ABWM Work ManagementABWM Work Management

Planning, Scheduling, Tracking & Results Analysis

System Capabilities

Service Max Capability Max Demand Date

Electric 760 MW 825 MW 8/25/03

Gas 260,000 MCF 213,388 MCF 1/12/97

Water 233 MGD 182.4 MGD 7/7/01

Wastewater 75 MGD 75.4 MGD 4/30/99

Operations/Systems Control Staff

Electric Staff - 1953 Fossil Fuel plants (7 units)2 Combustion Turbines4 Hydro Units1 Combined Cycle Plant

Water Staff - 616 Water Treatment Plants Groundwater System

Wastewater – Staff 261 Treatment Plant1 SHDF

Field Operations Staff - 144Raw Water Collection Electric, Gas, Water I&CFinished Water Distribution WastewaterPipeline Operations Substations C&MGas/Electric Distributions Ops

Systems Control Staff - 34

Electric Transmission, Electric Distribution, Gas & Water Engineering/Technical

Operations/System Control Staff-Present

Plants-Reliability & Savings Power Production: 01/01/99 to 09/31/03 efficiency

improvements

1. EAF: improved 12.21% from 83.09 % to 95.3%2. Capacity Factor: Drake improved 13.65% - Nixon .982%3. Forced outages decreased: Drake 45.2% Nixon 26.6%

Nixon plant rated 14th best utilized plant in U.S. in 2003

Savings From ABWM (1999 As Baseline) 2000 through 2002

1. Avoided purchase power costs = + $2,953,000 2. Avoided labor costs = $2, 823,6003. Positions left unfilled in Power Production = 164. Water Treatment installation of ABWM still in progress5. System Control: Began installation of ABWM in August 2003

Future Facilities

Additions:Future staffing needs are expected to be minimal or zero for Water and Wastewater plants because of work management efficiency gains.

Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant

Southern Delivery System

Northern Water Reclamation Plant

ABWM General Project Goals

ABWM Brings Culture Change to CSU Plants

Reduce costs

Improve reliability

Improve availability

Provide feedback loop - process improvement

Improve job planning, scheduling, staging, execution

How we did our work

Found something broken Fixed it Found something broken Fixed it Etc. Etc.

How we will do our work

1. Determine actions that will prevent failures

2. Think about every aspect of the actions needed

3. Line up all resources ahead of time

4. Do the right work at right time with the right resources

5. Measure how well the plan worked and see if we can do better next time

6. Start again at step 1

Things to improve1) Equipment preparation

2) Organization of smaller jobs

3) Feedback to operators

4) System needs impact on jobs

5) Formal job acceptance policy

6) Work order legibility & timeliness

7) Turf wars and crew rivalry

8) Clearance needs and capture of lessons learned

9) Formal work procedures

10) Tools, parts, materials staging

11) Inconsistent responsibilities for job closure

Work Management System Key Points

1. Work Identification

2. Planning

3. Scheduling

4. Accomplishment

5. Documentation

6. Results & Equipment Analysis

7. Culture Change

Scheduling is CrucialScheduling is Crucial Know who and where your resources are Know when they are available for wrench on bolt

time Schedule them for the job Apply the work process

WrenchWrench on Bolt Time on Bolt Time

Is Not :

TrainingAdministrationA 40 hour work week

3 Week Scheduling Process

1. Week One @ 80% of Available Work Hours

2. Week Two @ 60% of Available Work Hours

3. Week Three @ 30% of Available Work Hours – (Nearly all PM or PdM)

4. Process enables parts & materials staging

5. Improves wrench on bolt efficiency & productivity

Work Process Pays Off 1. Lower costs

2. Less down time

3. Provides data for work analysis & measurement

4. Provides data for equipment history/cost analysis

5. Provides for continuous improvement of processes

6. Enables proactive approach to maintenance

7. Lower backlogs

8. Resource sharing

Plants Reliability & SavingsPower Production:

01/01/99 to 09/31/03 Efficiency Improvements

1. EAF: improved 12.21% from 83.09 % to 95.3%

2. Capacity Factor: Drake improved 13.65% - Nixon .982%

3. Forced outages decreased: Drake 45.2% Nixon 26.6%

Nixon rated 14th best utilized plant in U.S. in 2003 Savings From ABWM (1999 Baseline) 2000 through 2002

1. Avoided purchase power Costs = + $2,953,000

2. Avoided labor costs = $2, 823,600

3. Positions left unfilled in Power Production = 16

4. Water Treatment installation of ABWM still in progress

5. System Control: Began installation of ABWM in August 2003

Accountability Based Work Management

Continue ABWM System Implementation1) Process completion date-mid 20072) Further expand resource sharing capabilities in all areas3) Continue continuous improvement efforts4) Document processes

Expectations:1) Process will drive down costs2) Plant & Field efficiency and effectiveness will improve3) Backlog will decrease4) Work force efficiency and effectiveness will improve

5) Plants reliability will improve

Contact Information

Hugh Hines

Customer Operations Superintendent

215 Nichols Boulevard

PO Box 1103, Mail Code 1328

Colorado Springs, CO. 80947-1328

E-mail: HHines@csu.org