Deferred Maintenance Reporting for Federal Facilities: Meeting the Requirements of Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board Standard Number 6, as Amended (2001)

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.

DEFINITIONAL ISSUES AND POTENTIAL REVISIONS 35 Site 4 (0.20) (1) 0.2000 Utility systems (exterior) Not Applicable in this Example % CRV Systems 0.2465 * $4,500,000 = $1,109,250 Site 0.2000 * $250,000 = $50,000 $1,159,250 for deferred maintenance In this methodology, condition levels are tied to a fixed percentage of a facility's current replacement value. Facility systems values are tied to a fixed percentage of the overall facility CRV, which would not exceed 100 percent. The intent is to provide a model for quickly generating information for deferred maintenance reporting. NASA Dryden Flight Research Center Statistical Model This approach is based on a procedure developed by Mr. Gregory Spencer, Chief of the Maintenance, Operation and Logistics Branch at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in California (EMR, 2000). The methodology uses an updated facilities inventory and a recently completed baseline condition assessment of all facilities and equipment to develop simplified condition codes and current replacement costs for all inventory items. Condition information for all equipment is kept up-to-date during the scheduled maintenance process that requires technicians to annotate work orders with the condition observed during execution of the maintenance tasks. Because recurring maintenance is scheduled on a one year interval, or less, the status of equipment is considered “real time”. Implementation of a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) is a requirement for this methodology. The CMMS database identifies all equipment and includes job plans, frequencies of maintenance, replacement costs, and condition data (a code from 1-5 is used identifying condition ranging from failed to excellent). A random sample of inventory items in each of five standard condition codes is selected. A detailed estimate of repair costs is determined for each item; this cost is then divided by the item's replacement cost, providing a weighted factor for each item. The factors are then averaged for all selected inventory items in each condition code, and the average is multiplied by the total replacement cost for all inventory items in that condition code. This figure provides an approximation of the backlog of maintenance and repair (BMAR) costs for all items in that condition code; the figures for each condition code are then summed to give a total BMAR estimate for the entire physical plant. For agencies with large inventories, using random sampling and extrapolation may be helpful in generating an approximation of the cost of the backlog of maintenance and repair. To use this method effectively, however, an agency's facilities condition inventory must be kept up to date; to do so in a efficient manner is resolved by noting condition by technicians performing maintenance versus the traditional “end to end” condition assessment.