All Member Open Forum

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

------------------------------
Haydn Scott
Maintenance & Reliability Engineer
CertainTeed
Peachtree City, GA
------------------------------

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

Haydn,

I have worked with organizations that have restricted work on certain assets to be done by only qualified personnel - whether staff or contract.  If your asset was an F1 race car, you won't be taking it to a local mechanic shop for corrective repairs, no matter how good their reputation. Sounds like this was a costly event.  Clearly your asset, in this story, has high potential or actual value.

Step 1: asset management plan

This scenario puts light on an organizational issue that should be addressed by a simple strategic asset management plan.  It doesn't require expensive consultants with endless stacks of post-it notes.  A simple document and consensus is all that's needed.  Also, no software needed other than what's needed to produce the document.

Step 2:

Compare your existing process to a generally accepted failure elimination work process to see if you're documenting this reliability event and asking yourself the right questions about the loss itself, the event data, RCA, failure mode review, strategy review, etc.  Again, no software tools needed other than Visio or equivalent.

Step 3:

Tool - there are some excellent solutions and libraries available to help execute the strategy (step 1), enable the work process (step 2), and operationalize the strategy that is meant to keep these types of events from happening.

Hope this is helpful.  Please let me know what you think.

For everyone's interest, ISO Technical Committee 251 is working on a proposed guidance standard called, "ISO 55012 - People involvement and competence" (which might address Haydn's question at a higher level).

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

Thanks for responding Marc. Your initial analogy is correct, and the steps you've outlined are helpful. I've spent some time thinking on how to low-key pitch a SAMP where there is not organizational support for that (at least not as such). I agree having that would drive other activities, so I'd be interested to hear any thoughts you have on that.

Regarding the third step you outlined, are there any specific tools that you seen successfully deployed?

I'd be interested to see the ISO guidance document when it is published - my initial thoughts on my approach were based on ISO 55001 8.3 and what I'd done in the past for ISO 9001 regarding outsourced activities.

Haydn,

I have worked with organizations that have restricted work on certain assets to be done by only qualified personnel - whether staff or contract.  If your asset was an F1 race car, you won't be taking it to a local mechanic shop for corrective repairs, no matter how good their reputation. Sounds like this was a costly event.  Clearly your asset, in this story, has high potential or actual value.

Step 1: asset management plan

This scenario puts light on an organizational issue that should be addressed by a simple strategic asset management plan.  It doesn't require expensive consultants with endless stacks of post-it notes.  A simple document and consensus is all that's needed.  Also, no software needed other than what's needed to produce the document.

Step 2:

Compare your existing process to a generally accepted failure elimination work process to see if you're documenting this reliability event and asking yourself the right questions about the loss itself, the event data, RCA, failure mode review, strategy review, etc.  Again, no software tools needed other than Visio or equivalent.

Step 3:

Tool - there are some excellent solutions and libraries available to help execute the strategy (step 1), enable the work process (step 2), and operationalize the strategy that is meant to keep these types of events from happening.

Hope this is helpful.  Please let me know what you think.

For everyone's interest, ISO Technical Committee 251 is working on a proposed guidance standard called, "ISO 55012 - People involvement and competence" (which might address Haydn's question at a higher level).

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.

I have a couple of questions for the group, but will provide some context first.

In the plant that I am working in, we somewhat regularly suffer from rework/infant mortality shortly after starting up from planned maintenance outages. These stem from defects introduced during intrusive corrective maintenance work. Due to the amount of time we typically get for an outage and our staffing level, corrective maintenance is largely done by 3rd party contractors while our technicians focus on PM work. A "commissioning" form was developed in the past for our technicians to use before equipment is returned to service, but it is generic and not consistently implemented. My questions are:

• Has anyone had success with a process or tool to identify/manage, before the work is done, the risks to equipment of performing a particular maintenance task?
• Is anyone using equipment criticality or other criteria to control who (3rd party, internal, OEM, etc) is/is not authorized to work on certain equipment?

The most recent incident bit us hard, to the tune of 23.5 hrs of rework, but it is part of a pattern of less serious incidents. Any insight is appreciated.