Search Results for: asset management series

Water Asset Management – Portsmouth

The City of Portsmouth Public Works Water Division takes a pro-active posture to continuously maintain and improve not only the assets that comprise the water system, but also the processes that are used to manage it. Within the past fifteen years the Water Division has made significant investments in the tools it uses to manage the system including investments in the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS), a three phase water system master plan, an updated hydraulic model, and in computerized maintenance management / asset management (CMMS/AM) software.

The Hoyle, Tanner/Kleinfelder team was hired by the City of Portsmouth to develop an Asset Management Plan for the water system. It is designed to not only meet the requirements of the Asset Management grant, but to provide an effective framework for the City’s water system asset management program for cost effective decision making. The program includes several elements that were done through a series of workshops and training sessions; Level of Service, Asset Inventory, Condition Assessment, Criticality Analysis\Risk Assessment, Life Cycle Costing\Long Term Funding, Workflow\Reporting and Communication Plan. The success of these programs was based on the inclusion of decision maker, technical staff, field foremen, and supervisors. It allowed for the development of workflow to occur, capturing the information in the field that is critical in making the best decisions. This understanding throughout the organization is the root of its success. After each workshop, steps were taken to implement elements of the Asset Management program using the current data, staff knowledge and software tools.

Asset Management – Optimization of O&M & CIP, & Funding Strategy

Recently, John Jackman, P.E. and Carl Quiram, P.E. finished our series discussion on Asset Management highlighting the Optimizing O&M and CIP, as well as Funding Strategy tasks. The concepts presented in this video reflect the utilization of collected data collected to more accurately develop a Capital Improvement Plan and the necessary steps to fund those projects. Presented are examples used by various municipalities as wells as the information necessary to capitalize on the Asset Management Program data.  – Click Here to review the other presentations given as part of the Asset Management Series.

Asset Management – Maintenance & Lifecycle Costing

Today, John Jackman, P.E. and David Wheeler, E.I.T. continued our series discussion on Asset Management highlighting Maintenance and Lifecycle Costing tasks. Covered in this presentation are the basic principles of maintaining assets as well as how to determine the lifecycle cost of those assets. Presented are project examples of maintenance programs used by various municipalities as wells as the information necessary to start adding lifecycle costs to the Asset Management Program.

Asset Management – Condition Assessment

Today, John Jackman, P.E. and Ben Horner, P.L.S. continued our Asset Management Series with a discussion on Condition Assessment. This presentation covers the differences between inspection and assessment; the benefits of knowing the condition; basics to developing a standard condition assessment; and estimating the existing useful life of various assets. Presented are examples of standard condition forms as well as our use of these forms to complete condition assessment for our clients.

Asset Management – Inventory

As part of our Asset Management Series, today we discussed – Inventory. To share their knowledge on the subject, John Jackman, P.E. and Heidi Lemay present the process; associated questions; available data; organization, data management and collection tips; and project examples of how inventory has been collected on our various asset management projects.

Click here to view the Introduction to Asset Management presentation completed last week.

Introduction to Asset Management

Recently, John Jackman, P.E. and Carl Quiram, P.E. administered the Introduction to Asset Management presentation discussing the basic principles presented in our Continuum of Asset Management post, as it relates to public works. This presentation will assist viewers in understanding the basic steps of a successful Asset Management program to help develop the process. A basic understanding of the asset management principles can assist decision makers in creating a successful and supported program.

This presentation is the first in our asset management series discussing each of the principles in depth.

Continuum of Asset Management

This graphic illustrates the Asset Management continuum with a focus on system-wide assets. Understanding the basic steps of a successful Asset Management program will help in developing a process and not a project. By describing the steps of a program it will assist decision makers in understanding the cohesive benefit for everyone to be successful and supported.

Inventory: An inventory, cataloging and mapping of the existing assets and their associated data, creates the program foundation. This includes both vertical and horizontal assets, the various information collection methods, and the accuracy standards that have to be met. Different sources of information, including paper records, spreadsheets and databases can be used to develop the list of assets. Importance is stressed on the uniformity of format for each of the assets cataloged with an eye towards its long term value to the higher end evaluation needs of the asset management program. In varying circumstances environmental, energy, financial and political information is collected with the asset logged.

Condition Assessment: An industry standard form of measure is established using asset management software to manage the following variables: age, location, risk, and current condition. The development of these standards is subjective to the organizations minimum quality level and ensures consistency throughout the program. Without these established standards asset condition becomes opinion-based and non-comparable.

Maintenance: Establishing a maintenance plan and tracking all planned and reactive efforts enables the program to validate the repairs approved, and the associated costs. Utilizing the manufacturers’ operation and maintenance manuals (where appropriate) to develop your program will ensure all asset characteristics are accounted and planned for. Work flows will be developed to define how users will capture pertinent information and keep it up to date. Standard operating procedures will be developed for preventive maintenance and energy responses to reduce the risk of failure as well as frustration. When work orders are issued, the associated tasks will be completed in the program for future planning efforts.

Lifecycle Costs: Improving asset utilization can extend asset life and performance while reducing capital costs and asset-related operating costs. Cradle to grave asset costs should be established which would include the acquisition cost, maintenance and operation costs as well as end of life costs. For many assets this would be difficult to establish, however, the more realistic the input the more reliable the output. Once this system is established, new assets would be input accurately improving the data’s usefulness over time.

Level of Service: Understanding the current level of service being delivered by the asset to its consumers, and identifying the gap between the current and proposed standards will identify the desired goals moving forward.

By formally defining a Level of Service, the goals of the program will be communicated, a link between cost and service identified, customer expectation met, and measurable results developed. Standardizing the assessment process will allow for all users to identify the remaining life of an asset and the factors impacting that useful life.

Criticality/Consequence of Failure: Identifying the impacts failure would have on the associated assets, consumers, and system is known as criticality. By developing an understanding of the consequence of failure, the organization is able to manage the associated risk. Risk is simply calculated on the probability and consequence of failure as defined by the equation:

Probability of Failure x Consequence of Failure = Risk

With an understanding of how we can reduce the system’s risk and focusing on assets where risk cannot be reduced, we are able to identify the priority of asset repairs or replacements. Failure has many factors including impacts to social, financial and environmental environments and therefore each need to be evaluated for each asset. By monitoring high risk assets impacts to those factors can be reduced, or eliminated in certain circumstances.

Optimizing Operations & Maintenance and Capital Improvement Plan: Understanding the assets condition, life cycle costs, criticality and the desired level of service allows for the analysis of an asset’s true useful life thus reducing premature replacement. By embracing asset management technology data will be gathered and analyzed in standardized and regular ways to ease the management process. By completing an analysis in a sound asset management system, a rational and defendable Capital Improvement Plan can be generated for various funding strategies and the results on Levels of Service can be clearly communicated.

Funding Strategy: Developing a long-term funding strategy based on the highest failure risk assets will assist in preventing sizeable cost increases to the system owner as well as its users. Using long-term budgeting for system assets will determine the priority based on the environmental impacts. This information will affect any grants or loans and therefore need to be discussed. By developing a long-term plan for the future the organization can assess the different impacts changes to their assets plays on their future Capital Improvement Plan.

We will be hosting a series of Lunch and Learns in our Manchester office explaining each of these tasks in more depth. To find out the dates or to join us for this series contact Nichole Davis.

A Community Mobilizes in Support of a Runway Expansion

Construction photo on runway with sun and trees in background

The unlikely catalyst for the ongoing Runway 13-31 extension project at Newton Field in Jackman, Maine can be directly traced to an announcement by the Penobscot Community Health Care (PCHC) in May 2017. That announcement stated that due to a lack of revenue, MaineGeneral Health (MGH) would be closing their nursing home and end management of overnight emergency and urgent care services in Jackman. The impact of that closure meant that the local emergency medical support services for the northern Maine region would be down to the one full-time physician in town and limited weekday service hours provided by the Jackman Community Health Center.

Jackman town officials and residents understood the broader implications to the community of MGH’s decision and immediately held a special public hearing to discuss their options. Approximately 150 attendees, including residents from nearby communities, business owners, and public officials, attended the meeting and expressed concern about the limited medical options remaining for the rural communities in the Moose River area.

Adding to these apprehensions, the Town realized they had few feasible options to address this critical lack of medical services. MGH was forced to close due to lack of revenue, thus, establishing any new in-town medical facility would be difficult. Funding was also unavailable to provide additional staff and training for an all-volunteer EMT crew from Jackman. Creation of an official route to seek nearby medical services across the international border, which are technically located closer to Jackman than Skowhegan or Greenville, would be unprecedented and logistically challenging. The most feasible option was to establish a reliable and time-efficient method of patient transport to the following trauma centers: Eastern Maine Medical Center in Bangor or Maine Medical Center in Portland. It was at this point during the meeting that the interim Jackman town manager and the director of LifeFlight of Maine reminded the community that as a public asset, the airport had the capacity to play a greater part in regional emergency and health services.

A Possible Solution

LifeFlight of Maine was already providing critical aeromedical services from Jackman to Redington-Fairview Hospital in Skowhegan during warmer temperatures via helicopter. In the winter however, without anti-ice systems, the helicopter is not equipped to fly in freezing precipitation. LifeFlight does operate a King Air B200 fixed wing aircraft with a certification for flight in known icing conditions and can be used for emergency medical transport in specific winter conditions. The King Air B200 seemed like the logical solution to serve this rural community with a direct need for medical support. There remained, however, one problem: In order for the King Air to operate out of Jackman, the airport would need to widen, extend, and rehabilitate the existing Runway 13-31 pavement surface.

The Airport turned to the aviation experts at Hoyle Tanner to assist them to first identify and then secure the funding necessary to complete the needed runway improvements. The initial project development step required an Airport Master Plan Update. The emphasis of this planning effort was on examining and documenting regional medical and socio-economic conditions along with evaluating runway length requirements to support Lifeflight of Maine fixed wing aeromedical flights. The master plan would include environmentally and financially feasible runway alternatives that would be examined in more detail in subsequent National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and state/federal permitting efforts. Another major component of a master plan is public outreach. Public involvement has its greatest impact during the early stages of the planning process. With this in mind, the Town advertised that the public could initially provide input during the airport master plan update scoping meeting. The Town held another public meeting to kick off the master plan update process. During this meeting, preliminary runway alternatives were shared, and the public demonstrated overwhelming support both at the meeting and through letters of support. Ultimately the master plan update recommended a series of short-term Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) necessary to support the dimensions and configuration that would meet current FAA design standards for B-II runways and would be able to be used by LifeFlight’s airplane.

A Plan in Action

The first short term CIP project proposed for 2019 included an Environmental Assessment (EA) and permitting for the runway expansion. After review of the EA and upon receiving a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) from FAA, the Jackman Board of Selectmen voted unanimously to move ahead with widening, extending, and rehabilitating Runway 13-31 from its current 60-foot-wide, 2,900-foot-long to 75-feet-wide by 3,600-feet-long to permit LifeFlight of Maine’s B-200 fixed wing aircraft to safely access the field. 

The 2020-21 obstruction removal phases included Land or Easement Acquisition of all, or a portion of property located on the Runway 31 end to acquire rights to access and removal of tree obstructions to the proposed runway approaches. Hoyle Tanner’s in-house drone team collected and analyzed drone-captured imagery to identify trees to be selectively cut to create unobstructed navigable airspace for arriving and departing aircraft in the proposed new runway configuration.

The humble roots of this project can be traced back to an announcement made in spring 2017. Now four years later with funding from FAA and MaineDOT, as well as tremendous community support, construction is under way at Newton Field. When construction is complete this fall, the northern Maine region will have a runway whose width, length and pavement strength support lifesaving aeromedical flights.