Developing a Comprehensive Asset Management … › docs › 1015_Developing...Developing a Comprehensive Asset Management Plan by Consistently Assessing Asset Condition, Consequence

Developing a Comprehensive Asset Management Plan by Consistently Assessing Asset Condition, Consequence of Failure, and Risk

Imagine the result

One Water 2015 Utility WorkshopKevin Slaven, CRL, CPM

Today’s Agenda

What is Asset Management? Risk-Based Capital Planning Framework Questions & Discussion

2

What is Asset Management?

• EPA Definition:

•“Asset management is maintaining a desired level ofservice for what you want your assets to provide at thelowest life cycle cost. Lowest life cycle cost refers to thebest appropriate cost for rehabilitating, repairing orreplacing an asset. Asset management is implementedthrough an asset management program and typicallyincludes a written asset management plan.”

Businesslike management of assets

USEPA’s 10 Step Asset Management Process

Risk-Based Asset Management for Capital Prioritization

Inventory Assets

Assess Condition

Assess Criticality

Assign Risk

Determine Remaining Life and Replacement Cost

Set Targets for Service Levels

Determine Maintenance

Program

Determine CIP

Fund the Program


Inventory Assets

Assess Condition

Assess Criticality

Assign Risk




Program

Determine CIP

Fund the Program

Asset Definition

• Will a work order be written to this specific asset?• Will a separate condition assessment need to be performed on this

asset?• Will depreciation or costs need to be tracked separately on this

asset?

Define Assets by Assessment Type

Mechanical Assets• Individual Pumps (pumps and motors are separate assets when >=50hp)Structural Assets• Process Structures • Grounds Electrical/Instrumentation Assets• Panels, MCC’s, Generator • Transfer Switches

Typical “Parent-Child” Asset Hierarchy

Virtual Levels - Level 1 to Level 6: Performance Centers for rolling-up

costs and other data required for reporting.

Maintenance Work Orders – generally NOT written here

Other Work Order Types can be tracked here

Real Assets - Level 7 to Level 8: Maintenance work orders are written

here.Important to Note: A good asset hierarchy is performance

driven rather than location driven. Components: optional - depends on

CMMS capabilities.

1. Utility

2. Division

3. Facility

4. Area

5. Process

6. Group

7. Asset

8. Component

Virtual Assets

Real Assets9

Asset Attribute Data Categories

Asset Management Attributes: Physical Condition Performance Condition Consequence of Failure Risk

Financial Attributes: Install Date Install Cost Replace Cost Estimated Useful Life

Physical Attributes: Facility ID Asset ID Asset Name Asset Type Capacity/Size Etc.

Location Attributes: Asset Location Community Watershed

GCWW Asset DefinitionsEQUIPMENT GROUP EMPAC KEYWORD EMPAC QUAL ASSET DEFINITION COMMENT

CHEM FEEDER - Slacker, Belt, Pump for equipment from day tank to injections. Include associated pipes and valves.CHEM FILL STA - All equipment that transfers chemical from delivery to bulk storage. Include associated pipes and valves.

CHEM TRANSFER -Equipment used to transfer chemical between bulk storage and day tank. Include associated conveyor, pump, pipes, and valves.

CHEM TANK-BULK - Include stirrers or mixersCHEM TANK-DAY - Including hopperUPS -BATTERY CHARGERBREAKER - Breakers 5kV and up are separate assets. Breaker <5kV are part of switchgear.CATHODIC PROT - CP system is a single assetDISCONNECT -DIST PANEL -MCC - Individual MCC buckets are not separate assets.METERING -SWITCHGEAR - Switchgear includes all breakers less than 5kV. Breakers 5kV and up are separate assets.TRANSFER SWITCH -TRANSFORMER -VFD -PROTECTIVE RELAY - Includes lightning protectionCONDUIT/DUCT BANK - Single asset for entire station/building which includes cables.GENERATOR - Includes engine and load bank.LIGHTING - Indoor lighting system and Outdoor lighting system are separate assets.COMMUNICATION - PA and phone system AIR COMPRESSOR Air compressor that is used for shop work or tools and is not used to support a process.ELEVATOR -LABORATORY - Includes all laboratory equipment.SCALE -WATER WHEEL -PUMP - Sump pumps and flood pumpsSANITARY SYSTEM - One asset per station. Does not include sanitary piping in yardWATER HEATERWELL -CRANE -

CHEMICAL EQUIPMENT

GENERAL EQUIPMENT

ELECTRICAL

Maintaining Asset Inventory

Group Info collect/format Who collects Where does Information go?

Supply CMMS Support -Retire Asset

Hard copy scrap asset form filled out by Project Manager. Asset is then made 'inactive' in EMPAC. Form sent to Acct.

Project Manager EMPAC, Accounting


Inventory Assets

Assess Condition

Assess Criticality

Assign Risk




Program

Determine CIP

Fund the Program

Probability of Failure: Evaluate By Condition Assessment (desktop, visual or testing)

14 14

Condition Type

Failure Mode Description Assessment

Method

Performance

Capacity Does not meet demand (flow, loading, storage volume, etc.) Test or Desktop

Level of Service

Does not meet functional needs (regulatory permits, customer commitments) Desktop

Efficiency Not lowest cost alternative (labor, maintenance, obsolescence) Desktop

Physical MortalityCurrent state of repair and operation as influenced by age, historical maintenance and operating environment

Test, Visual, Desktop, Modeling

Condition Assessment Methods:

• Desktop Assessment: Considers operating data, maintenance history, staff knowledge, current needs, future needs and industry standards.

• Visual Assessment: Uses a set of standard criteria specific to the type of asset. Results in a comparative ranking of assets on a standard scale (e.g. 1-best to 5-worst). Most effective when applied against a broad asset base with a large quantity of assets.

• Testing: Uses industry accepted methods. Examples include: capacity test and advanced condition testing. Performed on individual assets. Provides an absolute ranking for asset condition. Results can be expressed on a standard scale. Some tests are “failure finding” – not condition assessment.

15 15

Site Assessment

Example Physical Condition Field Scoring Sheet

16

Condition Assessment Tools

Visual Condition Assessment - Overall Scoring Approach

Score Description

1 - Excellent Fully operable, well maintained, and consistent with current standards. Little wear shown and no further action required.

2 – Good Sound and well maintained but may be showing slight signs of early wear. Delivering full efficiency with little or no performance deterioration. Only minor renewal or rehabilitation may be needed in the near term.

3 - ModerateFunctionally sound and acceptable and showing normal signs of wear. May have minor failures or diminished efficiency with some performance deterioration or increase in maintenance cost. Moderate renewal or rehabilitation needed in near term.

4 - PoorFunctions but requires a high level of maintenance to remain operational. Shows abnormal wear and is likely to cause significant performance deterioration in the near term. Replacement or major rehabilitation needed in the near term.

5 – Very PoorEffective life exceeded and/or excessive maintenance cost incurred. A high risk of breakdown or imminent failure with serious impact on performance. No additional life expectancy with immediate replacement needed.

18

Condition Assessment by Assessment Type

• Define Condition Scoring Criteria for Physical and Performance• Electrical • Structural• HVAC• Mechanical

19 19

Visual Condition – Score 1

• Equipment & Ancillary Items• Like new with tag

20

Visual Physical Condition – Score 2

• Equipment & Ancillary Items• Older equipment• Little to no signs of wear and/or

degradation

21


• Equipment & Ancillary Items• Older equipment• Visible signs of wear and/or

degradation

22


• Equipment & Ancillary Items• Older equipment• Excessive wear and/or degradation• Near end of “useful” life

23


• Equipment & Ancillary Items• Older equipment• Excessive wear and/or degradation• At end of “useful” life

24

Desktop Performance

25

• Capacity• Ability to meet current and future needs

• Regulatory• Ability to meet current and future needs

• Availability• Work Orders

• Obsolescence• Spare Parts

• Testing• PdM Testing

• Oil Analysis, Pump Efficiency, Thermography

25

Combining Results from Multiple Assessments: Worst Score Wins

26 26

Methods Criteria Score

Field Test Vibration 3

Visual Corrosion 2

Desktop Capacity 4

Overall Score 4*

*4 = poor condition


Inventory Assets

Assess Condition

Assess Criticality

Assign Risk




Program

Determine CIP

Fund the Program

Consequence of Failure: Evaluate by Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis (desktop or GIS)

28

Economic

Social

Environmental

Triple Bottom Line

Sustainability

• Economic: additional capital and operating costs resulting from a failure. Example: asset replacement/maintenance cost.

• Environmental: cost of environmental degradation resulting from a failure. These costs may or may not be directly incurred by municipality. Example: regulatory fine.

• Social: cost of community impacts resulting from a failure. These costs are generally not directly incurred by GCWW. Example: loss of property use and safety.

Consequence of Failure (COF):Triple Bottom Line Categories

29

Example Magnitude Ranges for TBL Criteria

Example Magnitude Ranges for Triple Bottom Line Analysis

Criteria Category Criteria Low Moderate High Very High

Equipment damage <$20K $20K - <$100K $100K - <$500K >$500K

Facility damage <$20K $20K - <$100K $100K - <$500K >$500K Economic Property damage <$20K $20K - <$100K $100K - <$500K >$500K

30


Inventory Assets

Assess Condition

Assess Criticality

Assign Risk




Program

Determine CIP

Fund the Program

Overview of Assessment Process

• Risk Is a Simple Equation: Probability * Consequence

Probabilityof Failure

Consequenceof Failurex Redundancy

Factorx Risk Score=

Failure Mode• Mortality

• Level of Service

• Capacity

• Efficiency

Risk Supports Optimization of Capital Improvement Programs

Consequence• Economic

• Social / Safety

• Environmental

TBL:Triple Bottom Line

“Right projects at the right time”


Inventory Assets

Assess Condition

Assess Criticality

Assign Risk




Program

Determine CIP

Fund the Program

Remaining Life and Replacement Cost

• Adjusted Remaining Life

• Cost (Replacement, Rehabilitation, and Maintenance)


Inventory Assets

Assess Condition

Assess Criticality

Assign Risk




Program

Determine CIP

Fund the Program

What Are Service Levels?

• A commitment to deliver a specified level of service, and quality to customers and stakeholders

• A mechanism to communicate and report performance results, focus organizational efforts, and prioritize investments

• The linkage between your strategic objectives and operational or tactical objectives

Service Levels Build Transparency and Stakeholder Relationships

SL Category Water WastewaterReliability •water main

breaks•unaccounted for water

•worst served customers

•sewer blockages / collapses

•SSOs / CSOs•spills / backups

Quality • customer complaints (pressure, taste/odor, color)

•odor complaints from plants pump stations, and WWTPs

Customer Service

•outage response•call enter performance

•event response•call enter performance

Regulatory •water quality compliance

•discharge permit compliance

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Breaks and Leaks Per 100 Miles Per Year

Current Performance Trends and Issues• Stable performance driven by rehabilitation and renewal

program of 100 miles per year.• Continued focus on oldest cast iron pipe and worst served

areas.• 2007 performance impacted by spike of 75 third party

damage incidents during downtown light rail construction .

Sample Service Level and Supporting Maintenance Performance Measures

Strategic Plan Elements LOS Category and Measures

1 Ensure system and asset reliability and minimize interruptions

Water Distribution• LOS X1 Breaks / Leaks Per 100 Miles• LOS X2 Inadequate Water Pressure

Events• LOS X3 Worst Served Customers• LOS X4 Event Response Time

2 Provide high quality service and effective response

Sample Performance Measures

Distribution Operations and Maintenance• Out of service hydrants repaired within target date• Percentage of valves inspected per month• Ratio of PM/CM work orders• Work order completion ratio• Average backlog (days) for PM repair work orders


Inventory Assets

Assess Condition

Assess Criticality

Assign Risk




Program

Determine CIP

Fund the Program

Risk Assessment BalancesCapital with Maintenance

Prioritized Capital Plan

Capital Improvement Plan Overview By Project Type 2007-2013 (Non-Escalated Costs)

Project Number Dist rict Project Name Priorit y Project Type

2007 2008 2009 2010 TotalGrowth - Plant and Lift Stat ions

24 3 Southtowns Wet Well and ORF Improvements High Growth / Augmentat ion -$ 1,000,000$ 4 ,600,000$ 1,300,000$ 7,900,000$

8 4 Aurora N/ Aurora S Pump Stat ion Improvements Med High Growth / Renewal -$ -$ -$ -$ 4 ,000,000$

4 2 6 Kennedy PS Replacement Low Growth -$ 200,000$ 300,000$ -$ 500,000$

TOTAL - GROWTH -$ 1,700 ,000$ 5 ,300 ,000$ 1,300 ,000$ 13,300 ,000$ Augmentat ion - Plant and Lift Stat ions

16 2 Lake St reet PS Improvements High Augmentat ion 1,000,000$ 4 ,000,000$ -$ -$ 5,000,000$

17 2 Sweet land PS Improvements High Augmentat ion 100,000$ -$ -$ -$ 1,900,000$

30 3 Southwestern PS Eliminat ion Med High Augmentat ion -$ -$ -$ -$ 700,000$

36 3 Southtowns Solids Handling Med Augmentat ion -$ 2,000,000$ 4 ,000,000$ 880,000$ 6,880,000$

58 3 Pump Stat ion Eliminat ion Evaluat ion (Greenmeadow) Low Augmentat ion -$ 580,000$ -$ -$ 580,000$

Augmentat ion - Collect ion System34 3 Rush Creek Interceptor Med High Augmentat ion -$ -$ 4 ,000,000$ 2,800,000$ 10,300,000$

Augmentat ion - Other61 All CMMS Implementat ion Med Augmentat ion 290,000$ 1,145,000$ 3,145,000$ -$ 4 ,580,000$

TOTAL - AUGMENTATION 1,630 ,000$ 9 ,295,000$ 13,14 5,000$ 6 ,58 0 ,000$ 36,650 ,000$ Renewal / Rehabilit at ion / Replacement - Plant and Lift Stat ions

3 1 Cayuga & Indust rial Parkway HVAC High Renewal -$ 350,000$ -$ -$ 350,000$

4 0 6 Lackawanna STP Chlorine Building and Primary Tank Repairs Med High Renewal -$ 170,000$ -$ -$ 170,000$

63 3 Southtowns Roof Replacement Med Renewal -$ -$ -$ 1,400,000$ 1,400,000$

Renewal / Rehabilit at ion / Replacement - Collect ion System32 3 Village of Hamburg Collect ion System High Renewal 592,000$ 1,000,000$ -$ -$ 1,592,000$

10 5 Replacement of ACP along Transit Road* High Renewal 500,000$ 1,300,000$ -$ -$ 1,800,000$ 4 4 6 Bethlehem Park PS and Collect ion System Improvements High Renewal 250,000$ 500,000$ -$ -$ 750,000$

64 6 Holland Avenue Sewer Replacement * High Renewal 600,000$ 200,000$ 800,000$ 51 8 East Aurora Collect ion System Replacement NYS DOT Low Renewal 2,000,000$ -$ -$ -$ 2,000,000$

TOTAL - RENEWAL / REHABILITATION / REPLACEMENT 6,08 2,000$ 6 ,620 ,000$ 1,200 ,000$ 1,4 00 ,000$ 15,302,000$

Total - All Projects 7,712,000$ 17,615,000$ 19,64 5,000$ 9 ,28 0 ,000$ 65,252,000$

Est imated Annual Expenditure

Analyze and Review Financial and Rate

Implications

Assess and Analyze Asset Data and

Establish Policies and Procedures

Conduct Asset Inventory and Condition

Assessment

Develop 5/20 Year Capital Investment

Plan (CIP)

Project Priority

2

34 5

7

8

9

11

13

15

22 24

26

27

33

34

36

3739

41

42

43

51

52

54 55

56

62

10

14

16

17

18

19

2530

32

35

38 40

44

53

57

58

60

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 1 2 3 4 5

Consequence of Failure (Rehab / Renewal / Replacement Projects)Project Impact (Enhancement / Growth Projects)

The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image

The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to ope

The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted



The image cannot be displayed.

The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not h The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to ope The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image




The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to ope

The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not h







The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not ha



Low Priority Med Priority

High Priority

Pro

babi

lity

of F

ailu

re (

Reh

ab /

Ren

ewal

/ R

epla

cem

ent P

roje

cts)

Fina

ncia

l and

Str

ateg

ic A

lignm

ent

(Enh

ance

men

t / G

row

th P

roje

cts)

High Probability/ Consequence or

Impact / Alignment

Low Probability/ Consequence or

Impact / Alignment

Projects Can Be Validated and Prioritized Through Defined Criteria

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

6-80

4

6-61

1

5-70

8

6-01

9

6-50

1

5-60

2

6-60

2

6-60

3

5-XX

Z

6-97

3

6-55

2

5-80

5

6-08

5

6-XY

X

5-40

4

6-40

4

6-95

2

5-95

2

6-07

0

5-XX

Y

6-04

1

5-40

3

6-40

3

5-60

4

5-08

9

6-10

6

5-96

7

5-15

1

6-15

1

5-80

6

6-14

8

5-25

2

6-80

2

5-04

6

6-06

1

5-50

1

5-94

4

5-08

4

5-40

2

6-08

9

5-25

5

5-80

2

5-09

0

6-XX

Y

5-08

6

6-55

7

5-14

8

5-11

6

6-11

6

5-80

4

5-25

0

5-25

4

5-95

1

6-95

1

6-14

9

Tota

l Pro

ject

Prio

rity

Scor

e (1

-10)

CIP Project No

FY 2012 CIP Prioritization Projects Funding Unvailable

Funding Available

Physical Condition Performance Condition Strategic Plan Alignment Regulatory/

Environmental Service Level/Reliability O&M and Safety Public Benefit Financial Efficiency/Energy Community/Growth

Business Cases and TBL / Cost Benefit Analysis Support CIP Needs and Priority

Next Steps Upon Program Completion

• Sustainable Financial Projections

• Capital Prioritization

• Affordability Analysis

• Funding Options

Helps Balance Capital Funding and Rate Impacts

Risk Assessment Results: Greater Cincinnati Water Works

Summary Results of Pilot Condition Scoring

• 685 Total Assets Scored

• Processes Evaluated at Richard Miller• Lamella• ORP• Mt Wash PS• Chem E• Chem W• PCF

47

Summary Results of Condition ScoringBy Assessment Type

48

Summary Results of Condition Scoring By Process

49

Assets Scoring 4 & 5 From Desktop Analysis: Availability and Testing

Asset NameCorrective

HoursCorrective

Work OrdersReactive

HoursReactive

Work OrdersCorrective

HoursCorrective

Work OrdersReactive

HoursReactive

Work OrdersAvailability

ScorePdM Testing

ScoreType of Test

CBE LIME SLAKER 2 44.5 2 35.5 5 45.5 3 35.5 5 4 xCBE LIME SLAKER 3 21 1 74.5 8 21 1 74.5 8 5 xCBW CARBON FEEDER-1 S60" 34 1 34 1 4 xCL2 INJBLDG-CL2 INJECTOR 1-RCM 9 2 9 2 4 xCL2 INJECTBLDG-PRESS REG 1-RCM 76 1 76 1 4 xCL2INJECT BLDG-CALI SUPPLY-RCM 35 1 35 1 4 xMWPS PUMP MOTOR NO.3 79 3 309.5 4 79 3 309.5 5 4 1 MCA, ThermoMWPS PUMP NO 3 152 2 32 3 152 2 32 3 4 xMWPS PUMP NO 4 16 3 16 3 4 xORP BATTERY CHARGER 0 1 5 5 0 1 5 5 4 1 ThermoORP INSTRUMENTATION 34 1 34 1 4 xORP PUMP 1 20 1 22 3 29.5 2 22 3 4 xORP PUMP 2 13 2 37.5 4 13 2 37.5 4 4 xORP PUMP 3 702.5 3 394.5 4 702.5 3 394.5 4 4 xORP PUMP 4 55.5 4 63 7 55.5 4 63 7 5 xORP PUMP MOTOR 3 51 2 26 2 51 2 30.5 3 4 1 ThermoORP PUMP MOTOR 4 60 2 60 2 3 5 ThermoPCF CHLORINATOR 3 12 2 12 2 4 1 UltrasonicPCF DRY CHLORINE SCRUBBER-RCM 6 2 6 2 6 2 6 2 4 1 UltrasonicPCF VACUUM REG 2-RCM 23 1 23 1 4 1 UltrasonicPCF VACUUM REG 4-RCM 25 1 25 1 4 1 Ultrasonic

2012 2012 & 2013 (through 8/19)

50

Results of Condition Scoring By Assessment Type by Criteria – Excel

51

Results of Mechanical AssessmentsCorrosion & Leakage Most Common Mode of Failure (4 and 5)

Consequence of Failure and Risk Scoring

COF Triple Bottom Line Criteria

• GCWW developed economic, social, and environmental criteria and magnitude ranges.• 6 Economic criteria• 2 Environmental criteria• 3 Social criteria

• Total COF scores range from 1-5. • Highest single evaluation score ‘wins’ and decides the

COF for that asset.

53

Triple Bottom Line Scoring Spreadsheet

54

Asset/Assessment Class/Redundancy ValuesRF

(Average Conditions)

Asset Replacement

Cost

Asset Repair Cost

Facility & Property Damage

Repair Cost

Additional or Standby Power

Cost

Operational Losses

Additional Contractor

Services

Regulatory Violation

Environmental Costs

Disruption of Service

Public Image

Safety

#DIV/0!Rank NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE

# of Assets in EQ Group Evaluation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Assessment Class Score #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!# Assets Needed for Ave Conditions# Assets Needed for Peak Conditions

#DIV/0!Total Score

Economic Criteria Environmental Criteria Social Criteria

Example for Chem East Process Area:

Basin Structures scored a 5 for asset replacement cost, so total COF score for the asset = 5.

Risk Score Summary –Chem East

Area Sub Area Process Overall Condition Score COF Score Risk ScoreCBE TREATMENT COAGULATION 4 5 20CBE TREATMENT COAGULATION 4 5 20CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 5 3 15CBE TREATMENT LIME 5 3 15CBE TREATMENT IRON 4 3 12CBE TREATMENT LIME 4 3 12CBE TREATMENT LIME 4 3 12CBE TREATMENT LIME 4 3 12CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 3 3 9CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 3 3 9CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 3 3 9CBE TREATMENT IRON 3 3 9CBE TREATMENT IRON 3 3 9CBE TREATMENT IRON 3 3 9CBE TREATMENT LIME 3 3 9CBE TREATMENT LIME 3 3 9CBE TREATMENT LIME 3 3 9CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 3 3 9CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 3 3 9CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 3 3 9CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 3 3 9CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 2 3 6CBE TREATMENT COAGULATION 2 3 6CBE TREATMENT COAGULATION 2 3 6CBE TREATMENT IRON 2 3 6CBE TREATMENT IRON 2 3 6CBE TREATMENT LIME 2 3 6CBE TREATMENT LIME 2 3 6CBE TREATMENT LIME 2 3 6CBE ADMINISTRATION POWER GENERATOR 2 3 6CBE TREATMENT LIME 2 3 6CBE TREATMENT LIME 2 3 6

55

Risk Score Matrix – Chem East

0 Assets 0 Assets 2 Assets 0 Assets 0 Assets

0 Assets 0 Assets 1 Asset 0 Assets 2 Assets




1 2 3 4 5

Cond

ition

Sco

re

Prob

abili

ty o

f Fai

lure

GCWW CHEM EAST ASSETS

4

3

2

1

5

56

Program Implementation Outcomes

• Quantitative: • Return on Investment

• Quick Wins• Capital vs Maintenance

• Failure Incidents• Qualitative:

• Public Perception

© 2013 ARCADIS19 August 201558

QUESTIONS?

Developing a Comprehensive Asset Management … › docs › 1015_Developing...Developing a Comprehensive Asset Management Plan by Consistently Assessing Asset Condition, Consequence

Documents