Refit Close-out Lean VSM Project Trident Refit Facility Kings Bay, GA

1. Refit Close-outLean VSM ProjectTrident Refit Facility Kings Bay, GA Presenters: Refit Close-out Project Team September 08

2. Team Debi Bemis Steve DeWitt Mike Hrivnak Ray LaFontaine Mike Litchfield Andy Lowe Brett Mounsey • Danny Russell • Cynthia Rucker • Ernie Schwach • Christine Smith • Teresa Smith • Jill Winkelman

3. Project Introduction OBJECTIVE Reduce variation and ambiguity in refit close-out processes to provide confidence in the accuracy of information and its sources 2008 GOALS ( show graph of future refits w/goals – progressing from end of project to May 08?) Goal for closing out projects in real time and in conjunction with the schedule – beginning in November, seasoned by May 08 Reduce the number of jobs not closed out at end of refit in LDS by _____% this year Reduce the number of jobs not closed out at end of refit in LDS by _____% by May 08 (or show graph of future refits w/goals – progressing from end of project to May 08?) VISION All paperwork is turned in and reconciled in real time according to job-specific schedule …thus upon boat departure/sea trials, all paperwork is turned in and reconciled. Create a method for objectively assessing and displaying refit status (green, yellow, red) at any point during the avail

4. Significance Benefits of closing out refits in real time: What happens when not closed out: 4

5. Closing Out a Refitwith respect to AWR’s and CWP’s Value Stream Map 5

6. Variation: • At least three forms in use: • Instruction • TRF pdf file (cant save) • Excel database for archiving created by a Planner for individual use PMAs Ship Sups Location: Ship Sups Exception: CNO, DGAR Closing out AWR’s & CWP’s during a Standard Refit Current State VSMTRFKB 16 Sept 08 AWR’s Hand walking paperwork building to building Form travels appx. 2 miles or if CCS bldg, 6 miles Not delivering in real time causes delays AWR’s • SUBMEPP • Single POC who travels and is overloaded • NSSC • All single POCs • Not calibrated in what’s approved and what’s not • Communication folow to relevant POC could be a bottleneck AWR’s AWR’s Put in in-boxes or mail 1-2 days for delivery AWR’s Create 5-6 Copies Code 432 2% 30-40% corr maint, service routines, ALTS 60-70% PMR’s = Code 432 LWC Signs with Comments • Ship’s Force • LCPO’s • Div Officers • -3MC’s • Batch delivering AWR’s • from daily to once per refit • Refit Mgr, Ship Supt, Shop, PMA, Tank Coord – Mult roles check on status ARRS Review -CKI Signatures Final Action Taken (FAT) code Has job been issued Man hours Date Rework = appx. 20% ISIC (NSSC delegated to SUBMEPP) NSSC = 10 min – 1 day SUBMEPP 1 day – 2 weeks Initiation to Action Response Time: 1 day, 100 min – 3 weeks, 210 min 10 min – 2 days 10 min – 1 day 1 – 2 days 6 10 min 10 -30 min 10 - 60 min 5 min 5 min

7. Current State Observations What is the requirement? Close within 7 days of departure - JFMM Average = 16 DAYS 7

8. Current State Observations What causes delays (read: “signing parties”) (create pie chart with estimated percentages?) AWR’s not issued Parts or material on order Production ESR’s Growth Testing Waiting on QA Rework Waiting on installation of interference, paint or AWC Waiting on paperwork Lost paperwork CK not complete (ALTs) Hold jobs open to charge hours against it (can include time needed for clean up, de-staging and retooling) 8

9. Current State Observations Refit in planning: Work completed during last refit but not closed out 740/44 (Total of 37 not closed out at the end of the refit) 22 jobs + 15 jobs comped by planners that we don’t know if they were done or not 742/38 (Total of 62 not closed out at the end of the refit) 20 jobs that have action taken coded plus 42 jobs comped last refit (1 from 2006) that have no action taken (don’t know if they are deferred….) 9

10. Variation and Ambiguity in Processesobservations made through interviews with:General ForemenShop SuptsRefit MgrsShip Supts 10

11. Current State Observations Reasons you don’t want to close out jobs when they are complete? (2) Want to use all their man hours (can include: sometimes need man hours for clean up, de-staging and retooling….)****** Still waiting on installation of interference, paint or AWC to finish. Don’t ever sign off a job that is not complete Occasionally sign off a job that is not complete – (knows not allowed but if boat is leaving that day and paint is not complete yet, he’ll sign it off if he has confidence it will get done) No reason, they should close (2) Parts/material still on order Boat work complete but shop still working ? Jill’s “pie in the sky question” - Can the shops keep unused hours or a percentage of unused hours as incentive to close out and use/learn actual times? Can we do this in the name of designating the hours as an aggregate “holding area” for finishing jobs (i.e. cleaning a valve after new one has been replaced) in the interest of load leveling? 11

12. Current State Observations When do AWR’s go to the boat (for close out signature)? When supervisor signs off he gives it to GF and whenever GF delivers When ship sup delivers (2) When job is complete and LPO is there to witness – sign off on the spot Sup signs off and gives to GF who delivers daily to ship sup Gives to ship sup daily Saves until the end of the refit When complete work, shop supt take it to boat for Ship to verify completion of job then sign their block on the AWR Get them from shop in a pile, every day after 0900 meeting. If only have one, will wait until go down to the ship that day (930-1015). If boat chief is not there, then ship supt keeps AWR (Never give them AWR) Scenario: Looked at three AWR’s on a Ship Supt’s desk (representative scenario for most refits) Date signed by shopDate signed by shipDate found on ship sup’s desk8/268/269/178/268/289/178/209/99/17 Recommendation: (short term) LWC delivers LWC-signed AWR to Ship Sup by the following day’s production meeting; or The LWC gets signature from Ship’s Force upon completion of work then delivers to Ship Supt by the following day’s production meeting (mid term) Consider ship’s force signing their part on a list or database instead of individual forms assuming that TRFKB uses recommended definition of work complete. Consider alternative to meet requirement of Ship’s Force concurrence of TRFKB’s work complete (investigate SNAP/RMAIS correlation/exceptions). (long term) make electronic and update in real time in a database 12

13. Current State Observations How do you track jobs? PSR Intrusive - When AWC signs off the WAF, they know interferences are reinstalled Non-intrusive – direct communication and contact with the shops Final ship check by supervisor or work leader Supervisory job sight observation Performance of second checks with senior mechanics Stay abreast of job, go down and check, constantly call AWC Contact AWCs and/or Ships force if they don’t know if it is done (i.e. testing) Night sheets – physical board on the wall Daily observation of the job Recommend designating PSR as official tracking mechanism for job status LWC’s use codes in remarks section to update status daily 13

14. Current State Observations How does paper get lost? If leave on the boat (ship sups) drop off. Former 3MC – said great time to sign AWR’s was at night. If chief grabs then goes and solves a different issue, then 3MC loses accountability. Ship sups put down in a shop, then forget What are the costs to not closing out jobs? No consequence for ship sup Determine who has the expectations/accountability for job close out by due date (7 days after sail) and give visibility (Recommend: Refit Mgr) RO/PMA/Deputy PMA/Planning Officer/Business Manager/NSSC N4 - take action on poor performance within close out process 14

15. Current State Observations Other recommendations: Ship Sup review of AWR should include review of comments i.e. “don’t allow work not complete” or “work deferred” to be in remarks when closing an AWR Per JFMM requirement ,NSSC take on current MDCO role of incoming to free up their capacity 15

16. Sorted PMR Before After FMA Work Complete Class Maint Plan 430 Alts ESR DFS IDIQ Tank Status PSRs from prev refits Nuc/Major work Planning Brief Package 2 Days 422 Planning • Discuss key events schedule • Determine major work items tracked by PMA • Determine Jobs needing detailed schedule or fast start • Determine work submission cut off date • Negotiate work requsted by boat since pre0arruvak • Needed before • Boat leaves PMA’s ISIC Planners GF Discuss what is deferred Planning Closing out AWR’s & CWP’s in a Standard Refit Current State VSMTRFKB 16 Sept 08

17. Current State Work Deferral Data (from sample of 7 refits in 2008) Estimate 1231 MAN DAYS expended by Planning on jobs that were deferred Total # of Deferrals 729 Std Refit Ave: 19% Deferred Total in Progress when Deferred 559 17

18. Current State Repetitively Deferred Jobs sampled from three active refits 18

19. Recommendations Macro Map – Recommendation 1 Develop, implement and enforce processes to ensure that AWR’s are signed off when completed. (Repair Officer and Weapons Repair Officer) For consideration: Reporting weekly metrics closed AWRs in comparison to the schedule (include realistic testing time in schedule) work deferral (numbers/percentages) Identify and reschedule deferred work to an applicable, realistic future refit at FMA Work Complete Assessment Conference. Identify incomplete work and develop a plan of action to complete items. Train lead work centers on criteria for signing off to close AWR’s. Create a electronic location for deferred work so it can be monitored, evaluated and reported for future scheduling. (Work currently goes to future key events or future refits). 19

20. Recommendations Macro Map – Recommendation 2 Initiate a call down at A-60 to allow time for Code 305 to develop initial boat schedule in PIM to support an A-50 meeting. At A-50, evaluate integrated schedule and available resources to determine if action is needed to complete the refit For any constraints determined in A-50 meeting, take action to fully complete refit. Options may include: obtaining external resources deferring work prior to A-45 meeting extending refit duration Long term strategies: Provide input in Fleet Scheduling Conference to influence results based on known capabilities and scheduled maintenance. Expand capacity through improvement events 20

21. Recommendations Macro Map – Recommendation 3 5S all SSBN and SSGN PSRs Relocate all jobs to correct refits 21

22. Deferral ProcessProcess Map 22

23. Recommendations Process Map – Recommendation 1 Incorporating electronic transfer of information in work deferral process Upon deferred work approval, notification and trigger for entry into LDS is simultaneous. Deferred work approval notification should include NSSC, SUBMEPP OSR, Planners, 3MC, WPCG, Production and C/430. Develop a daily report in LDS that broadcasts to all necessary personnel the cumulative deferred work for all units. 23

24. Variation: • At least three forms in use: • Instruction • TRF pdf file (cant save) • Excel database for archiving created by a Planner for individual use TRFKB Deferral ProcessRecommendation 1Future StateTRFKB Hand walking paperwork building to building Form travels appx. 2 miles or if CCS bldg, 6 miles Not delivering in real time causes delays • SUBMEPP • Single POC who travels and is overloaded • NSSC • All single POCs • Not calibrated in what’s approved and what’s not • Communication flow to relevant POC could be a bottleneck Electronic Format and Transfer Put in in-boxes or mail 1-2 days for delivery Form 4790.5 JCN Defer/ Cancel Create 5-6 Copies E-Daily LDS Report Planners Ship Sups SUBMEPP ARRS Others PMAs Ship Sups Location: Ship Sups Exception: CNO, DGAR ISIC NSSC – All but PMR’s SUBMEPP - PMRs ARRS (Part of Code 430) 400 Ship Sups 3MC WPC Production PMR Schedulers ISIC NSSC = 10 min – 1 day SUBMEPP 1 day – 2 weeks Initiation to Action Response Time: 1 day, 70 min – 3 weeks, 210 min 50 min – 2 weeks, 110 min 10 min – 2 days 10 min – 1 day 1 – 2 days 24 10 min 10 -30 min 10 - 60 min 5 min 5 min

25. FORM INITIATOR Possibly: GF or Refit Mgr or Planner or Lead Work Center or Ship Supv. FORM INITIATOR Possibly: GF or Refit Mgr or Planner or Lead Work Center or Ship Supv. Ship’s Force Ship’s Force PMA/Ship’s Supv PMA/Ship’s Supv WPCG WPCG PMR Scheduler PMR Scheduler NSSC/ SUBMEP (PMRs) NSSC/ SUBMEP (PMRs) Code 401 Code 401 ARRS (Code 430) System Entry & Copy Dist. ARRS (Code 430) System Entry & Copy Dist. Work Deferral Form Travel Red: Approval Process Blue: Copy Distribution Work Deferral Form No Travel Electronic communication

26. Recommendations Process Map – Recommendation 2 Change approval authority from NSSC/SUBMEPP (keep them informed but not depend on their review) to Project Supts and TRF Chief Engineer. This change does not contradict JFMM per Submarine Maintenance Program Manager at COMSUBFOR. After A-45 Meeting, all deferral requests are routed through Ship Supts for approval. 26

27. TRFKB Deferral ProcessRecommendation 2Future StateTRFKB • SUBMEPP • Single POC who travels and is overloaded • NSSC • All single POCs • Not calibrated in what’s approved and what’s not • Communication flow to relevant POC could be a bottleneck Revise Approval Authority to Project Supts and Chief Engineer Electronic Form 4790.5 JCN Defer/ Cancel Planners Ship Sups SUBMEPP ARRS Others PMAs Ship Sups Location: Ship Sups Exception: CNO, DGAR Project Supts Chief Engineer NSSC SUBMEPP ARRS (Part of Code 430) 400 Ship Sups 3MC WPC Production PMR Schedulers ISIC Initiation to Action Response Time: 1 day, 70 min – 3 weeks, 210 min 50 min – 2 weeks, 110 min 40 min – 110 min ? NSSC = 10 min – 1 day SUBMEPP 1 day – 2 weeks 27 10 min 10 -30 min 10 - 60 min 5 min 5 min

28. Recommendations Process Map – Recommendation 3 Revise deferral process for simultaneous notification of approval and entry into the system 28

29. TRFKB Deferral ProcessRecommendation 3Future StateTRFKB System Entry and Receive Info/Take Action/File Processes occur simultaneously Electronic Form 4790.5 JCN Defer/ Cancel 400 Ship Sups 3MC WPC Production PMR Schedulers ISIC Planners Ship Sups SUBMEPP ARRS Others PMAs Ship Sups Location: Ship Sups Exception: CNO, DGAR Project Supts Chief Engineer ARRS (Part of Code 430) Initiation to Action Response Time: 1 day, 70 min – 3 weeks, 210 min 50 min – 2 weeks, 110 min 40 min – 110 min 35 min - 105 29 10 min 10 -30 min 10 - 60 min 5 min 5 min

30. Thank you 30