2. Purpose of Initiative
• Improve methodology for entry of Ship’s Force
PMS items into the shipyard scheduling
database.
3. What problem are we trying to solve?
• The current process duplicates the existing • For many PMS items, there is no value
SF PMS management system. added to including them into the master
• Current requirements result in significant integrated schedule (MIS).
churn in the SFZMs schedule. • Expectations for entry of PMS items into
• Volume of PMS items in the SFZMs the AWP to develop a line item/cu phase
schedule creates a significant are inordinately cumbersome and require
administrative burden to manage, taking significant effort when work around
time away from more critical items. methods exist that would significantly
• Mismanaged PMS items in the schedule reduce the required effort.
skew the graphs and make them poor • Shipboard Work Center Supervisors are
management tools for senior leadership unfamiliar with the work package during
on the ship. the initial stages of availability planning
• Volume of PMS items entered significantly and do not have access to or co-location
adds to the load of the APT and takes their with the shipyard which provides for a
time away from more critical planning significant challenge when asking them to
aspects. develop their PMS plan.
• Artificial scheduling constraints remove
the requisite flexibility for PMS item
scheduling and accomplishment.
4. What won’t change?
• The intent of this proposal is not to remove the
requirement for entry of SF PMS items into the
Master Integrated Schedule (MIS).
• There is no intent to change the method for RPPY
maintained PMS items entry into the BAWP.
• PMS Items to be accomplished by the shipyard
will continue to be addressed via the BAWP or
AWP.
• SF PMS items that meet specific criteria will be
entered into the shipyard scheduling database.
5. Process Recommendations
• PMS items to be accomplished by Ship’s Force will not require a JSN
(AWP Line Item) to be entered into the shipyard scheduling
database. Some SF PMS actions will continue to require JSNs (e.g.
requires parts, etc.). NOTE: Other more efficient methodology for
accomplishing this task will be discussed below.
• Only those PMS items that meet specified criteria (identified below)
will require entry into the shipyard scheduling database.
• The APT will assume the responsibility for initial review of the cyclic
and quarterly schedules to identify which PMS actions meet the
specified criteria.
• The Nuclear and Non-Nuclear Test codes will be provided a list of
PMS items that were identified as not meeting the below criteria
for a cursory review at the line item level.
6. Criteria for PMS Integration
• Requires a specific plant/ship’s condition. (e.g.
accomplish in dry dock)
• Effects a major distributed system (e.g. CHT,
Firemain, etc.)
• Is on a component or affects a component that
has other work being performed on it.
• Is required to support a test program (e.g. startup
PMS, pre-requisite item , etc.)
• PMS action cannot be fully completed (e.g. any
retests that can’t be accomplished in conjunction
with the PMS may require a test line item)
