Airport Terminal Facility Activation Techniques (2010)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Many of the airport terminal activation policies, processes, and procedures discussed in chapter six depend on the timely and transparent gathering of data from and circulation of infor- mation to a large group of participants and stakeholders, all of whom have differing expectations for the timing and detail of the information presented. To date, most airport terminal facilities activation projects have depended on traditional, often manual, tools (e.g., checklists and reports), as well as office and project management software to collect and share information. As demonstrated by the successful activation of most of the airports surveyed in this synthesis, these con- ventional tools can be successful; however, the time delays inherent in collecting, entering, formatting, and distributing information by traditional means can lead to decisions being based on outdated information. Survey participants indicated that the use of checklists or milestone matrices is particularly useful in tracking, report- ing on, and communicating the status of activation activities. The following is extracted from the Milestone Matrix used at SeaTac (see Table 7): • Identification of person responsible for each task (Team Lead). • Name & ID for each task and activity. (Note that activity ID and dates can be linked with the project schedule to automate updating of dates and status.) • Activity description with color code to facilitate focus- ing on critical issues. • Comments to indicate which tasks are vital and other issues. If the milestone matrix or checklist is on line, the dates in the checklist can be cross linked to dates in the project schedule so that they are automatically updated at the same time as the project schedule. Appendix C is an extensive checklist that was used for the South Terminal Expansion Project at SeaTac. There is movement of owner organizations toward inte- grated platforms to contribute to collaboration and full, long- term management of a facility from pre-planning to O&M. The design, construction, and many other industries are adopt- ing web-based collaboration tools and EDMS with the goal of significantly improving the flow of information between parties. If used appropriately, web-based tools can improve the timeliness, accuracy, and transparency of the information 34 being circulated so that decisions are informed by actual cur- rent conditions instead of outdated information. Recognizing this trend, many owner organizations are adopting integrated platforms to contribute to collabora- tion and full, long-term management of a facility from pre- planning to operation and maintenance. Ideally, these tools are selected at the start of a project and the entire team uses the same tools. Standardizing of tools across the entire team facilitates access to information and resolution of any issues that arise during the activation process. Activation projects incorporate input from multiple con- tributors to: 1. Track and report on the progress of construction/ commissioning and operational readiness; 2. Produce documents such as operational procedures and trial plans; and 3. Identify and resolve issues and deficiencies. Fortunately, web-based collaboration tools and EDMS can be configured to permit multiple users and contributors to documents and progress reports potentially improving the timeliness and accuracy of information shared between parties. In essence, these tools can facilitate an environment where all members of the activation team have access to the most current information in formats that are useful to them, which enables decisions to be made based on the best, most current, and most accurate information. Web-based collaboration tools and EDMS also facilitate historical archiving of information so that, when desired, reviews of previous decisions and documentation can be undertaken, which may be key to better understanding and resolving a particular issue. Ready access to this historical information facilitates conducting lessons learned sessions at critical milestones so that the processes can be continuously improved. Today, many of those involved with the design and con- struction of large projects use and are familiar with online collaboration tools and EDMS. This implies that much of the project data and information may already be archived in the system. Unfortunately, airport operations access to and familiarity with these systems is often limited. Additionally, the systems are generally tailored to the needs of a design and CHAPTER SEVEN AIRPORT TERMINAL ACTIVATION TOOLS AND SERVICES

35 construction team, as opposed to the needs of an activation and operations team. Therefore, the systems in use by the design and construction team may need to be reconfigured or augmented with a new system tailored to the needs of the activation and operations team. Before utilizing a collaboration tool or service to sup- port airport terminal facility activation, a clear understand- ing of the complexity and rigor of the processes involved is necessary and it must be possible to translate these processes into the system either in use or being considered. For some individuals working on a project, an online col- laboration tool or EDMS could be new, and training in the use and purpose of the system may be necessary. Many sys- tems are content driven and to get the most and best out of the system it is crucial that users regularly enter and update the appropriate data. Regular reviews and updates are con- ducted to confirm that the system is used appropriately; sometimes, additional training and/or support staff for the system may be necessary to get the most out of the system. For some airport terminal facility activations the appropri- ate level of automation may be limited; for others (gener- ally larger projects), a more automated approach may be appropriate. Team Lead Task Activity ID Activity Description Current Start Date Current Finish Date Baseline Finish Date Comments Andy C.06 Operational Readiness Trials C0601010 Develop Staffing and Budgeting Plan 02-Jun- 03* 19-Sep- 03 19-Sep- 03 C0601020 Develop Program Objectives 03-Mar- 03* 15-Jul- 03 15-Jul-03 A G F.01 Access Control System F0101010 Develop Staffing and Budgeting Plan 02-Jun- 03* 19-Sep- 03 19-Sep- 03 F0101020 Define Roles/Responsibil- ities of Other Entities 03-Mar- 03* 31-Jul- 03 31-Jul-03 F0102010 Define Badging Requirements 28-Mar- 03 31-Jul- 03* 31-Jul- 03* F0102020 Develop Badging Phasing Plan 28-Mar- 03 31-Jul- 03 31-Jul-03 F0102030 Identify Office Tower Elevation Access Requirements and Issue Memo 9-Jun-03 29-Aug- 03* 29-Aug- 03* F0102040 Review/Revise Access Control Policy 9-Jun-03 29-Aug- 03* 29-Aug- 03* F0102050 Develop Procedure— ID/Badge Office 9-Jun-03 29-Aug- 03* 29-Aug- 03* F0102060 Develop Procedure— Employee/User 9-Jun-03 29-Aug- 03* 29-Aug- 03* F0102070 Review/Revise Procedure—Senior Access Controller 9-Jun-03 29-Aug- 03* 29-Aug- 03* F0103010 Determine Service/Support Contract Requirements 03-Mar- 03* 23-May- 03 23-May- 03 F0103030 Review Specifications 26-May- 03 31-Jul- 03 31-Jul-03 F0103070 Develop Equipment and Spare Parts Lists 21-Jul-03 12-Sep- 03 12-Sep- 03 Danilo Simich, Parsons & John Christianson SeaTac (2003). Note: Shading denotes activity status (in reference to current finish date) Pale grey = Complete (as of June 30, 2003); Clear = On schedule; Darker grey = Due within 2 weeks (due by July 31, 2003). Vital TABLE 7 AIRPORT TERMINAL FACILITY CHECKLIST

36 When considering a collaboration tool, it is important that the following issues be considered: 1. Type and level of user (experience with EDMS and collaboration tools) 2. Type of information to be shared and exchanged 3. Level of information archiving necessary 4. Compatibility with other systems in use on the project; for example, the construction team may be using a similar system for document management 5. Processes for raising and resolving issues 6. Level of transparency within the system 7. Type of output; for example, graphical presentation of data 8. Level of version control 9. Consistency with project quality assurance processes and procedures 10. Security of the data being held in the tools 11. Potential use of information beyond the activation proj- ect; for example, O&M data, as-built drawings, and warranty and guarantee information.