbcglobal.net.
815-543-9112