Presentation on theme: "Technical Interchange Meeting MALS-36 Notes and Action Items (2/3) Not Intended for General Presentation. Prepared by: SSgt Napolitano."— Presentation transcript:
Technical Interchange Meeting MALS-36 Notes and Action Items (2/3) Not Intended for General Presentation. Prepared by: SSgt Napolitano
1 st MAW-13 (LIR) PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: The MF LIRS Folder is an outdated and dysfunctional system of documenting and tracking information regarding the condition of a mobile facility. The required separators/dividers to be contained inside the LIRs Folder are not readily available to the supply system. This cause 60C to do an open purchase requests or simply buying materials out of pocket. This increases Aircraft Maint Admin Specialist responsibilities to make time consuming and burdensome efforts to maintain a system for the simple reason of an inspection. Furthermore, no valuable information is gleaned from the LIR once the service life of the MF has ended and despite considerable work done to maintain the LIR throughout its service life. A virtual LIR system should be utilized which tracks only the critical information contained in a LIR. The schedule/unscheduled maintenance, preservation/depreservation, and acceptance transfer has virtually no use while the Technical Directives and CSC inspection sections are tracked online and are readily available. RECOMMENDATION: Reduce the contents in a LIRS Folder to the equivalent but condensed 51 card and remove all documentation contained in the LIRS Folder as it is found online or NALCOMIS. This will allow 6499s to focus on maintaining the structural and material condition of the MF rather than maintaining the superfluous documentation surrounding an MF. MMF PROGRAM RESOLUTION: The MMF Program APML will review the LIR to determine absolute minimum content requirements from a programmatic stand point. Maintaining MMF LIRs remains mandatory and shall continue until such time as the LIR is replaced or requirements for LIR upkeep are rescinded.
1 st MAW-13 (LIR) ACTION REQUIRED: MMF Program comprehensive review of LIR to be conducted by GySgt Gipson. Fleet develops and submits recommended changes to MMF Program Office. MMF Program Office reviews and conferences with fleet to finalize recommendations and changes NLT August 29th, 2014. MMF Program publishes new LIR instructions and dividers as required, target completion date June 2015. SSGT NAP NOTES: Specific examples of the future LIR with justifications are attached in the following slides. The LIR is currently a snapshot logbook rather than a living record. Points of contention: – The current LIR is simply tossed at the End of Service (EOS) for an MF or ECU. No valuable trend information is gained from the LIR specifically to the history of why the MF is no longer serviceable. – 6 Months of Discrepancy MAFs (Unscheduled Maintenance) provide very little maintenance history of a particular shell. – The most recent 2404 is retained, the historic 2404s are purged. This is the maintenance history document prescribed by the 138B. This should be the primary means of tracking maintenance and repairs. These should never be purged. – The current mentality of keeping all this documentation in the LIR is designed to manage failure to upkeep the 51 card. Not to provide useful documentation on the shell itself. – Thousands of man-hours are expended to manage failure, rather than to document important and useful information especially when a shell is transferred! – The current mentality values ‘did a LCpl do the last 90 day’ over ‘What repairs and maintenance has this shell had done of the last 5-10 years’. This mentality must shift.
The LIR (Currently) The current LIR guidance requires the following contents; NAMP/5500 CSEC requirements in green. The ‘unofficial’ requirements are in red. – 4790/61 - Table of Contents – 4790/62 - General Instructions – 4790/63 - Part I, Table of Contents – 4790/51 - SE Custody and History Card (MF) – Scheduled Maintenance (MF) Most Recent; 7, 30, 90, 180, 360 PMs – Unscheduled Maintenance (MF) 6 Months of maintenance MAFs – Preservation/Depreservation (MF) Some Pres information that mirrors SE How do you pres a building anyway? – Acceptance/Transfer (MF) The Accept/Transfer sheet (usually the SE Acceptance/Transfer) We’re not SE! Requirement is for 1 year as per 5500 CSEC. Expectation is from receipt until transfer. – Technical Directives (MF) Copy of every TD ever done. God help you for inspection if you are missing one regardless of what the 51 card says. A Subsequent NAT02 within 1 year. A Baseline NAT02 from whenever. – CSC Reinspection (MF) Most recent 2404 with 910 day PM. – 4790/51 – SE Custody and History Card (ECU) – Scheduled Maintenance (ECU) Most Recent; 90, 360 PMs (as applicable) – Unscheduled Maintenance (ECU) 6 Months of maintenance MAFs – Preservation/Depreservation (ECU) Some Pres information that mirrors SE How do you pres a building anyway? – Acceptance/Transfer (ECU) The Accept/Transfer sheet (usually the SE Acceptance/Transfer) We’re not SE! Requirement is for 1 year as per 5500 CSEC. Expectation is from receipt until transfer. – Technical Directives (ECU) Copy of every TD ever done. God help you for inspection if you are missing one regardless of what the 51 card says. TD Verification MAFs!!!! A Subsequent NAT02 within 1 year. A Baseline NAT02 from whenever. – (Repeat if MF has 2 ECUs) – 4790/73 - Part II, Table of Contents – 4790/73A - Part II, Inventory – 4790/74 - Equipment List Separator – 4790/74A - Equipment List Form – 4790/75 - Record of Shortages Separator – 4790/75A - Record of Shortages Form Note: All items in Red are typically purged and not included with new MFs or reworked MFs by Config Site with the exception of the DA FORM 2404 CSC Reinspection (No MAF, Inspection Hit).
Scheduled Maintenance PM cycle baseline information already available from 4790/51 Sec. VI entry. This is a required entry available to receiving units since 51 Cards are never purged. Requirement Tie-In: 4790 Ref: 10.17.4.1.3 – “Information includes start/hour meter changes, modification of base dates for scheduled PM inspections, replacement of major repairable components (based on SM&R code), …“
Unscheduled Maintenance Any maintenance from CC to light bulb changes are documented here. This information is currently maintained for only 6 months. No trend analysis can be determined for the shell and minimal maintenance history is available. Active discrepancies are not filed. Only completed maintenance actions. It makes the LIR a snapshot, not a living document and record.
Preservation/Depreservation Currently, a few units try and preserve a building. Those that do use a swag from the SEPMS program to ‘properly’ preserve the building. How do you preserve a building? A building inside a building isn’t preservation. It’s smart. No preservation paper or tape required. No Pres/Depres section is needed.
Acceptance Transfer Currently utilizes the SE Acceptance/Transfer Checklist which doesn’t fit the MF very well. Requires routing through IMRL, CAL, Main PC, QA, AVO, etc. This superfluous routing is redundant and inconsistent with the MF program goals. If the MF has IMRL or Calibrated equipment, separate checklists are generated for them. The MF checklist should be tailored not for SE, but for the end item (MF) and include provisions specific to the MF itself. A new type of checklist is included and recommended.
Technical Directives This section, currently, somehow supersedes the 51 card in the eyes of inspectors. The 51 card should be the ultimate authority. Having a MAF for every TD regardless of incorporating activity generates the ‘TD Verification’ mess. Printing a subsequent for every MF and ECU a unit possesses and having it in each LIR is wasteful at best. A central subsequent for all TECs should be more than sufficient compared to printing 700 Subsequent NAT02s and filing them. We need to spend time ensuring the accuracy of the 51 card rather than filing MAFs and generating TD verifications for TDs that are 10 years old and not even valid.
Technical Directives Common Misconceptions: – Keeping MAFs on file ensure the 51 card is accurate. Reality proves that wrong. – How do you know if a TD is incorporated correctly without a MAF? Whether you have a MAF or an ad-hoc, only inspecting the MF itself will indicate proper incorporation or not. – It’s Required! True, for SE. Not buildings. – It’s important historical information! True, that’s why we have a 51 card. – It makes it easier for MFC/WING/MARFOR inspection. True, but an ad-hoc is just as easy. For assets transferred between MALS, the initial receipt inspection includes the TD data plate. It’s already addressed by the current process. Let’s emphasize success, not manage failure.
So What Would the New LIR Look Like? Pretty much the same as they are received from the configuration sites! The additions emphasize success and historical trending data. The new design does NOT manage failure while making it harder to succeed as the current system does. No NAMP changes required! No changes to the 13670.1D required! No changes to the 5500 CSEC required, but a few are recommended. A central location for subsequent NAT02s for all TEC codes easily maintained and referenced for inspection.
The LIR (Proposed) The LIR (as proposed with changes in blue) – 4790/61 - Table of Contents – 4790/62 - General Instructions – 4790/63 - Part I, Table of Contents – 4790/51 - SE Custody and History Card (MF) – Revised MF Acceptance/Transfer Consolidated Checklist – Maintenance (MF) All 2404s for the life of the shell including repairs by Config Site. – 4790/51 – SE Custody and History Card (ECUs) – 4790/73 - Part II, Table of Contents – 4790/73A - Part II, Inventory – 4790/74 - Equipment List Separator – 4790/74A - Equipment List Form – 4790/75 - Record of Shortages Separator – 4790/75A - Record of Shortages Form
MFP Acceptance/Transfer Consolidated Checklist Concise sheet designed to be maintained on record from receipt to transfer. Contains a step-by-step process for gaining and dispositioning the MF. Minimal workload and paperwork burden. No exhaustive routing to entities that don’t care about an MF anyway. Includes important naval message traffic information which would be useful to backtrack message releases in a clear and simplistic manner.
Maintenance DA FORM 2404 is a repair and maintenance form. Here is an example of a 2404 which documents both CSC Failure discrepancies and non- failure discrepancies. This is how the current 2404 is expected. We are not adding anything to what is currently done at 60C shops everywhere. It works in the civilian world, let’s not invent the square wheel.
Maintenance Here we can see the 2404 updated with the appropriate information that would be useful to a future receiving organization. If we stop purging the 2404 then this information persists for the life of the MF. Trend information can be extracted at any point or at the end of an MFs life. Superfluous information is omitted like light bulb or E- Light ballast replacements.
What about the ECU! Environmental Control Units (ECU) do not have DA FORM 2404s however documenting their maintenance history is no more difficult. PM cycle baseline information already available from 4790/51 Sec. VI entry. This is a required entry available to receiving units since 51 Cards are never purged. – Requirement Tie-In: 4790 Ref: 10.17.4.1.3 “Information includes start/hour meter changes, modification of base dates for scheduled PM inspections, replacement of major repairable components (based on SM&R code), …“ Replacement of major components would be a Section VI entry just as the PM baseline is. (i.e. Lower Fan, Compressor, Upper Fan) This information is now persistent rather than 6mo of unscheduled maintenance MAFs and then purged. A simple Acceptance/Transfer checklist which is similar but specific to the ECU could be utilized if deemed necessary.
ECU Optimal Resolution Eliminate the ECU section and 51 card entirely. The ECU is not stand alone. It requires an MF to function or a test/power apparatus. Merge the requirements of the ECU PMs into the MF as ‘as applicable’ cards. (their interval is identical already) Common sense approach.. Performing your 90 day for the MF includes both the MF and ECU. Rather than mismatched intervals due to separate and drifting SESS records (we can’t change SESS but we can change this). Manage the ECU no different than a repairable sub-assembly of the MF. It would simply become a Weapon Replaceable Assembly (WRA) of the MF. Designating the ECU as a Wing Officer (not Supply Officer) asset will maintain current consistency for inventory management. If the refrigeration system of a Mobile Facility is malfunctioning, a discrepancy against the MF would be issued. Same as the civilian world. Removal and replacement of these assets could be performed appropriately in NALCOMIS and on the MF 4790/51 Card as removed/replaced WRAs.
Potential 5500 CSEC Questions Potential New Questions reflecting the LIR. – New: “Is a central location established and updated semi-annually with NAT02 Subsequent listings for all applicable TEC Codes?” (new requirement reference) – New: “Are historic DA FORM 2404 inspections kept on record in the LIR and maintenance history properly documented/updated?” (new requirement reference) – Chng to 5545C: “Is a procedure checklist initiated for every MF transferred/received and a completed copy retained in the LIR?”
Thought Process Realignment These are mobile buildings. They aren’t aircraft, don’t fit the definition of SE, and managed outside of general aviation supply funding. The big white ‘Box of Whoop Ass’ is really what the Mobile Facility represents. We are the keepers of those Boxes of Whoop Ass. This is our program, with our own line of accounting and support. Let’s own it! We’re mobile ‘facilities maintenance’. Succession from the NAMP is inevitable. Mark my words. It’s coming eventually. It’s been an honor being a part of this program and the highlight of my service in the United States Marine Corps! Good luck at the TIM to all 6499s and the non-6499 warriors battling for the future of our MOS! I’m there in spirit with you.