Department of Toxic Substances Control Enforcement and Emergency - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Shawn Cox (Project Greenbelt) Adam Palmer (Project Champion) Keith Kihara (Executive Sponsor)

Lean Six Sigma Inspection Report Project

Department of Toxic Substances Control

Enforcement and Emergency Response Division

We perform inspections and enforcement on the following: Universal Waste Facilities (E-Waste) Hazardous Waste Transporters Generators Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities

Enforcement and Emergency Response Division (EERD)

 Problem Statement: From 2014-2016 DTSC completed about 84% of inspections within 65 days, as required by statute.  Objective: Complete and submit 95% of inspection reports within 30 days.  Primary Metric: Days from the first day of the inspection until submission to the operator.  Project Team: Over 100 years of experience combined. Christie Bautista Abdalin Asinas Bailey Franklin Ellen Pates

Inspection Report Lean Six Sigma

Van-Anh Le Josilynn Spray Leah White Danny Demarco

 Most Non Value Added steps are in the review phase

Initial Process Map

insert process map

= Value Added = Non Value Added = Legally Required = Data Collection

 35 day Inspection Report average  49% completed in 30 days

Baseline Capability

insert capability analysis graph

240 200 1 60 1 20 80 40

UB

Process Capability Report for All inspections

Calculations Based on Weibull Distribution Model

Inspection Reports Completed Days to Completion of Inspection Report

Baseline Capability Analysis Capability Six Pack Interval Plot FMEA Scatterplot One-Way ANOVA Fishbone Diagram High Level Process Map Mood’s Median Test 2-Sample T Test Regression Analysis

Analysis Tools

Findings

Time to Complete Report:  Treatment, Storage, and Disposal (TSD), Generator Inspections – 65 Days  Transporter Inspections - 44 days  Electronic Waste (E-waste) Inspections - 7 days

Findings (Cont’d)

 Class 1 Violations – Increase time by 30 days  Sampling – Increase time by 40 days  Class 2, Minor, or No Violations - No effect  Violations Vs. Days to Completion of the Inspection Report – No Difference

Inspection Report Template Consultation and Research Sampling Multiple Review Phases

Critical X’s (root causes of problems)

 52 Steps initially

New Process Map

 28 Steps after

= Value Added = Non Value Added = Legally Required = Data Collection

Checklist for Transporter Inspections Inspection Report Template Sampling Kit Health and Safety Code / California Code of Regulations Database

Improvement Techniques

Inspection Report/Penalty Determination Team Standard Cover Letter Eliminate Review Phases

Improvement Techniques (Cont’d)

Monitor days to complete inspection report Ensure Report quality through audits Use sampling kits Template Control

Control Plan

 Name: Shawn Cox  Phone: (916) 322-7527  Email: shawn.cox@dtsc.ca.gov

Green Belt Contact Information

Lean 6-Sigma Program

Swai Bruce Ratsamythong (Project Greenbelt)

Department of Toxic Substances Control

Enforcement and Emergency Response Division

Maria Salomon (Project Champion) Keith Kihara (Executive Sponsor)

Penalty Assessment Project

 Problem Statement: It takes an average of 259 days to assess a penalty which delays enforcement.  Objective: Approve 95% of administrative penalties within 14 days of completing sending the inspection report  Primary Metric: Time it takes to assess and approve penalties  Project Team:

 Tolu Awosika – Senior Environmental Scientist Specialist  Alex Baillie – Senior Environmental Scientist Supervisor  Rita Hypnarowski - Senior Environmental Scientist Specialist  Julianne Kay – Attorney III  Hee Kyung Lim – Environmental Scientist  April Ranney - Senior Environmental Scientist Specialist  Carlo Rodriguez - Senior Environmental Scientist Supervisor

Penalty Assessment Project

 Current Average: 259 days  Current Maximum: 640+ days  Percent within 14 day limit: 0%

Baseline Capability

640 480 320 1 60 USL

Days

 Non-Value Added steps:

 How DTSC currently drafts penalties  Multilevel reviews  Workgroup review

Initial Process Map

 Fishbone diagram  Failure Modes and Effects Analysis  Interval Plot  Fitted Line Plot  Boxplot  Time Series Plot  Correlation/Regression  Process Map Time Analysis  Capability Analysis  I-Chart

Analysis Tools

Decide if there will be Enforcement Draft Penalty Matrix Multilevel Review Penalty Work Group Proposed Penalty Approved

Process Map Time Analysis

100 days 48 days 114 days Total Process Time = 259 days 16 hours 18 hours 42 hours

How DTSC currently drafts penalties Multilevel review and revisions Penalty approval

Critical X’s (root causes of problems)

Templates/tools Minimize reviews/revisions Involve necessary people at the start

Lean 6-Sigma Program

Improvement Techniques

New Process Map

Lead Inspector Penalty Specialist Supervisor Legal Counsel Other specialist as needed

Pursue enforcement Determine penalty

p

New Capability Analysis

7/1/2017 1/27/2016 1 0/26/2015 9/16/2015 6/18/2015 5/19/2015 2/26/2015 12/5/2014 8/27/2014 1/23/2014 700 600 500 400 300 200 100

Inspection Date Days

_ X=10 Before test

1

 Baseline average: 259 days  New average: 10 days

Efficient use of staff time Boost morale/pride in work Breakdown silos Cross training

Additional Benefits

Monitor the new process Monthly audits Make adjustments

Control Plan

Name: Swai Bruce Ratsamythong Phone: 916.323.3511 Email: swai.ratsamythong@dtsc.ca.gov

Green Belt Contact Information

Lean 6-Sigma Program

Julie Pettijohn (Project Greenbelt)

Streamlining the Environmental Review Document Identification Process for Cleanup Program Sites

IRP Presentation October 25, 2017

Janet Naito (Project Champion) Mohsen Nazemi & Amilia Glikman (Executive Sponsors) Dot Lofstrom & Kathie Schievelbein (Process Owners)

Lean Six Sigma (LSS) Team Members

Cheryl Mahoney, OPEA, Sacramento Jonathan Sampson, OPEA, Sacramento  Jennifer Holman, Office of Legal Counsel, Sacramento  Eileen Mananian, Cleanup Program, Cypress Lori Hare, Cleanup Program, Cypress Lynn Nakashima, Cleanup Program, Berkeley

New LSS Team Members to Assist with Expanded Pilot Testing

Julie Propes, Cleanup Program, Chatsworth Shahir Haddad, Cleanup Program, Cypress

When Does the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Apply?

CEQA evaluation is required for DTSC site mitigation activities Measures are implemented to minimize potential impacts to the environment & community

Truck wash & tarping Vibration monitoring Air monitoring Excavation in tent; odor suppressant

Problem Statement: The timing, method, and content of CEQA consultation between the Cleanup Program & Office

• f Planning & Environmental Analysis (OPEA) needs to be

better defined to help expedite projects Objective: Streamline & define the CEQA process from the end of site characterization to identification of appropriate CEQA document

Streamlining the Environmental Review Document Identification Process

Lean Six Sigma Baseline & Goal

Baseline

• 101 day average from site

characterization to decision on CEQA document type; maximum 881 days

• 52% of time, we don’t meet our

goal

Goal

• For 95% of projects,

the decision on what CEQA document is needed will be within 30 days from the end

• f site characterization

What Lean & Quality Tools Did the Team Use?

Stakeholder analysis Fishbone diagram/Ishikawa Process mapping Capability analysis Time value chart analysis Work in progress analysis Process time analysis Pareto charts Failure Modes & Effects Analysis 5 Whys and a How Box plots Dot Plots Multi-variate Analysis Mood’s Median Test Levine’s Variance Test

A Lot!

• 1. Earlier consultation between OPEA and Cleanup

Program

• 2. New Envirostor activity to request & track OPEA

consultation

• 3. Created Agenda for OPEA consultation meeting
• 4. Produced Supervisors Checklist to reinforce earlier

consultation with OPEA Initial Pilot testing of improvements: 6/20-7/10/2017 New baseline: 30 days, max 102 days (5 projects)

Improvement Techniques

Improved Process Map

Consultation with OPEA added early in the process Adds value down stream during OPEA CEQA approval

New Activity for Requesting OPEA Consultation

New Envirostor activity called OPEA Consultation

What’s on the OPEA Consultation Agenda?

• Regional & local site map
• Historical & current land use
• Project intent
• Prior local land use approvals
• Site characterization
• Cleanup remedy proposed & project

controls

• Any special project or site conditions?

Direct:  Improved communication/collaboration between Cleanup & OPEA

– Earlier preparation/planning for CEQA work – Earlier identification of potential CEQA issues – Earlier communication with project proponents about likely remedy

 Increased Supervisor engagement  Fewer ‘surprises’ impacting project schedules  Reduce rework loops (saving time & $) Indirect:  Increased external stakeholder satisfaction more expeditious cleanup & site redevelopment  Applicable to all Cleanup Projects leading to organizational efficiencies

Benefits

Next Steps Phased roll-out Expanded pilot: September 2017 to March 2018 Full roll-out: April/May 2018 Prepare 1 page CEQA ‘quick sheet’ (November 2017) Quarterly Reports to Governor’s office (first due November 2017)

 Julie Pettijohn  Berkeley Cleanup Program  Department of Toxic Substances Control  510-540-3843  Julie.Pettijohn@dtsc.ca.gov

Green Belt Contact Information

Lean 6-Sigma Program

Maryam Tasnif-Abbasi (Project Green Belt)

Department of Toxic Substances Control

Peter Garcia (Project Champion) Dot Lofstrom (Executive Sponsor)

Voluntary Program Reducing Document Approval Time

Project Team

Dot Lofstrom – Division Chief, Executive Sponsor Peter Garcia – Branch Chief, Champion Maryam Tasnif-Abbasi – Project Green Belt Triss Chesney – Brownfields Grant QA Manager, Cypress Janet Naito - Branch Chief, Berkeley Tedd Yargeau – Brownfields Coordinator & Project Manager, Chatsworth Steve Becker – Brownfields Coordinator & Unit Supervisor, Cal Center Jane Numazu – Technical Advisor, Strategic Program Development, HQ

DTSC’s Voluntary Program

Problem Statement: There is an opportunity to address inconsistent and delayed schedules for approval of documents received through the voluntary program. Objective: To aim for consistent and timely approvals

• f incoming work plans, reports, and cleanup plans.

Voluntary Program Document Approval Time Reduction

Process Map - Baseline

Process Map - Focused

Meeting with Proponent & Support Staff DTSC Receives Document DTSC Internal Review Process Comment Resolution with Proponent Document Approved

• Work Plans
• Cleanup Plans
• Reports
• CEQA
• Public Participation

220 days 320 days 540 days 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Schools (n = 570) Voluntary Cleanup Program (n= 356) Non-Voluntary (n= 87) Months Site Type

Baseline data: Comparison of Average Time for DTSC to Approve a Document for School, Voluntary, and Non-Voluntary Site Types*

*Analysis of projects initiated after January 2005 and completed before December 2016

Data Evaluation!

We did a lot!!

Lean Six Sigma Baseline and Goals

Baseline

• Work plans –58%

approved within 75 days

• Reports – 41%

approved within 100 days

• Cleanup plans –

37% approved within 150 days

Goals

• Work plans – 95%

approved within 75 days

• Reports – 95%

approved within 100 days

• Cleanup plans – 95%

approved within 150 days

Improvement Techniques

• Usable, relevant, concise guidance & tools

– Updated Policy – Quick Sheets – Checklists – Portfolio of sample documents

• Increased communication and collaboration

– Mandatory scoping meetings – Management engagement tools

• Increased Controls

– EnviroStor modifications – Performance measures and program strategic plan – Increased supervisor engagement on schedules – Implementation & tracking team

Solution 8 – PEA Process Quick Sheet

Solution 8 – Voluntary Oversight Services Quick Sheet

Benefits

Direct

• Document meet DTSC expectations
• Faster and consistent DTSC reviews
• Ease of access to information on DTSC processes

and projects Indirect

• Greater public confidence in DTSC’s process
• Stakeholders more likely to request DTSC’s
• versight to address contamination
• Applicable to ALL DTSC projects, leading to
• rganizational efficiencies

Schedule of Implementation

• June: Initiated development of solutions
• July: Branch Chief input on solutions
• August/September: VCP Policy Update in progress
• September-November: Regional implementation

meetings & EnviroStor modifications

• December: First phase solutions completed
• January 2018: Solution roll-out & data collection
• January 2019: Post-implementation data analysis

Green Belt Contact Information

Maryam Tasnif-Abbasi Department of Toxic Substances Control 5796 Corporate Avenue Cypress California 90630 Maryam.Tasnif-Abbasi@dtsc.ca.gov