Post on 07-Feb-2023
Measure
Lean Six Sigma Service 60 Refuse Removal
Costs
BB Candidate Sean Lambur
Project Initiation Date: 06/05/2008
Measure Tollgate Date: 09/02/2008
Measure
2
Project Charter Svc 60. Refuse Removal
Problem: IMCOM Europe’s expenditures for Svc 60
(>$27M FY07 for IMCOM Europe, $1.3M for USAG
Baumholder) make it one of the 10 most expensive CLS
services.
Scope: The process of refuse collection & disposal within
USAG Baumholder
Goal: A reduction in costs of at least 10%
Problem/Goal Statement
Tollgate Review Schedule
Business Impact
Core Team
Financial Impact
Cost of LSS Project: 20% time of BB
Investments: None
Revenues None
Reduction in USAG Baumholder costs will make more
dollars available to the Direct-Reporting Garrison
Wiesbaden for distribution for renovation & maintenance
Sponsor: Mr. Holt USAG Wiesbaden DPW
DD: Mr. Fred Wegley, USAG Baumholder DGC
GB/BB: Mr. Sean Lambur, USAG Baumholder
MBB: Mr. David Wright, IMCOM Europe MBB
Core Team Role % Contrib. Pos.
Jutta Spohn DRM 10 RM Specialist
Margit Simon DRM 5 RM Specialist
Harald Weber DPW 10 Cost Analysis
Robert Martin DFMWR 5 Metal Processor
Heinz Baumann DPW 5 Green Refuse Spec
Georg Natter DPW 5 Food Refuse Spec
Clemens Bambach DPW 60 Refuse Specialist
Tollgate Scheduled Revised Complete
Define: 15 Mar 08 30 Jun 08 5 Sep 08
Measure: 15 May 08 31 Jul 08 09/15/08
Analyze: 15 Jun 08 29 Aug 08
Improve: 1 Oct 08 30 Sep 08
Control: FY09 31 Oct 08
Measure
Key Input, Process, and Output Metrics Service 60 Refuse Removal
Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Customers
• Removed Trash
• Lower Cost Refuse
• Dumpster (Residual) Refuse
• Bulk Refuse
• Recyclable Refuse (Paper, Metal)
• Housing Residents
• Office Workers
• Soldier Work Areas
• Retailers
• Garrison Resource Management
• Garrison Morale, Welfare & Recreation
Prep
Trash
Vehicles
Drive to Trash Bins
Empty
Trash
Bins
Repeat
Drive to Trash
Contractor
Wait in
Queue Weigh
Empty Truck
Input Metrics Process Metrics Output Metrics
Quality
Speed
Cost
• Tons of Trash
• Cost of Trash
VOC/VOB
Return
Receive
Weight
Slip
Weigh Truck
Receive
Billing
• Variability of trash amounts
Y = f(x) or Cost of trash
= f(amount of trash)
• Amounts of each type of trash
• Types of Trash/Cost per type
• Trash per day
Outside of Scope Outside of Scope Outside of Scope
Measure
Performance
Measure
Operational
Definition
Data Source
and Location
How Will Data Be
Collected
Who Will
Collect Data
When Will
Data Be
Collected
Sample Size Stratificat
ion
Factors
How will data be
used?
Monthly Weight of residual refuse
Refuse is measured by the metric ton (1000 kg)
Refuse contractor history logs
BB will collect history of contractor weight receipts from Garrison Refuse Team
BB Jan 2007 – Apr 2008
100% data capture (16 months of receipts)
Type of Refuse
To create the baseline
Cost of refuse
Weight of delivered household trash
Weight Tickets At weight scale BB Jan 2007 – Apr 2008
100% data capture (16 months of costs)
Type of refuse
To create the baseline
Daily Weight of Residual Refuse
Refuse is measured by the metric ton (1000 kg)
Refuse contractor history logs
BB will collect history of contractor weight receipts from Garrison Refuse Team
BB Jan 2007 – Apr 2008
100% data capture (680+ Receipts)
Day of Collection
Analysis of refuse collection
Data Collection Plan – Svc 60 Refuse Removal
Measure
Value Stream Map Svc 60 Refuse Removal
Trash Team Supervisor
Empty Bin
P/T = 5 Min
Error Rate=0%
5 min
Load, empty &
unload bin 4
1 min
SUPPLIER/ Trash Receiver
Empty Bin
P/T = 5 Min
Error Rate=0%
Load, empty &
unload bin 4
Empty Bin
P/T = 5 Min
Error Rate=0%
Load, empty &
unload bin 4
Empty Bin
P/T = 5 Min
Error Rate=0%
Load, empty &
unload bin 4
Queue for Weight Scales
5 min 1 min 5 min 1 min 5 min
15 min 15 min
Prep
Get vehicle
Prep Vehicle
Drive to trash bin
4
CUSTOMER
NOTE: VSA shows times of the residual refuse collection process but this
project will focus on the costs of the residual refuse. Costs inherent in the
collection process (vehicle fuel, labor, etc.) are negligible in comparison.
Measure
Consequence
Lik
eli
ho
od
1
2
3
4
5
1 2 3 4 5
Risk Analysis and Mitigation-Svc 60 Refuse Removal
Risk points are: Large Scope (variety of processes), Process Mapping, Processes are heavily behavior-dependent, Accurate identification of current costs, Process prejudice
•Identification of current costs •Risk: Costs easily identified through Trash Team records •Mitigation: None •Consequence: None
• Process Prejudice • Risk: “There’s nothing to be done”
attitude • Mitigation: Show quick, small
improvements & focus on positive team members
• Consequence: May have to delay MEASURE Tollgate
•Process Mapping •Risk: Many processes to map •Mitigation Plan: Map at the macro level •Consequence: 1-2 week slide in schedule
•Large Scope •Risk: Costs of Svc 60 stem from many processes and many customers •Mitigation Plan: Scope out low-impact & low cost processes •Consequence: Project delay
• Behavior-dependent processes • Risk: Improvement to processes may
heavily depend upon changing long-learned customer behavior
• Mitigation: TBD • Consequence: Most cost-effective process
improvements may not be practical to implement
Measure
Reducing List of Root Causes: Pareto Analysis 3
Count 6972 583 440 383
Percent 83.2 7.0 5.2 4.6
Cum % 83.2 90.2 95.4 100.0
$$
Co
sts
Pe
rce
nt
Trash Type
Othe
r
Woo
d, categ
ories A1
, A2 an
d A3
Pape
r and
car
dboa
rd m
ixed
Resid
ual w
aste /
Restmue
ll
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
100
80
60
40
20
0
FY07-08 Refuse Types by Weight
Residual
refuse weight
is >80% of all
refuse weight
Measure
Count 1359489 45768 35733
Percent 94.3 3.2 2.5
Cum % 94.3 97.5 100.0
$$
Co
sts
Pe
rce
nt
Trash Type
Other
Bulky tra
sh (Woo
d, fu
rnitu
re, e
tc.)
Residu
al w
aste / Res
tmue
ll
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
100
80
60
40
20
0
FY07-08 Refuse Types by Cost
Reducing List of Root Causes: Pareto Analysis 4
Residual
refuse costs
are nearly
95% of all
refuse costs
Measure
Baseline Data Svc 60 Refuse Removal – Monthly Residual Trash Costs
Sample size is a set of 16
monthly measurements
The current process has a
normal distribution with the
P-Value > 0.05 and has a
normal bell-shape.
The range is € 55,528 and
the standard deviation is
€14,909
The average monthly cost for Residual Refuse is € 84,968. This
exceeds our monthly average maximum cost target of € 76,471
(10-50% cost reduction is target).
12000011000010000090000800007000060000
Median
Mean
9500090000850008000075000
1st Q uartile 75534
Median 81381
3rd Q uartile 97317
Maximum 117739
77023 92913
76564 94777
11014 23075
A -Squared 0.26
P-V alue 0.678
Mean 84968
StDev 14909
V ariance 222290465
Skewness 0.566400
Kurtosis -0.033958
N 16
Minimum 62211
A nderson-Darling Normality Test
95% C onfidence Interv al for Mean
95% C onfidence Interv al for Median
95% C onfidence Interv al for StDev
95% Confidence Intervals
Summary for Residual waste / Restmuell
Measure
10
Process Performance and Capability: Monthly
Baseline Data Residual Trash Costs
16 Observation points
The Range has one
point more that 3
standard deviations from
the center line – Range
is not in Control
Out-of-control Range
nullifies the information
of the Individual Values.
Observation
In
div
idu
al
Va
lue
15131197531
125000
100000
75000
50000
_X=84968
UC L=115553
LC L=54384
Observation
Mo
vin
g R
an
ge
15131197531
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
__MR=11500
UC L=37573
LC L=0
1
1
I-MR Chart of Residual waste / Restmuell
Root causes for the out-
of-control range will be
examined in Analyze
Measure
16 Data points collected from Jan 07 through Apr 08
Mean € 84,968, St. Dev. € 10,194. Cp is 0.83 indicating that the total variation of the process is too great to fit within the LSL of € 25,490 (70% cost savings) and USL of € 76,471 (10% cost savings). Cpk (amount off target) is -0. 28 indicating that the center is outside the spec limits.
With an overall PPM of 712,474 defects per million opportunity, the current process has a Sigma Quality Level of .67 or a 28.7% yield
Process Performance and Capability: Monthly Residual Trash Costs
120000100000800006000040000
LSL USL
LSL 25490
Target *
USL 76471
Sample Mean 84968.1
Sample N 16
StDev (Within) 10194.9
StDev (O v erall) 15159.8
Process Data
C p 0.83
C PL 1.94
C PU -0.28
C pk -0.28
Pp 0.56
PPL 1.31
PPU -0.19
Ppk -0.19
C pm *
O v erall C apability
Potential (Within) C apability
PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 750000.00
PPM Total 750000.00
O bserv ed Performance
PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 797709.39
PPM Total 797709.40
Exp. Within Performance
PPM < LSL 43.65
PPM > USL 712431.15
PPM Total 712474.80
Exp. O v erall Performance
Within
Overall
Process Capability of Residual waste / Restmuell
Measure
Recommended Quick Wins and RIEs
Quick Wins to be Implemented
Bust tires off of rims to reduce weight of tires and gain funds from sale of metal. A reduction of 60% of 07/08 tire weight would have saved almost $2K
Take over cardboard disposal from Baumholder DECA commissary to earn DFMWR funds (currently disposed of at no cost). Potential of $60K in DFMWR earnings
Change DFMWR Metal Contract to enact quality controls over the amounts of scrap metal collected (currently no controls over contractor’s collection or weighing). Revenue FY07 without controls was $15K. At estimation of 50% loss and including the higher price of metal there is potential to double this revenue in FY08/09
Measure
13
Measure Phase Summary Svc 60 Refuse Removal
Baseline Data
Tools Used
Process Capability
Recommended Quick Wins/RIEs
Root cause: Cost of Tires
Quick Win: Break tires off of heavy rims
Root cause: Lack of Reimbursable funds from Paper
Quick Win: Sell DECA Commisary Cardboard
Root cause: Loss of Reimbursable Funds from Scrap metal
Quick Win: Renegotiate contract for scrap metal collector to implement Controls
Detailed process mapping
Measurement Systems Analysis
Value Stream Mapping
Data Collection Planning
Basic Statistics
Process Capability
Histograms
Pareto Analysis
Control Charts
120000100000800006000040000
LSL USL
LSL 25490
Target *
USL 76471
Sample Mean 84968.1
Sample N 16
StDev (Within) 10194.9
StDev (O v erall) 15159.8
Process Data
C p 0.83
C PL 1.94
C PU -0.28
C pk -0.28
Pp 0.56
PPL 1.31
PPU -0.19
Ppk -0.19
C pm *
O v erall C apability
Potential (Within) C apability
PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 750000.00
PPM Total 750000.00
O bserv ed Performance
PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 797709.39
PPM Total 797709.40
Exp. Within Performance
PPM < LSL 43.65
PPM > USL 712431.15
PPM Total 712474.80
Exp. O v erall Performance
Within
Overall
Process Capability of Residual waste / Restmuell
Measure
Input-Process-Output Measures
Measure Storyboard Svc 60 Refuse Disposal
Define
BUS CASE: Be #2 Fin Service Provider
GOAL: Reduce Refuse disposal costs by at least 10% of FY07 cost of 1,476,831.00 €
FIN IMPACT: €147,000 per year
Project Charter
Process Flow Value Stream Map
MSA Data Collection Plan
Baseline Control Charts Process Capability
Sigma Performance Level of only .94!
Measure
Sign Off
• I concur that the Measure Phase was successfully completed on 09/15/08.
• I concur the project is ready to proceed to next phase: Analyze.
Ursula Griffin Resource Manager/Finance
Fred L. Wegley Deployment Director (if different from Sponsor)
Sean Lambur Green Belt/Black Belt
David Wright Master Black Belt
Jerry Walters, DPW Sponsor / Process Owner