DOE Integrated Safety Management Best Practices Workshop―Aurora, Colorado Work Control Process Alignment Presented by: Michael C. Hughes President & General.

DOE Integrated Safety Management Best Practices Workshop―Aurora, Colorado

Work Control Process Alignment

Presented by:

Michael C. HughesPresident & General ManagerBechtel Jacobs Company

pg-2DOE Integrated Safety Management Best Practices Workshop―Aurora, Colorado

Oak Ridge Accelerated Cleanup Project

MilestoneCompletion Date

September 30, 2005

Complete Sept. 29, 2005

September 30, 2006

On Schedule

September 30, 2008

Forecast Moving to FY 2009

September 30, 2008

On Schedule

Scope

Safely treat and dispose of Legacy Low-Level and Mixed Low-Level Waste stored on the Oak Ridge Reservation.

Melton Valley: Decommission surplus facilities and complete hydrologic isolation/capping of major burial grounds and trenches.

East Tennessee Technology Park Closure: Decommission surplus facilities; complete remediation of waste sites: and implement groundwater remedies.

Manage Balance of Program scope, including high priority risk-reduction projects at Y-12, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and offsite.

Major Quantities

1.3 Million ft3 of waste

163 Potentially Contaminated Sites

500 Surplus Facilities

5,951 Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Cylinders


30 Surplus Facilities

143 Acres to Cap


232 Facilities

57 Waste Processing Facilities to Manage


BJC Work Control Planning and Implementationat Various Phases of the Contract

Maintenance &

Operations

Outsource all work

De-centralized control

Project & Functions (matrix) not in balance – “Functions not at the table”

Multiple work control processes

Limited alignment across projects

1998 2003 2006

No contract requirement to outsource work

Rebalanced the matrix – “EPC approach” – functions play an important role (people, processes, procedures)

One work control procedure

People-Based Safety Training

Improve Work Planning & Control procedure

Implement Human Performance Improvement concepts & tools

Complete Work Planning & Control Alignment workshops

2009

Accelerated Cleanup Project


K-25 Ironworker Falls 29 Feet

On the afternoon of January 3, 2006, at approximately 1355 hours a BJC employee working on the operating floor in the K-25 Building fell 29.5 feet to the cell floor. The employee was treated at the scene and transported to the University of Tennessee Medical Center via helicopter.

Immediate Actions Taken:

– Stop Work

– The ORO Manager commissioned a Type B Investigation

– Bechtel Jacobs Company commissioned an independent Extent of Condition Review


K-25 Building is a Unique D&D Opportunity

= Approximate location of the incident

Construction started 1943Construction started 1943

Roof added over Operating Roof added over Operating Floor ‘roof’ panels Floor ‘roof’ panels

Operations 1945 – 1964Operations 1945 – 1964

Building Stats:Building Stats:

• 4.7 million square feet4.7 million square feet

• 4,975 feet long4,975 feet long

• 380 feet wide380 feet wide

• 58 feet tall58 feet tall

Construction started 1943Construction started 1943

Roof added over Operating Roof added over Operating Floor ‘roof’ panels Floor ‘roof’ panels

Operations 1945 – 1964Operations 1945 – 1964

Building Stats:Building Stats:

• 4.7 million square feet4.7 million square feet

• 4,975 feet long4,975 feet long

• 380 feet wide380 feet wide

• 58 feet tall58 feet tall


Type B Identified 7 Judgments of Need Detailing Deficiencies and Gaps in the Following Categories

Work Planning and Control

Engineering / Design Control

Feedback and Improvement

Replan for K-25/K-27 Access and Demolition

Contractor and DOE Oversight

Root CauseThe Project “failed to follow the work control process

and allowed informality in the execution of its Integrated Safety Management (ISM) Program.”


Work Control Process Alignment

Define scope

Analyze hazards

Develop/implement controls

Perform work within controls

Feedback and improvement

Line management responsibility for safety

Clear roles and responsibilities

The Work Control Process Alignment is used to enhance the effectiveness of the implementation of the ISM Functions

The process alignment also focuses on the ISM principles of


Conducting Interactive Work Control Alignment Workshops at the Project Level

Work Control SessionsAssociated Breakout

SessionsObjectives Setting Process Key aspects of setting objectives

1. Review current work control process objectives

2. Review work control roles by organization

Management / Stakeholder Alignment Review the key aspects of alignment Review the alignment profile Review the mechanics of Alignment Thermometer

3. Identify key alignment issues

Barriers to Success Review typical barriers to project success

4. Identify key alignment barriers

5. Identify actions to overcome the barriers

Work Package Alignment Review work package process & objectives

6. Identifying key barriers to work package alignment

7. Identify actions to overcome the barriers

Summary & Conclusions Gaining and Sustaining Alignment


Alignment is Critical to Project Success

Definition - The condition where appropriate projectparticipants are working within acceptable tolerances to develop and meet a uniformly defined and understood set of objectives.

– A state of being; focused on objectives

– Must be fostered throughout the project life

– Must be readdressed as new participants added to project, or as objectives change


Longitudinal – stay aligned

throughout project’s life

Ver

tica

l –

Pro

ject

tea

m a

ligne

d in

val

ues

& p

urpo

se

Alignment Must Exist in Three Dimensions

Task Lead

Planning Team

Management Team

Work Team

Identify Work

Walkdown Job Site

Perform hazard

Analysis

Incorporate Lessons Learned

Write Work Package

Approve Work

Package

Review by PRC

Perform Pre-Job Briefing

Perform Work

Perform Post-Job

Diseminate Lessons Learned

Send package to

DMC

Horizontal – Functional support aligned with project objectives

Safety

Engineering

Construction


Understanding the Alignment Challenge

Projects have complex objectives – sometimes they are in direct conflict

Mixed stakeholders cause project complexity

Different functional groups – sometimes specialists tend to do their own thing

Multiple decision makers increase the need for communication – both deployed and non-deployed

Project Dynamics – schedule and funding changes


Alignment Thermometer: Where Are We Starting?

Measures the project team alignment

Identifies the areas needing focus

Assists in tracking toward alignment

Captures agreement / disagreementamong stakeholders

Captures how well alignment issues are addressed on project

Leads to pinpointed actions

70%

40%

100%

Comfortable Road

to Success

Comfortable Road

to Success

Discomfort on the Road to Mediocrity


Stressful Road to Failure



Legend: 1 = Strongly Disagree 5 = Strongly Agree

Steps 1 and 2 – Collect Survey Data

Survey Weighting

0 Not Applicable

1 0

2 3

3 5

4 8

5 10

Survey Weighting

0 Not Applicable

1 0

2 3

3 5

4 8

5 10


Average - Implementers

01

23

45

67

89

10

12 3 4

56

78

91011

1213

1415

1617

1819

2021

22232425

26272829

3031

3233

3435

3637

3839

4041

4243

4445

46 47 48

Work Control Alignment - All Sessions

Steps 3 and 4 – Analyze Data (Spider diagram)

Average ranking of Work Implementers

– Each spoke is an alignment statement from the survey

– Average for all respondents

– The larger the “spider web” the more poorly aligned the team

– Indicates alignment work to be done


Range - Implementers

01

23

45

67

89

10

12 3 4

56

78

91011

1213

1415

1617

1819

2021

22232425

26272829

3031

3233

3435

3637

3839

4041

4243

4445

46 47 48

Work Control Alignment - All Sessions

Steps 3 and 4 – Analyze Data (Spider diagram)

Range ranking of Work Implementers

– Max minus Min ranking for each of the alignment survey statements

– The larger the “spider web” the more poorly aligned the team

– 44 of 48 statements had a range of 10 (maximum mis-alignment possible)


70%

40%

100%

Step 5 – Alignment Thermometer Indicates we are Making Progress

Comfortable Road

to Success

Comfortable Road

to Success





Feb 2006

July 2006

Results at BJC

– Twelve sessions (344 personnel) conducted Feb through July

– Senior management through craft in workshops

– Alignment of personnel also being seen in workshop sessions


Gaining and Maintaining Alignment

AlignmentAlignment

Culture

ExecutionProcesses

Communication / Information

Tools

Barriers


Examples of Barriers to Work Control Alignment

Culture – No formal division of responsibility for work control - all stakeholders not accepting ownership and not holding each other accountable

Execution – Workers not fully engaged in the work planning process - management, non-manual, & craft workers not fully engaged in the work planning process

Communication – Lack of sufficient vertical & horizontal communication - management-to-craft and craft-to-management, line management-to-functions and function-to-line management

Tools – Feedback & Lessons Learned not adequately collected or incorporated into the work control process - doing the same thing over & over and expecting different results


Wor

k P

acka

ge

Pro

cess

StartExecute

Work Package

Close-Out Work

PackageComplete

PlanWork

Package

Approve Work

Package

Examples of Barriers to Work Package Alignment

Plan - Entire work team not engaged in the process

Approve - Comment resolution is too cumbersome

Execute - Work package is too complex

Closeout - No feedback or feedback follow-through


Culture Establishes the Lead Planner and Task Lead positions Single line accountability on a project for work package preparation Single line accountability for work execution Institutes a required Project Team (workers, technical experts, supervision,

facility management) approach to work package development in order to generate better integrated packages,

Training drove home ownership of the work control process emphasizing technical, supervision, and worker responsibilities

Execution Stresses responsibilities for successful implementation as well as

development Requires technical, supervision, and worker input during planning walkdown Requires worker and supervisor pre-job walkdown to make sure work package

matches task and conditions Establishes Work Control Task Lead position for each work package to ensure

clear ownership of the work package during implementation

Work Control Changes


Communication Includes workers as part of the team even to the point of work package

sign-off The required team approach eliminates isolated development of work

package elements Requires review of package to ensure integration and eliminate conflicting

direction (e.g., PPE) Training dealt directly with the importance of communication Requires adequate technical review of any changes – eliminated red-line

changes in the field

Tools Requires technical experts to incorporate Lessons Learned from their area Establishes Project Work Package review for incorporation and integration

of hazards, controls, lessons learned, and work instruction Requires periodic end-of-shift briefings not just at the end of the job to

increase feedback

Work Control Changes


Has to be a Project Leadership Absolute!

Needs to be defined, measured, and tested early on in the Project

Especially critical in joint-venture/multiple-partner projects

Is an essential element to Zero Incidents & Injuries

Instills discipline in the approach to work

Complements Integrated Safety Management

Establishes “our” work control culture and expectations on the Project

Needs to be maintained for the life of the Project

Disciplined Work Control Alignment


How do we plan, approve, and get work done around here?

Can you show or describe the work process to me?

Who is responsible and accountable for the various phases of the work process?

How do we measure whether we are aligned?

Some Key Questions to ask Regarding Work Planning & Control on Any Project

DOE Integrated Safety Management Best Practices Workshop―Aurora, Colorado Work Control Process Alignment Presented by: Michael C. Hughes President & General.

Documents