Version 1.
0 January 2006
Reliability Program Scorecard
Created by John S. Mitchell; jsmitchell@worldnet.att.net
January 2006
Reliability Program Category Summary
Reliability Program Elements Element Weight -% Category Weight -%
Results / Reliability Program Effectiveness
High plant, system and equipment availability 2.7%
Optimum maintenance costs 2.7%
Minimum Emergency, break-in work 2.6%
Few unexpected failures last two years 2.0%
Failure rate trending down 1.9%
Total 11.9% 17%
Values, Culture, Relationships
Good partnership between Production, Maintenance 2.8%
Reliability culture in place and effective 2.0%
Training and coaching available and effective 1.2%
Change Management process in place and effective 0.8%
Total 6.8% 8%
Charter, Organization, Administration, Training
High level management champion actively involved 1.3%
Skills management, training and certification in place 1.3%
Specifications, procedures and practices documented, up to date and available 1.1%
Risk analysis and ranking established 1.1%
Control plan established for sustainability 1.1%
Reliability champion appointed and active 1.1%
Program business value contribution determined 1.0%
Component, Condition, Cause, Action codes in use 1.0%
Vital facility and and equipment records up to date 0.8%
MTBF determined 0.8%
Document revision / configuration control process in use 0.8%
Total 11.4% 16%
Version 1.0 January 2006
Supporting programs
Lubrication Program 8.0% 8%
Condition Monitoring / CBM Program in place and effective 2.6%
Vibration 2.1%
Lubrication 2.2%
Temperature; infra red imaging and measurement 0.7%
Process / operating performance 0.7%
Motor electrical analysis 0.5%
Air and gas leakage; out, through and in (hazard, waste, lost efficiency) 0.4%
Ultrasonic -- active (thickness measurement), passive (leak detection) 0.3%
Steam trap performance 0.3%
Transformer oil, gas and temperature 0.2%
Total 10.0% 10%
Time based Preventive Maintenance (PM) Program 8.0% 8%
Maintenance Requirements Analysis and Program Development — RCM FMEA 5.0% 5%
Proactive Maintenance
Lubrication system integrity 1.5%
Clean and orderly plant and workspace 1.1%
Precision shaft alignment utilized effectively 0.9%
Total 3.5% 6%
Maintenance, Maintainability for Capital Projects
Comprehensive maintenance strategy in place and followed 2.0%
Comprehensive procedure followed to assure optimum reliability and maintainability 1.3%
Total 3.3% 5%
Activities
Failure Analysis — RCFA
Implementing procedure established and followed 1.1%
Failure analyses accomplished 1.1%
Corrective action reviewed, applied and checked for effectiveness 1.1%
Total 3.2% 7%
Reliability Improvement
Reliability improvement teams chartered and active 2.1%
Continuous reliability improvement program active and effective 1.9%
Participation by Production and Maintenance 1.6%
Total 5.6% 8%
Reliability Modeling, Prediction, Lifetime Analysis 2.0% 2%
Version 1.0 January 2006
Total 79% 100%
Version 1.1 January, 2006
Reliability Program Detailed Scorecard
Created by John S. Mitchell; jsmitchell@worldnet.att.net
January 2006
Necessity, Comparative Requirements Element Program Quartile Spread
Reliability Program Elements Definition Metrics Weight - % Weight - %
Results / Reliability Program Effectiveness 100 17% 1 2 3
Version 1.1 January, 2006
Values, Culture, Relationships 100 8%
Version 1.1 January, 2006
Charter, Organization, Administration, Training 100 16%
Supporting Programs
Lubrication 100 8%
Plant wide lubrication program in place. Compliance with Quality
best practices including determination of coverage, assurance, Procedure written,
yes 80 6.4 cmplete some, not all
optimum type, requirements for receipt, storage, testing, maximum published and followed
transfer, delivery to equipment and sampling reliability
Lubrication sidestream filtering / polishing in place and in
20 1.6 yes
use
8.0
Condition Monitoring, Condition Based
100 10%
Maintenance
Time Based Preventive Maintenance 100 8%
Maintenance Requirements Analysis and
100 5%
Program Development — RCM FMEA
Proactive Maintenance 100 6%
Maintenance, Maintainability for Capital Projects 100 5%
Activities
Failure Analysis — RCFA 100 7%
Reliability Improvement 100 8%
Reliability Modeling, Prediction, Lifetime
100 2%
Analysis
Total score 100
World Class Performance >80 >80 60-80 40-60
Version 1.1 January, 2006
ogram Detailed Scorecard
. Mitchell; jsmitchell@worldnet.att.net
January 2006
Quartile Spread
4
Version 1.1 January, 2006
Version 1.1 January, 2006
no
no
<40
