efcog supply chain quality task team conference call may 2012 · 1. inadequate nqa-1 suppliers...

Tank Operations Contract

1

EFCOG Supply Chain

Quality Task Team

Conference Call May 2012

Vince GrossoSupply Chain Quality Chair

(Including a review of the EFCOG ISM Working Group Semi-Annual Meeting held May 2, 2012, Las Vegas, NV)


2

Overview & Spring Meeting Review

1. EM Corporate Board Feedback

2. EFCOG Spr ing Meet ing Feedback

3. Object ives & Goals

4 . Logist ics

5 . Successes

6. Task Act iv i t ies

7 . Audi t Schedul ing

8. In ter face Feedback

9. Old Business

10.New Business

11.Discussion & Close Out


3

EM Corporate Board Feedback

1. Status of Action Items

2. Summary of the Site ISM/QA Declarations

3. Status of Phase II Follow‐up Reviews

4. Overview EM QA Program of (as provided to DNFSB)

5. EM Corporate QA Program (EM-QA-001)

6. Focus Area Discussions

7. NQA‐1 Interpretation Letter Discussion

8. Discussion of the DOE Lessons Learned Process

9. Best Practices, Attention to Detail, and other Cross‐Cutting Issues

10. Proposed New Focus Areas


4

Status of Action Items

1. Presentations Available(http://www.em.doe.gov/Pages/QACorporateBoard.aspx)

2. EM-40 Responsible for EM QA Program

3. Matthew Moury named Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Safety, Security, and Quality Programs (EM-40)

4. Large turnover among Federal Site QA Managers

5. Initiating Federal QA Managers call to discuss issues & lessons learned

6. Reviewed EM Board Action Items

A. JSEP, Journey to Excellence Goal #5 Performance Metric, Project Plan, FAR revision, CGD guidance document, QA in Design guidance document


5

Site ISM/QA Declarations

1. Why Do It (EM-QA-001); What is Required; Who Responded

2. Common Issues / Areas Needing Improvement

A. Quality Improvement (only paragraph 100 of NQA-1; Phase I / phase II reviews not performed; QAP not sufficient; Reduced staffing)

B. Work Processes (Hazard identification and analysis)

C. Personnel Training & Qualification (Training material not up-to-date)

D. Documents & Records

E. Management Assessment (Term “assessment” used in broadest possible sense)

F. Independent Assessment

G. Procurement (Requirements flow-down; Vendor and Supplier Oversight)

H. Design (Inadequate specification)

I. Software Quality Assurance (Documentation issues)

J. Insufficient QA Staff


6

Phase II Follow‐up Reviews

1. Oversight Strategy and Approach (Enhance project specific QA execution and performance)

2. FY2012 QA Assessment Priorities (Basis for Planning, Prioritizing, and Scheduling QA Audits)

3. QA Oversight Implementation Strategy

4. Standard Review Plan

5. All reviews complete by 2013 (SR, RL, EMCBC, Moab (5/2012), ORP (6/2012), WVDP (7/2012), PPPO (7/2012), ID (8/2012), OR (9/2012), SPRU (10/2012), CBFO (1/2013)


7

EM QA Program (as provided to DNFSB)

1. State of QA and recent accomplishments in EM

A. Enhance / standardize QA Program

B. Issued two EM guidance documents (CGD; Integrating QA in Design)

2. Critical QA issues of interest to the DNFSB

A. DOE O 414.1D Implementation

B. Staffing and Qualification

C. Flow-Down of Quality Requirements

D. Suspect and Counterfeit Items

E. Safety Software

F. Commercial Grade Dedication


8

EM Corporate QA Program (EM-QA-001)

1. Writing Team (Perkins; Scott; Rowland; Tabatabai; Carter; Hassell; Shugars)

2. Primary Changes (incorporate 414.1D; adopt NQA-1-2008 with addenda through 2009; update management expectations; federal records; validation and verification of computer models; added Transportation Quality Assurance)

3. Revised EM-QA-001 will be formally distributed to the field offices by EM-1/2


9

Focus Areas

1. Inadequate NQA-1 Suppliers (JSEP) Focus Area 1

2. QA/QC Evaluation of QA Resources Focus Area 2 (survey out by 5/2012; final report by 8/2012)

3. Strategy for EM QA/QC/QE Training Focus Area 3 (assess the current needs and strategy for training) EM‐QA‐001 revision training provided by 10/1/2012


10

NQA‐1 Interpretation Letter

1. Question: For an implementer, is choosing to apply only paragraph 100 of applicable requirements of Parts I and II of the standard an appropriate and sufficient method to implement a NQA-1 based Quality Assurance Program

2. Response: No. With the exception of the Part I requirement areas: 5, Instructions, Procedures and Drawings; 14; Inspection, Test and operating Status; and 16 Corrective Action, paragraph 100 is a summary and introductory paragraph for additional mandatory criteria contained in the requirement area. The application of only section 100 by an implementation organization is insufficient to claim credit for implementation Part I or Part II of an NQA-1 based QA program. It is also insufficient for an invoking organization to invoke only section 100 of Part I or Part II and expect results equivalent to specifying all of Parts I or II. This response is applicable to NQA-1-2000, NQA-1-2004, NQA-1-2008 and the NQA-1b-2011 Addenda


11

DOE Lessons Learned Process

1. Jeannie Boyle retired, Ashley Ruocco now lead

2. Reviewed DOE O 210.2A, Corporate Operating Experience Program

3. DOE Corporate Operating Experience Program Documents

4. Overview of the Lessons Learned Database

5. Lessons Learned Reports

6. Lessons Learned Reports Analysis

7. Lessons Learned Improvements

8. Lessons Learned Initiatives


12

Best Practices, Attention to Detail, and

other Cross‐Cutting Issues

1. DOE contractors have stable QA programs

2. Problems are associated with implementation not programmatic

A. Inattention to detail

B. Poor workmanship

C. Lack of training

D. Supervisory priorities and schedule demands

E. Worker discipline

3. Cause (inadequate HPI; poor understanding of management expectations; inadequate planning)

4. Recommendations (reinforce QA requirements & QA culture; supervisor training)


13

Proposed Focus Areas

1. EFCOG and/or EM Site Offices

A. Procedural compliance/execution/conduct of operations

B. Effectiveness of corrective actions regarding human performance

C. Vendor issues

D. Supplier Quality Assurance

E. Consistent application of regulations/requirements, and consistent interpretations

F. Inspector training/mentoring and understanding inspector expectations

G. Improve understanding of expectations for safety software and software QA

H. Path forward for small contractors without rigorous NQA-1 programs

I. Addressing overseas suppliers

J. Applying graded corrective action to DOE

K. QC & Inspection criteria integration combined with the content in work plans for effectiveness


14

Proposed Focus Areas

1. EM-43 will address

A. Identifying HQ requirements from memos and other correspondence beyond orders

B. QAP/QIP Implementation/Clear roles and responsibilities

C. ORPS reporting of S/CI Program

D. Balancing inspection/field work control with HQ program audits and oversight


15

Supply Chain Quality Action Item

1. EM Corporate Board Requested the Supply Chain

Quality Team to address:

A. Cost data and savings to the Department

B. How can the Supplier Base be increased


16

Supply Chain Quality Objectives

• Session Objectives:

– Provide Feedback, Share Knowledge, Identify Barriers, Develop Proposals to Overcome Barriers, Status Tasks, Identify New Tasks, Create Value, Prepare for the Future

• EFCOG Supply Chain Objectives:

– Eliminate Duplicate Effort, Keep Federal & Contractor Supply Chain Personnel informed, Provide Feedback, Share Knowledge, Create Value, Prepare for the Future, Get Everyone Involved

– Good List of Information (Key position contacts by Site)

– Expand knowledge on and about Suppliers

– Integrate information between EM & NNSA


17

Supply Chain Quality Bottom Line


18

Session Goals

• Discuss Performance Issues

• Identify Program Change Team

• Develop a 2012 / 2013 Proposed Audit Schedule

• Identify Audit Team Leads & Participants

• Discuss Site Specific Best Practices

• Identify Supply Chain Quality Needs

• Identify Task Group Leads / Members

• Identify Topics that Need to be Worked

• Improvements to make the job Easier


19

Supply Chain Quality Logistics

• EM Sites

• National Laboratories

• NNSA Sites

• Headquarters

• Service Centers

Federal & Contractor Participation Continues to Grow!

• Supply Chain

• Supplier Evaluations

• JSEP

• MASL

• Trust Building


20

Federal HQ Participants

• EM Office of Nuclear Safety

• HS-24 Office of Analysis

• HS-33 Office of Quality Assurance

• EM-43 Standards & Quality Assurance

• EM Consolidated Business Center

• NA-2 Principal Deputy Administrator Central Technical Authority

• NA-10 Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs

• NA-SH Associate Administrator for Safety & Health


21

EM Site Participants

• Hanford Site

• Savannah River Site

• Idaho Site

• Portsmouth / Paducah Sites

• Carlsbad Site

• Oak Ridge

• West Valley

• Others?


22

National Laboratory Participants

• Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

• Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

• Savannah River National Laboratory

• Brookhaven National Laboratory

• Los Alamos National Laboratory

• Oak Ridge National Laboratory

• Argonne National Laboratory

• Idaho National Laboratory

• Sandia National Laboratory

• Stanford Linear Accelerator Center National Laboratory


23

NNSA Sites

• Kansas City Plant

• Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

• Los Alamos National Laboratory

• Nevada National Security Site

• Pantex

• Sandia National Laboratory

• Savannah River Site (Tritium)

• Y-12 National Security Complex


24

Supply Chain Quality - Successes

• Joint Supplier Evaluation Program (JSEP)

• Filter issues worked proactively with SMEs

• Working with EPWOG, MASL, BMAC

• Communications and information sharing

• Monthly conference calls

• Use of Webex for meetings

• Web site posted


25

JSEP - Successes

• JSEP database loaded with audits

• Available for use

• POCs trained

• Supplier Evaluation Audits being conducted

• Working toward integrating information with NNSA

and MASL database

• JSEP / MASL differences resolvable

• NNSA Portal access concept approved


26

JSEP Refresher

• Joint Supplier Evaluation Program (JSEP)

• Supply Chain Quality Tool

• Standardized evaluation by multiple Contractors of

Supplier’s capability to provide item(s) or service(s)

• Cost reduction associated with supplier evaluations

• Opportunity for shared data on a Supplier’s capability

• Database hosted by INL


27

JSEP Supplier Logistics

• Supplier’s in JSEP Database (as of 4/30/12)

– 110 Suppliers, Located in 28 States:

• 14 Suppliers in Washington

• 12 Suppliers in Tennessee

• 8 Suppliers in North Carolina

• 7 Suppliers in States of: Georgia / Ohio / Pennsylvania

• 6 Suppliers in California

• 5 in New Jersey / Colorado

• 4 in Illinois / Texas

• 3 in Alabama / Florida / Idaho / New Mexico / New York / South Carolina

• 2 in Connecticut / Oregon

• 1 in Delaware / Indiana / Kentucky / Louisiana / Maryland / Minnesota / Missouri / Oklahoma / Utah


28

JSEP – MASL Integration

• Agreement in concept for EFCOG access to NNSA Portal

• Identified organizations requiring access and pilot operation

• Developed next steps and initiated project plan

• Added EFCOG representation on NNSA Quality Supplier Working Group

• Obtain funding for any MASL database changes

• Review EM Portal project for synergy with JSEP/MASL integration


29

JSEP – MASL Next Steps

• Finalize changes required to jointly utilize MASL data base (short range)

• Determine / obtain funding for changes (short range)

• Generate comprehensive project schedule (short range)

• Coordinate pilot for data upload, input, and access (short range)

• Develop joint process and MOU (long range)


30

JSEP + MASL Benefits

• Common Suppliers:

– 66

• Combined information leading to:

– >1000 Suppliers

– Not counting unknown common suppliers

• Supplier reliability

•$aving$


31

Process Check

• Conference Call

– Schedule

– Time

– Info Covered

– Length

– Webex Feedback

• Points of Contacts

• Database Access

• Other??


32

Task Sheet Update

Supply Chain Quality Task – SC-12-01

1. Develop a comprehensive Supply Chain Quality Site and Site contact List. The list should include National Laboratories, NNSA, EM, and Science

A. Phase 1 - QA Manager / Subject Matter Expert

B. Phase 2 - Engineering and Procurement Management

C. Phase 3 - This becomes a living document to ensure all DOE sites have the opportunity to participate

2. Quasi list developed based on distribution

3. Need Volunteer(s)

A. Project Manager – Kirk Bailey

B. Team Members – ??


33

Task Sheet Update


1. Schedule and Conduct Monthly Supply Chain Quality Conference Calls with published minutes

A. Schedule calls for 2012 & 2013

B. Conduct monthly calls as scheduled and issue minutes

2. Calls scheduled for 2012 & 2013 using Webex


A. Project Manager – Vince Grosso

B. Team – Bill Wingfield


34

Task Sheet Update


1. Work with Engineering Practices Work Group to evaluate the feasibility of developing a standard set of criteria for Commercial Grade Surveys and Suppliers for Non-NQA-1 suppliers.

2. Contacts with EPWOG established and being worked


A. Project Manager – David Lewis

B. Team Members –

- Cathy Nesser

- Marvin Montoya


35

Task Sheet Update

Supply Chain Quality Task – SC-12-041. Utilize a single tool for supplier quality data.(MASL / JSEP

Integration).

2. Have consensus on Tool. Resolving data access issue(s). Briefed EM and EFCOG. Need to schedule NNSA, & BMAC Leadership Teams. Joined NNSA QSWG. Need to: define Governance Structure; establish roles & responsibilities; establish access protocol; make software modifications; develop program document and data entry protocol; develop procedures, training, qualification; roll out ; cost savings metrics; add Commercial Grade Survey capability to the tool


A. Team Members – Bill Wingfield, Marvin Montoya, Bob Hendrickson, Alice Lewis


36

Task Sheet Update


1. Develop a 2012 & 2013 Joint Supplier Audit Schedule

2. Working to keep up with demand


A. Project Manager – Alice Lewis

B. Team Members – Ron Natali, Mark Ryan, Bill Wingfield

4. Recommendation:

– 1 Year Rotating assignment


37

Task Sheet Update

Supply Chain Quality Task – (SC-12-06)

1. Manage Supply Chain Quality Webpage

2. Page developed and posted. Need feedback


A. Team Members to review website and provide feedback / improvement suggestions

B. Everyone


38

Task Sheet Update

Supply Chain Quality Task – (SC-12-07)

1. Develop a Departmental list of Subject Matter Experts from across the complex.

2. Determine if the list is to be controlled (through the supplier evaluation tool) or publicly available (through a website or other means)

3. Provide access to the list


A. Project Manager –

B. Team Members –


39

Supply Chain Quality Improvements(Developed during May 2012 Meeting)

1. Better planning so that everyone knows what joint audits are coming

2. Better pool of suppliers that understand NQA-1 (i.e., ASME Section 8 vessel suppliers)

3. More oversight resources

4. Better communication and understanding of how all commitments are covered in joint audits


40


5. More tools and development opportunities to enable small businesses to become qualified suppliers

6. Consistent requirements among sites, projects, contractors (i.e., level the playing field)

7. Streamline bureaucracy and paperwork required of suppliers

8. Better understanding of funding sources for type B radioactive packages


41


9. Consistency between PQR, QC-1, and NQA-1

10.Better identify what the key important things to look at on NQA-1 checklists

11.Develop a supplier performance tracker (risk informed basis) for maintaining a supplier on the approved list. How do we establish a performance tracking system using the 3 elements of QC-1 and NQA-1 (Performance history, direct evaluation, objective evaluation of records)

12.Allow / Maximize use of Third party evaluations, where possible


42


13.Consistent level of audit format protocol, detail, and checklist information

14. Improve material traceability and design verification lessons learned from suppliers for audit teams (share known problems) (issue not supplier)

– Look at audits done by others demonstrating NQA-1 compliance / compliance (Supplier capability equivalent to Commercial Grade Survey)

– Gain confidence to award contracts

15.Maximize use of third parties to demonstrate supplier capabilities with regard to NQA-1 compliance to allow shift of focus from pre award to post award


43


16. Improve scheduling of EFCOG audits so that there are no last minute coordination issues (known suppliers)

17.Firm commitment by participating auditors participating on EFCOG audits

18.Better list of shared suppliers from all EFCOG members (list of ALL ASL / ESL / QSL suppliers)

19.Better sharing of radioactive packaging design (Type A / B packages)


44


20.Share packaging Committee (Brian Hermann) information with supply chain quality team – CONTACT INITIATED

21.Regarding small business set asides – what are the cost savings versus using larger qualified supplier and what is the QA role in making them perform

22.Ensure that clarity, expectations, requirements, and flow down to suppliers is clearly established and communicated during initial audit meetings to set the tone for the audit


45


23.Need qualified and dedicated experts and auditors to perform and provide results to facilitate timely reporting. The expectation should be to provide a draft report at the exit meeting

24.Ensure implementation and pride in final product of the joint audit effort

25. Improve the willingness to share results and build trust

26.Track cost savings to provide documentation of cost savings to the Department

– Track savings to show JSEP savings to HQ


46


27.Establish a share drive of sample procedures – EFCOG should develop a set of best practices

28.Establish procurement level / quality level consistency, clarity, and understanding consistency between sites and risk to public (i.e., radiological and biohazard)

29.Develop a united approach at a high level for common suppliers at the DOE / NNSA level rather than the project level

30.What is the process for handling distributors – pass thru or material handlers. Are they evaluated to any extent?


47


31.Consistent process for handling Consumable’s – do they carry the same functional classification as the Structure, System, or Component?

32.Ensure consistent data entry into the JSEP database

33.Add individual site supplier lists to JSEP and make them available to all registered users

34.Ensure that auditors and Subject Matter Experts looking at Department of Transportation (DOT) testing are DOT trained


48


35.Develop a audit report Template and post to the JSEP website for EFCOG / JSEP audit reports

36.Review JSEP data quality and remove or isolate old audits so there are not duplicate suppliers (old and new audits) that can be clicked on by accident

37.Send out website URL to participants

– EFCOG Main Page URL - http://www.efcog.org/

– EFCOG Supply Chain Quality URL -http://www.efcog.org/wg/ism_qa_scqtt/qa_scqtt.htm

38.Post Subject Matter Expert list to JSEP


49


39.Develop Equivalent guidance document to NRC Reg. Guide 1.28 on how to use audit material

40.Develop a automatic mail distribution list for questions or supplier information from the website that goes out to a standard distribution

41.Add a “Basis for Qualification” section to the JSEP database


50

Proposed Future Task Ideas

• JSEP Program Revision

• Lead Auditor Certification Evaluations

• Audit Program Evaluations

• Database User Support Group

• Supply Chain Quality Charter

• Adding Supplier Surveys

• Adding Site Specific Audits

• Add More Suppliers & Commodities

• ???


51

Audit Scheduling – Schedule Update


52

Audit Scheduling – May 2012

• GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas: Canonsburg, Pa

– Lead: TBD (BNI)

– Germann (Portsmouth/Paducah DUF6)

• Major Tool & Machine: Indianapolis, IN

– Lead: Lewis (Y-12)

– Kunis (SRR)

• Nuclear Filter Technology: Golden, Co

– Lead: Hendrickson (INL)

– Gutgsell (LANL), Chavez (LANL), Bingham (LANL), Stone (LANL)


53

Audit Scheduling – June 2012

• Consolidated Power Supply: Birmingham, AL

– Lead: Wagner (BNI)

– Bailey (Y-12)

• Wright Industries: Nashville, TN

– Auer (BNI)

– Barnette (HS-33); Zweifel (NNSA)


54

Audit Scheduling – July 2012

• American Crane: Douglassville, Pa

– Lead: TBD (BNI)

– TBD

• Nuclear Logistics Inc: Fort Worth, TX

– Maupin (BNI)

– Frazier (SRNS)


55

Audit Scheduling – August 2012

• Canberra Inc.: Meriden, CT

– Nesser (Carlsbad)

– Barnette (HS-33), Zweifel (NNSA), Davis (SRNS), Stein (BNL), Montoya (LANL), Kahnhauser (BNL)

• ARES Corporation: Richland, WA

– Lead: Montoya (LANL)

– Maciuca (WRPS), Lewis (PNNL), TBD (EPWOG)

• Nova Machine: Middleburg, OH

– Lead: Davis (SRNS)

– Montoya (LANL), Lewis (Y-12)


56

Audit Scheduling – September 2012

• Hy-LoK: Houston, TX

– Lead: TBD (BNI)

– TBD


57

Audit Scheduling – October 2012

• Operation Technology (ETAP): Irvine, CA

– Lead: Davis (SRNS)

– Lewis (Y-12), Sparkman (EM-CNS); Gravois (LBL), Williams (Y12)

• Air Liquide Specialty Gases: Longmont Co

– Montoya (LANL)

– TBD


58

Interface Feedback

• EPWOG

– Commercial Grade Dedication Task Group workshop May 22 & 23

• Supply Chain Management Center

• Others


59

Old Business

• Any Other Old Business to Discuss?


60

New Business

• Fall EFCOG Meeting (Not Confirmed or Official) – May be Oak Ridge (Early October)

• Any Other New Business?

• Next Webinar/Call:

– 6/19/12

• 14:00 PM EST

• 13:00 PM CST

• 12:00 PM MST

• 11:00 AM PST


61

Open Discussion & Close Out