Loss Elimination Root Cause Analysis (RCA)

Chris Galeotti

May 2015

MMG

MMG – Our Operations

2

MMG - Positioning

3

Strategic Plan

4

Work Management KPI’s

5

Schedule Compliance - Primary Maintenance (all SAP sites)

6

Average Schedule Compliance 2010 = 82.2% 2011 = 84.1% 2012 = 84.2% (+.1% on previous year)

Trend is largely flat

Schedule Compliance – Secondary Maintenance (all SAP sites)

7

Average Schedule Compliance 2010 = 60.3% 2011 = 67.9% 2012 = 66.6% (-1.3% on previous year)

Trend is largely flat

Schedule Work trend (all SAP sites)

8

Average Scheduled work 2010 = 53% 2011 = 60.5% 2012 = 61.9% (+1.4% on previous year)

Guess Again - Trend

is largely flat

AEVR – distribution by reason

9

Equip. Unavailable, 702, 18%

Incomplete Planning, 685, 18%

Materials Unavailabl, 102, 3% No Labour, 952,

24%

Priority Change, 1270, 33%

Schedule Overrun, 158, 4%

SAP/BW Scheduled work not complete 2010-2012 PM01's only - Unassigned code removed

The most significant reasons for not completing planned works and potential underlying causes; •  Priority change- typically

breakdowns or unplanned demands displace planned works

•  No Labour- either the personnel numbers or skillsets are lacking

•  Incomplete planning - procedures, materials lacking resulting in more resources for each job

•  Equipment Unavailable – Breakdowns impacting on planned works

Why Loss Elimination

10

• WM metrics have remained flat over 3 year period

• Primary reasons for not completing planned work= Breakdowns??

•  To stop breakdowns we need to solve root causes

•  To determine root causes we need to investigate

• We can’t & shouldn’t investigate everything

• What to investigate (need to pick our targets)

Why Loss Elimination

11

For a Loss Elimination program to be effective it must

include;

• Process for

•  Initiating (TARP)

•  Investigating (RCA2Go©)

•  Managing of Actions

• Training & support (coaching)

• Metrics to report on performance

The Journey

12

The two definitive characteristics of higher level organisations; •  Continuous Improvement – Eliminate Defects •  Organisational Learning – Sharing experiences, knowledge expertise and practices

TARP – Trigger & Action Response Plan

13

Essential Elements

•  A way of ranking losses so we know what events to investigate

•  A way of deciding scale of investigation

•  5Whys (can be done by individuals or small teams)

• RCA (more complex, run by Engineers)

• Allocating who is responsible and who is to be informed

•  Identifying type, detail and timeliness of output

TARP’s for each site

14

TARP (Trigger, Action, Response Plan) - MMG Mandated Requirements

Root Cause Analysis Trigger and Communication Escalation Guideline

Loss Type/Trigger Consequence

1 2 3 4 5 6#

Econ

omic

Los

s

Plant Loss in Equivalent Metal Units <30 30-99 100-499 500-999 1000-4999 5000+

Development Metres, Ore/Overburden Tonnes, Metal tonnes** >10% of planned output for period >20% of planned output for period >40% of planned output for period >80% of planned output for period 100% of planned output for period 100% of planned output for period

Estimated total cost impact $(MMG mandated) $5k to $24.9k $25k-$249.9k $250k-$2.49m $2.5m-$24.9m $25m-$250m >$250m

Likelihood Likelihood Examples Ranking for Response Table (below)

F Certain Weekly occurance

E Likely Monthly occurance

D Possible Yearly Occurrence

C Unlikely Has/potential to occur every 3-5 years

B Rare Has/potential to occur every 5-10 years

A Remote 1 in 100 year event

Ranking/Level Minimum RCA Tool (Action) Immediate Contact Accountable (A)

NOF Completed within / Investigation & report Completed within***

Mandatory Analysis Team Output Required (Response) Corrective Action Recording

Level 0 Minor No action required nil n/a nil nil nil

Level 1 Low Single Person 5-Whys - formal (paper forms only) Supervisor (A) 24hours / 48hours Individual

NOF Form (5-Why) Update Maintenance tactics, materials, SOP's Tolbox Talk

SAP PM05 WO for corrective actions with M5 activity code

Level 2 Medium Team Based 5-Whys Supervisor

Superintendent (A) 24hours / 48hours Work group & Team leader

NOF Form (5-Why). 5-Why report (RCA2Go) Update Maintenance tactics, materials, SOP's Toolbox Talk

Actions in RCA2Go SAP PM05 WO for corrective actions with M5 activity code

Level 3 High

RCA Fault Tree Analysis Cross Functional

Supervisor Superintendent Manager (A)

48hours /14 days Multi department, Facilitated by Reliability Engineer/ Process Engineer/Business Analyst

NOF Form (issued as Reliability Alert) Formal report (RCA2Go) Update Maintenance Tactics, parts, SOP's, Review Design Toolbox Talk Presentation to Operations & Maint/Eng Department Managers

Actions in RCA2Go SAP PM05 WO for corrective actions with M5 activity code

Level 4 Very high

RCA Fault Tree Analysis Cross Functional with Formal Report Mandatory Ops + Maint Manager participation, GM & Corp discretionary

As above + Site GM (A), COO Notification within 24hours of initial event

48hours / 28 days

Multi department, Skilled facilitator(ext), Reliability Engineer/Process Engineer/Business Analyst, Dept Managers, GM & OEM

NOF Form (issued as Reliability Alert) Formal report (RCA2Go) Update Maintenance Tactics, parts, SOP's, Review Design Toolbox Talk Presentation to Site GM, Lead team & OLT

Actions in RCA2Go SAP PM05 WO for corrective actions with M5 activity code

Notes * The value used for repeated events should be the cumulative value over a given period # Represents Corporate level whole of business risk

** Site to determine and fill in the equivalent measures suitable for the productive area concerned. ***Site to determine reporting timeframes 5-Whys worksheets to be the subject of Toolbox Presentations & team notice board display Table represents minimum MMG requirement, site manangers can request higher level analysis to suit specific needs

2 3 4>0HR for EW Plant, Oxy Plant, Tails Line, HV power>6 HR - POX, Crushing / Mill circuit, Decant Line, CSM and EW Crane

>6HR for EW Plant, Oxy Plant, Tails Line, HV Power>12HR - POX, Crushing / Mill circuit, Decant Line, CSM and EW Crane

>24Hr Full Plant Outage

Ranking/Level

Level 1Minor

Level 2Low

Level 3High

Level 4Very high

RCA Fault Tree Analysis

RCA Fault Tree Analysis with Formal Report

Multi department, Facilitated by Reliability Engineer/ Process Engineer/Business Analyst

Multi department, Skilled facilitator(int/ext), Reliability Engineer/Process Engineer/Business Analyst, Dept Managers, GM & OEM

Minimum RCA Tool (Action)

No action required

Team Based 5-Whys

Mandatory Analysis Team

nil

Work group & Team leader

TARP (Trigger, Action, Response Plan) - MMG Mandated RequirementsRoot Cause Analysis Trigger and Communication Escalation Guideline

1

?????

Loss Type/Trigger

Hours Downtime

Input ValuesMetal Unit Development Day X Y

Site $2,100 $1,000,000Century DateTARP VALUES

InvestigationLevel 1 2 3 4AverageDailyCostGreaterthan 136.99$ 410.96$ 1,369.86$ 5,479.45$

Annualcost 50,000.00$ 150,000.00$ 500,000.00$ 2,000,000.00$Onceoffincidentof 20,000.00$ 50,000.00$ 250,000.00$ 1,000,000.00$

AreaUnitSystemMobile EquipmentIncident/Oportunity NameInvestigation TrigerDirect CostsMetal UnitsMine/Ore Stock Pile Development %

XYMobile Equipment Downtime Hr

Total Cost

Period DataFrequency (one only)EstimateKnown Frequency/Period Days

Cost per Day

Investigation

DE facilitator

Defect Elimination Check Sheet

Comments:

** Maintenance Event Requirements

Unscheduled Downtime 15mins - 4 hours Variance Tracker entry

1-4 hrs downtime: Tradesperson conducts 5 Why's with recommendations to RE or Superintendent by end of shift.

Throughput at 190 - 210tph over 24 hours Variance Tracker entry No analysis required unless requested by Operations

Recovery loss 2-3% over 24 hours Variance Tracker entry No analysis required unless requested by Operations

Unscheduled Downtime 4hr - 24hrs Variance Tracker entry

Fpe incident investigation

4-24 hrs downtime: Tradesperson and Supervisor conduct 5 why's with recommendations to RE or Superintendent by

end of shift.

Throughput at 170 - 190tph over 24 hours Variance Tracker entry

Fpe incident investigation No analysis required unless requested by Operations

Recovery loss 3% - 10% over 24 hours Variance Tracker entry

Daily production meeting & No analysis required unless requested by Operations

Unscheduled Downtime 24hrs +Variance

Tracker entryFpe incident investigation

RCA carried out at Manager's discretion

> 24 hrs downtime : Team based RCA conducted. Minimum : (Tradesperson or Supervisor) + (REng or Superintendent) + (Operator) + (Specialist or OEM as

necessary) within 4 weeks. Also, RCA presentation to site leadership team 4 weeks.

Throughput at <170tph over 24 hours Variance Tracker entry

Fpe incident investigation

RCA carried out at Manager's discretion No analysis required unless requested by Operations

Recovery loss 10% + over 24 hours Variance Tracker entry

Fpe incident investigation

Daily production meeting & action plan

RCA carried out at Manager's discretion No analysis required unless requested by Operations

NB - 230tph for req throughput rate. Base variances from this figure. * 5Why's and RCA's to be filed by Rel Eng. using AMPLA reference. RCA to be ICAM, unless root cause already known, (ie SP rundown, scats crusher failure etc)Action plans - as more of these are done, create 'Master Action Plan', a compendium of all actions being recorded per oretype.

Operational Requirements

Rev 1 draft for discussion - Required Actions for Below Target Performance

Process for investigating

15

Process for investigating

16

•  Use a standard investigation process – RCArt •  Paint by Numbers approach •  Standardised format – easy to share

Warning Signs •  Too many Actions

•  Actions not being effective

•  Actions not being completed

Actions can range from; •  Change of PM task, detail, frequency

•  Increase workforce skills, training, advanced tooling

•  Use of ConMon for a new type of task

•  Install additional detection equipment, Alarms

•  Modify Equipment/ New Equipment

Prioritise Actions •  Risk (probability of success)

•  Timeliness

•  Impact (value)

Actions

17

RCA Metrics

18 •  11 investigations initiated during October

6

5

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

2011 2012 2013 2014

RCAInves*ga*onsbysite

Sepon

Rosebery

Kinsevere

Karumba

GoldenGrove

Century

All

RCA Metrics

19

1 6 6

11

3 5

16

10

2 5

4

9

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

RCA Investigation Status by site to April 2013

Started

On Track

null

In Progress

Completed

Abandoned

7 1

25 21

2

93

18

43

17

64

6

49

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

All Century Golden Grove

Karumba Kinsevere Rosebery Sepon

RCA Action Status Report by site 2012-April 2013

(blank)

Started

On Track

On Hold

In Progress

Completed

Abandoned

RCA Metrics

20

19, 4%

149, 33%

44, 10%

18, 4% 4, 1% 18, 4%

197, 44%

RCA Action Status - 2012-April 2013

Abandoned

Completed

In Progress

On Hold

On Track

Started

(blank)

85,8%

502,46%277,25%

32,3%

7,1% 126,11%

63,6%

RCAAc*onStatus,2012-October2014

Abandoned

Completed

InProgress

OnHold

OnTrack

Started

(blank)

RCA Training

21

5Why training in Sepon, Laos - August 2014

The hardest part; •  Continued Leadership & Coaching

•  Site Champions

•  Promotion of activities via Monthly RCA report

•  Mirroring KPI’s against plant performance •  If we are doing the right things in RCA, then the benefits will become apparent

Sustaining the process

22

Sustaining the Process

23

Sustaining the Process

24

What does a successful RCA program look like? •  Proactive rather than reactive use

•  Understood & Supported by Managers

•  Targeted at the right type of investigations (the ones that make a difference)

•  Cross functional involvement (not just Maintenance)

•  Timely completion of investigations

•  Active management of actions (we do what we say we will do)

RCA Success

25