National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Chapter 5: Selection and Implementation of an Airport CMMS
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 51
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 54
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 55
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 56
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 57
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 58
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 59
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 60
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 61
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 62
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 63
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 64
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 65
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 78
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 79
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 80
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 81
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 83
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 86
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 87
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 88
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 89
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 90
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 91
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 92
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 93
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 94
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 95
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 96
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 97
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 98
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 99
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 100
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 101
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 102
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 103
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 104
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 105
Page 106
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 106
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 107
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 108
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 109
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 110
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 111
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 112
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 113
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 114
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 115
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 116
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 117
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 118
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 119
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 120
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 121
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 122
Page 123
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 123
Page 124
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 124
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 125
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 126
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 127
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 128
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 129
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 130
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 131
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 132
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 133
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 134
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 135
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 136
Page 137
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 137
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 138
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 139
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 140
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 141
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 142
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 143
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 144
Page 145
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 145
Page 146
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 146
Page 147
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 147
Page 148
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 148
Page 149
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 149
Page 150
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 150
Page 151
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 151
Page 152
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 152
Page 153
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 153
Page 154
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 154
Page 155
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 155
Page 156
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 156
Page 157
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 157
Page 158
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 158
Page 159
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Appendices." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22103.
×
Page 159

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.

P A R T I I : A P P E N D I C E S 50

APPENDIX A: Glossary and Related Asset Management Terms A Alias An alternative name used instead of a primary name. Acquisition The process by which the airport comes into possession and ownership of a fixed asset (examples: purchase, donation, construction, eminent domain or foreclosure). Airport Property All property owned by the airport, whether purchased, leased, confiscated, donated received by eminent domain, constructed or annexed. Airport property may include supplies, real property, police property, capital assets and controlled items. Area The way the airport subdivides the airport campus into areas. The combination of campus designation and area designation may define the general location of a facility. As-Built Documents Final documents and records of the assets as installed. Asset Capital investments maintained by the airport’s accounting system. The maintenance department typically refers to an asset as any item of physical plant or equipment. It is used to describe items such as buildings, facilities, systems and components that are controlled by the airport and from which a benefit is derived. For industry purposes these items are considered fixed assets deployed or intended to be deployed in an operational environment. It is also the manageable object in a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS). Asset Life cycle The asset life cycle is the time span from when the asset is placed in service through its eventual replacement or disuse. How the asset’s life cycle is managed is dependent on the strategies and goals of its management. These strategies normally include training, maximizing utility, preventive maintenance, evaluation and when use will stop. A-1

Asset Management The systematic planning and control of a physical resource through its life cycle. This may include the specification, design, and construction of the asset, its operation, maintenance and modification while in use, and its disposal when no longer required. Asset Register A list of all the assets in a particular workplace, together with information about those assets, such as manufacturer, vendor, make, model, specifications etc. Assignment A labor requirement on a work order record that has been matched to an appropriate laborer. Attribute A characteristic or feature of a facility, system or component. Auto Generation of PM Work Orders Work Orders are automatically created based on some frequency (# of weeks, meter, etc. - whichever comes first). Auto Generation of Purchase Orders Purchase Orders are automatically created from a list of parts that have dropped below the minimum stock on hand quantity. B Backlog Backlog is the work that has not been completed by the nominated 'required by date'. The period for which each Work Order is overdue is defined as the difference between the current date and the 'required by date'. All work for which no 'required by' date has been specified is generally included on the backlog. Backlog is generally measured in "crew-weeks", that is, the total number of labor hours represented by the work on the backlog, divided by the number of labor hours available to be worked in an average week by the work crew responsible for completing this work. Bill of Materials (BOM) A list of all the parts and components that make up a particular asset. Blanket Agreement A blanket agreement is a purchase contract that specifies a vendor, a total dollar amount to be spent, and the dates between which the agreement is valid. Blanket Contract A blanket contract is a contractual agreement to spend a pre-determined amount of money with a specified vendor over a predefined period of time. A-2

Breakdown A breakdown is a specific type of failure, where an item of plant or equipment is completely unable to function. Break Down Maintenance (BDM) "Unplanned" corrective maintenance performed on equipment after the equipment has suffered a failure and has to be corrected during a break down of the equipment. Break down maintenance indicates a lack of planning. Building A building is a facility that has a roof, walls and a defined location. Building Automation System (BAS) This is a general term to describe a system used to monitor and control individual room temperatures, lighting and/or security. The system optimizes the start-up and performance of HVAC equipment and alarm systems. A BAS greatly increases the interaction between the mechanical systems of a building, improves occupant comfort, lowers energy use and allows off-site building control. Building System Scorecard (BSS) Assessment tool used to grade building systems based on established criteria. Business Process The defined set of business activities that represent the required steps to achieve a business objective. A business process includes the flow and use of information and resources. C Calendar-Based Maintenance A maintenance strategy where specified activities (typically preventative in nature) are undertaken on a pre-determined schedule at fixed intervals of time. Capital Spares Usually large, expensive, long lead time parts that are capitalized (not expensed) on the books and depreciated. They are often deemed as a "protection" against downtime. Computer Aided Facility Management (CAFM) Computer aided facilities management system uses computers to provide facility managers with the ability to track, plan, manage, maintain and report on facilities, systems and components. Change Order An update to a purchase order that is already approved or printed and that changes information such as quantity or vendor. A-3

Charge Rate This is the rate that is charged for a mechanic or engineer's time. In addition to the direct wages, it includes provision for benefits and overhead (such as supervision, clerical support, shop tools, truck expenses, and supplies). Claim A request for reimbursement, replacement, or repair for an item or an asset that is under warranty. Clearance The control and positioning of plant equipment for providing protection for personnel and equipment during work on plant devices. Component Element of a system that is managed, monitored or maintained separate from the system. Component Renewal Component renewal is the financial requirement associated with the replacement or renewal of a system or component that has reached the end of serviceable life and with an intended design life less than the design life of the entire facility. The capital/component renewal cost includes the deconstruction of the existing system or system components and replacement with a new system of equal capability and performance. Component Renewal Index (CRI) Indicates the relative funding required for identified component renewal and renovation/modernization needs. CRI is derived by dividing projected component renewal by current replacement value. Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) A computerized system designed to assist with the effective and efficient management of maintenance activities. It generally includes features such as work order management for the planning, scheduling and monitoring of work orders and maintenance needs. Condition Assessment Architectural and engineering due diligence assessment of an existing building and site that informs the property acquisition process. Evaluates physical condition, general code compliance, capacities/ adequacies, repair and maintenance issues, recommended replacements, capital expenditures, and provides corrective action probable costs opinions. It is also used to compare the conditions of facilities, systems or components to determine the effectiveness of maintenance practices, and compare the long- term functionality of specific facilities, systems and components. Condition Index (CI) An indicator of the actual physical condition of a facility, system or component. Each building system is scored based on a predefined condition scale (i.e. Excellent, Good, Average, Poor, and Fail) with a coordinating numerical scale and is totaled to determine the building’s overall CI. A-4

Consignment A classification type for inventory materials that are stored on-site but that are owned by an external vendor. The vendor retains ownership of the consignment items until they are used and paid for by the organization that is storing them. Contracts A written legally binding service maintenance agreement that defines what is to be worked on, how often, the costs, hours of service, what is covered (parts and/or labor), emergency service and limitations. Contracts are necessary as a method of managing airport vendors and costs. Corrective Maintenance Any maintenance activity that is required to correct a failure that has occurred or is in the process of occurring. This activity may consist of repair, or replacement of components. Craft A work activity performed by a labor category such as "plumbing." Craftsperson Alternative to Tradesperson. A skilled maintenance worker who has typically been formally trained through an apprenticeship program. Current Replacement Value The total expenditure in current dollars required to replace any facility, including construction costs, design costs, project management costs and project administrative costs. D Data Dictionary A centralized repository of information about data such as meaning, relationships to other data, origin, usage and format. Data Type A category of data. Typical data types are logical (true/false), numeric, alphanumeric (character) and dates. When data are assigned a type, they cannot be treated like another type. For example, alphanumeric data cannot be calculated and digits within numeric data cannot be isolated. Date types can only contain valid dates. Dead Date The date past the due date plus the grace period, at which point the component becomes inoperable. Deferred Maintenance Deferred maintenance represents curable physical deficiencies that are present on an existing facility, system or component and that have been deferred from the time frame that they were intended to be accomplished. A-5

Demolition Removal of a facility, system or component that has been determined to be unsafe or no longer meets, or is not required to meet, mission goals. Design Life Period for which a facility, system or component is expected to function at its designated capacity without major repairs. Direct Issue Item An ordered item that is issued immediately upon receipt to a work order, equipment, or location rather than stocked in the storeroom. Disposition The process by which the airport relinquishes possession and ownership of an asset or a facility, system or component. Documents Documents refer to the paper trail to support CMMS functions. These may include blueprints, receipts and contracts as well as PDF, pictures and other computer based images. Downtime The time that an item of equipment is out of service, as a result of a fault within the equipment or within the environment. The time that an item of equipment is available, but not utilized is generally not included in the calculation of downtime. Downtime Control Tracking causes of asset failures to determine whether the PM program is effective and making adjustments to it if found lacking. E Economic Order Quantity The optimum reorder quantity of an item, in the specified units of order, to be used as the default or standard reorder amount. The economic order quantity is a calculation of the optimum reorder amount that balances the costs of keeping inventory in stock and the costs of reordering inventory items. Emergency Maintenance A maintenance task carried out in order to avert an immediate hazard or to correct an unexpected failure. Emergency Work Maintenance work that requires immediate response from the maintenance staff. Its urgency is usually associated with safety, operational, health, or environmental effects. Emergency work is often performed without a requisite work order issued in advance. A-6

Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) EAM refers to the management of assets to the benefit of the organization as a whole and not limited to a specific area such as a department, location or division. It includes the entire process of managing the airport’s assets throughout its life cycle from initial planning, designed use, installation, training, operations, maintenance and eventual replacement. Escalation A course of action that is taken when a task is not completed satisfactorily within a specific period of time. Escalation Point A condition or threshold that must be met in order to trigger an escalation. Exception A condition or event that cannot be handled by a normal process. F Facility A structure or installation serving a specific function. A facility is a permanent, semi-permanent, or temporary commercial or industrial property such as a building, plant, or structure; built, established or installed for the performance of one or more specific activities or functions. Facility Condition Represents the current physical state of the facility, system or component. It is used to evaluate the conditions facilities, systems or components to determine the effectiveness of maintenance practices, and compare the long-term functionality of specific facilities, systems and components. Facility Condition Assessment (FCA) An inspection and assessment of facilities producing a complete account of system and component deficiencies and a list of remediation scenarios. FCA results inform maintenance and capital renewal planning. Facility Condition Index (FCI) A comparative indicator of the relative condition of facilities expressed as a ratio of the cost of remediating maintenance and repair backlog to the CRV. Facility Fixed Asset Any asset with a significant original value and will be capitalized. A “Facility Fixed Asset” can be a single facility or groups of facilities, a system or group of systems, a component or group of components. Facility Group The common features or characteristics by which a facility and its subordinate systems and components are categorized. A-7

Facility Hierarchical Levels A facility management best practice is to organize and maintain a hierarchical relationship between facility, system and component, sometimes called a parent–child relationship. Facilities have systems and systems have components. A facility can exist without related system records but a system cannot exist without a related facility. Likewise, a system can exist without components, but a component cannot exist without a parent system. Facility Management (FM) Primary function is to make sure buildings operate at maximum efficiency through the optimal integration of people, processes and technology. Includes HVAC, electrical, plumbing, lighting, cleaning and security. Facilities Management Information System (FMIS) The integration of several computer systems that are each designed to perform a specific function. An example would be the integration of an electronic document management system and a Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) to manage facilities and the associated information. Facility Registry The database of information about airport facilities, systems and components and their location, attributes, characteristics and condition. Facility Criticality: The ranked importance of a facility to an airport’s mission. Failure A breakdown or decline in the performance of a facility, system or component. Note that "failure" is an event, as distinguished from "fault" which is a "state." Failure Class The highest level of a failure hierarchy. Failure Code An alphanumeric code typically entered against a work order in a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS), which indicates the failure cause (e.g. lack of lubrication, metal fatigue, etc.). These codes are employed to facilitate analysis of plant history. Failure Hierarchy A tree structure that shows relationships between identified problems, causes, and remedies for asset and operating location failures. Failure hierarchies are built from the top level, the failure class, down. Feature A physical object, such as a guardrail or mile marker, that is associated with one or more linear assets, but which does not have a unique ID. A-8

First Cost The cost to acquire (construct or purchase) a facility, system or component. First-in First-out Costing A method of cost accounting that can be used to make an inventory valuation, based on actual receipt costs. First-in first-out costing uses the "first in" (oldest) item cost for inventory transactions. G GIS Geographic Information System (GIS) The combination of cartography and technology to create and analyze spatial information about geographic features. Mapping data can be accessed, transferred, manipulated, overlaid, processed and displayed. Geospatial Geospatial is a term most often associated with advanced mapping techniques by merging imagery, maps, charts, and environmental data into sophisticated 3d images. Global Positioning System (GPS) The Global Positioning System is a U.S. space-based worldwide radio navigation system made up of three parts: satellites, control stations and receivers). Receivers are then able to provide a three- dimensional location (latitude, longitude, and altitude). H Hard Reservation A firm request for items from a storeroom that is defined by the need for the items within a specific time frame. A hard reservation reduces the available balance of items. Hard reservations are prioritized and cannot be superseded by other reservation types. I Incident An event that is not part of the standard operation of a service and causes or can cause a disruption to or a reduction in the quality of services and customer productivity and results in an emergency service request that must be addressed immediately. An incident report is entered into as a high priority service request. Inspections An inspection is the act of examining assets in order to determine their condition by checking on known issues, answering checklist questions, observing and documenting changes and making recommendations or scheduling maintenance. Inspections are a form of preventive maintenance. A-9

Inventory In accounting terms, inventory is a record of current assets, which includes property and equipment owned (counting parts in stock, value of work in progress, and work completed but not sold). In maintenance terms it is frequently used to describe the list of equipment and spare parts currently held in stock. Inventory Management The process by which inventory is controlled. Typically, this includes tracking usage of stock items, Optimization of stock levels and Control of costs. Invoice The bill for services or products provided to a customer. The invoice includes all charges associated with the services or products provided. Issue Unit The quantity of an item that is considered a single item; for example, gloves are issued in pairs. The issue unit might be different from the order unit. Item Inventory that might be part of an asset, but which is not strictly monitored, and whose cost is less than an asset. J Job Plan A detailed description of how to implement or undertake a maintenance activity. The description includes a list of work steps (tasks) and the typical resources (labor, material, equipment) needed to perform the work steps. K Key Performance Indicator (KPI) A measurement of specific actual performance that will be compared to a specific targeted performance criteria. L Labor A person who carries out a specific job (a labor performs a craft). Laborer A human resource within a crew. A-10

Labor Record A document that contains information about a worker, such as craft, skill level, hours worked, and certifications. A labor record cannot exist without a corresponding person record. Last-in First-out Costing A method of cost accounting that can be used to make an inventory valuation, based on actual receipt costs. Last-in first-out costing uses the "last in" (newest) item cost for inventory transactions. Lead Time The amount of time between placing an order and receiving the items. Legislatively Mandated Deficiencies that must be corrected in response to regulatory or code requirements. These activities include retrofitting for code compliance, accessibility and removing hazardous materials such as asbestos and underground storage tanks. Linear Asset An asset that is maintained in segments, such as a road, pipeline, or railroad track. Measurements are made along the linear asset to specify work, monitoring, metering, or placement of signs. Linear Segment The span of a linear asset that is defined by a start and an end measure. The span can be the entire length of the linear asset or any continuous part of it. Location A place where assets are operated, stored, or repaired. The coordinate, name or address that uniquely locates a facility, system or component. Lockout-Tagout (LOTO) A safety procedure used with dangerous machines to ensure machines are properly shut down and started to prevent injury or death. M Maintenance Any activity carried out on an asset in order to ensure that the asset continues to perform its intended functions, or to repair the equipment. Note that modifications are not maintenance, even though they may be carried out by maintenance personnel. Maintenance Categories Maintenance categories describe the primary function of the maintenance activity. Examples of maintenance categories may include the following: inspection, condition monitoring, non-destructive testing, overhauls, and faultfinding. A-11

Maintenance Contractor Expenses Cost of labor and material for contracted maintenance services. This does not include contract labor for capital projects. (Total) Maintenance Cost All direct and indirect costs regarding maintenance activities. Direct costs are costs charged to a maintenance budget as fixed costs (e.g. personnel, materials, subcontractors, and overhead). Indirect costs are related to loss of revenue due to unavailability. Maintenance Engineering A staff function whose prime responsibility is to ensure that maintenance techniques are effective, that equipment is designed and modified to improve maintainability, that ongoing maintenance technical problems are investigated, and appropriate corrective and improvement actions are taken. Maintenance Labor Expenses Direct pay for maintenance labor including overtime premium. Maintenance Management All activities of the management that determine the maintenance objectives, strategies, and responsibilities, and implement them by means, such as maintenance planning, maintenance control and supervision, improvement of methods in the airport, including economic, environmental, and safety aspects. Maintenance Material Expenses All materials, spare parts, supplies, etc., consumed for maintaining equipment and facility including materials purchased for maintenance by contractors and excluding materials for capital projects. Maintenance Repair and Operations (MRO) Maintenance Repair and Operations is the fixing of broken or damaged physical items. This includes any mechanical or electrical device. Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) The predicted elapsed time between inherent failures of a system or component during operation. MTBF can be calculated as the arithmetic mean (average) time between failures of a system. Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) A basic measure of the maintainability of repairable items. It represents the average (mean) time required to repair a failed component or system. Metadata Information about data; for example, a text document's metadata may contain information such as: document length, author, creation date and summary. A-12

Meters A PM Task Work Order can be triggered by some meter frequency (Miles, millions of units, hours, KM) Mission Critical Activity, component, service or system whose failure or disruption will result in the failure of business operations. Mobile Computer The use of a computing device while in transit. Mobile computers with CMMS systems generally refer to the use of handheld devices (handheld computers). N New Construction Construction that adds to an existing footprint or creates a new facility, system or component. Non-Operational Downtime Downtime that occurs when an asset is not normally in use. Non-Routine Maintenance Any maintenance task not performed at a regular, pre-determined frequency. Non-Scheduled Maintenance An Equipment Maintenance Strategy, where no routine maintenance tasks are performed on the equipment. The only maintenance performed on the equipment is Corrective Maintenance, and then only after the equipment has suffered a failure. O Operating Location A location type that indicates the presence of operating assets (as opposed to a storage or repair facility). Operational Downtime Downtime that occurs during a period in which asset is normally in use. The outage causes a facility, system or component to be out of service that results in operational time to be lost. Operator Based Maintenance Basic maintenance tasks performed by operations/production personnel. Typically such activities include cleaning and subjective inspection. Sometimes referred to as Operator Maintenance. A-13

Order Unit The standard unit by which an item is ordered that can differ from the issue unit. Outage Term used in some industries that is equivalent to a planned shutdown. A period of time during which there is a complete planned production stoppage. Overrun A situation where a planned event takes longer to complete than was planned. For example, an overrun occurs when an asset was planned to be in maintenance for 5 days but it actually takes 6 days. P Physical Deficiencies The presence of conspicuous defects or deferred maintenance of facilities, systems or components as observed during the field observer's walk-through survey. Physical deficiencies specifically exclude deficiencies that may be remedied with routine maintenance, miscellaneous minor repairs or normal operating maintenance. Planned Downtime Time when equipment is scheduled to be down and available for maintenance work. The calendar of an asset is used to calculate downtime. Planned Maintenance Any maintenance activity for which a pre-determined job procedure has been documented, for which all labor, materials, tools, and equipment required to carry out the task have been estimated, and their availability assured before commencement of the task. Planning The process of determining the resources, methods, and processes needed to perform maintenance work efficiently and effectively. Predictive Maintenance An equipment maintenance strategy based on measuring the condition of equipment in order to assess whether it will fail during some future period, and then taking appropriate action to avoid the consequences of that failure. The condition of equipment could be monitored using Condition Monitoring, Statistical Process Control techniques, by monitoring equipment performance, or through the use of the Human Senses. The terms Condition Based Maintenance, On-Condition Maintenance and Predictive Maintenance can be used interchangeably. Preventive Maintenance (PM) Maintenance that occurs on a pre-determined schedule. Typically includes inspection, testing, lubrication and minor adjustments. Equipment maintenance strategy based on replacing, overhauling or remanufacturing an item at a fixed interval, regardless of its condition at the time. The purpose of A-14

preventive maintenance (PM) is to increase efficiencies by reducing the amount of reactive work in relation to planned maintenance thus increasing the ability of management to manage work more efficiently and with greater flexibility. PM allows for the early identification of problems and significantly increases the life cycle of equipment, lowers capital expenditure requirements and allows for better planning of capital budgets. Preventative Maintenance Alert A message that indicates that a preventive maintenance work order is about to become due for an asset or location. Preventative Maintenance Record A template for scheduled preventive maintenance work. PMs can contain job plan and corresponding safety plan information that the system copies to work orders. Primary Failure A failure not caused either directly or indirectly by another failure or fault. Priority The relative importance of a task in relation to other tasks. Used in scheduling work orders. Proactive Maintenance Any tasks used to predict or prevent equipment failures. Project Record Documents Also known as As-Built Documents, these are the final installed and/or acquired asset construction records, including, but not limited to: record drawings and specifications, product data, samples, spare parts and tools, technical manuals, permits, certificate of occupancy, miscellaneous and record submittals. Property Condition Report (PCR) The work product resulting from completing a Condition Assessment in accordance with the Condition Assessment Policy. The PCR incorporates the information obtained during the walk-through survey, the document review and interview portions of the Condition Assessment, and includes opinions of probable costs for remediating the physical deficiencies identified. Purchase Order An authorized order to an external vendor or internal supplier. Purchase Requisition A written request that is issued internally to the purchasing department to purchase items, materials, or services. A-15

R Reactive Maintenance Maintenance Strategy to equipment malfunctions or breaks downs after they occur. Maintenance is mainly performed during irregular non-planned stops. It may be undertaken where equipment is knowingly assigned a Run-To-Failure (RTF) strategy, or No Scheduled Maintenance strategy. Recurring Maintenance Work activities that recur, based on normal wear patterns, on a periodic cycle of greater than 1 year and less than 10 years. Typical work includes painting, caulking, sealing, carpet replacements, tree trimming, sprinkler head replacements, curb painting, etc. Release Purchase Order A purchase order for a portion of the total amount or lines specified on an associated volume contract. Remaining Useful Life An estimate made by a qualified inspector, based upon observations and experience, on the number of remaining years that a facility, system or component will be functional before needing replacement. Reorder Point The point at which an inventory item should be reordered so that its in-stock balance does not fall below the level designated as safety stock during the lead-time for the order. Repair Any activity which returns the capability of a facility, system or component that has failed to a level of performance equal to, or greater than, that specified by its functions, but not greater than its original maximum capability. An activity that increases the maximum capability of a facility, system or component is a modification. Requisition A request for an asset, item, tool, or service. The requested entity can be procured from a vendor, or it can be acquired by an inter-departmental transfer. Reserve Item An item is placed on hold in a storeroom for a given work order, GL account, asset, or location. Room A space that can be accessed by a door and is enclosed by a floor, walls and a ceiling. Root Cause Failure Analysis (RCFA) Generally stands for a systematic procedure to investigate the root causes of asset failures (failure diagnosis). The diagnosis results are used in maintenance tasks as a proactive way to prevent repetitive failures. A-16

Rotating Asset A non-perishable asset that is tracked in inventory through its association with a specific rotating item. Rotating Item An inventory item for which each instance of the item is also tracked by its own asset number. Rotating items are typically repaired or refurbished, not discarded. Rotating Tool A tool for which each instance of the tool is also tracked by its own asset number. Routine Maintenance Task Any maintenance task that is performed at a regular, predefined interval. Run-to-Failure (No Scheduled Maintenance) An Equipment Maintenance Strategy, where no routine maintenance tasks are performed on the equipment. The only maintenance performed on the equipment is Corrective Maintenance, and then only after the equipment has suffered a failure. Also described as a No Scheduled Maintenance strategy. S Safety Stock The minimum inventory level of an item that should always be available at the associated storeroom location. Scheduled Downtime A period of time when the equipment is not available to perform its intended function due to planned downtime events. These include maintenance delay (delay after an interrupt is reported, but before anyone arrives to repair it); production test; preventive maintenance; change of consumables; set-up; and facilities-related downtime. Scheduled Work Order A Work Order that has been planned and included on an approved Maintenance Schedule. Segment A defined section of a linear asset. Service Level Agreement (SLA) A contract between a customer and a service provider that specifies the expectations for the level of service with respect to availability, performance, and other measurable objectives. Service Request A request for work to be performed. A high priority service request is also known as an Incident Report. Service requests are used to track requests for work that comes into the Airport Response A-17

Coordination Center. If the request for service requires cannot be resolved on the first response and requires additional resources, then a work order is created. Shipment Receipt Record A record that contains information about the receipt of materials at a location, for example, at a site or storeroom within an organization. A shipment receipt record contains details such as the quantity of items that are received, the date of receipt, and the locations of the source and destination storerooms. Shipment Record A record that contains information about the transfer of materials between source and destination storerooms, such as between two sites within an organization. A shipment record contains details such as the delivery method, the quantity of items, the date of the shipment, and the storeroom locations. Shop Work Order A work order that is created ad hoc by a shop for a discovered problem, as opposed to being created as a result of a service request or planned maintenance. Shutdown Outage scheduled in advance for maintenance or other services. Sometimes called planned outage. Site A work location, such as a plant or facility. Soft Reservation A request for items or tools that is not yet defined by the need for the items within a specific time frame. A soft reservation does not reduce the available balance. When a reservation is classified as soft, the item is available for eventual issue from the list of reservations. Spare Part Any component or equipment intended to restore a corresponding one in order to restore the original required function of the component or equipment. Standby Node A device that assumes the identity of a primary node if the primary node fails or is taken out of service. The standby node runs the primary node's workload until the primary node is back in service. Subassembly An assembled unit that is incorporated with other units into a complete assembly. A subassembly is a child asset. Sub-Room Rooms that can only be accessed from another room and have no doors directly off of a corridor (i.e. a room within a room). A-18

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) A computerized system often used to collect real-time maintenance information for monitoring and control of assets. Sustainment Cost The total of costs required to operate, maintain, preserve and renew the facility, system or component on an annualized basis. System A collection of components performing a specific function for a facility. Systems are logical elements of a facility that are unique in their life cycle and/or function. T Tag A physical label that is applied to an asset to indicate the device, its position, and the controlling authority. Tag Out Procedure The procedure for taking work assets out of service or placing them back in service to ensure a safe work environment. Task List In a maintenance inspection context, a task list provides directions about what to look for during an inspection. Tasks include inspecting, cleaning, tightening, adjusting, lubricating, replacing, etc. Tasks are specific, complete, and have a performance standard. Technical Record A record that maintains information that is related to an externally published directive or bulletin, such as an airworthiness directive or a customer service notification. Technical records are used in highly regulated industries to ensure that all regulations are properly implemented. Telemetry Telemetry is defined as the science and technology of automatic measurement and transmission of data by wire, radio, or other means from remote sources to a monitoring device recording and analysis. For CMMS this means the remote transmission of maintenance information. Ticket A record, such as a service request, incident, or problem report that can be routed and assigned a status. Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) The sum of the expenditures required to construct, operate, maintain, preserve and renew the facility, system or component over its intended design life with acceptable functionality. A-19

Total Cost per Acre (or Square Foot) A benchmark per grounds (for acre) or facility (for Square Foot) to track total expenditures relative to the size of the facility. It is the ratio of total maintenance, repair and replacement costs divided by total gross acre or square footage, respectively, of the facility. TCO Ratio The ratio of first cost to sustainment cost. Total-Productive Maintenance (TPM) TPM is an airport-wide management program that emphasizes production operator involvement in equipment maintenance, and continuous improvement approaches. U UNIFORMAT II Code UNIFORMAT II is a format for classifying building elements and related site work. Elements are major building components that perform a given function, regardless of the design specification, construction method or materials used. Unit A unit (of measurement) is a definite magnitude of a physical quantity that is used as a standard for measurement of the same physical quantity. Unplanned Maintenance Any maintenance activity for which a pre-determined job procedure has not been documented, or for which all labor, materials, tools, and equipment required to carry out the task have been not been estimated, and their availability assured before commencement of the task. Unscheduled Downtime A period of time when the equipment is not available to perform its intended function due to unplanned downtime events. These include maintenance delay, repair, and change of consumables, out-of-spec input, and facilities-related downtime. Unscheduled Maintenance Any maintenance work not included on an approved maintenance schedule prior to its commencement. Note: this is not necessarily a breakdown, rather a break in the schedule of maintenance. Uptime The opposite of downtime. It is defined as being the time that an item of equipment is in service and operating. A-20

V Vendor A person or company that supplies materials or services to another person or company. W Workflow The structured sequence of activities and tasks that are used to implement a specific change, release, or other process, including automatic routing and tracking of records for approval and other tasks. Work Inspections Either a situational review of the work site during preparation for an existing work order, or performance of a scheduled inspection as a work order. Workload The amount of labor hours required to carry out specified maintenance tasks. Work Order (WO) An instruction with the accompanying details and information needed to perform a defined scope of work. Work Orders are created when a service request cannot be resolved on the first response, or are created automatically for planned maintenance. A Work Order contains a description of the task, details of the asset, tracking number, date requested, due date, who it is assigned to, a priority, time spent on, inspection notes, and general notes/remarks section. Work Order Criticality Work order importance rating based on the sum of asset criticality and work type criticality. Work Order Priority Ranking of a work order based on allowable work initiation time. Work Plan A list of the operations, labor, materials, and tools that is required to complete a work order. Work Request (WR) A document/online form used for making the initial request for maintenance. Once approved, the document is normally converted into a work order. Work Type Classification of work based on business need, such as legislatively mandated or unplanned corrective work. A-21

Work Type Criticality The importance of the work in maintaining functioning facilities, systems and components. Sources of Definitions: • http://www.mintek.com/eam-cmms/glossary/#top • http://www.promaintainer.com/Glossary.html • http://www.cmmssoftwareguide.com/cmms-glossary.htm • LAWA FM Handbook • IBM Maximo Asset Management Manual A-22

APPENDIX B: Case Study Reports Case Study Report 1: Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Case Study Report 2: General Mitchell International Airport Case Study Report 3: Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Case Study Report 4: Southwest Florida International Airport Case Study Report 5: Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport B-1

Case Study Report 1: Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport CMMS Implementation & Use Synopsis Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) is a large hub operating a mature CMMS platform that is widely accepted and used by diverse stakeholder groups. The functional use of the system has expanded and continues to expand since the initial implementation in 2004. It is used to manage assets pertaining to: aircraft parking, ramp area, roadways, runways, taxiways, bridges, people mover vehicles, shuttles, drainage, fuel infrastructure, lighting, tanks, baggage, HVAC, plumbing, elevated bridges, parking garage/lots, passenger terminals, passenger-loading bridges, administration buildings, maintenance facilities, pump stations, wastewater treatment facilities, and signage. The airport actively manages all airside assets, but contracts out most of the maintenance functions inside terminals B and D. Interviewees • Jennifer Harris – ITS Project Lead • Keith Pachuilo – SEAM Manager • Ed Kitchen –SEAMS Coordinator • John Sutten – Sr. Programmer / Systems Analyst • Meryl Fisher – Senior Database Analyst • Scott Sizemore – Airport Operations • Jim Hewitt – Airport Call Center • Dawn Delaney – Airport Call Center Trainer The airport provided a tour of the fleet maintenance shop and the airport EOC and call centers to demonstrate the use of Infor EAM in the operations. Operational Assessment DFW uses Infor EAM to generate and track work orders, schedule preventive maintenance, track maintenance history, monitor asset health, track FAA Part 139 discrepancies and maintenance history, and provide safety management entries and workflow for maintenance. The Part 139 tracking and safety management entries are tied to work orders and are viewed within the context of work orders. The captured information is used for regulated reporting. Additionally, Infor EAM is integrated, either directly or indirectly, with the following airport systems: • C3 Portal for Airport Operations and Status Board • Oracle Financials • GIS • PropWorks Property Management System • Skire Program Management System B-2

Airport Description DFW, the world’s third busiest airport by aircraft movements, serves the Dallas/Fort Worth, TX metropolitan area. In terms of passenger traffic, it is the eighth busiest airport in the world serving approximately 60M passengers annually. DFW is the largest hub for American Airlines. At 18,000 acres, DFW is the second largest airport campus in the United States. The airport is the only one in the world with seven active runways. DFW achieved 200 nonstop destinations in 2013, including 52 international and 148 U.S. domestic destinations. DFW has its own police, fire protection, and emergency medical services. DFW manages Terminals D and E, whereas Terminals A and C are managed by American Airlines. CMMS History at DFW DFW began using an in-house developed CMMS in the late 1970s. The system was used until 2002, when the airport purchased and implemented DataStream’s 7i asset management software. The airport upgraded to Infor EAM after the purchase of DataStream by Infor Software Solutions in 2006. The original need for replacement of the in-house software came after the airport took over management of Terminal D. The planning for implementation was started in 2002 and completed about two years later. Business Case The system upgrade in 2008 was undertaken to better manage the airport’s assets in support of the Asset Management Departments mission: “The Asset Management Department manages the airport board's multi-billion dollar physical infrastructure by providing services necessary to ensure the safe and efficient operation of a world- class airport through core business activities of maintenance, repair, renewal, operation and special support.” The objectives targeted for accomplishment by the Asset Management Department were: • Development of the organization consisting of infrastructure planning and systems performance functions teaming with engineering and sustainability • Development of work standards and criteria • Improvement in work practices and work order management • Development of KPIs that track the maintenance of critical systems and infrastructure renewal funding levels for benchmarking to industry standards • Development of a five (5) year project-planning instrument CMMS Implementation Driver(s) The Director of Airport Development identified and championed the need for DFW to have a cradle-to- grave asset management system. An in-house developed system had served adequately for several years, however, it was limited in accommodating the airport growth that was occurring. Both passenger volume B-3

and physical space (Terminal D under construction) was increasing and future expectations were that DFW needed to prepare for that trend to continue. Also, assets previously supported by the airlines were transitioning to DFW control for ownership and maintenance. The increasing cost in labor resources to manage the larger number and greater scope of assets was significant. Better management of those assets required better tools for asset maintenance, repair, and replacement. Selection Process In early 2002, a Selection Committee of stakeholders was assembled to investigate the opportunity to recommend a new CMMS solution to replace the existing system. The highest-level requirement was to select a system superior to the current platform with enhanced functionality. Requirements were captured to support DFW operational processes for asset management. Resources in developing the requirements included the VP of Information Technology, VP of Airport Maintenance, ADE (Airport Engineers), and resources from Asset Management and Information Technology. Research and surveys of other airports were conducted to discover what CMMS software and applications were in use and successful. The research results were presented to the Vice Presidents. An RFP was developed and released in mid-2002. Evaluation of CMMS Solutions Using the business requirements, an evaluation matrix was prepared to determine the merits of one CMMS solution versus another. The evaluation was grouped by requirement categories and then detailed requirements within each category. Table B1-1 provides the highlights of the factors used by DFW to conduct the evaluation. Evaluation Category Factors Maintenance Management Functions • asset maintenance capability • preventive, predictive, proactive maintenance features • work order management • inception to close with scheduling, tracking, and material/tool inventory management CMMS Program Features • user customization • ad hoc query • data import/export • data and transaction archive • user friendly system interface • security and password flexibility CMMS Operating Environment • data points from proposing vendors on: • hardware platform • operating system • network requirements • storage requirements • supporting software • end-device requirements and options B-4

Evaluation Category Factors CMMS Vendor Data • background of the vendor’s CMMS experience years in business • customer base • support & upgrade policies • training • ability of the vendor to produce an evaluation copy of the software Table B1-1: DFW Evaluation Summary DataStream 7i (now Infor EAM) was selected as the system of choice and the contract award was completed by September, 2002. Implementation The implementation process began in September, 2002 and the estimated plan initially targeted implementation by November, 2003. Production “go-live” was achieved in December, 2004. Table B1-2 presents the services and functions provided by the vendor and the initial software implementation. Service or Function Description Base Administration System administration functions Asset Management Asset identification and management Work Management • Repair order • Routine maintenance • Response maintenance • Preventive maintenance Materials Management Material allocation to repair orders Vehicle Maintenance and Repair Fleet management functionality Data Collection Data import capability Barcode Ability to record asset identification through barcode scanning Mobile Capacity Access to information in CMMS through handheld devices Workflow Track progress and status of work and task process sequences Reporting Ad hoc reporting capability Commercial Maintenance work cost input Data Conversion Data migration service Data Integration External data access through application program interfaces Table B1-2: DFW Functional Components of Initial Implementation The implementation activities were developed by the vendor, reviewed with DFW project team, and then executed through planned tasks. The tasks were used to establish the project implementation plan. Some of the key tasks listed below were planned to be replicated as a secondary tasks or as multiple iterations as necessary to achieve successful start-up. • Future State Business Process Review • Configuration Analysis • Component Configuration/Testing • Integration Planning/Install/Test B-5

• Data Mapping/Migration Planning/Validation/Testing • Reporting Tool Training • Standard Operating Procedures Planning/Training • End-user Training • Train-the-Trainer Class Data migration was a challenge during the implementation. Even though new naming conventions were put in place for new asset data entry, the legacy system asset data maintained the naming and descriptive information when transferred to the new system. In the Infor EAM system, naming conventions are in two formats, one for mobile assets and another for fixed location assets. The implementation contractor conducted the validation of the data. In addition to the system vendor/contractor resources, DFW applied approximately 6 resources at a 70- 80% allocation during the 2-year implementation effort. Key Points The configuration of the organization/security table proved later to be an obstacle to allowing contracted maintenance providers use of the system. External users of the system were not considered in the initial security model. That critical decision was one that the airport would like to change, but the change requires a significant amount of work. DFW built the security table based on the existing organization structure that had all stakeholders and users under a single organization. When maintenance was subcontracted, the single organization model did not adequately support the airport’s processes. The configuration originally implemented has limited the flexibility needed to address the roles of subcontracting maintenance organizations. DFW is currently considering a reimplementation to address the single organization configuration installed. Also, the development of the asset hierarchy will be investigated for the need to adjust. For example, DFW chose to identify and roll up costs by facility with lighting, electrical, and plumbing assets comprising the facility assets. Airport Use of CMMS Organizations and the Use and Benefits of CMMS Asset Management Asset Management controls approximately 25,000 assets with more assets continually added. Most airfield assets (lighting, pavement, signs, etc.) are in-house maintained while a majority of other asset maintenance is contracted out. Terminals that are exclusive to American Airlines are maintained by the carrier. When the CMMS selection process was conducted, most maintenance tasks were in-house resourced. Since that time, DFW has adopted the use of contracted resources to manage and conduct maintenance tasks beginning with the custodial areas and progressing into other maintenance shop duties. In some cases, a contractor may be responsible for multiple maintenance contracts. Where contract resources are applied, the vendor is required to use the DFW CMMS system to enter and maintain work order information appropriate to the access and security level provided. The DFW Contract Coordinating B-6

Group manages contractor service levels. Figure B1-1 provides a sample of a DFW Contractor Performance Report. Asset and parts inventory tracking and procurement is not managed through CMMS. While some asset analysis is conducted through the CMMS system, true life-cycle analysis is not currently accomplished through the system. Figure B1-1: Example of DFW Contractor Performance Report Fleet Management Fleet assets are primarily controlled by internal resources. Contractors may be used to conduct some repair and service tasks, but the asset management process is controlled by the Fleet business operation. The ability to enforce processes through management support and a business user champion has enabled Fleet to maximize the use of the system and to continue to introduce new functionality that benefits Fleet asset management. All vehicles are commissioned through Fleet. No vehicle is commissioned for use by DFW if it has not met Fleet commissioning requirements. Commissioning includes the registration of the asset in CMMS. Fleet inventory includes not only vehicles such as buses, cars, trucks, and motorcycles (police), but also trailers, construction equipment, lawn mowers, landscape equipment, etc. DFW currently has over 1,000 assets in the Fleet inventory. Vehicles are measured for usage through metrics appropriate for the asset (mileage, fuel usage, usage hours, etc.) The assets are monitored for Preventive Maintenance through supervisor reports and Work Orders are initiated automatically for the required PM tasks. The Work Orders are monitored for status and completion. B-7

The ownership and authority of Fleet’s control on the PM processes has enabled Fleet to be the front- runner at DFW in using and maximizing CMMS functions and capabilities. The task management of CMMS has also enabled Fleet to streamline processes, reduce paper work, reduce hard-copy archived data, and produce analytical reports. Figure B1-2 provides a sample of a DFW Fleet Statistics Report Figure B1-2: Example of DFW Fleet Statistics Report. Airport Operations Call Center All calls coming into the Airport Operations Call Center (AOC) are entered into Infor EAM using a defined set of categories to identify the appropriate nature of the call. Basic information collected at the time of the call includes the customer identification plus some call record information. The AOC handles approximately 1,000 trigger points per day, of which 10% become Work Orders. AOC reports are usually generated automatically, but can be generated on-demand, and made available for distribution to predefined user groups. The use of the CMMS Tool for recording call data information is a critical part of the training that AOC resources receive. When call volume gets too high so that data entry of an operator falls behind, B-8

they are expected to record information as needed and follow up as soon as possible with updating the on- line system. Thick binders of paper documents and manual reviews have been replaced by the efficient functionality of the Infor EAM system. It is estimated that at least 100 man-hours per week are saved between the previous, manual method of call logging versus the current automated system. Continuous Improvement and Expansion of CMMS Use Since the 2004 initial implementation of Infor EAM and the replacement of the legacy in-house developed asset management tool, the growth of airport assets and diverging methods for asset management and maintenance have resulted in multiple ways of leveraging CMMS. In addition to enhanced asset management functionality, in 2006 the AOC has used CMMS to replace the Call Center Logbook (a PowerBuilder application) and has moved forward in applying the functionality to address Part139 compliance tracking as well. Figure B1-3 highlights the continuous improvements and expanded use of the CMMS over time. Figure B1-3: Continuous Improvement and Expanded Use of CMMS Software The interaction between the business resources using Infor EAM and the technology support resources has generated a synergy that, through the use of user defined fields and system capabilities, has produced enhanced functionality providing benefits of efficiencies and streamlined processes. Technical Support of CMMS Implementation DataStream (Infor EAM) and a contractor implemented the Infor EAM system in Development environment first. The implementation into the Test platform was also conducted primarily by the contractor at that time. DFW technical resources then engaged with the contractor in the move to the Production platform. After the first upgrade of the system was done by a contractor, the DFW technical and DBA team became responsible for conducting the implementation of all upgrades and changes. The Infor EAM system is established in three technical environments: Development, Test, and Production. The Production system data can be replicated as needed to the Development or Test platforms. The three-platform approach enables DFW to manage changes, testing, and training thoroughly and with tight control. Asset Management Fleet Management Airport Call Center Airfield Ops (Part 139) 2004 2013 Implementation Continuous Improvement B-9

Change Management Software changes and patches, whether to multiple layer servers, the database, or the application, are applied to Development and proven first. A copy of Production is migrated to Development so that real- time conditions and data are similar for both technical validation and business user validation of new functions. Testing The Development platform provides the first opportunity to test changes, new releases, and/or upgrades. Once satisfactory results have been obtained, the move to the Test platform provides enhanced testing procedures. Business users engage in the Test processes as well as contractors since they must use the DFW system. Training DFW uses the Test environment to conduct the various training programs for Infor EAM. Testing not only includes the internal business resources, but also is used to train contractors that will be required to interact with the system. The ability to replicate production data in the Test environment provides those being trained to use data that will be familiar to them. Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Planning Databases reside on Sun clusters. Storage and mechanicals are redundant. Failover processes and capabilities can be accomplished within minutes. CMMS data resides in locations near physical business user locations. On the application side, snapshots are conducted nightly as well as transaction logs. Proof of restore capability is evidenced by the ability to restore Production to the Development and/or Test environments as needed for testing or training. Disaster recovery planning practices and exercises are scheduled and executed accordingly. Regulatory The Infor EAM system has become a critical tool in the administration of FAA Compliance Part 139 reporting. The organizational structure of the Airfield Operations in place at DFW consists of: • Assistant Airfield Operations Officer • Airfield Operations Officer • Airfield Agents Inspections are generated as a Work Order through the CMMS Preventive Maintenance process or through observance by Airfield Agents. Also, AOC events may generate an inspection, if the situation warrants such. If inspection is required, a Work Order is created. For example, a bird strike requires the inspection of an airfield location and the removal of unknown debris. An “Inbox” tab presents a view of all inspections and status including those that have been completed. Through selection, each inspection record can be viewed in detail. Metrics are also available based on % complete summaries. B-10

An inspection Work Order status can only be raised to a “Discrepancy” level by an Airfield Officer and a specific Part 139 discrepancy code is required for data entry. Codes with standard abbreviations enable consistent reporting for analysis. Maintenance resources can look at Work Orders and find references to parts, conduct work, add comments, and change the status to “Work Completed Technician”. An Airfield Operations Officer, using a filtered screen of Inspection Work Orders, will check the repair for compliance. If it passes inspection, the Work Order status is changed to “Completed”. If the inspection fails, comments are added and the status is changed to “Release for Rework”. An FAA inspector can ask for a particular day of inspections information including a history of a Work Order or a summary of Work Orders on a given day. These audits/reviews are now conducted electronically through CMMS and have been accepted by the FAA as sufficient, no longer requiring hard copy, signed documents. Financial Concerns No financial concerns were raised at DFW. However, DFW conducted due diligence in determining the best licensing method for the CMMS platform and to ensure the proper level of availability to the system users both internal and external (contractors). Licensing of the system is based on concurrent users in Production. The Development and Test licenses are not charged to DFW. The Oracle database license is based on CPUs. Future Enhancements Airfield Operations currently have 3 hard copy “shift” reports using Excel forms, but are looking to build these reports within Infor EAM and complete the move to “paperless” capability. Also, Airfield Operations is researching opportunities to support the Emergency Operation Functions using information and data available in their CMMS platform. Lessons Learned The following lists the major lessons learned: • Building more granularity inside the configuration parameters causes more up front work, but will allow unanticipated changes to be accommodated later (this is much like leaving spaces between house numbers). • Define data fields at a granular level as much as possible. By going general at first and then trying to go more granular later, one loses the drill down capability on historical data. It is easier to start granular and then become more general later if necessary. Example: Closing Code should be precise and exclude “Miscellaneous”, “Other”, etc. • System configuration of both the System Security/Access and Asset Hierarchy should be flexible to accommodate the existing airport business environment as well as potential changes the airport may incur. As an example, the highest level of the asset hierarchy for DFW was a single organization. Group and users were defined under that single organization. When contractors were hired to manage particular assets, it would have been more convenient to put them in a separate organization, but this requires a reimplementation of the system. It is a significant enough issue that the airport is considering the reimplementation. B-11

• Invest sufficient time to ensure naming conventions and standard methods for identifying assets are thorough, consistent, and flexible for the future. • Workflow processes should be established and enforced at roll out or inconsistent data collection can result. Use the system to enforce compliance to the workflow. While, reports can show discrepancies or non-compliance issues, the system should embed workflow enforcement where possible and practical. • Multiple character sets: Flexibility in design is necessary. You may not be storing data in another language character set but it may be required to support the system. For example, it became necessary for DFW to support the system with two databases due to a need for the Chinese character set which was not recognized at implementation. • Estimated time frames to conduct upgrades vary, but typically an upgrade with no hardware changes or platform changes will take two months. Upgrades including hardware modifications may require a six-month duration. • The original data validation did not include airport IT support. The contractor was not an airport-experienced resource and definitely not DFW experienced. Data field terms, definitions, and expected use could have been better related to DFW business. Data validation should involve airport asset SMEs to improve the data quality for migrating information from an existing system to a new system. Keys To Success Business Ownership & Stakeholder Engagement From the inception of the CMMS initiative at DFW, the need for a thorough, accurate, EAM solution has been driven by DFW leadership and adopted by leaders of the various departments benefitting from an asset management tool-set. The DFW ownership has enabled the airport business to not only achieve a successful implementation and sustainable CMMS for asset control, but has also provided the momentum to broaden the use of system capabilities into other airport business such as Part 139 inspections and discrepancies as well as AOC control. DFW’s commitment to its 2004 implementation of CMMS has benefitted the airport in a system that is effective and considered critical to its operation today. Business & Technical Resource – Collaboration and Expertise Departments using the CMMS tool-set engage in ongoing collaboration through scheduled meetings, new initiatives, and brain storming sessions to identify opportunities to improve and enhance the effectiveness of the system. The airport has dedicated technology support staff to configure, customize, and develop additional functionality as the needs are identified. CMMS users are extremely comfortable and confident in presenting problems and possible solutions to IT, knowing that IT resources can quickly understand business processes and have the necessary familiarity of the CMMS capabilities. In addition to application support, the technical support for the application includes database specialists. System upgrades are the responsibility of the database personnel, not the vendor. Change Management The airport has three environments for the system; Development, Test, and Production. Changes must have successfully worked in Development and thoroughly tested by system users (not IT staff) before they are implemented in production. The investment in hardware cost to establish the Development and B-12

Test environments, the risk of problems resulting from an upgrade or enhancements are significantly reduced. Applicability to Other Airports Most large airports will align with DFW in the need for efficiently managing the variety, complexity of assets in their operational environment. Airports will also be similar to DFW in using multiple methods for managing and conducting asset maintenance and repairs through both internal resources and contracted vendors. Airports will be at different stages in the use of CMMS from nothing at all, to limited functionality through application software, to full-blown CMMS platforms. DFW provides a perspective on a mature system that continues to implement added and enhanced functionality to their operational users and even new user groups. Airports will be able to leverage DFW’s experience in not only a successful CMMS implementation, but also in their approach for a sustainable, continuously improving system that the DFW system users embrace and depend upon. B-13

Case Study Report 2: General Mitchell International Airport CMMS Implementation & Use Synopsis General Mitchell International Airport (MKE) is a medium-sized airport. It was chosen for a case study to provide information on an innovative implementation of Cityworks, a GIS-based maintenance management system. The implementation of Cityworks at MKE, takes advantage of the airports mature GIS to locate assets on the airport. The system is used to manage all FAA Part 139 assets, the Terminal's interior infrastructure, and through a configuration of the application, the system has replaced a number of paper reports with a digital logbook and automated reporting functions. MKE's Cityworks configuration is the first of its kind to be approved by the FAA for automated 139 reporting. Interviewees • Terry Blue, A.A.E. – Deputy Airport Director, Operations & Maintenance • Timothy Pearson – GIS Coordinator • Kathy David – Airport Operations Manager • Jenny Tremmel – Airport Control Center Operations • Phillip Crow – Airport Control Center Operations • Neal Snyder – Electrical Shop • Tony Burger – Electrical Shop • Chris Lukas – Airport Maintenance Manager • Tim Brown – Assistant Maintenance Supervisor • Ken Skowronski II – Airport Maintenance Supervisor • Holly Ricks – Assistant Airport Landside Operations Manager • Jackie Boyd – Landside Coordinator • Ed Cyprian – Landside Coordinator • Kenneth Hanney – Landside Coordinator • Mark Loach – AECOM Project Manager Operational Assessment MKE uses Cityworks to generate and track work orders, schedule preventive maintenance, track maintenance history, provide asset data via an embedded map service, maintain control center logbook entries, track Part 139 discrepancies, and generate automated reports including but not limited to incidents, NOTAMS, and Part 139. Airport Description General Mitchell International Airport is named for Brigadier General William “Billy” Mitchell, a leader in establishing the US air force during the First World War. After the war, he was made Chief of B-14

Air Service of the Group of Armies, the top command post at the time for aviation. General Mitchell was a tireless proponent of aviation’s future in its earliest days. MKE provides nonstop flights to more than thirty cities. It serves Wisconsin, Northern Illinois & Chicago and is the only local regional airport served by all major domestic airlines. MKE is just over an hour’s drive from Chicago O’Hare International Airport, providing an alternative to Chicago’s airports for residents of Northern Illinois. The airport also hosts the Wisconsin 128th Air National Guard base. MKE covers an area of 2,180 acres that contains five runways ranging in length from 4,183 to 9,690 ft. CMMS History at MKE Since the late 1980s, the airport managed its work orders with an underdeveloped and underutilized application (eMaint). In 2010, MKE, as part of an enterprise Geographic Information System (GIS) development, had evaluated, selected, and started to develop a CMMS based around the Cityworks software. In late 2011, a catastrophic system failure caused the loss of many work order records and the corruption of the eMaint application. Fortunately, the airport had already developed the replacement system and was within weeks of a pilot program and implementation. It took just 4 days for the airports Cityworks team to put the application into production. One of the essential requirements for the CMMS was that it would integrate with the airports existing GIS, which was already a mature system (first implementation started in 1997). The core GIS database is built on the FAA GIS data standards (AC 5300-18B). It contains everything from lights, signs, navigational aids, security features, pavement, and other airport-specific features. The staff utilized at MKE is comprised of a GIS Coordinator, GIS Data Specialist, and a small team of programmers from AECOM, who were contracted to support the overall enterprise system development including Cityworks configurations, custom database triggers, report development, and data support. Business Case The airport’s Deputy Director of Operations and Maintenance realized the need for better tracking of maintenance tasks, tenant responsibilities, material and equipment costs, and, in turn, billing amounts. All of these could be configured and managed in the Cityworks application. Manual tracking was time- consuming and did not provide efficient reporting and tracking capabilities for the airport. The Deputy Director’s sponsorship of the project and his continued involvement in the development of new features is key to the project’s success. CMMS Implementation Driver(s) A group of airport Operations and Maintenance managers along with the GIS Coordinator, identified and championed the need for MKE to have an integrated GIS and maintenance management system. eMaint was used only to provide work orders and some maintenance tracking. Work orders were managed manually. Logbook entries were done manually in a notebook. Part 139 inspection reports were done manually at the close of each shift, printed, signed, and retained in a binder. Many copies of B-15

reports and multiple databases were kept by various departments. As a result, it was difficult to track events, or even to correlate them. Searches were manual, and descriptions – although similar – might be different enough to determine that an event in one system was the same as an event in a different system. The integration of that existing data with a maintenance management system had the potential to improve operational and maintenance related functions. Selection Process MKE assembled stakeholders from multiple departments and disciplines in an effort to clearly define their needs within a CMMS. Participants included maintenance managers, operations coordinators, control center operators, property managers, and senior administrative staff. They discussed processes for events at the airport to determine system requirements to support those processes. The sessions were often conducted in front of whiteboards and requirements were captured to support MKE operational processes for maintenance management. A consultant worked with the airport to capture requirements for a CMMS and match the requirements to available CMMS solutions. Those requirements suggested that a system commonly used by municipalities would actually work very well at meeting the needs of the airport. The consultant assisted the airport in choosing Cityworks for its CMMS. Cityworks provided flexibility towards configurations and good capability to integrate with the airport GIS, and by repurposing portions of the application, the airport was able to use a Cityworks module to provide an electronic logbook for the Operations Control Center (OCC) and automate Part 139 reporting. Evaluation of CMMS Solutions A consulting firm was retained to capture and develop the requirements for the airport. The consultant evaluated software to fit those requirements and provided the most cost-effective solution for the airport. The Cityworks application was recommended as the solution that could best satisfy the requirements of CMMS at MKE. After assessment of that recommendation, MKE decided to procure Cityworks as their asset and maintenance management solution. MKE was utilizing a second consulting firm (AECOM), to develop its Enterprise GIS and invited them to assist with the Cityworks implementation. AECOM and the GIS Coordinator modified the application to meet the specific need of the airport. A large part of this modification was the conversion of a service request module into an Operational logbook. Key Points The success of the system is due to several factors: • Stakeholder engagement is a critical and essential factor. The stakeholders of the system were engaged in development of the requirements through many white board sessions to identify processes and needs. • The airport has a small technology support staff to configure, customize, and develop additional functionality as the needs are identified. However, the GIS Coordinator is enthusiastic about the project and has given unparalleled support to the airport for this project. The consultant has been instrumental in providing the functionality for the stakeholders. B-16

• The ability to easily configure Cityworks was a deciding factor in selection. The application has been adapted to use a module (that the airport did not need) as an electronic logbook. It is used by the control center in lieu of a hand-written logbook. Part 139 asset work orders can be linked to logbook entries. A major feature of the implementation is that Part 139 inspections reports can be automatically generated. MKE performs an airfield inspection on each of its 3 daily shifts. The results of these inspections, associated work orders, discrepancy lists, and NOTAMs are all recorded in the system. This change to the MKE business processes saves a great deal of paper and time-consuming report writing. • The airport has a large number of its assets (>30,000) in its GIS database. Many of those assets were integrated into the CMMS. • The implementation was designed, and redesigned when necessary, to make staff functions more efficient. • The GIS Coordinator was requested to attend the AAAE Airport Certified Employee (ACE) Operations courses in an effort to improve his understanding of operations, 139 reporting, and the daily business processes of the operational staff. • Care has been taken to improve the efficiency of the user. If a particular form caused a user to take more time than the process that was being replaced, the GIS Office worked with the users to understand how to streamline the process and tweak the data entry to make it a faster and easier process. • The Deputy Director of Operations and Maintenance championed the need for an improved CMMS and factored in its success. Airport Use of CMMS Organizations and the Use and Benefits of CMMS The primary users of Cityworks at MKE are Airport Operations and the Maintenance staff. Operations maintains both the airfield and public spaces, including the terminals. The GIS contains not only airfield assets but also a number of terminal assets including detailed floor plans, room related assets, and associated objects such as HVAC equipment and utilities. Multiple map services can be accessed through Cityworks allowing users to see both interior and airfield assets. The application is used by the maintenance shops to manage equipment, materials, and track labor, and at the same time provide a basis for work orders and preventative maintenance tasks, as shown in Figure B2-1 (next page). The system is used by the OCC for specifically tracking and logging day-to-day operations. The OCC also uses Cityworks to record a number of digital logbook entries, as shown in Figure B2-2 (next page), for items such as incidents, wildlife strikes, airline issues, weather, staffing, and other data reported to the OCC. The system has been modified to meet airport-specific requirements by the use of custom fields, customized templates, and renaming of tables and records in the Cityworks database. B-17

Figure B2-1. Cityworks – Work Order Sample. Figure B2-2. Cityworks – Logbook Entries Sample B-18

The implementation of the logbook in Cityworks has eliminated two manual logbooks – one for Airside Operations and one for Landside Operations. In the initial implementation, the airport eliminated 22 paper reports for the Airside Coordination Center and 8 paper reports for the Landside Coordination Center. In addition to the Operations and Maintenance staff, Airport Security, Parking Operations, Property Management, and even the IT Department utilize Cityworks for maintenance requests and tracking or work. Safety and Security personnel use the system to track security inspections and work orders for security specific assets. The IT and Properties offices utilize the system to track work performed on tenant space, monitor tenant issues via the logbook, and communicate projects to the staff. Other users of the system, primarily for work orders include Parking Administration, ARFF, Noise Management, Environmental Management, and even MKE’s Accounting office. A key element to the system is the airport’s mobile components. The Cityworks application is available, wirelessly, to Airfield Coordinators using laptops and both maintenance and landside coordinators via tablets. Continuous Improvement and Expansion of CMMS Use The airport is planning to invest in the integration of a document management solution that ties to Cityworks, GIS, and CAD systems. There is still data cleanup to be done in the database. Camera locations, card readers, electrical panels, and some other assets are stored in the GIS and utilized in the Cityworks application. The system is still missing attributes for some of the assets, but the system holds locations for most. Additional staff has been added to the GIS office in an effort to develop and enhance the CMMS and GIS data. As part of the asset development process, the Cityworks application can be configured to allow end users to update both spatial and attribute information. This function allows the GIS office to concentrate on core assets while utilizing personnel that truly understand the assets to collect information on them. An example of this is allowing electricians to collect airfield lighting and signage attributes. Currently, condition assessments are only performed on pavement assets. The Wisconsin DOT performs an annual assessment of the pavement and provides the data via MicroPaver to MKE. The airport GIS currently tracks over 46,000 separate slabs of concrete in its pavement dataset. Technical Support of CMMS The GIS office at MKE provides primary support to both the GIS and CMMS. MKE staff consists of a GIS Coordinator, GIS Data Specialist, 2 data technicians, & 2 IT technicians that handle hardware support. A software programmer is provided via the contract with AECOM. Implementation The implementation of Cityworks began in mid-2010 and went live in late 2011. The go-live date was accelerated due to the failure of the previous system. The CMMS is used for asset and work management, incorporates airport workflows, and includes operational logs, Part 139 inspections, and multiple special inspections. B-19

Key Points The following list the key points: • Work orders can only be closed by maintenance supervisors or operations coordinators. The exception to this rule is that work orders for Part 139 work orders may only be closed after inspection by an airfield coordinator. • Documenting processes and setting up workflows can save a great deal of time and paper. An example of implementing a workflow at MKE is the “Alert 4” events. • If a person falls in the airport terminal and sustains an injury, an OCC coordinator will receive a call, enter the incident into the logbook, and then place a radio call to the on duty landside coordinator. A coordinator is dispatched and sends alerts to police and rescue. The landside coordinator adds detailed incident information to the same log entry including photos, statements, and private data. The incident is located on a map, witness statements are entered, and when the logbook entry is closed, emails are automatically sent to Risk Management, Safety, Security, and other key supervisors. This type of embedded workflow is just one example of how the system has eliminated numerous paper forms and reports from the airports daily business processes. • Another example of streamlining work processes is the automation of daily Part 139 airfield inspections. A process that once involved the tracking of paper work orders, recording of the information on a paper record sheet, and the maintaining of this and any supporting information for 12 months is now all digital. The Cityworks application utilizes a custom Crystal Report that incorporates data from work orders, log entries, and NOTAMS to create, auto publish, and store the Part 139 inspection automatically. • Supervisors in the system are super users with rights to create and close work orders. • All users are allowed to customize their Cityworks Inboxes, so that the opening screen for the application is tailored to the users’ needs only displaying those log entries and work orders that are relevant to their job functions. Training Training for Cityworks is done through three primary methods: • Training classes and personal training by the GIS Office • Customized training documents created by the GIS Office and their consultant • Peer training Change Management The GIS Office and their consultant provide change management for the application. Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Planning Databases reside on mirrored servers in multiple locations. Servers, storage, and mechanicals are redundant. Failover processes and capabilities can be accomplished seamlessly. Daily back-ups are made of the database and all servers. Disaster recovery exercises are scheduled and executed periodically. B-20

Regulatory The Cityworks system has become a critical tool in the administration of Compliance Part 139 reporting. A current Safety Management System initiative will develop integration with Cityworks to attempt to comply with the upcoming release of the FAA Advisory Circular for Safety Management Systems. Part 139 inspections are generated through logbook entries by the Airfield Coordinators. If a work order is generated to address a discrepancy, it is flagged as a Part 139 work order. The asset cannot be returned to service without inspection and sign-off by the ACO. All non-139 work orders can be inspected by maintenance supervisors. Once inspections occur, supervisors return the asset to service and close out the work order. MKE performs Part 139 inspections for every shift, 3 shifts daily. An FAA inspector can ask for particular inspection information, including a history of a work order or a summary of work orders on a given day is indicated in the report. These audits/reviews are now conducted electronically through CMMS and have been accepted by the FAA as sufficient, no longer requiring hard copy, signed documents. The report is also configured with embedded links between the report and live logbook or associated work orders allowing the FAA inspector a quick and direct way to evaluate any item on a report. Financial Concerns No financial concerns were raised at MKE. However, MKE conducted due diligence in determining the most financially effective CMMS platform and to ensure the proper level of configurability required to meet the airport’s needs, in the context of the available applications. Future Enhancements MKE plans to develop more workflow to support the maintenance processes at the airport, including addition of tracking maintenance costs (labor, asset use, inventory, etc.), as well as additional statistical and analytical reports for management. The Airport hopes to incorporate licensing and permitting into the Cityworks application and is currently in the process of tying their SMS developments to the Cityworks data. Document management integration will likely be with the County’s OnBase EDMS for plan reviews. Lessons Learned The following list the lessons learned: • Disaster recovery is a key element of system planning. • Training for staff is critical. • Correct entry of information is essential in maintaining the underlying database and in turn, the reports and processes that come out of the system. • Processes will change with the adoption of new workflows. Everyone must buy-in to those changes. • Get as many users as possible involved early in the requirements process. B-21

Keys To Success The following list the Keys to Success: • Stakeholder engagement was essential. The stakeholders of the system were engaged early on in the development of the application requirements. The team utilized many white board sessions and workflow process developments to identify processes, needs, and any additional data required. • The airport has a small technology support staff used to configure, customize, and develop additional functionality as needed. However, the GIS Coordinator is enthusiastic about the project and has given unparalleled support to the airport for this project and the consultants have been instrumental in providing any additional support to stakeholders. • The application has been configured to make use of an unneeded module as an electronic logbook. These log entries can be directly linked to additional entries and, in turn, to work orders. • A major feature of the implementation is that Part 139 daily inspection reports can be automatically generated. Work orders, airfield discrepancies, and any associated 139 requirements can all be recalled from the database and used to generate the report. • At the behest of the Airports Deputy Director of Operations and Maintenance, the airports GIS Coordinator was certified in ACE to ensure a thorough understanding of the stakeholder needs. Business Ownership & Stakeholder Engagement From the inception of the CMMS initiative at MKE, the need for a thorough, accurate, integrated maintenance management solution has been driven by MKE leadership and adopted by various airport departments to support their processes and eliminate manual data flow. The MKE ownership has not only enabled the airport business to achieve a successful implementation, but also has provided momentum to expand the system capabilities to automate Part 139 inspections reports, and to provide workflow and centralized data for numerous business processes. MKE’s integration of its GIS with its CMMS provides ease of use for airport users that encourages the use of the system. Business & Technical Resource – Collaboration and Expertise Departments using the CMMS engage in dialog with the GIS Office on a near daily basis in an effort to improve and enhance the effectiveness of the system. Therefore, CMMS users are extremely satisfied with the efficiencies that the system provides, and are complimentary of the support from the GIS staff. Change Management The small staff supporting the system makes the change process simple to manage. The GIS Office maintains testing and documentation of configuration changes. Any new functionality is tested on the production system, after prime hours of use. Daily back-ups are available for rollbacks in the case of issues with changes. Applicability to Other Airports Airports with mature GIS will be more likely to see the possibility of integrating a CMMS with GIS. The initial investment in GIS at MKE was started 16 years ago, and the maturity of that system was a key B-22

factor in the selection of a CMMS. The airport users universally applauded the mapping capabilities within the CMMS. The opportunity for MKE to develop an integrated solution for Part 139 was enhanced by the lack of an electronic logbook for the OCC. There was no need to consider the implications of integration, or to retrain users to different logbook software for the OCC. The benefits of an electronic logbook were clear to most users, but did there was some resistance to change in processes within the OCC. That resistance was overcome early and all CC users were enthusiastic about the improvements. The applicability to other airports that are manually recording logbook entries is high. Airports with stand-alone logbook applications will likely also find the automation and tracking for Part 139 discrepancies to be compelling. MKE is providing for a best effort Safety Management System integration, although it is not yet regulated. Other airports considering a Safety Management System implementation may want to include integration language in any SMS procurement. MKE provides a perspective on an innovative implementation of a system, specifically tailored to provide functionality not provided by other applications, and to integrate with existing systems to eliminate redundant data and processes. B-23

Case Study Report 3: Seattle-Tacoma International Airport CMMS Implementation & Use Synopsis Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Sea-Tac) is a large West Coast hub airport, with a mature implementation of a CMMS. Maximo, the software that was implemented at Sea-Tac, is prominent in the airport industry for managing and maintaining assets. The system is used to manage: wastewater treatment plants, pump stations and ancillary systems, maintenance facilities, administration buildings, passenger-loading bridges, ramp tower, auto shop, taxiways, runways, roadways, ramp area, aircraft parking, shuttles, operations support vehicles, non- revenue, electric vehicles, snow removal equipment, security, plumbing, IT, HVAC, electrical, communication, baggage, utilities, tanks, navaids, instruments, lighting, fuel infrastructure, drainage, FIMS, CUTE, CUSS, parking revenue control system, access control, parking structure, people mover stations, passenger terminals, parking garage/lots, buses for rental car facilities and employees (80 buses), electrical car chargers, and signage. Interviewees • Jennifer Mims – Senior Manager Asset Management & Logistics, Aviation Maintenance • Valarie Johnson – Planning Supervisor, Aviation Maintenance • Brendalynn Taulelei – Manager Business Systems, Aviation Maintenance • Krista Sadler – Manager Program Office, Information & Communications Technology • Delmas Whittaker – Logistics Manager, Aviation Maintenance • Deb Sorenson – Asset Manager, Aviation Maintenance • Kelsi Pothier – Business Systems Analyst, Aviation Maintenance • Charles Goedken, C.M. – Manager International Operations, Airport Operations • Dave Richardson – Airport Communications Center Duty Manager, Airport Operations • Terry Tucker – Maintenance Manager Field Operations, Aviation Maintenance • David Sanchez – Veteran Fellow SMS Project Coordinator, Airport Operations • David Crowner - Airport Operations Manager Operational Assessment Maximo is used primarily to support the Aviation Maintenance Department’s (AMD) work orders, preventive maintenance, and inventory. It has a larger role in helping the airport with a comprehensive sustainable asset management program, component renewal analysis, repair management and history, maintenance management and history, and reporting and dash boarding, all key factors in optimizing total cost of ownership. B-24

Airport Description The Seattle-Tacoma International Airport is located in the town of Sea-Tac, Washington, about 15 miles south of Seattle. The airport serves Seattle and Tacoma, as well as the rest of Western Washington. The airport is the most visited destination for vehicles in the state. Its 13,000-car parking garage is recognized as the world's largest parking structure under one roof. In 2012, the airport was ranked 15th in passenger traffic for US airports, serving over 33 million passengers. Destinations throughout North America, Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia are serviced from Sea-Tac. The airport is the primary hub for Alaska Airlines, and operates three parallel North–South runways that range from 8,500 feet to 11,900 feet long. CMMS History at SEA The airport began using Chief Advantage for work orders in the 1980s. An integrated solution, Worktech, was used for payroll and timekeeping. The transition was made to MRO, which later became Maximo. Maximo was subsequently purchased by IBM in 2006. That occurred before the airport did its last major upgrade of Maximo, from version 5.2 to version 7.1. The airport’s CMMS implementation has been through several phases, with a key phase identifying work processes and requirements for the system. With the last major upgrade, the Port of Seattle (Port), which includes both the seaport and the airport, consolidated their implementations of Maximo to minimize costs and optimize resources to manage and administer the system. The process of defining the common requirements for the system was protracted, taking about two years. The Port’s IT department also moved management of their assets to Maximo during that upgrade. Business Case The Port has taken a programmatic view of asset management, and uses Maximo to support that program’s goals. Before the last upgrade of Maximo, there was a reorganization within the airport. That reorganization impacted the AMD, serving to centralize some functions to optimize resources and efficiencies. This changed some processes within the department, including planning and procurement being done centrally instead of within each of the 16 maintenance shops. In addition, an Asset Manager’s position was created within the AMD. That role was created to assist the airport in analyzing the role that maintenance plays in managing the total cost of ownership for its assets. Proactive asset management for the airport focuses, not just on the total cost of facility ownership, but also on environmental performance. The capabilities of Maximo are required to perform the analysis and to provide optimal maintenance in support of Sea-Tac’s goals. On the way to understanding how to best use the system to support asset management at the airport, the Port asked the following questions of its staff: • What are our goals in using this system? • What do we have that we need to manage? • What are our processes? • Are these processes documented? • How do we want to use the maintenance management tool? • What information is important to capture in the system? B-25

This evaluation resulted in change management implementation and organizational structure changes. Processes were standardized and documented. Strategic goals were established. Training and performance measurements were key. An external audit that identified issues with assets was a major driver. Transparency was a major goal to improve AMD’s performance. • The airport has focused on using the system for its intended use in the AMD. Although integrating the airport’s inspection application, Airport Inspector (developed in-house) has been considered, the decision was made to defer integrations until such time as the integration would improve workflow. • The airport has a large number of its assets (>30,000) in its CMMS database. • FAA Part 139 work orders are running work orders on a monthly basis. Operations uses their inspection application to manage inspections and Part 139 inspections. Integration with Maximo was not done because of the large number of work orders that Maintenance would have to manage to manage fulfill the requirements of the Part 139 inspections. Integration was considered and deferred until a future time. • Integration with PeopleSoft procurement is an important enhancement that is underway. • There is a hosted Safety Management System for the airport. It is not currently integrated with Maximo, but exchanging data between the two systems is being considered. • Mobile applications are available for work orders and for inventory using a third-party product from InterPro called EZMaxMobile. It is deployed on IOS devices (iPhones and iPads). The product was chosen after an initial deployment of the Maximo mobile platform. EZMaxMobile does not require a separate Maximo mobile server to be installed. It is a mobile application with caching for information so that it works offline when Wi-Fi is not available. • Inventory and assets are tagged with 2D barcodes. • The AMD has centralized scheduling for its 16 shops. Maintenance planners and shop supervisors use a scheduling application (AKWIRE by Solufy) that pulls work orders from Maximo to assign and distribute work. • Current integrations are with the fueling system, vendor interface (PeopleSoft), and time and labor system (PeopleSoft). Batch transfers are scheduled periodically from PeopleSoft to Maximo for these systems. CMMS Implementation Driver(s) The Port decided to consolidate its implementation of Maximo across the airport and the seaport and include Information Technology, which was using a different asset and configuration management software. Selection Process There has not been a new product selected in the last several years. Success with the product, investment, and maturity in configuration, and user familiarity were some of the reasons to retain Maximo. B-26

Airport Use of CMMS The primary user of Maximo at Sea-Tac is the AMD, which supports 16 different shops within the airport, with about 350 personnel. Organizations and the Use and Benefits of CMMS Aviation Maintenance Maximo supports three key initiatives in the AMD: • Work management • Inventory management • Asset management Operations The Operations Department uses Maximo to provide documentation on work orders for FAA Part 139 discrepancies. In addition, the Operations Department is also a significant user of Maximo in their Airport Communications Center (ACC). The ACC utilizes the Maximo Service Desk ticketing module to log and track customer calls on emergent facility and system asset issues. There is an average of 1,200 calls monthly that go into ACC for maintenance issues, that are captured in Maximo and then routed to the Maintenance department for follow-up and action. This process provides another avenue for Sea-Tac to trend emergent issues being called in and identify any gaps in their maintenance programs. Safety Management Safety Officer uses Maximo to provide documentation on incidents for safety management. Technical Support of CMMS The airport IT staff supports the hardware and operating system for all airport systems, including Maximo. The AMD has staff that are responsible for application support in the following areas: • Configuration and change management • Customization and enhancements • Development of additional functionality as the needs are identified Implementation Data in the system is organized hierarchically by system and location on the airport. Unit costs and quantities are captured. Condition and remaining life can be assessed, based on age or observation. Condition modeling can be used to offset the high cost of observation assessments for lower priority assets. With the last major upgrade, the Port consolidated its implementations of Maximo to minimize costs and optimize resources to manage and administer the system. The process of defining the common requirements for the system was protracted, taking about two years. The Port’s IT department also moved management of their assets to Maximo during that upgrade. B-27

The last upgrade of the system was kicked off in 2008, and completed in September 2010. The decision to upgrade and consolidate Maximo was made at the highest level of the organization. The Deputy Director of the airport was a proponent, and internal in the department the general manager and senior leaders of the AMD were champions. The last upgrade had three components: • Physical infrastructure upgrades, including network hardware • Implementation of a new version of Maximo (5.2-7.1) and consolidation of Maximo instances for the Port, the airport, and IT • Enhancements: o Mobility (mobile applications for work orders and inventory) o Interfaces: − Payroll system − Vendor interface (PeopleSoft updates vendor data in Maximo) − Fuel system (Fuel Master for buses, and Phoenix Software for other vehicles) − General ledger updates to Maximo from PeopleSoft − New hires are populated in Maximo from PeopleSoft It was not possible to phase the actual upgrade of the system. The old system (version 5.2) and the new system (7.1) were running in parallel for about two weeks, but the old system was kept up in read-only mode, for reference, during that time. A hot desk, staffed by the CMMS support team, was maintained 24/7 for about a week. The hot desk was available for issue resolution and application support. Users could call a central number or show up in person for assistance. Change Management Testing The upgrade of Maximo to 7.1 was operated in a test environment before the cutover to the new version. After the cutover, the previous version was kept up for about two weeks in read-only mode for users to reference. Training There was extensive training for every staff member. Training was held no more than two weeks before the upgrade, and was conducted 24/7 to include all staff. All staff needed training because time reporting was moved into Maximo. Training was specific to particular roles within the organization. Training was developed in-house, with a training consultant to organize the material and tailor it to the airport’s needs. Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Planning All systems at the airport are backed up, and are represented in a disaster recovery plan. That plan is tested periodically. This is critical since most Port systems are running on virtual machines. Regulatory The airport uses the maintenance management system to track FAA Part 139 discrepancies. B-28

Financial Concerns There were no reported financial concerns. Future Enhancements Sea-Tac is considering future enhancements, including integration of the airfield lighting systems, GIS, and building management systems, with Maximo. Lessons Learned The following lists the major lessons learned: • The processes that resolve problems are long-term. There was a five-year change process to address the goals identified in the audit. • Centralized maintenance planners were hired to optimize resourcing. Scheduling was done in third-party software, but is integrated with Maximo. More efficiency between the shops, as well as within particular crews, can be achieved by using centralized scheduling. Centralizing the reporting structure for the maintenance planners made sharing of information, standardizing of processes, and sharing resources between the shops possible. • Getting projects to provide all the asset data that can be used to populate the asset database is a challenge. Some information is turned over to the airport when the assets are commissioned, but the forms that are provided to the contractors are generally not completely filled out. Keys To Success Sea-Tac realized that not only does software not make a maintenance management organization successful; but also that success results from having the right organization and processes in place to support the long- and short-term goals of the AMD. With the airport reorganization in 2006, the AMD was restructured to better and more effectively support airport goals. The implementation of the software was structured to support the organization’s processes and goals. The Port took the time to understand how it wanted to use the system. In 2006, the AMD took a timeout to understand how to use Maximo to support the airport processes. During that period, the Port evaluated its goals for use of the system, and made the changes required to meet its goals. Applicability to Other Airports Most large airports will align with Sea-Tac in the need for efficiently managing the variety and complexity of assets in their operational environment. Airports will also be similar to Sea-Tac in understanding the need to minimize total cost of ownership of assets over the asset’s life cycle. Sea-Tac provides a perspective on a mature system that has been implemented to support the maintenance organization’s goals. The tailoring of the system to support the airport, instead of trying to align the airport’s processes to the system, is a valuable message. B-29

Case Study Report 4: Southwest Florida International Airport CMMS Implementation & Use Synopsis Southwest Florida International Airport (RSW) is a medium-sized non-hub East Coast airport. It was chosen as a case study to provide information on a relatively young implementation of a CMMS. Maximo is the software of record, and is prominent in the airport industry for managing and maintaining assets. The system is used to manage: passenger-loading bridges, administration buildings, cargo, maintenance facilities, other ancillary facilities, elevators/escalators, aircraft parking, ramp area, roadways, runways, taxiways, bridges, drainage, fuel infrastructure, lighting, instruments, navaids, tanks, utilities, baggage, communication, electrical, HVAC, plumbing, security, elevated bridges, parking garage/lots, passenger terminals, and signage. Interviewees • Marvin Buford – Director of Maintenance Department • James Hess – Agent, Airport Operations • James Furiosi – Senior Manager, Maintenance Department • Robert Moreland – Air Traffic Controller • Angie Chestnut – CMMS Manager • Phillip Murray – Director, Information Technology • Margaret Crame Operational Assessment The system is used primarily to support the Aviation Maintenance department’s work orders, preventive maintenance, and inventory. The implementation is relatively young, and there is a desire for additional functionality. Airport Description Southwest Florida International Airport serves more than 7 million passengers annually, and is one of the top 50 U.S. airports for passenger traffic. Currently, eighteen airlines provide RSW with nonstop service throughout North America, and international service to Canada and Germany. CMMS History at RSW The airport used a Canadian airport developed system to issue work orders. The system was rudimentary and did not have good reporting capabilities. There was little history functionality, and the airport realized that the system did not provide the functionality needed to manage asset life cycles, preventive maintenance, and resources. B-30

The airport began implementation of the current CMMS in May of 2008. The implementation was complete in 2009. The implementation of Maximo was done by internal staff, a consultant, and the vendor. Maximo was chosen for its features and functionality as they suited the Maintenance Department’s needs. Its ease of use was also a primary reason cited. History from the previous system was not migrated to Maximo. CMMS Implementation Driver(s) Maximo was in place to manage the airport’s baggage handling system. Maximo was required to handle PMs from: • Johnson Controls’, Metasys Facilities Management System (FMS) • P2000 Security Access System The airport also required the ability to integrate with: • IDC Inventory and IDC Purchasing System • PROPWorks lease management system Drivers for the system included: • Need to manage PMs • Reporting for airport Assistant Aviation Directors to enable better decision-making • Need for inventory control • Better asset history to manage costs and plan replacements Selection Process The airport decided on Maximo because of its prevalence in the industry as well as a current implementation of Maximo at the airport to manage the baggage handling system. RSW hired a consultant to evaluate the requirements for Maximo at RSW. The evaluation began with an assessment of maintenance and inventory practices. Topics in this assessment included: • Asset Management • Maintenance Work Management • Preventative Maintenance Management • Airfield Management (FAA Part 139 and NOTAM) • Organizational Transformation • Purchasing/Inventory Optimization The consultant worked with the airport to determine the implications of the following topics on configuration and implementation of Maximo: • Location and asset hierarchy data • Work request and work order requirements • Scheduled maintenance • Purchasing/ inventory management (IDC interface) • FAA Part 139/NOTAM inspections, reporting, start centers, and key performance indicators B-31

• Failure hierarchy (problem, cause, remedy) • Interface (GIS, financial, and other) • Implementation project plan Airport Use of CMMS The primary user of Maximo at RSW is the Aviation Maintenance Department. Operations is a stakeholder for Part 139 work orders. Planning is a stakeholder for budgeting capital costs. Organizations and the Use and Benefits of CMMS Maintenance Department Maintenance Department, and the Assistant Aviation Directors, use the system to track work, build and view historical data, and track inventory. Operations Operations uses Maximo to provide documentation on work orders for Part 139 discrepancies. Technical Support of CMMS The airport IT staff supports the hardware and operating system for all airport systems, including Maximo. The Maintenance Department has staff responsible for application support in the following areas: • Configuration and change management • Customization and enhancements • Development of additional functionality as the needs are identified Implementation The implementation was multi-phased: • The first phase established logistics for the implementation. • The second phase evaluated maintenance business processes to provide the information needed to provide a blueprint for configuration and workflows. • The third phase was the implementation of the work requests/work order. • The fourth phase was the implementation of the preventative maintenance module. During the assessment, the following systems were reviewed for inclusion of elements and processes in the system implementation: • System Configuration & Administration o Configuration Change Process o Security Profiles o Workflow Management o Report & Query Development B-32

• Equipment & Locations o Hierarchies o Failure Codes o Systems o Asset Catalogs • Preventive Maintenance & Job Plans • Work Orders o Workflows o Work Types o Status Codes o Priorities • Inventory o Storerooms o Reorder Points o Categories o Asset Catalogs The following documents were reviewed: • Business Process Documents • Airport Certification Manual (Airfield Safety Inspection Checklist & Process) • Key Reports o Work Order Backlog o PM Planning o Inventory Utilization • Forms o Work Request o Work Order (if different) o Inspection Checklists o Material Requisition o Stock Request • Policies / Procedures • Organization Charts During the implementation, in phase three, asset data was entered into the system. Data in the system was organized hierarchically by system and location on the airport. Unit costs and quantities are captured. Condition and remaining life can be assessed, based on age or observation. Condition modeling can be used to offset the high cost of observation assessments for lower priority assets. Change Management Training Following the evaluation of requirements, the consultant-conducted immersion training session for Maximo based on the results of the evaluation. B-33

Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Planning All systems at the airport are backed up, and are represented in a disaster recovery plan. That plan is tested periodically. Regulatory The airport uses the maintenance management system to track Part 139 discrepancy work orders. Operations has a separate bespoke application into which work order information for discrepancies is entered. The Part 139 maintenance and airport operational reporting requirements included: • Airfield lighting • Navigational aids In addition, risk management required the following reporting requirements: • Insurance requirements • Property • Vehicles Financial Concerns There were no reported financial concerns. Future Enhancements RSW is considering possible future enhancements, including integration of Maximo with GIS, data exchange with Operations inspections application, and building management systems. Lessons Learned The following lists the major lessons learned: • Create well-defined requirements document before the procurement to ensure that the system chosen is adequate to meet the needs of the airport. • Create policies (e.g., who can close a work order) and procedures (to incorporate work flow in the software to efficiently manage the assets). • Include ongoing technical support in the budget. • Training is a critical success factor, and needs to be addressed in the implementation. Ongoing training is needed as the system and the use of it evolves. Keys To Success RSW realizes that software does not make a maintenance management organization successful; that success results from having the right organization and processes in place to support the long and short- term goals of the Aviation Maintenance Department. B-34

• The airport has focused on using the system for its intended use. • The airport has a large number of its assets (>10,000) in its asset database. There is an ongoing effort to capture additional assets for inclusion in the database. • Asset hierarchy is important to establish in such a way that makes them easy to find and manage. System hierarchy versus location hierarchy can both be supported. In lieu of a mapping component, the hierarchy is the way that users locate assets. • The airport uses a grid layout and includes the grid coordinates on the work request to locate issues, particularly for pavement and grass. They also use the grid coordinates for centerline lights because newer lights are difficult to engrave. • Price and price plus maintenance cost is captured so that the total cost of the asset is known. • Estimated replacement date and costs are used to project capital expenditures and operating budgets forecasting. • Airport is using the annual operating cost to gauge the replacement date for the asset based on the cost to maintain it. The airports plans to have Maximo do this automatically. Currently, reports are being run manually. • The fuel system (Megatrax) holds mileage data. Next year (2015), that system will be integrated. • All inventory and purchase orders are supported in Maximo. • Integration with the County’s One World JD Edwards financial software is planned for next year (2015). • The CMMS also manages inventory. When inventory drops to a minimum level, Maximo can automatically generate the purchase order. The integration with the One World JD Edwards software is expected to generate a purchase requisition within One World. • The preventive maintenance module issues PMs based on the periodicity of the PM. PMs can be hierarchical, e.g., 12-month maintenance of a vehicle is different than the 3-month maintenance, and it supersedes every fourth PM for that vehicle. • After four years, the Maintenance Department is still growing the capabilities of the system. There is still potential for growth in utilization of the software. While the currently used features and functions of the system have greatly improved reporting and management capabilities, the airport expects to continue to get additional benefits as the implementation matures. • The airport spent weeks of staff hours to input asset information that was available in spreadsheets and on hard copy documentation. • The airport has a good concept of operations for inventory management that has been almost completely implemented within Maximo. Applicability to Other Airports Most airports will align with RSW in the need for efficiently managing the variety and complexity of assets in their operational environment. Airports will also be similar to RSW in understanding the need to provide the right information to airport management to be able to better manage their assets. B-35

Case Study Report 5: Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport CMMS Implementation & Use Synopsis Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (ANC) is a medium-sized airport. It was chosen for a case study to provide information on an innovative implementation of Cityworks, a GIS-based maintenance management system. The implementation of Cityworks at ANC takes advantage of the airports mature GIS to locate assets on the airport. The system is used to manage: ramp tower, administration buildings, cargo, hangers, maintenance facilities, aircraft parking, ramp area, roadway, runways, taxiways, bridges drainage, fuel infrastructure, lighting, instruments, navaids, utilities, baggage, electrical, HVAC, plumbing, security parking garage/lots, passenger terminals, people mover stations, and signage. The airport actively manages all assets, but pavement condition assessments are done by the Milwaukee County Department of Transportation. Interviewees • John Parrott – Airport Manager • Marilyn Burdick – IT Manager • Martin Pezoldt – Database Analyst II • Jonel Schenk – Analyst/Programmer IV • Zaramie Lindseth – Airfield Maintenance Manager • Larry Swanson – Manager, Facilities • Richard Swoboda – Building Maintenance Supervisor Operational Assessment ANC uses a custom-written CMMS that has been developed to meet the needs of the Airport to provide management for maintenance facilities, operations support vehicles, fuel infrastructure, lighting, baggage, IT, and other resources. Although the airport has considered off-the-shelf options, the system has been developed and tailored to meet the needs of the airport in a way that would require a great deal of customization from an off-the-shelf product. The Engineering Department manages pavement condition assessments with another system, Micropaver. Airport Description Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport is a major airport in the U.S. state of Alaska located 4 miles Southwest of downtown Anchorage. The airport is named in honor of Ted Stevens, the U.S. B-36

Senator from Alaska serving from 1968 to 2009. ANC is at a strategic location to serve US air traffic to Europe and Asia. It is less than 9 ½ hours from 90% of the industrial world. Due to its strategic location, cargo is a large component of the Airport’s traffic. The Airport is ranked second in the U.S. for landed weight of cargo. It is among the top five airports in the world for cargo throughput. UPS and FedEx have major distribution centers in Anchorage. To accommodate cargo, about 60 wide-bodies aircraft land at ANC every week. The airport operates 24 hour a day, 7 days per week. Of the approximately five million passengers who travel through ANC terminals, one third of them arrive during a three months period in the summer. That requires the airport terminals to have the capacity of an airport that would handle 8 million passengers annually. ANC also houses the world’s largest and busiest floatplane base, Lake Hood. ANC covers approximately 4,500 acres and has three asphalt paved runways from 10,600 feet to 12,400 feet in length. CMMS History at ANC The airport began using a CMMS that was developed in-house in 1996. It was developed in conjunction with an Airport Information System (AIS), also under development at the same time. The first application for AIS was “Lost & Found,” to track items for the badging office. The first maintenance application written was “Work Orders,” in 1998. Airfield Maintenance quickly became the primary stakeholder and sponsor for the project, and worked directly with Airport IT staff to define requirements. ANC’s Airfield Maintenance department provides maintenance for aircraft movement areas, public roads, walkways, and other exterior airport infrastructure. Airfield Maintenance also provides management of all vehicles and heavy equipment owned by ANC. In addition, they use AIS for preventive maintenance, tracking assets (and inventory), resource management, and other related functions. Airfield Maintenance is subdivided into Field Maintenance, Equipment Maintenance, and Airfield Electricians. Within each of these sections are several other specialized shops including the Sign Shop, Machine and Welding Shop, Radio Maintenance, Parts and Supply, and OSHA Safety. There are approximately 110 users of AIS within Airfield Maintenance. AIS was developed to address the Airfield Maintenances department’s requirements and has been incrementally modified as new requirements have been identified. The current fleet of vehicles at ANC includes 395 pieces of rolling stock of all types including snow and ice removal vehicles, aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF) trucks, and light duty vehicles. Every year the airport replaces 6-10 major pieces of equipment and a few more light duty vehicles. The airport’s core snow removal fleet is comprised of about 20 front snowplows and snow blowers. An airport evaluation team was formed in 2005 to investigate the replacement of the AIS. However the airport stakeholders who were vested in the AIS were not convinced that a replacement would provide the same functionality at a reasonable cost. In addition, the work that had been done to incorporate workflow and required functionality within AIS would have to be redone. B-37

The costs for development of AIS, and all its applications, were limited to resource costs for airport IT staff. Over the last eleven years (2003-2014), approximately 80% of one full-time equivalent employee (FTE) has been dedicated to development and maintenance of the system. In prior years (1996-2002), the resource cost was approximately 50% one FTE. Business Case ANC has a snow season that usually lasts from October through mid-April. The snow doesn’t generally melt, but remains for the duration of the winter. The airport has been closed due to volcanic ash, a windstorm, the 1964 earthquake and, like other U.S. airports, for a few days after 9/11. There are no records that show the airport has ever been closed due to ice or snow. A maintenance management system is critical to being prepared to manage snow. In addition to having the right equipment, it is important that airports maintain their equipment and not try to save cost relating to crews and supplies necessary to managing snow and ice. As a state that is removed from the contiguous 48 states by thousands of miles, and one that has vast areas accessible only by air, Alaska’s livelihood depends on its airports. Maintaining assets is critical to keeping the airport open. The airport’s Airfield Maintenance department realized the need to track assets and preventive maintenance for those assets required to keep the runways open. When the decision to develop an internal system was made, it was replacing an obsolete system, Software Solutions Maintenance Management System. Internal development was seen as a cost-effective replacement option that could be built to accommodate the airport’s needs. The Facilities Department has responsibility for trades and crafts that operate and maintain all the terminals, buildings, vertical structures, and utilities. In order to protect the public, these facilities are required to comply with some of the most stringent national and international building codes, fire protection, ventilation, security, Federal aviation, and other regulations unique to an airport occupancy. CMMS Implementation Driver(s) The airport’s Airfield Maintenance department had previously maintained a database with preventive maintenance records for various pieces of equipment. However, that database was stand-alone and did not integrate with any other airport, or State, applications or systems. It was developed to work in conjunction with CMMS. The Assistant Airfield Maintenance Manager was technically savvy and realized that additional efficiencies could be attained through sharing information from other systems. He enlisted the IT department’s Database Administrator to provide solutions that met his department’s requirements. In working closely with the Field Maintenance department over several years, modules were developed in AIS to address the department’s needs. In addition, other airport applications were developed and integrated where possible. B-38

Selection Process IT worked directly with Airfield Maintenance to develop requirements were captured to support operational processes for maintenance management. The staff involved in developing the requirements was initially Airfield Maintenance, but later included Airport Facilities to include terminal assets. Evaluation of CMMS Solutions The decision to develop an internal solution was originally based on cost. Subsequently, the customizations that had been developed in AIS became compelling factors to keep the bespoke solution in lieu of off-the-shelf solutions. Key Points The success of the system is due to several factors: • Stakeholder engagement is a key factor. The stakeholders of the system were engaged in development of the requirements. The process has been incremental and addressed needs as they arose. • The airport has a small technology support staff to configure, customize, and develop additional functionality as the needs are identified. Originally, only one database administrator/developer was available to support the system. An additional programmer/analyst was deemed critical to long-term sustainability of the system and hired for system development, documentation, and support. • The airport has most of its assets in its asset database. Initial stock requests are issued, and on receipt of an invoice, assets automatically populate the asset database. • The IT staff responsible for the development of the AIS and the staff’s dedication to meeting the needs of the airport was another key point. Airport Use of CMMS Organizations and the Use and Benefits of CMMS The primary user of the asset and maintenance management applications, and of the inventory application, is Airfield Maintenance. Other airport users are shown in Table B5-1. Activity Tracking Asset Management Inventory Reporting Personnel Airfield      Facilities      Operations  Police & Fire      Badging   Safety  Development   Leasing     IT    B-39

Activity Tracking Asset Management Inventory Reporting Personnel Marketing   Environment  Engineering   Planning  Noise  Table B5-1. Airport Users of the CMMS The implementation of the system was organic, developed as needs were identified. The gradual development over many years has allowed functionality to evolve as users identified the ways in which the system could improve their effectiveness and make their jobs easier. That development has led to the development of other modules, as shown in Table B5-2, not specifically related to assets and management of them, but that interface with the assets and maintenance records. In some cases, AIS also interfaces with accounting applications utilized by the State of Alaska. Asset Management Activity Tracking Inventory Tracking AIS Reporting Personnel Assets Work Orders Stock Requests Equipment Admin Personnel Key Master PF Case Card Inventory Email Ticklers Employee Time Vehicle Permits Leasing Priorities Vendor (SR) Equipment Adhoc Safety Timesheets Facilities Inventory FMDailyLog HazMat MSDS Management Time Clock Artwork Inventory Sign Out Board GasBoy AIS Reports Dispatch Meter Readings Inventory Personnel Work Schedule Conference Rooms What’s Due Leave Calendar Engineering Drawings Mailing Lists Fixed Assets OT Reporting Phone List Training Log Activity Tracking Police & Fire Training Log Table B5-2. Additional Modules Activity Tracking allows the recording of work accomplished or any other situation in which personnel perform a duty that should be recorded. This is the most used function of AIS with more 40,000 Work Orders generated annually. Inventory tracking records the requisition, receipt, and distribution of consumables, spares, and stock items. This generates a purchase request; but purchase orders are done through the State of Alaska procurement system. Receipt of goods is entered into AIS through the stock request module, which B-40

populates inventory and asset databases. There are approximately 30 reports available in the AIS Reporting module. Ad hoc reporting is supported, using a third-party tool. Personnel reporting tracks information about both personnel at the airport and associated contact information. Mobile applications are used in the warehouse; and inventory is done by scanning barcodes on parts and assets. Technical Support of CMMS Implementation The IT department at ANC supports the AIS and the CMMS applications. Staff consists of a Database Analyst and a Programmer/Analyst. IT department is also responsible for additional hardware support. Change Management The IT department provides change management for the application. Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Planning Databases reside on mirrored servers in different locations. Servers, storage, and mechanicals are redundant. Daily back-ups are made of the database and all four servers. Regulatory The Cityworks system has become a critical tool in the administration of Compliance Part 139 reporting. A current Safety Management System initiative will develop integration with Cityworks to attempt to comply with the upcoming release of the FAA Advisory Circular for Safety Management Systems. Part 139 inspections are generated through process flow in Cityworks or through logbook entries by the Control Center staff. If a work order is generated to address a discrepancy, it is flagged as a Part 139 work order, and asset cannot be returned to service without inspection and sign-off by Operations. Maintenance then returns the asset to service and closes out the work order. ANC performs Part 139 inspections for every shift. An inspection report can be generated entirely automatically. An FAA inspector can ask for a particular day of inspections information including a history of a Work Order or a summary of Work Orders on a given day. These audits/reviews are now conducted electronically through CMMS and have been accepted by the FAA as sufficient, no longer requiring hard copy, signed documents. Logbook entries and work orders are linked to the reports, so that the FAA inspector can examine the process entirely electronically. Financial Concerns No financial concerns were raised at ANC. However, ANC conducted due diligence in determining the most financially effective CMMS platform and to ensure the proper level of configurability required to meet the airport’s needs, all within the context of the available applications. B-41

Lessons Learned The following list the lessons learned: • A single resource was responsible for development and support for the system. There is risk in having a single developer. If the staff member retires or takes another job, the airport would struggle to maintain the system. Recognizing this, the airport has hired additional development and support personnel for the system. • Documentation is important for users to buy in to the system. Departments not as involved in the development were more reluctant to use the system. That was in part due to the lack of available documentation. • Flexibility in the system architecture is key to system enhancements, expansion, and growth. Hard-coded parameters may limit the ability to change the system as desired for additional functionality. Keys To Success The following highlight the keys to success: • A key sponsor was responsible for the development of the system. • Because the personnel developing the system was an airport resource, budgeting was not a key issue. • The system has been in use for almost twenty years, and users are still satisfied with it because it was tailored to their requirements with continued improvements over time as requirements changed. • The relationship between the users and the systems’ support staff. • The system has asset management and CMMS functionality, but has additional enhancements not usually seen in a CMMS. Business Ownership & Stakeholder Engagement From the inception of the AIS and the beginning of a CMMS initiative at ANC, the need for a thorough, accurate, integrated maintenance management solution has been driven by an internal ANC sponsor and adopted by other airport departments to support their processes and eliminate manual data flow. Business & Technical Resource – Collaboration and Expertise Departments using the CMMS engage in dialog with the IT department to improve and enhance the effectiveness of the system. The airport has a small but dedicated technology support staff, to configure, customize, and develop additional functionality as the needs are identified. CMMS users are extremely satisfied with the efficiencies that the system provides, and complimentary of the support from the IT staff. Change Management The small staff supporting the system makes the change process simple to manage. The IT department maintains documentation of configuration changes. Any new functionality is tested on the production B-42

system, after prime hours of use. Daily back-ups are available for rollbacks in the case of issues with changes. Applicability to Other Airports The initial investment in CMMS at ANC was started more than in the mid-1990s, in response to the end-of-life of a previous system. The capabilities within the Airfield Maintenance and IT departments led to a collaboration that has worked well over the years. The functionality of the suite of applications within AIS, including the CMMS, is their specificity to the airport’s processes. The applications were built to support more efficient operations at the airport, to eliminate redundant data entry, as well as to automate processes. The ability to create unique software tailored to specific needs is undeniably a great benefit to an airport that can provide the development and support staff. ANC provides a perspective on an innovative implementation of a system, specifically tailored to provide functionality not provided by other applications, and to integrate with existing systems to eliminate redundant data and processes. B-43

APPENDIX C: CMMS Evaluation Tool – User Guide The CMMS Evaluation Tool is fully self-contained on the CD. Because it does not require that the user maintain any subscriptions to software of any kind, the tool will run locally on most personal computers or laptops “out of the box.” NOTE : Respondents can run the CMMS Evaluation Tool locally on their computers, by inserting the provided CD and running the autoplay option. .  A startup screen will open on the default browser.  Click the “Start Tool” button - A summary and instructions on how to use the Evaluation will show on the next screen (see screenshot following). C-1

Introductory Questions Every respondent will be asked the following introductory questions to initiate the interactive questionnaire process: Enter the name of the airport.  Click the “Next” button to show the following screen C-2

This question inserts the entity name – just as it is entered - onto the cover page of the List of Requirements that can be used for evaluating software options or for using in a procurement document. Enter the address of the airport  Click the “Next” button to show the following screen Enter the name of the person at the airport who is responsible for completing all steps in the CMMS Evaluation Tool.  Click the “Next” button to show the following screen C-3

Step 1. Determine which assets the airport wants to manage using a CMMS. To determine a best CMMS solution, the airport should begin by understanding which assets they will want to accumulate in an asset catalog for management in the CMMS, and the functions that a CMMS will support in their management of those assets. The first step to defining requirements for a CMMS catalogs those assets and functions, and prioritizes them based on a scale of the airport’s choice. The following questions are used to determine the different types of assets that the airport wants to manage using a CMMS, including: facilities, airfield, fleets, pavement, systems, airside structures, and landside structures. Refer to the Guidebook’s Chapter 4, Step 1: Choose CMMS Assets for more information.  Click the “Next” button to show the following screen C-4

 Select the Facilities Assets that shall be managed with a CMMS.  Click the “Next” button to show the following screen C-5

 Select the Runways, Taxiways and Roads that shall be managed with a CMMS.  Click the “Next” button to show the following screen C-6

 Select the Vehicle Assets that shall be managed with a CMMS.  Click the “Next” button to show the following screen C-7

 Select the System Assets that shall be managed with a CMMS.  Click the “Next” button to show the following screen C-8

 Select the Landside Assets that shall be managed with a CMMS.  Click the “Next” button to show the next screen C-9

 Select Other Assets that shall be managed with a CMMS.  Click the “Next “ button to show the following screen. Step 2. Decide How To Manage the Selected Assets in the CMMS From here on, the next series of windows will allow the user to identify how the airport wants to use the CMMS to manage the selected assets. For this purpose, a list of CMMS functions that can be used to manage asset will be presented. Refer to Guidebook Chapter 4 Step Two. Decide How To Manage the Selected Assets in the CMMS for detailed information. C-10

 Select the « Functions to be managed » related to the selected asset group (i.e., facilities, airfield, fleets, pavement, systems, airside structures, landside structures, or other assets)  Click « Next » to move the next group of assets  Once the selection of functions for the last group of selected assets has been completed, the prioritization task will start in the following screen C-11

The next task is to prioritize the “Functions” that can be used to manage the selected groups of assets. C-12

The following table explains the scale and helps the user to understand what is meant by “High”, “Medium”, and “Low”. High Mission critical requirement Medium Required eventually but could wait Low A enhancement that would be nice to have when resources permit  Select “High”, “Medium” or “Low” to prioritize the Functions for each of the group of assets.  Click the « Next » button Once the prioritization process is completed, a summary of all selected data will be presented, indicating if the information will be added to the List of Requirements (High priority), the list of items to be reevaluated for Cost Analysis (Medium priority) or to the Nice-to-Have List (Low priority). The following (see next pages) are sample summaries of Functions that will be added to the List of Requirements, Functions that will be added to the Cost analysis for reevaluation based on budget, and Functions that will be added to the Nice-to-Have List. The information is grouped by Asset type. C-13

C-14

 Click the “Next” button to move to the summary of functions that will be added to the Cost analysis for reevaluation based on budget.  Click the “Next” button to move to the summary of functions that will be added to the Nice- to-Have List. C-15

 Click the “Next” button to move to Step 2. Step 3. Determine Integrations The next step of the CMMS Tool is to Determine Integrations – see screenshot below. The CMMS can be integrated with other systems that use asset data, such as building management and SCADA systems, financial systems, procurement systems, scheduling systems, inspection systems, safety management systems, GIS, and CAD systems, among others. Refer to Guidebook Chapter 4 Step Three: Identify Integrations for more information. C-16

 Select the systems to be integrated with CMMS  Click the “Next” button to show the following screen and prioritize the selected systems integrations C-17

Using the same prioritization scale as during Step 1, the user can now prioritize the selected systems integrations  Select “High”, “Medium” or “Low” to prioritize the systems to be integrated  Click the “Next” button Once the prioritization process is completed, a summary of all selected data will be presented, indicating if the information will be added to the List of Requirements (High priority), the list of items to be reevaluated for Cost Analysis (Medium priority) or to the Nice-to-Have List (Low priority). C-18

The following (see next page) is a screenshot summarizing the systems integrations based on the user’s prioritization.  Click the “Next” button to move to Step 4. Step 4. Analyze Workflow Management Standard operating procedures within the maintenance organization exist for routine tasks and procedures. Those tasks may be documented and kept up-to-date, or they may be organizational knowledge passed to team members when they are trained in their roles. Whatever the circumstance, those procedures are the basis for the day-to-day operations of the maintenance department. Refer to Guidebook Chapter 4 Step Four. Analyze Workflow Management to identify workflows that should be analyzed for potential automation in a CMMS.  Type the identified processes for workflow in the following screens C-19

C-20

 Click the “Next” button to show the following screen and prioritize the selected processes for workflow C-21

Using the same prioritization scale as during Steps 1 & 2, the user can now prioritize the selected processes for workflow  Select “High”, “Medium” or “Low”  Click the “Next” button Once the prioritization process is completed, a summary of all selected data will be presented, indicating if the information will be added to the List of Requirements (High priority), the list of items to be reevaluated for Cost Analysis (Medium priority) or to the Nice-to-Have List (Low priority). C-22

 Click the “Next” button to complete all steps in the CMMS Evaluation Tool A List of Requirements is generated by the CMMS Tool. The output of the Tool suggests requirements to be considered for use, but should be modified to fit the airport’s actual requirements. (Please note: In order to fit the screenshot on one page, the list is truncated by cutting out material in the middle) C-23

C-24

Each page of the output generated by the CMMS Evaluation Tool can be printed to a local computer by clicking the button “PRINT this page of the Report” In addition, if supported by their local settings, users can specify if they want to save the document as a PDF file. C-25

Tip: A useful method for saving the output generated by the CMMS Evaluation Tool is to select the entire content, save it to the clipboard, then paste it to a Word Document. C-26

 Click the “Next” button after printing or saving the output of the CMMS Evaluation Tool.  A final screen will show next alerting the user that all the steps in CMMS Evaluation Tool have been completed. C-27

APPENDIX D: CMMS Feature, Functionality, and Capacity Feature/Functionality/Capability Required 1. Inventory Database a. Recording of data for each facility, system, vehicle, and all collateral equipment and inventory b. A unique identifier for each maintained item c. Grouping items by systems and subsystems d. Provide for storing of make, model, location, custody, facilities maintenance standards reference, facilities maintenance requirements reference, financial information, maintenance manuals, and standard reports e. Develop policies & procedures (manual or mechanized) to facilitate new data from various sources to be added to the database as new facilities are built or modified 2. Inspections a. Permit each item to have an explicit and unique inspection schedule and frequency b. Inspection checklists and guides, with linkages to work orders to account for any remediation needed as a result c. Storage for, or link within the system, to maintenance standards and drawings, prior inspection results, safety, current or pending work orders, and work requests for the system being inspected d. Storage for, or link within the system, to information on plans and coordination requirements e. Provide the means to report on inspections, their results, and associated work orders generated to remediate issues found to assess the efficacy of the inspection program 3. Preventive Maintenance (PM) a. PM scheduling b. PM work order preparation based on maintenance requirements c. Multiple levels of scheduling based on criticality, use, condition, or calendar term d. Coupling of inventory data, maintenance checklist, parts, safety requirements and special environmental concerns, coordination/outage requirements results of the last PM, diagnostic and maintenance references, drawings, special tool or equipment requirements, and special skill or trade requirements e. Schedule reporting for each week to provide planning for resources and summary schedules f. Capability to schedule future PM dates for increments based on actual completion of a previous PM D-1

Feature/Functionality/Capability Required 4. Predictive Testing & Inspection (PT&I) a. Analysis capabilities for PT&I results, process parameters (e.g., normal baseline temperature, pressure, flow, and other measures) b. Diagnose capabilities for possible causes of measures out of recommended range c. Display trends in test results, and schedule maintenance actions or additional inspection based on trends d. Automatic notification to operators and maintenance personnel for any changes, modifications, repairs, and/or improvements for equipment being maintained e. Monitoring capability for equipment environment, which could affect PT&I f. Ability to interface with PT&I equipment hardware and software 5. Proactive Maintenance a. Provide for analysis of data trends that are indicative for proactive maintenance b. Allow entry of historical data, including life-cycle costs and failure histories c. Maintain reference criteria (e.g., vibration tolerances, maximum allowable slope of the baseplate, and the required accuracy instruments) d. Record additional information (e.g., maintenance practices, PT&I monitoring periods, maintenance materials, and vendor data 6. Work Request (WR) & Work Order (WO) a. Tracking of receipt of requests for maintenance b. Tracking of planning and estimating, scheduling , internal execution, or execution by external contractor forces, and documentation of lapses due waiting for funding or incorporation of the work into a capital project c. Capability to provide WR or WO numbers with a combination of alphanumeric characters of adequate length d. Provide a means for all stakeholders to originate a request for maintenance 7. Trouble Calls a. Permit receipt and issue of Trouble Calls (TC) b. Accommodate data tracked by any related system c. Provide the status of TC tickets pending action, in process, and completed, escalation procedures, and customer feedback d. Intelligent dispatch based on location data of the TC, available staff, skill sets, and time of day optimized for cost and priority 8. Work Orders for PM, Repair, ROI a. Provide for the preparation of specific or one-time WOs for PM, repair, ROI, and other work that is of fixed duration and scope b. Integrate with WO estimating and scheduling c. Capability to search WOs by any field, e.g. customer, funding source, or tasks 9. Work Order Estimating a. Estimates for craft, time, material, local labor and material rates, local unique cost factors, and standard work tasks b. Integration with current estimating system D-2

Feature/Functionality/Capability Required 10. Maintenance History a. TC’s b. Service Requests (SR) c. WOs d. PM history e. Alterations, modifications, and improvements f. Inspection results g. Productivity measurements at the individual, trade, and organization level h. Backlog reporting 11. Material Management a. Material inventory (including high and low limits) b. Ordering based on minimums incl. inventory reserved for incomplete work orders c. Order tracking, receiving, issuance, reservations against work orders, and material status for work order scheduling d. Vendor and price data for stocked materials e. Purchase agreements f. Interface capabilities with t procurement systems g. Analysis of satellite storage areas h. Stock Room functions including finding parts, manufacturer contacts, parts catalog, part pricing thresholds, alternative suppliers, alternative substitute parts, part revisions, and bill on material structures 12. Tool and Equipment Management a. Issuance, inventory, and accountability for specialized tools and related maintenance equipment 13. Scheduling 14. Backlog for Maintenance and Repair 15. Contract Administration a. Support for contract preparation and administration, including tracking delivery orders, modifications, and payments 16. Utilities a. Support utilities operation and management, including estimating and reporting b. Direct interface with building monitoring and control systems, allowing changes in equipment operating parameters to automatically generate TC’s or other maintenance actions 17. Environmental Tracking a. Facilitate necessary tracking, reporting, and historical record functions 18. CAD/GIS Support 19. Priority System a. Provide for assigning work priorities b. Allow use of priorities in automated scheduling c. Enable helpers to be designated D-3

Feature/Functionality/Capability Required 20. Warranty Tracking a. Include provisions for tracking warranties on facilities and equipment b. Alert users when work orders (including SR and TC’s) are entered on covered equipment within the warranty period c. Track requested warranty work d. Accommodate tiered warranties and multiple warranties with different expiration dates on the same item 21. Management Reports a. Provide management reporting for airport managers’ needs and maintenance operations 22. User Customization a. Permit authorized user to modify, add, or delete reports, forms, screens, data elements, data definitions, and other features to meet individual needs 23. Ad Hoc Query a. Ability to perform a specialized or one-time query b. Permit use of multiple conditions c. Support use of information from different records d. Perform statistical operations on the query results 24. Data Sharing and Integration with other systems a. Potential interfaces include: i. Financial, personnel, accounting, supply, and other related automated systems ii. Part 139 inspections software iii. Safety management system iv. Procurement systems v. Personnel and payroll systems vi. Scheduling systems 25. Presentation Graphics 26. Warranty a. Support for patches b. Performance problems c. Annual support agreements 27. Service level agreements (SLAs) a. Transaction speed established for: i. Preparation of reports ii. Printing PM schedules, PM work orders or cards iii. Database searches e.g., WO status iv. Response for ad hoc queries v. Estimate preparation b. Considerations: i. Degradation with database size increase ii. Degradation with increase in concurrent users iii. Hardware recommended will support the required size and number of users D-4

Feature/Functionality/Capability Required 28. Transaction Recording a. An audit log of CMMS user and changes 29. Data Import and Export a. Ability to import batch data from standard formats, particularly from a previous CMMS 30. Bar Coding Data Interface a. Ability to accept data from bar code readers and print 31. Archive a. Capability to archive inactive records and data based on user-selection 32. Back-up a. Automated data backup and recovery features b. Support for multiple media types 33. Licensing a. Concurrent or individual user licenses 34. Capacity a. Number of records limited only by storage 35. User Documentation 36. Menus/User Interface a. Provide and easy, logical flow from one operation to another b. Permit keyboard shortcuts for expert users and menus for less experienced users c. Allow user to create custom menus 37. Error Handling a. Provide comprehensive error handling b. Data Validation, e.g., checking against limits or a list of permitted entries c. Protect the data from abnormal situations d. Error conditions should be ‘trapped’ e. Informative error messages should be given to user f. Data deletion should be subject to user verification 38. Password Protection a. Multiple levels of password protection b. View only, modify, enter, and delete c. System changes d. Creating and modifying reports, forms and data structure e. Apply to each of the several functions and databases D-5

APPENDIX E: Functions Checklist Functions Checklist for Each Asset Type High Med Low NR Facilities 1. Work orders 2. Preventive maintenance 3. Condition assessments 4. Condition based maintenance 5. Inventory management of spare parts and supplies used in maintenance 6. Suppliers of those spare parts 7. Tracking maintenance done through other entities 8. Documentation of warranties 9. Scheduling work 10. Maintenance costs 11. Chargebacks – cost for parts, labor, asset use, and contractors 12. Reliability and cost 13. Scheduling resources 14. Rollup of reporting by system and/or by facility 15. Mobile applications Runways Taxiways and Roads 1. Work orders 2. Preventive maintenance 3. Condition assessments 4. Condition based maintenance 5. Inventory management of spare parts and supplies used in maintenance 6. Suppliers of those spare parts 7. Tracking maintenance done through other entities 8. Documentation of warranties 9. Scheduling work 10. Maintenance costs 11. Chargebacks – cost for parts, labor, asset use, and contractors 12. Reliability and cost 13. Scheduling resources 14. Rollup of reporting by system and/or by facility 15. Mobile applications Vehicles 1. Work orders 2. Preventive maintenance E-1

Functions Checklist for Each Asset Type High Med Low NR 3. Condition assessments 4. Condition based maintenance 5. Inventory management of spare parts and supplies used in maintenance 6. Suppliers of those spare parts 7. Tracking maintenance done through other entities 8. Documentation of warranties 9. Scheduling work 10. Maintenance costs 11. Chargebacks – cost for parts, labor, asset use, and contractors 12. Reliability and cost 13. Scheduling resources 14. Rollup of reporting by system and/or by facility 15. Mobile applications Systems 1. Work orders 2. Preventive maintenance 3. Condition assessments 4. Condition based maintenance 5. Inventory management of spare parts and supplies used in maintenance 6. Suppliers of those spare parts 7. Tracking maintenance done through other entities 8. Documentation of warranties 9. Scheduling work 10. Maintenance costs 11. Chargebacks – cost for parts, labor, asset use, and contractors 12. Reliability and cost 13. Scheduling resources 14. Rollup of reporting by system and/or by facility 15. Mobile applications Airside 1. Work orders 2. Preventive maintenance 3. Condition assessments 4. Condition based maintenance 5. Inventory management of spare parts and supplies used in maintenance 6. Suppliers of those spare parts 7. Tracking maintenance done through other entities 8. Documentation of warranties 9. Scheduling work 10. Maintenance costs 11. Chargebacks – cost for parts, labor, asset use, and contractors E-2

Functions Checklist for Each Asset Type High Med Low NR 12. Reliability and cost 13. Scheduling resources 14. Rollup of reporting by system and/or by facility 15. Mobile applications Other 1. Work orders 2. Preventive maintenance 3. Condition assessments 4. Condition based maintenance 5. Inventory management of spare parts and supplies used in maintenance 6. Suppliers of those spare parts 7. Tracking maintenance done through other entities 8. Documentation of warranties 9. Scheduling work 10. Maintenance costs 11. Chargebacks – cost for parts, labor, asset use, and contractors 12. Reliability and cost 13. Scheduling resources 14. Rollup of reporting by system and/or by facility 15. Mobile applications E-3

APPENDIX F: Sample CMMS Vendor Assessment Matrix This is a ranking scorecard with sample requirements used to rank software from multiple vendors in a software selection process. Rank each requirement using a scale of 1-10 and tally scores for a total comparative ranking at the end. REQUIREMENT 1 2 3 4 1. Inventory Database Management. The CMMS shall permit recording necessary information for each facility and equipment item. It shall provide for a unique identifier for each maintained item and shall permit grouping items by systems and subsystem as well as providing for the make, model, location, custody, facilities maintenance standards reference, facilities maintenance requirements reference, financial information, and standard reports. 2. Continuous Inspection. The CMMS permit each facility or equipment item to have an individually determined inspection schedule or frequency. It shall provide inspection checklists and guides for the inspector, including appropriate facilities maintenance standards and drawings, prior inspection results, current or pending work orders and work requests for the system being inspected, information on future plans for use of the system, and safety and coordination requirements. 3. Preventive Maintenance (PM). A CMMS shall provide complete PM scheduling and PM order preparation based on the inventory and facilities maintenance requirements entered into the system. This includes multiple levels of scheduling based on criticality, use, condition, or calendar time. The system shall couple inventory data, facilities maintenance checklist, parts required, safety requirements and special environmental concerns, coordination/outage requirements, results of the last PM, diagnostic and maintenance references, drawings, special tool or equipment requirements, and special skill or trade requirements. It shall permit scheduling to the week, be able to give resource requirement reports and summary schedules. It shall include the capability to adjust future PM dates based on the actual completion date of the latest PM is a valuable feature. F-1

REQUIREMENT 1 2 3 4 4. Predictive Testing & Inspection (PT&I). The CMMS shall interface with PT&I equipment hardware and software to allow for downloading data and for CMMS support to the PT&I technician in setting sequence and periodicity and providing critical information concerning equipment and/or facility history. This shall include information for continuous inspection and include the ability to analyze PT&I results, process parameters (i.e., normal baseline temperature, pressure, flow, etc.), diagnose the possible causes of abnormal readings, project trends in test results, and schedule facilities maintenance actions or further inspection based on the trends. It shall communicate to operators and maintenance personnel any changes, modifications, repairs, and/or improvements not only to the equipment being maintained, but also to the equipment’s immediate environment, which could affect PT&I readings and other maintenance actions. 5. Proactive Maintenance. The CMMS shall provide for the processing of archived data that can be analyzed to identify the trends that are critical to performing the proactive maintenance function. Besides providing program metrics upon which management can base informed decisions, the CMMS shall have the capability of providing the following proactive program support: 6. a. Recording historical data, including life-cycle costs and failure histories of families of equipment, so that engineers can write verifiable purchasing and installation specifications for new and rebuilt equipment. 7. b. Maintaining a library of reference criteria for a specific equipment item such as vibration tolerances, the maximum allowable slope of the baseplate, and the required accuracy of the instrument used to measure that slope to support drafting precision rebuild and installation specifications. 8. c. Recording background information such as maintenance practices, PT&I monitoring periods for specific units of equipment, maintenance materials used, and vendor data for use by maintenance schedulers and by engineers investigating problems impacting system reliability. 9. Work Request & Work Order Tracking. The CMMS shall provide the capability to track the receipt of requests for facilities maintenance work or other work requirements received from any source from the time of receipt through final work completion. This includes tracking its progress through planning and estimating, scheduling, execution by in-house shops or contractor forces, and while any administrative or planning actions are undertaken such as waiting for funding or incorporating the work into a capital project. 10. Trouble Calls. The CMMS shall permit receipt and issue of Trouble Calls (TC). It also shall provide the status of TC tickets pending action, underway, and completed. 11. Work Orders for PM, Repair, ROI, etc. Provide for the preparation of specific or one-time work orders for Repair, PGM, ROI and other work that is of fixed duration and scope. This shall be integrated with work order estimating and scheduling. The CMMS shall be able to identify the work order by customer, funding source, and work breakdown structure. F-2

REQUIREMENT 1 2 3 4 12. Work Order Estimating. Provide for an integrated work order estimating system. The system shall provide planners and estimators with comprehensive assistance in preparing work order craft, time, and material estimates. It shall permit including local labor and material rates, local unique cost factors, or standard work tasks. 13. Maintenance History. The CMMS shall provide for fully documenting the facility maintenance history, to include summaries of all actions related to the facility. This includes TC's; specific Service Requests (SR); work orders; PM history, alterations, modifications and improvements; and inspection results 14. Material Management. The CMMS shall provide for material inventory (including high and low limits), ordering based on the low limit and new work orders, order tracking, receiving, issue, reservations against work orders, and material status for work order scheduling. It may include vendor and price data for stocked materials and information on purchase agreements. Memorandum financial accounting for material purchases is desirable. In order to incorporate material availability and cost data into the CMMS, a smooth interface with the Procurement Department's program is essential. 15. Tool and Equipment Management. The CMMS shall provide support for issue, inventory, and accountability for specialized tools and related maintenance equipment. 16. Scheduling. In addition to scheduling inspections and RCM actions noted above, it will facilitate scheduling specific work orders. The CMMS shall support the levels of scheduling used at the Airport, integrate with material management functions, and provide for workload and workforce balancing. 17. Backlog of Maintenance and Repair. The CMMS shall permit developing a BMAR (Backlog of Maintenance and Repair) based on condition assessment. 18. Contract Administration. Because a significant portion of the Airport’s work is accomplished by contract, a CMMS shall provide support for contract preparation and administration, including tracking delivery orders, modifications, and payments. 19. Utilities operation and management. The CMMS shall provide support for utilities operation and management, including estimating, reporting, and model generation and use. Some CMMS's can interface directly with Energy Monitoring and Control Systems (EMCS's), allowing changes in equipment operating parameters to automatically generate TC's or other maintenance actions. If this type of interface is desired, it will be a critical factor in the selection process. 20. Environmental Tracking . The CMMS shall provide Environmental Tracking. The CMMS shall facilitate necessary tracking, reporting, and historical record functions. 21. The CMMS shall provide CADD support. Access to a CADD system by the reliability engineer redesigning or modifying existing equipment designs and/or materials as a means of increasing system reliability is highly desirable. F-3

REQUIREMENT 1 2 3 4 22. Priority System. The CMMS shall provide for assigning work priorities in accordance with the Airport's system and using these priorities in any automated scheduling schemes employed. 23. 2.20 Warranty Tracking. Include provisions for tracking warranties on facilities and collateral equipment. It shall alert users when work orders (including SR and TC's) are entered on covered equipment within the warranty period, track requested warranty work, and accommodate tiered warranties and multiple warranties with different expiration dates on the same item. 24. Management Reports. Provide management reporting keyed to the Airport managers' needs as well as to facilities maintenance operations. This relates closely to the customization and ad hoc query features discussed in section 3 below. An important benefit of a CMMS is the ability to extract information out of vast amounts of data to help spot trends that might not otherwise be noticed. A CMMS shall be chosen that can provide information to the manager rather than just output data in voluminous lists. 25. Data Import. Have the ability to read and load data from standard file formats. Formats beyond those used at the Airport may be of limited value. However, support for file formats currently in wide use at the Airport is an advantage and may be a critical factor, depending on the other systems that the Airport desires to integrate with the CMMS. 26. Bar Coding Data Interface. Have the ability to accept data from bar code readers and print bar codes for field reader use. Bar coding has many applications to ensure that actions were performed on the correct equipment and at the time specified. Bar coding is especially useful for such repetitive tasks as equipment identification, inventory control, timekeeping, and PM task recording. 27. Data Export. Have the ability to export all (or user-selected portions) of the database in standard file formats. 28. Archive. Have the capability to archive inactive records and data based on user- selected criteria. For example, the Airport may wish to remove information on work orders that have been completed for over 2 years from the active data files, but still have the information available for off-line reference. Archiving systems shall provide the means to view and retrieve the data. Care shall be taken not to archive essential facility history data. 29. Back-up. Have automated data backup and recovery features. This shall support multiple media types. Since the CMMS is being installed on a network, the network operating system may handle the backup. If the CMMS has a backup routine as well, the potential for conflict between the systems would have to be investigated. 30. Number of Users. Software is typically licensed for a specified number of users or for use on a specified number of computers. Programs designed to operate on a network or with remote terminals may limit the number of simultaneous users. The capability of the program shall be determined. CMMS cost may vary with the number of users. It shall be possible to add additional users at a later date when expansion is required F-4

REQUIREMENT 1 2 3 4 31. Capacity. Capacity refers to the number of entries or records (and the maximum size of each record) that are permitted in each of the databases of the CMMS. The better CMMS's permit a number of records that is limited only by mass storage. However, some systems may be limited or require the purchase of modules adding capacity. The CMMS shall have sufficient capacity in each function to accommodate the Airport's facilities maintenance management requirements, including projected growth. 32. Speed. Speed refers to how quickly the CMMS can perform required operations on the database. Such operations include preparation of reports, printing PM schedules and PM work orders or cards, searching the database for the status of a work order, responding to an ad hoc query, or preparing an estimate using the work order estimating database. Database manipulation is a very processor- intensive operation. Speed tends to degrade as the size of the database increases and as the number of simultaneous users increases. Systems perceived as slow by users will fall into disfavor and shall be avoided. Speed is very dependent on the hardware used for the CMMS as well as on the data structure and software. To the maximum extent possible, speed evaluations shall be based on tests using the hardware configuration, database size, and operations planned for the installed CMMS. 33. User Help/ Documentation. Provide an adequate level of documentation and an effective on-line help system to assist users after initial training and installation. Documentation shall be clear, concise, and comprehensive, covering all aspects of the CMMS. The on-line help facility shall be available at all times and shall be context sensitive, providing assistance and suggestions to the user for the current operation. A user shall be able to find the answer to most routine questions in the on-line help module. The ability to edit or add to help screens is an advantage. 34. Menus/User Interface. Provide an easy, logical flow from one operation to another permitting rapid, direct movement by expert users as well as providing a methodical menu system for less experienced users. Use of the keyboard, mouse, digitizer, light pen, track ball, or touch-screen are possible methods to access menu items. The ability of the user to build custom menus is a desirable feature. 35. Error Handling. Provide comprehensive error handling. This includes a capability for data validation; i.e., checking against limits or a list of permitted entries. It shall also protect the data from abnormal situations, giving the user the opportunity to correct situations such as a printer out of paper or off-line, floppy disk missing, telephone connection lost, drive error, or similar event. Error conditions shall be "trapped" and informative error messages given to the user, permitting the user to save current data and exit the program if necessary. Data deletion shall be subject to verification. 36. Password Protection. Have levels of password protection to control the ability to view only, modify, enter, and delete data. It shall also control system changes such as creating and modifying reports, forms, and data structure. This shall apply to each of the several functions and databases. F-5

REQUIREMENT 1 2 3 4 37. Cost. In evaluating cost, the CMMS modules and options within functions as well as all recurring system operation, maintenance, and support costs shall be considered. The initial cost of the system will be negligible compared to the manpower savings resulting from fully implementing a CMMS. 38. Hardware Platform. The computer type or types on which the CMMS may be operated. One CMMS may be limited to one vendor's product or standard while another may operate on a broad range of hardware. When existing equipment is to be used for the CMMS, this will be a critical factor that eliminates some CMMS's from consideration. 39. Operating System. This is the core program that provides the software communication interface between the manufacturer's hardware and the developer's software. 40. Input/output Support. The ability of the CMMS to support the desired range of input and output devices shall be evaluated. Typical devices include a mouse, digitizing tablet, modem, light pen, optical disk, bar code readers, floppy disk, laser printer, dot matrix printer, backup media, and plotter. Special software drivers are often required for different brands and models of printers and plotters. These are usually built into the software, but may be provided as part of supporting software such as with WINDOWS. This may be a significant or even critical evaluation factor. 41. Years in CMMS Business. A longer term can imply a successful business that addresses the needs of the CMMS market and one that will be available to provide support into the future. However, be alert for past mergers, takeovers, or spin-offs, which could distort this factor. "New" does not necessarily mean a poor product. Conversely, "old" does not imply a good product, because it may not have been updated to reflect current advancements in CMMS technology. 42. 5.3 Installed Customer Base. The number of users of the CMMS system is an indicator of market success and the developer's potential to stay in the CMMS market. Check to see how many sites are using the current versus prior releases. Include checking their type of business, how they are using it (e.g., for PM only, material management, Repair work orders, etc.), and points of contact. 43. Other CMMS-related Products (list). The vendor may offer other products related to the CMMS that would be of interest to the Airport; for example, utilities management, motor vehicle management and dispatch, or project management software. These may offer an advantage in terms of a common user interface, shared data, and lower first cost and support costs if bought as a package. 44. Support/ Upgrade Policy. Look for a vendor that provides solid, after-market support and offers upgrades or updates at a reasonable cost. Because CMMS is not a mass market (installed bases are typically less than 1000), user support is normally not free. However, there shall be a period of "free" support after installation and a warranty period to provide for adjustment if the product does not prove satisfactory in actual use. F-6

REQUIREMENT 1 2 3 4 45. Customized Releases. The vendor may offer customized releases structured to meet the Airport's unique needs. This would include modifications to screens, standard reports and forms, and data structure. Additional cost would depend on the extent of the modifications required. However, this factor is offset to some extent by the ability to make end-user modifications to the CMMS system discussed under Program Features above. Since Airport requirements may change over time, buying a CMMS that allows customization by the user is generally preferable to buying a customized CMMS. 46. Training. The vendor shall provide training support, onsite or offsite as meets the Airport's needs. Examine scheduling and costs. Consider the experience of current users with the training offered. Note that programs with an intuitive, user-friendly interface that conforms to a facilities maintenance management model similar to that used by the Airport will require less training support. Training is an essential element of a successful CMMS installation. The Airport shall recognize that training is not a one-time event. Users will need refresher training. After a period of familiarization, some users will need training on advanced techniques such as custom menu, macro, and report generation. New employees will require initial training. A training plan needs to be developed to address all these needs. 47. Installation Support. The developer shall offer installation and initialization support. This may include initial data entry and conversion. Some vendors provide full-scale systems integration services, including hardware procurement and setup. This will simplify the Airport's tasks, at some additional cost. There will be a tremendous amount of effort that will be required to implement a new CMMS. Many CMMS installations have been "doomed to failure" from day one because the new user tried to implement the system with existing personnel “in their spare time" while still expecting them to accomplish 48. List of Users/ References. The vendor shall be willing to provide information on other users who the Airport can contact for first-hand impressions of the product. These references shall be contacted to determine their opinions on the product and how their application matches the Airport's planned use. A visit to their facility to see the CMMS in operation shall be made. Total F-7

F-8

Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Web-Only Document 23: Guidance on Successful Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) Selection and Practices provides guidance with selecting a CMMS that is most compatible with an airport’s individual needs. Airports use CMMS to help manage airport assets. The report explores ways to integrate a CMMS into airport processes, procedures, and other information technology systems.

This guidebook is accompanied by an evaluation tool, which may help airports with defining their requirements for a CMMS program.

This software is offered as is, without warranty or promise of support of any kind either expressed or implied. Under no circumstance will the National Academy of Sciences or the Transportation Research Board (collectively "TRB") be liable for any loss or damage caused by the installation or operation of this product. TRB makes no representation or warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, in fact or in law, including without limitation, the warranty of merchantability or the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, and shall not in any case be liable for any consequential or special damages.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!