Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports (2018)

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.

A-10 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Salt Lake City International Airport About SLC SLC is 15 minutes from the center of downtown Salt Lake City and serves more than 23 million passengers each year. SLC is the 25th busiest airport in North America and the 85th busiest airport in the world (2016). Seven airlines and their affiliates operate 330 flights daily to more than 91 non-stop destinations, including international non-stop service to Canada, France, Mexico, and the Netherlands. SLC is a hub for Delta Air Lines, which operates flights that make up 72 percent of the airport’s total market share. SLC covers 7,697 acres and has four runways, including three carrier runways and one general aviation runway. The current passenger facilities consist of three passenger terminals with five airside concourses and 82 aircraft gates. SLC is building a new terminal complex to better serve its passengers. The current airport terminal was built in 1961, and the airport has since grown into a hub airport with many flights that arrive and depart simultaneously. Its security needs have also changed significantly since 1961, as have earthquake safety standards. The new SLC construction project broke ground in 2014, and the first phase of the $2.9 billion project is scheduled to be completed in 2020. The three-story terminal and concourse will eventually replace 29 outdated structures that are connected, including three separate terminals and five concourses. Architectural firm HOK designed the 1.7 million square foot terminal to be convenient, inspiring, and sustainable. The new design celebrates Utah’s natural beauty and reputation as an outdoor recreation hub. Floor-to-ceiling glass is used to provide expansive views to the airfield and mountains beyond and is intended to create an uplifting ambiance. The facility’s centerpiece will be a soaring interior space called the Canyon, which will house security screening areas, shopping, and dining facilities. The new facility is designed to achieve a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold certification as well as to incorporate a sustainable design that minimizes the airport’s environmental footprint. The efficient configuration of the terminal and gate locations will reduce fuel use and aircraft emissions, while efficient mechanical and lighting systems will provide additional energy savings. Plus, airlines plan to convert all of their airport ground equipment to alternatively fueled vehicles. These changes and upgrades are part of the airport’s strategic plan to improve the services provided to the passengers, airlines, freight services, concessions, and the city-at-large to become one of the best airports in the world. The planned upgrades will also improve operations and maintenance (O&M) activities to drive reliability, robustness, and resiliency to the airport assets. The challenges that SLC is facing include: • Continuing to operate the airport facilities while constructing the new airport terminal • Dealing with an aging workforce and facilities • Changes in leadership • Budgetary constraints • Acquiring and maintaining a professional workforce • Talent planning and up-to-date training on new equipment • Aligning the workforce’s talent with airport’s strategies and goals • Meeting stakeholder expectations (travelers, airlines, concessions) • Having the infrastructure in place to handle the increasing number of passengers

Appendix A A-11 Maintenance Organization The Maintenance Business Unit at SLC is part of the Department of Airports in Salt Lake City (Figure A-3). The main challenges the SLC Maintenance Department faces are: • Scheduling of projects • Budgetary constraints • Supporting new terminal construction and commissioning while maintaining the old • Dealing with an aging CMMS • Acquiring and maintaining a professional workforce • Aligning the workforce’s talent with airport’s strategies and goals • Training on new equipment and their controls Figure A-3. SLC Organization with breakdown of maintenance structure. The main concerns that Maintenance has with its existing maintenance management software include: • Reports are limited (e.g., Maintenance cannot run reports for individual labor, and reports are bulky and cannot be formatted). • The system is not user-friendly for work orders. It takes a long time to enter data, does not track user input and changes, and does not allow photographs to be attached to individual work orders. • The system has limited security features. • The system is not web-based and does not allow real-time updates. • The system has limited options for customer feedback and tracking repeated maintenance issues. • System upgrades and updates are time consuming and occur on an individual basis per workstation. • The system is not GIS-centric (e.g., it does not allow individual assets to be mapped so users can easily find, update, or report work to be done). • The system is not enterprise-wide. The existing system does not allow the airport to house work order information, warehouse inventory, certain financial aspects, etc. Having an enterprise-wide system would allow better tracking of true maintenance and operations cost.

A-12 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Maintenance is working under a strategic plan to meet the following goals: • Implement maintenance best practices (e.g., add structure to existing asset system, develop business plans, and ISO 55000 standard) • Tie inventory with the CMMS • Implement Wi-Fi mobile solutions • Integrate related asset programs • Use a paperless system to initiate, develop, track, and report work orders status and results • Improve on the reporting system • Adopt clearer communication processes across less organizational layers The maintenance program at SLC can be described as 65% PM and 35% CM. It should be noted that this ratio is dependent on the types of assets. For example, Fleet Services performs a high amount of PM, whereas Plumbing performs a high amount of CM. Asset Management Program at SLC The main driver behind implementing a CMMS was to address the airport’s aging facilities, workforce, and retirement issues by using the system to better track and retain institutional knowledge. Its workforce challenges have provided the impetus to improve knowledge management by documenting and automating processes, tracking maintenance, and instituting a reporting system to aid the budget process tracking older equipment. The CMMS was implemented to achieve many related benefits, such as improving access to critical information; improving quality of information; streamlining business and operational processes; implementing maintenance best practices; and gaining efficiencies in overall asset management. Implementing the CMMS at SLC was a phased process, initiated with a low cost interim solution until the overall needs were gathered and funding secured, at which time a fully expanded CMMS was ultimately rolled out. System Requirements The chosen CMMS has the ability to manage work order processing, PM, cost controls, and required reports to inform maintenance decisions. The specific functional requirements of the CMMS included the ability to: • Track asset information such as cost center, department, location, etc. • Allow for cost and repair information to be accessed at multiple asset levels • Save work orders to the asset history as one line of information or full detail • Access all information in the asset history by sorting or building ad hoc reports The PM requirements that were considered in selecting the CMMS included: • Schedule PMs by calendar, meter readings, operational parameters (real time) • Allow for unlimited numbers of PMs per asset • Schedule PMs for any specific date and/or day of the week • Schedule PMs for assets or facilities • Generate the PM work orders; daily, weekly, monthly, or at user-defined intervals • Provide system reports; overdue PMs by number, incomplete PMs, or results of PM inspections mobile/paperless

Appendix A A-13 The work order requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included the ability to: • Track information at the work order task/step level for planned versus actuals, for labor, materials, tools, contractors, and safety • Produce a report of all work orders which can be sorted by their current status in the work order workflow • Track work order backlog by craft, crew, department, planner, supervisor, or other defined categories • Update work order status either manually or automatically via workflow configurations • Allow user to access stores, personnel, tools, contractors, etc., w/without leaving the work order module The following management reporting statements were considered in selecting a CMMS: • The system produces reports; daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, or any user-defined interval • Reports produced by the system are summary reports, just lists of information, or exception reports • Reports were designed to be used by system managers, managers, or maintenance personnel The implementation requirements that were considered in selecting the CMMS included: • The vendor performing full turn-key implementation, software implementation, data loading, system training, and user training • The system requiring some customization The maintenance software analysis requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included the system’s ability to: • Be operated by maintenance personnel • Apply necessary modules to meet the organization's needs (PMs, work orders) • Provide single, semi-multi, or multi-user capabilities • Closely integrate all system modules • Archive files and retrieve files for reports spanning long time periods • Update software on a regular basis CMMS Implementation When implementing its CMMS, SLC followed an implementation flow consisting of the following steps: • Establish steering committee for the CMMS (only for end users) • Establish the site implementation team • Establish site project teams • Promote kick-off meeting for site and project teams • Install the CMMS software (hardware was in-house) • Initialize the CMMS software (create multiple system environments, including development, test, train, and production) • Provide initial training for the site and project teams • Begin data entry process • Begin user training on the CMMS • Begin using work order system During the CMMS implementation, the team faced the following challenges: • Assessing current and future needs • Properly documenting the system user requirements or “get user input”

A-14 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports • Conducting a good search in the CMMS marketplace • Assessing vendor’s qualifications • Software testing • Putting an implementation plan together • Obtaining sufficient training and/or documentation • Correctly estimating time needed to collect and load data The Maintenance Department utilizes the CMMS 95% of the time for the planning and scheduling of its maintenance activities and 30% of the time for its maintenance inventory and purchasing. All SLC assets are incorporated into its CMMS. By implementing the CMMS, the airport has seen benefits in: • Planning and scheduling maintenance activities • Safety • Asset longevity • Productivity • Assigning accountability • Budget planning Asset Classes in CMMS SLC added asset classes to its CMMS based on their criticality, their impact on the operational services provided to customers (airlines, travelers, and concessions), regulatory compliance, and safety. Table A-4 shows the assets that are managed through the CMMS, and future asset groups to be added to the CMMS are presented in Table A-5. The asset hierarchy at SLC is a flat one, as shown in Figure A-4. Table A-4. Asset classes in CMMS. Asset Class Asset Class Asset Class - Terminal buildings - HVAC - Fleet - Runway lighting - Electric - Airfield signage - Facilities - Plumbing - Utility – Treatment facilities (sewage lift) - Hangars - Power plant (central utility plant) - Stormwater infrastructure (pump stations) - Parking garages - Baggage handling system - Fire protection - Pavement (Airfield) - Jet bridges - Deicing system (only structure) - Airfield lighting - Fueling system (airlines and vehicles) Table A-5. Asset classes to be added to CMMS. Asset Class Asset Class Asset Class - Glycol recovery - Elevators - Security system - Escalators/Moving walkways - Chemicals expensing

Appendix A A-15 Adding assets to the CMMS is an informal process. Representatives from Maintenance are consulted when a new asset is in the planning phase. They provide their feedback and input during the design, construction, and commissioning phases. The Maintenance Supervisor accepts and approves the commissioning of the asset(s), based on recommendations and information provided from the group. A key element of the process is assigning an Asset ID to the assets listed in the plans. Figure A-4. Horizontal asset hierarchy at SLC. Data There are many data points collected through the CMMS. These data points include PM, corrective maintenance, labor, parts, repair history, and meter readers. This data is used to inform decision makers about: • Labor hours • Repeat history • Failures • Incidents • Crew size • Availability of resources • Condition and maintenance history • Budgets The collected data are saved on an SQL server. This data, before being finalized, is randomly checked for any errors. Maintenance does not follow a specific methodology to analyze the data to produce reports; rather, reports are produced on an as-needed basis. Fleet Services can provide a specific example of how the CMMS data triggers a PM. When a driver fuels a vehicle, mileage is entered into the fuel meter. This entered data will trigger a PM for the vehicle, based upon miles driven. CMMS Integration The CMMS is not integrated with other systems at SLC. Systems integration is, however, a part of the new strategic plan and new airport terminal construction. Such integration will be discussed and documented throughout the different business units at the airport. Figure A-5 provides a high-level view of how the CMMS can be integrated into SLC’s maintenance activities. SLC’s plan is to have the following systems integrated: • Resource management • Financial software • Safety management • Wildlife hazard management • Pavement management • Fleet management • Time and labor • Property management

A-16 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports • Fueling system for vehicles and generators • Airfield lighting • Storeroom • GIS • Inspection application (Part 139) • Attic stock tracking Figure A-5. CMMS integration into SLC’s maintenance activities. Performance Measures SLC uses performance measures to manage and report the condition of assets across the different business units. Maintenance and other superintendents developed these measures, but Maintenance is the only business unit that tracks and uses the measures to understand its performance. These measures are reported and communicated to the leadership via e-mails and meetings on a quarterly basis or whenever there is a need. As an example, Fleet Maintenance has a total of 966 vehicles and pieces of equipment with an asset value of $61 million. Its operating budget is $4.3 million, and the acquisition budget is $4.8 million (FY 2016). Fleet Maintenance maintains diverse vehicles and pieces of equipment, ranging from line lasers and weed whips, to fire trucks and runway snow removal equipment. In addition, Fleet Maintenance maintains the airport’s garbage trucks, glycol recovery vehicles, paint strippers, airfield sweepers, deicer trucks, stationary and portable generators, passenger ramps, backhoes, and graders.

Appendix A A-17 SLC adopts new measures by reviewing industry standards and learning from other airports. An example of measures for Fleet Services is presented in Table A-6. Table A-6. Measures for Fleet Services. Measure Recorded Value Industry Standard Vehicle In-Commission (Degree to which fleet units are available for fleet customers) 92.7% >90% 24-hour Turnaround Time (How quickly vehicles are returned to service) 85% >70% Shop Return Rate (Fleet customer returns to shop with same issue without specific time period) <1% <1% Billable Hours (Productivity of technicians in regards to direct vs. indirect labor) 70% 70% PM Performance Rate (Percentage of PM done on or before scheduled date) 96.3% -- Decision Making Maintenance uses the CMMS on regular basis to make robust and informed decisions for its maintenance practices. Reports from the CMMS assist in increasing wrench time and reducing downtime for maintenance activities, which will positively impact the assets operations and improve on customer service. These reports include: • Work order costs report • Completed work order performance • Work order backlog summary • Work order waiting reports • Asset repair history • Asset maintenance costs repair • Preventive maintenance overdue report The information produced by the CMMS is reported to leadership through: • KPIs • Periodic reports • Briefings Seattle-Tacoma International About SEA SEA is the largest airport in the Pacific Northwest Region of the United States. It is the fifth fastest growing airport in the world. In 2016, SEA served over 45 million passengers, which makes it the country’s ninth largest airport. In 2014, Delta established a hub at SEA for its Trans-Pacific services, which was one of the key contributors to its recent growth. As part of its “Century Agenda” goals, SEA plans to become the West Coast “Gateway of Choice” for international travel, double the number of its international flights and destinations, and meet the region’s

A-18 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports air transportation needs for the next 25 years through cost-effective expansion of domestic and international passenger and cargo services. SEA is one of the pioneer airports in pursuing and adopting sustainable practices. It is committed to sustainable growth that balances environmental, economic, and social outcomes. SEA is also utilizing sustainability goals and objectives as the basis for identifying airport development alternatives and developing criteria to evaluate such alternatives. This is driving SEA’s efforts to evaluate and construct new and renovate existing buildings and facilities in a sustainable manner. SEA is the first airport to implement an avian radar system that provides around-the-clock monitoring of wildlife activity across the airfield. This system was designed and implemented to reduce and protect wildlife activity on and near the field. The challenges that SEA is navigating to achieve its strategic plan are: • Meeting stakeholders’ growth demands • Capacity constraints at terminals and facilities • Managing the passenger volume at each gate, since SEA has some of the highest volume in the nation Maintenance Organization The Aviation Maintenance Department at SEA is one of the few such units at airports with vision and mission statements and guiding principles. The unit’s vision statement is as follows: “As a strategic aviation business partner, we strive to minimize the long-term total cost of ownership of airport facilities and systems. We are skillful at continuous change, and value collaborating with our internal and external customers. We focus on maintainability, safety, flexibility, and innovation to operate and maintain our world-class international airport.” Its mission statement is: “Ensure that all airport facilities, equipment and systems function properly 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.” Aviation Maintenance operates in accordance with the following guiding principles, intended to help them drive maintenance toward having a safe operating environment, available and reliable assets, and minimized cost: • The development of people, optimal use of equipment and inventory, and our ability to leverage technology • Reduced equipment and system failures through PM practices • The utilization of well-defined and understood operating procedures • The use of KPIs based on industry best practices Aviation Maintenance recognizes that there are challenges they face as they strive for excellence, including: • Over-utilization of assets • Making assets available for maintenance work • Resource constraints in terms of staffing and availability of highly skilled and specialized technicians • A preponderance of aging facilities, when funds are normally directed toward new assets • Obtaining information about new commissioned assets Despite these challenges, the Aviation Maintenance Department continues to make progress on achieving its goals. Based on recent numbers, the maintenance program spends 83% of its efforts on PM

Appendix A A-19 and 17% of its efforts on corrective maintenance (CM). Its PM to CM ratio places SEA at the top of comparative airport performance in the nation. CMMS Selection at SEA In 1996, SEA decided to improve on its asset management practices by implementing a CMMS. The main driver behind the CMMS implementation was the desire to: • Identify airport facilities, assets, and systems • Document maintenance personnel activities • Better documentation on asset life cycle • Map and manage the assets • Identify resources utilized to maintain each asset System Requirements The chosen CMMS can manage: work order processes, materials and inventory management, PMs, cost controls at the asset level, integrations with other software applications, and required reports for different organizational levels to facilitate informed decisions. The specific functional requirements of the CMMS included its ability to: • Track asset information such as cost center, department, location, etc. • Allow for cost and repair information to be accessed at multiple asset levels • Save work orders to the asset history as one line of information or full detail • Access all information in the asset history by sorting or building ad hoc reports • Provide a bill of materials for each asset • Provide user-defined screens for storing information relative to asset items/types, which also can be selected and sorted by reports The PM requirements that were considered in selecting the CMMS included the ability to: • Schedule PMs by calendar, meter readings, operational parameters (real time) • Allow for unlimited numbers of PMs per asset • Allow for multiple crafts scheduled on a PM • Schedule PMs for any specific date and/or day of the week • Forecast (labor resources, material requirements, or special tools) for PMs due for any specified time period • Schedule PMs for assets or facilities • Combine all PMs that are due for an asset automatically or manually, or not at all • Generate the PM work orders daily, weekly, monthly, or at user-defined intervals • Provide system reports (e.g., overdue PMs by number, incomplete PMs, or results of PM inspections) The work order requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included: • Track information at the work order task/step level for planned versus actuals and for labor, materials, tools, contractors and safety • Produce a report of all work orders that can be sorted by their current status in the work order workflow • Track work order backlog by craft, crew, department, planner, supervisor, or other defined categories • Update work order status either manually or automatically via workflow configurations • Allow the user to access information on stores, personnel, tools, contractors, etc., without leaving the work order module

A-20 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports • Create notifications, escalations and send these items to personnel internally or externally • Allow for work process flows and assignments based on the end-user role The MRO inventory and procurement requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included: • Generate a spares reorder report when the quantity on hand drops below a minimum level • Manage multiple warehouses • Generate a purchase requisition if a reorder point is reached • Notify the planner or requestor, when a part is received, which work orders can now be filled • Produce performance reports for purchasing section that include overdue purchase orders (POs), inactive parts, or inventory valuation • Automatically track cost to the work order on an itemized basis The following management reporting statements were considered in selecting a CMMS: • The system produces reports daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, or at any user-defined interval • Reports produced by the system are summary reports, just lists of information, or exception reports • The system has a report writer in addition to standard system reports • Reports are designed to be used by system managers, managers, or maintenance personnel • The system reports and forecasts asset downtime • The system tracks asset downtime costs The implementation requirements that were considered in selecting the CMMS included: • The vendor performing full turn-key implementation, software implementation, data loading, system training, and user training • Vendor has fully documented installation plans • Vendor having software experts, maintenance experts, and training experts • The system requiring no customization The maintenance software analysis requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included the system’s ability to: • Be operated by maintenance personnel • Apply necessary modules to meet the organization's needs (PMs, work orders, inventory, integration, etc.) • Provide single, semi-multi, or multi-user capabilities • Closely integrate all system modules and external software applications (Planning/Scheduling tool, Mobile tool, etc.) • Archive files and retrieve files for reports spanning long time periods • Update software on a regular basis • Display analytical information in a graphic format • Integrate its functions with: payroll, accounts payable, general ledger, time keeping, etc. CMMS Implementation When implementing the CMMS, SEA followed an implementation flow consisting of the following steps. • Establish steering committee for the CMMS • Establish the site implementation team • Establish site project teams

Appendix A A-21 • Promote kick-off meeting for site and project teams • Install hardware and the CMMS software • Initialize the CMMS software (create multiple system environments, including development, test, train, and production) • Provide initial training for the site and project teams • Define organizational procedures for the CMMS use utilizing training manuals • Develop written the CMMS procedures within the training manuals • Restructure the organization/business processes (Note: one of the main organizational changes that was considered during the CMMS implementation was to move storerooms from under Finance to become part of Maintenance) • Begin developing various data collection formats (templates) • Use the formats to start data collection process (asset, stores, PMs, personnel, purchasing, accounting) • Begin data entry process • Begin user training on the CMMS • Establish stores stock levels • Begin using work order system • Monitor all usage of the CMMS • Audit the CMMS for 30 days • Consider having a periodic an audit program of the CMMS (site and enterprise levels) The CMMS implementation at SEA did not face any particular challenges and proved to be very beneficial to the Aviation Maintenance Department as well as the airport at large. It has allowed Aviation Maintenance to effectively manage the assets and increase their availability, reliability, and uptime. Additionally, it provides meaningful information in support of managing staffing and resources needs. The Aviation Maintenance Department utilizes the CMMS for asset management, work management, materials management, and reporting capabilities. Asset Classes in CMMS The asset classes added to the CMMS at SEA were chosen to be part of the system because they are critical to the different operational activities at the airport and because maintenance resources are involved in their maintenance and uptime. The asset classes that are part of the CMMS are presented in Table A-7. The plan is to add the new terminal connecting bridge to the list of assets in the CMMS. Table A-7. Asset classes in CMMS. Asset Class Asset Class Asset Class - Terminal buildings - HVAC - Security system - Runway lighting - Electric - Signage - Facilities - Plumbing - Utility – treatment facilities (sewage lift) - Power center - Elevators - Stormwater infrastructure - Parking garages - Escalators/Moving walkways - Fire protection - Pavement - Jet bridges - IT - Baggage handling system - Rolling stock - Custodial

A-22 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports SEA has an excel spreadsheet called “CMMS Data Input Form” that is populated with asset information and then is automatically uploaded to the CMMS. The CMMS has a function that reads data sheets and uploads them to the system. Four groups are responsible for entering information into the spreadsheet: architect; engineer (at 90% design); contractor, and the maintenance shops. Data Information about all assets maintained at SEA is collected, input, and managed in the CMMS, then saved on the SQL server. There is a formal process and in place for data collection and documentation. The CMMS Data Input Form collects new asset information, which includes some of the following attributes: • Equipment ID number • Equipment description • Geolocation • Model number • Install or purchase date • End of equipment warranty • Estimated equipment value • Expected equipment lifespan • Classification • Asset type • Work group The assets are organized by a geolocation functional hierarchy. In the future, the asset hierarchy will be updated and individual assets tracked using a UniFormat classification code. SEA employs a quality assurance (QA) process through which all the collected data and analysis is reviewed by the CMMS Business Analysis team and then validated by the various department leadership teams. The process covers every stage of the data life cycle: collection, retention, analysis, and reporting. SEA decision makers say the most beneficial CMMS information is that related to: • Asset management • Work management • Inventory management CMMS Integration The CMMS at SEA is integrated with the following systems: resource management, payroll, planning and scheduling, a mobile CMMS, fueling, baggage handling system, elevators and escalators, and lightweight directory access protocol. The main drivers behind integrating these systems are to eliminate redundant work, ensure accuracy of information, and increase data visibility. The impact of this integration has been: • Increased productivity • Transparent decision making • Better budget allocations and savings • Improved maintenance activities

Appendix A A-23 Performance Measures SEA senior leadership and maintenance managers are responsible for developing performance measures to measure and evaluate the overall performance of facilities and systems at the airport. These measures are incorporated within their CMMS and updated daily. Introducing a new performance measure starts by senior leadership and the Maintenance Review Board (Business Process Systems Change Board) identifying a need to measure and track a particular area of performance. Once the measure is created, measuring criteria is developed, and data availability or measurement is identified. The new measure is then put into practice. Aviation Maintenance is the department that employs most of these measures. The intention, however, is to distribute the information to additional business units’ supervisors, managers, and leadership. Table A-8 presents some of the KPIs that Aviation Maintenance utilizes and reports on. Some of the financial and environmental measures are as follows: • Estimated 20-year (O&M) Cost ($/square foot) • Total cost of ownership ($/square foot) • Age of infrastructure • Age relative to expected life • Total energy consumption (kilowatt hours, gallons) • Energy consumed per passenger or area Decision Making The CMMS data is used on regular basis by Aviation Maintenance and leadership at the airport to make robust and informed decisions. Data is presented in reports format. These reports include: • Scheduling activities • Inventory • Procurement • Work order costs report • Completed work order performance • Work order backlog summary • Asset repair history • Asset maintenance costs repair • Stock item usage report • Work order waiting report • Preventive maintenance • Preventive maintenance overdue report The information produced by the CMMS is reported to leadership through: • KPIs • Periodic reports • Dashboards • Briefings • Scorecards

A-24 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Table A-8. Maintenance KPIs. KPI Description Calculation Type All completed/closed PM count [Year To Date] (YTD) Decimal All canceled/incomplete PM count (YTD) Decimal On-time PM completion rate w/target completion on date (YTD) Percent Total “tool time” labor hours Decimal Total “non-tool time” labor hours (Admin, Leave, Training) Decimal Total “non-tool time” leave labor hours Decimal Total count of assets Decimal Total assets with spare parts – All storerooms Decimal Total assets with no spare parts – All storerooms Decimal Total count stock keeping unit (SKU) associated to equipment – All storerooms Decimal Total assets with no PM or route Decimal Total assets with no work orders associated Decimal Total assets with no replacement date Decimal Distribution Center (DC) inventory valuation Decimal Craft storeroom inventory valuation Decimal All storerooms inventory valuation Decimal Total inventory records Decimal Total SKUs on hand Decimal Toronto-Pearson International Airport (YYZ) About YYZ As a global hub for approximately 440,000 flights a year, YYZ is the largest and busiest airport in Canada. Its network of both regional and international destinations is among the most extensive of any airport, and it is considered the second largest access point into North America, second only to JFK International Airport. By the number of flights, it is the 13th busiest airport in the world; by total passenger traffic, it is the 33rd busiest airport in the world; by international passenger traffic, it is the 23rd busiest airport in the world. It has recently experienced an unprecedented annual compounded growth rate of 8%. In 2016, it served more than 44 million passengers and by 2033, it is expected to surpass 64 million passengers and 570,000 flights annually, as detailed in the 20-year strategic plan. An independent, non-profit entity called the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), manages the airport. The GTAA operates within the south-central region of Ontario on a commercial basis to set airport user fees, which are used to develop, improve, and maintain the facilities. Approximately 1,500 people are employed directly by the GTAA. Approximately 380 of those are employed by the Airport Planning and Technical Services (APTS) branch, which provides engineering, maintenance, project management, and technical performance services. In providing its planning and technical services, the GTAA considers the airport’s long-term growth strategy, as well as the unique structural demands of the airport and airline industries. Key considerations include the infrastructure planning and large-scale development efforts that are required to accommodate future traffic demand, improve passenger flow, and create dwell-time so transit passengers have an opportunity to enjoy the travel experience. The focus at YYZ is on managing its substantial growth in a sustainable manner, while honoring passenger needs in every initiative it undertakes with the overarching goal of becoming one of the best

Appendix A A-25 airports in the world for customer service. The vision is to be “The best airport in the world; Making a difference; Connecting the world” within the next 20-years. Three equal principles underscore its three- part vision: customer experience, financial sustainability, and operational excellence. The clear challenges that YYZ must address to achieve its vision and strategic plan are to: • Meet stakeholder expectations (travelers, airlines, concessions) • Have the right amount/type of infrastructure in place to handle the increasing number of passengers Maintenance Organization YYZ is a progressive organization that is seeking excellence in its operations and maintenance activities. It is on the path to meet the Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) requirements, comply with ISO 55000 standard requirements, and apply appropriate Internet of Things (IoT) technology to achieve real-time asset health. The maintenance business unit at YYZ is part of the APTS. Figure A-6 presents the organizational chart of APTS. Maintenance is a key element to the success of the YYZ 20-year strategic plan. Figure A-7 illustrates the 20-year strategic framework summary. Figure A-8 presents the hierarchy of needs at the airport to achieve operational excellence. Figure A-6. YYZ planning and technical services leadership organization chart.

A-26 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Figure A-7. YYZ’s vision, goals, values, and behaviors. Figure A-8. Hierarchy of needs at the airport. APTS 5-year strategic focus is to: • Plan, design, and construct facilities on time and on budget that support aviation growth, customer requirements, and financial sustainability, as defined by YYZ’s strategic framework • Improve asset management system and technical performance to achieve customer service and reliability at the lowest total LCC

Appendix A A-27 • Build a high performance team that drives business results through s focus of leadership, business acumen and technical competence • Be recognized as a world leader in environmental stewardship There are, however, a few challenges that the maintenance business unit is facing while on this journey to excellence. These challenges include: • Achieving and maintaining high customer service expectations • Maintaining asset condition, performance, and availability to meet increasing demands • Increasing asset uptime and reliability, including the availability of assets to meet peak hour volume (passengers, luggage, planes) • Maintaining and improving operational processes to achieve operational excellence, despite competing capital priorities and the lack of trained and specialized technicians and supervisors and other resources The maintenance program activities are 30%-40% PM and 60%-70% CM. There are, however, many resources being expended on the jet bridges system. If the jet bridges work is excluded, the PM to CM ratio is equally split. The goal is to achieve the industry standard 80-to-20 PM to CM ratio. Asset Management Program at YYZ In the 1970s, Transport Canada decided to computerize its systems. An airport maintenance management system (AMMS) was developed and deployed in all airports in Canada at that time. When Canadian airports were subsequently transferred to private management, they were given AMMS for their own internal management. From 1996 until recently, this AMMS has been in place and has been managed and developed internally by YYZ. In 2013, due to the limitations and challenges of its AMMS, YYZ began the process of selecting a CMMS (described in the following section) and it is now fully in place. The assets are being phased into the selected CMMS, with the phase-in expected to be completed in 2017. The desired outcomes from implementing the CMMS are: • Reliable work order management • Reduced maintenance costs via accurate predictive maintenance • Availability of FMEA [Failure modes and effects analysis] and root cause analysis • Ability to eliminate basic frequency based maintenance • Better data collection • Capability to perform real-time asset health analytics CMMS Selection Process Before selecting CMMS software, YYZ completed a detailed and comprehensive vetting process meant to ensure that their selection would support operational excellence through improved customer satisfaction, increased asset reliability, and reduced wrench time. This process began in 2013, when the airport started working with a consultant to assist in mapping-out the journey and developing a comprehensive request for proposals that set forth required functionalities of the system (described in the following section). The airport involved representatives from business units across the airport in vetting four vendors. The vendors were required to walk the attendants through the entire process and show how the system would function and how it would phase-out the AMMS currently in place. Because of this process, the airport selected its new CMMS because it incorporated best practices and the ability to support the vision of the airport’s leadership.

A-28 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports The selected vendor conducted 50 workshops with the different business units to discuss organizational and process changes to be impacted and how these changes would work to improve processes at the airport. One example of an organizational change was for inventory; after the CMMS implementation, Inventory was moved from Finance to be incorporated within the Asset Management functions. System Requirements The chosen CMMS can perform work order processing; materials and inventory management; PM; cost controls at the asset level; and to develop the required reports needed at different organizational levels to support informed decision making. The specific functional requirements of the CMMS included the ability to: • Track asset information such as cost center, department, location, etc. • Allow for cost and repair information to be accessed at multiple asset levels • Save work orders to the asset history as one line of information or full detail • Access all information in the asset history by sorting or building ad hoc reports • Provide a bill of materials for each asset • Provide user-defined screens for storing information relative to asset items/types, which also can be selected and sorted by reports The PM requirements that were considered in selecting the CMMS included the ability to: • Schedule PMs by calendar, meter readings, operational parameters (real time) • Allow for unlimited numbers of PMs per asset • Allow for multiple crafts to be scheduled on a PM action • Schedule PMs for any specific date and/or day of the week • Forecast labor resources, material requirements, or special tools for PMs due for any specified time period • Schedule PMs for assets or facilities • Combine all PMs that are due for an asset automatically, manually, or not at all • Generate the PM work orders daily, weekly, monthly, or at user-defined intervals • Provide system reports on overdue PMs by number, incomplete PMs, or results of PM inspections The work order requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included the ability to: • Track information at the work order task/step level for planned versus actuals, for labor, materials, tools, contractors and safety • Produce a report of all work orders which can be sorted by their current status in the work order workflow • Track work order backlog by craft, crew, department, planner, supervisor, or other defined categories • Update work order status either manually or automatically via workflow configurations • Allow user to access stores, personnel, tools, contractors, etc., without leaving the work order module • Create notifications and escalations, and send these items to personnel internally or externally The MRO inventory and procurement requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included the ability to: • Generate a Spares Reorder Report when the quantity on hand drops below a minimum level • Manage multiple warehouses • Integrate the inventory system with the vendors’ own purchasing system • Generate a purchase requisition if a reorder point is reached • Notify the planner, when the part is received, which work orders can now be filled

Appendix A A-29 • Produce performance reports for purchasing section that include; overdue purchase orders, inactive parts, or inventory valuation • Automatically track cost to the work order on an itemized basis The following management reporting capabilities were considered in selecting a CMMS: • The system produces reports daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, and at any user-defined interval • The system produces summary reports, just lists of information, or exception reports • The system has a report writer in addition to standard system reports • The system produces reports to be used by system managers, managers, or maintenance personnel • The system has a maintenance budget reporting module • The system reports and forecasts asset downtime • The system tracks asset downtime costs The implementation requirements that were considered in selecting the CMMS included: • The vendor performing full turn-key implementation, software implementation, data loading, system training, and user training • The vendor having software experts, maintenance experts, training experts, and airport operations subject matter experts on staff • The system requiring no customization The maintenance software analysis requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included the system’s ability to: • Be operated by maintenance personnel • Apply necessary modules to meet the organization's needs (PMs, work orders, inventory, integration, etc.) • Provide single, semi-multi, or multi-user capabilities • Closely integrate all system modules • Archive files and retrieve files for reports spanning long time periods • Update software on a regular basis • Integrate its functions with: payroll, accounts payable, general ledger, time keeping, etc. CMMS Implementation When implementing its CMMS, YYZ followed an implementation flow consisting of the following steps: • Establish a steering committee for the CMMS • Establish the site implementation team • Establish site project teams • Promote a kick-off meeting for site and project teams • Install hardware and the CMMS software • Initialize the CMMS software (create multiple system environments, including development, test, train, and production) • Provide initial training for the site and project teams • Define organizational procedures for the CMMS utilizing training manuals • Develop written CMMS procedures within the training manuals • Restructure the organization/business processes (Note: one of the main organizational changes considered during the CMMS implementation was to move storerooms from under Finance to become part of Maintenance)

A-30 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports • Begin developing various data collection formats (templates) • Use the formats to start the data collection process (asset, stores, PMs, personnel, purchasing, accounting) • Begin the data entry process • Begin user training on the CMMS • Establish stores stock levels • Begin using the work order system • Monitor all usage of the CMMS • Audit the CMMS for 30 days During the CMMS implementation, the team faced the following challenges: • Assessing current and future needs • Properly documenting the system user requirements or “get user input” • Conducting a good search in the CMMS market place • Assessing vendor’s qualifications • Software testing • Putting an implementation plan together • Obtaining sufficient training and/or documentation The CMMS implementation at YYZ was completed in phases, as groups of assets were entered into the CMMS. The first group consisted of assets related to jet bridges, the baggage handling system, and the fleet, and made up approximately 40% of total assets. After this initial phase was tested, more asset groups were added, representing 80% of total asset groups, followed by the remaining to reach 100% of asset groups over the next couple of years. From this point, an asset group was input into the CMMS, and maintenance activities for that group were planned and scheduled through the system. Inventory functions are now 100% conducted in the CMMS. Purchase orders are generated in the CMMS and then passed for financial processing. Since the CMMS implementation has just been initiated, its benefits have not yet been measured. There are, however, some early wins. For example, the visibility of work orders has greatly increased, and process improvement opportunities have been identified. One of the implementation challenges has been that all maintenance groups use the CMMS, but some vendors who conduct maintenance on certain asset groups do not. The goal is to use the CMMS to conduct all asset work and programs by 2018. Asset Classes in CMMS The asset classes added to the CMMS at YYZ were based on the asset hierarchy that was established many years ago in the initial system. Once the CMMS vendor was selected, the cross-functional implementation team held many sessions with the different business groups to identify business requirements of the system. Insights from these sessions were combined with best practices that the vendor offered the project. The asset classes that were first entered into the system where chosen because they are critical to the different operational activities at the airport and are frequently maintained. The asset classes that are part of the CMMS are presented in Table A-9, and the ones to be added in the future are in Table A-10. The migration of existing assets from the AMMS to the CMMS application was completed in phases. The first group to be input was composed of assets that are independent from other assets, are easy to manage, are close in proximity, and do not interfere with passenger flow. Fleet assets are such a class. After these assets were migrated, the Asset Management team moved to the next asset class and so on. For new capital improvement projects, the vendor is required to supply the airport with information about the assets, such as the bill of materials, O&M manual(s), and asset tags (bar coding). These

Appendix A A-31 requirements are detailed in a Testing, Commissioning, Acceptance, and Turnover document issued by YYZ. This document is part of every project to make sure the vendor understands the project and its related deliverables. The asset classes are broken down into three hierarchies: (1) Geographic, (2) Functional (asset perspective), and (3) Electrical. Table A-9. Asset classes in CMMS. Asset Class Asset Class Asset Class - Terminal buildings - HVAC - Fleet - Runway lighting - Electric - Signage - Facilities - Plumbing - Utility – treatment facilities (sewage lift) - Hangars - Elevators - Stormwater infrastructure - Parking garages - Escalators/Moving walkways - Fire protection - Pavement (airfield) - Jet bridges - Baggage handling system Table A-10. Asset classes to be added to CMMS. Asset Class Asset Class Asset Class - Power plant - Fueling system - Security system - Deicing facility Data There are many data points that YYZ maintenance staff collect through the CMMS. These data benefit system users and decision makers by providing: • Asset performance information • Asset functional location and history • Effectiveness in planning, scheduling, and execution of workflow • Asset condition information, which is relayed to technicians and vests decision power upon them • A platform for planning and execution excellence (parts, tools, equipment, and skills) • Improved oversight of maintenance activities by providing information at the job site The collected data goes through a QA/QC process, which starts when the data is collected. The technician makes sure that this data is collected and registered correctly in the system. The functional team reviews it and then the data becomes available for reporting and further analysis, including an annual audit and review. Data is stored on site in two database management systems. Both systems have the capability to store, analyze, and retrieve data efficiently. There is a plan to migrate the data into a Cloud-based system. CMMS Integration Many systems are active at YYZ. These systems can stand alone or be integrated in order to inform other systems. On a system-by-system basis, required touchpoints are identified, allowing information to flow in a single direction or bi-directionally. The CMMS collects data and informs other systems in place

A-32 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports and uses data from other systems (bi-directional). Figure A-9 illustrates the different systems at YYZ that are integrated with the CMMS and how the data flows between them. There are many benefits that arise from integrating systems, one being reducing the need for users to learn, use, and sign-in to multiple systems. This translates to a reduction in the time required to complete a job, with an increase in system efficiency and data yield. At YYZ, the CMMS is integrated with the following systems. • Financial system – brings people information to the CMMS • Time management system • Incident management system • Fuel system • Building management – mobile product interface for alarms from building management system • Asset health program Figure A-9. CMMS integration. Performance Measurement YYZ leadership and management have developed performance measures to help them manage and report the condition of their assets to various business units. The information is stored and then shared and presented through enterprise software. Depending on the business unit and its needs for the measures’ information, the reports are produced on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. Usually, the daily and weekly editions are reserved for technicians and supervisors, whereas the monthly reports are intended for leadership. Once the measures are reported and reviewed, actions are planned during the weekly status meetings. Actions taken can include performing: • Deeper dive analysis • Historical trending

Appendix A A-33 • Continued measurement • Engineering and technical intervention • Process changes (if needed) Figures A-10 through A-14 present various performance measures that are measured at YYZ related to baggage handling systems, people moving systems, elevators, escalators, and passenger boarding bridges (jet bridges). Figure A-15 shows the calculations equations for these metrics. * Jams: Baggage unable to move due to being stuck. ** PBB: Passenger Boarding Bridges; ***HSW: High Speed Walk; FEM: Alias of specific unit. Figure A-10. Key performance metrics during December 2015. ** *** *

A-34 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Figure A-11. PM performance metrics during December 2015. * Jams: Baggage unable to move due to being stuck. Figure A-12. Baggage performance metrics during December 2015. *

Appendix A A-35 Figure A-13. Passenger boarding bridges performance metrics during December 2015. Figure A-14. People moving systems performance metrics during December 2015.

A-36 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Figure A-15. Performance metrics calculation equations. Decision Making YYZ employs a CMMS to make robust and informed decisions. The reports that the CMMS produces are being utilized by multiple levels across the organization. These reports assist in increasing appropriate wrench time and reducing downtime for maintenance activities, which will, over time, have a positive impact on asset operations and improve customer service. Reports driving these benefits include: • Inventory – stores catalogue, counting inventory, and stock out • Stock item usage report • Completed work order performance • Work order backlog summary • Work order waiting reports • Preventive maintenance • Preventive maintenance overdue report The information produced by the CMMS is reported to leadership through: • KPIs • Periodic reports • Dashboards • Briefings • Scorecards General Mitchell International Airport (MKE) About MKE MKE is a county-owned, joint civil-military public airport located five miles south of the central business district of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. It is named after United States Army Air Service General Billy Mitchell, who was raised in Milwaukee and is often regarded as the father of the United States Air

Appendix A A-37 Force. Along with being the primary airport for Milwaukee, MKE is sometimes described as Chicago’s third airport, as many travelers in the suburbs north of Chicago use it as an alternative to Chicago’s O’Hare Airport and Chicago’s Midway Airport. It is also used by travelers throughout Wisconsin and Northern Illinois. The airport also hosts the General Mitchell Air National Guard Base on the eastern area of the airport property. MKE covers an area of 2,180 acres that contains five runways ranging in length from 4,183 to 9,690 ft. MKE maintains utilities, pavement, lights, signs, leased properties, and other assets. MKE also manages a host of airport-specific features such as navigational aids, security systems, alerts, weather feeds, airline information, and others. The airport began using a CMMS for work orders in the late 1980s. That software was used until 2007, when there was a catastrophic system hardware failure. Attempts to restore the system and its data failed. Fortunately, the airport had already developed requirements for a replacement system, evaluated software to meet those requirements, planned an implementation, and purchased the new CMMS. The airport used hand-written work orders until the new system could be implemented. That process took less than four days. Before the new CMMS, MKE struggled with a series of systems ranging from computer applications to an established set of forms. Their work order system was an admittedly underutilized legacy program that could not be deployed to its full potential. After many years of struggling with this program, the Maintenance Department embarked on a plan to replace the system. One of the requirements for the replacement system was that the CMMS would integrate with the airport’s existing GIS. The GIS was already a mature system (first implementation started in 1998), and the GIS database already contained many of the airport’s assets, including general and airfield-specific lights, signs, pavement, buildings, fences, gates, navigational features, security items, and other assets. The new CMMS was installed in early 2011 and went live on December 11, 2011. The drivers behind the CMMS implementation include that fact that MKE had an existing antiquated system, predominantly paper based, without ties or links to operational events. With the CMMS, MKE now foresees the replacement and elimination of aging and inefficient applications, along with improvements to project management, data sharing, and planning capabilities. Some of the challenges MKE faces include: • Staffing shortages • Talent planning • Moving from reactive to proactive maintenance • Budget constraints In the future, MKE plans to introduce more work order processes such as labor entry, statistics, and inventor, and add the ability to track work orders in the GIS web application. MKE aims to develop a variety of reports to further assist airport management with the data analysis. Organization Background MKE has four shops that work both the airside and landside: • South Shop – general maintenance • Electricians • HVAC-plumbers • Custodians The primary user of the CMMS at MKE is Airside Operations. Airside Operations maintains airfield and public spaces, including the terminals. The airport’s GIS has mapped building interior floor plans and

A-38 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports room-related assets. These maps can be accessed through the CMMS and used to call up an asset by location and initiate or follow up any work orders related to the mapped asset. The system is used inside the buildings by Landside Operations and shop supervisors (maintenance, electrical, HVAC, plumbing, custodians) to manage equipment, materials, and labor statistics. Security and safety personnel use the system to manage specific work orders, including Part 139 work orders by date. IT manages IT assets and tracks IT-related service requests and work orders. The system is also used to track airport rental space through the Property Management system integration with GIS. Users can determine who is renting a space, how to contact the lessee, and how to access leased space in an emergency. The parking management contractor and the county’s fire department also use the system. CMMS Program at MKE The CMMS is used to manage hundreds of assets and an array of maintenance procedures throughout the airport. The airport has compiled a comprehensive GIS database that includes general and airfield- specific lights, signs, pavement, buildings, fences, gates, navigational features, security items, and other assets – all managed with the CMMS. Airport operations care for both airfield and public spaces, including the actual terminal buildings. These features are all accessible within the CMMS, including many data layers that are linked to the airport’s Property Management software. Though the attributes associated with these features are very detailed, the airport continues to add more refined details within interior spaces such as lights, electrical outlets, carpet, wall coverings, and others. The CMMS has streamlined work. In the past, work orders would go to the wrong location, and there was no way to adjust the recipient. Work orders would then have to be canceled and re-created; paper copies were routed around the airport, and often a work order would be closed prior to final inspection. With the CMMS, the time it takes to complete work orders has been shortened, and routing of work has improved dramatically with virtually no errors. The staff is happy to find the right work order at the appropriate maintenance shop. Each day of the year, airports perform a variety of FAA-mandated inspections. With the ability to customize the CMMS, MKE has developed very specific work order templates. Their “Master Inspection Plan” guides staff through the FAA-required airfield inspections three times a day, as well as when an issue may require a runway inspection. This specific inspection (FAA 14 CFR Part 139) involves the examination of airfield assets including lights, signs, pavement, navigational aids, security items, and other assets. To accommodate multiple assets in an inspection, MKE customized a work order template with multiple tasks to act as an inspection form. Work orders resulting from this inspection are linked to the inspection as child work orders. This allows users to track work tied to a specific inspection while managing open work orders produced from subsequent inspections. The CMMS’s flexible search capabilities and unique map interface only make the process easier. At MKE, two offices oversee daily operations: Airside Operations and Landside Operations. Each of these uses logbooks to capture a veritable diary or “life” summary. Everything that occurs on the airfield is entered in the logbook – terminal incidents, weather, staffing, airline issues, and so on. MKE customized the CMMS Service Requests to facilitate the capture of events that occur at the airport. Staff enters these events into custom fields, customized templates, contact information, etc. Work orders and LOGBOOK items are trackable and searchable with the CMMS, which has eliminated a great deal of paperwork. Entries contain in one place all the information that would otherwise be recorded on multiple forms and by different offices. An example of how the CMMS manages a LOGBOOK incident might be when a person falls in the airport terminal and sustains an injury. Before the CMMS, an airline employee would call the Operations Control Center (OCC), who would then contact police, emergency medical technicians, and Landside Operations. The Landside Coordinator would respond to the scene, complete a lengthy form detailing the

Appendix A A-39 incident, replicate the information in a paper logbook, and make copies of the form to provide to the OCC. The OCC Operator would enter the same information into another logbook and make copies for the Security, Safety, and Properties offices. The Property Manager would then enter the information into a database, make copies, and forward those copies to Risk Management and the airport insurance provider. With the CMMS, the OCC Coordinator enters incidents directly into the airport’s LOGBOOK, which automatically dispatches the Landside Coordinator and alerts police and rescue. Using a tablet PC, the Landside Coordinator adds detailed incident information to the same record in the LOGBOOK, including a pinpoint map of where the incident occurred, photos, and witness statements. With all the information in the LOGBOOK, the Landside Coordinator closes the record, which is then immediately available to Security, Safety, Properties, Risk Management, and insurance providers. All personnel are now immediately aware of what occurred and have access to the same information – and more information than in the past. MKE now has a way to track events, categorize issues, and easily view the event status at multiple airport departments. Through a series of reports, information is automatically disseminated to departments, airlines, and others in a much more efficient manner, better communicating everything from outages to day-to-day issues. The CMMS has helped the airport virtually eliminate the trails of paper that once piled up, resulting in a considerable savings in resources and time. The CMMS has streamlined work processes, simplified user tasks, and created a better working environment. From a data management perspective, MKE can make changes to one map service immediately available to all users in both the CMMS and GIS systems. This eliminates the necessity to constantly update maps for multiple departments every time there is even the slightest change. The CMMS has also helped the airport better justify staffing needs, have a firm handle on labor and work statistics, and have a much more accurate picture of the time, effort, and efficiency of their maintenance efforts. The CMMS’s flexibility has proven invaluable to MKE. Airport-specific requirements demanded unique customizations to the service request and work order forms. The software was configured to add an airport-specific panel to the service request form while non-applicable fields were removed. MKE used universal custom fields and custom field templates to ensure the collection of key information. System Requirements MKE used a complete list of maintenance criteria when defining the system requirements prior to selecting the CMMS. This list included: • Preventive Maintenance Criteria – Schedule PMs by calendar, meter readings, operational parameters (real time) – System allows for unlimited numbers of PMs per asset – System allows for multiple crafts scheduled on a PM – The ability to schedule PMs for any specific date and/or day of the week – System will schedule PMs for assets or facilities – System will combine all PMs that are due for an asset automatically, manually, or not at all – System generates the PM work orders daily, weekly, monthly, or at user-defined intervals – System reports overdue PMs by number, incomplete PMs, or results of PM inspections • Work Order Criteria – System tracks information at the work order task/step level for planned versus actuals, for labor, materials, tools, contractors, and safety – System produces a report of all work orders that can be sorted by their status in the work order workflow – System is capable of tracking work order backlog by craft, crew, department, planner, supervisor, or other defined categories

A-40 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports – System updates work order status either manually or automatically via workflow configurations – When planning a work order, the user can access stores, personnel, tools, contractors, etc., without leaving the work order module – System provides the ability to create notifications and escalations and send these items to personnel internally or externally • MRO Inventory and Procurement Criteria – System generates a Spares Reorder Report when the quantity on hand drops below a minimum level – System can manage multiple warehouses – System produces performance reports for purchasing section that include overdue POs, inactive parts, or inventory valuation – System automatically tracks cost to the work order on an itemized basis • Management Reporting Criteria – System produces reports daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, or at any user-defined interval – Reports produced by the system are summary reports, lists of information, or exception reports – System has a report writer in addition to standard system reports – Reports were designed to be used by system managers, managers, or maintenance personnel – System has a maintenance budget reporting module CMMS Implementation The MKE CMMS selection team was made up of Maintenance, Operations, and leadership staff. As part of the selection and implementation, the following items were considered: • The system can track asset information such as cost center, department, location, etc. • The system allows for cost and repair information to be accessed at multiple asset levels • Work orders can be saved to the asset history as one line of information or full detail • All information in the asset history can be accessed by sorting or building ad hoc reports • The system provides a bill of materials for each asset • The system provides user-defined screens for storing information relative to asset items/types, which also can be selected and sorted by reports During the CMMS implementation, the selected vendor was required to perform a full turn-key implementation, including software implementation, hardware installation, data gathering, data loading, system training, and user training. The vendor also provided a fully documented installation plan, and their staff was made up of software experts, maintenance experts, training experts, and airport operations subject matter experts. As part of the initial CMMS implementation, the following activities were considered and implemented: • Work order processing • Materials management/inventory management • Preventive maintenance • Cost controls • Reporting MKE established and then followed the following process flows: • Establish a steering committee for CMMS system • Establish the site implementation team and site project teams

Appendix A A-41 • Establish kick-off meetings for site and project teams • Install hardware and the CMMS software • Initialize CMMS software (create multiple system environments, including development, test, train, and production) • Provide initial training for the site and project teams • Define organizational procedures for CMMS use • Develop written CMMS procedures • Restructure the organization/business processes as needed • Begin developing various data collection formats • Use the formats to start data collection process (asset, stores, PMs, personnel, purchasing, accounting) • Begin data entry process • Begin user training on CMMS system • Begin using work order system • Monitor all usage of CMMS system • Audit CMMS system for 30 days (180 days) • Continue 30-day audits for the 1st six months During the implementation, MKE experienced and addressed several issues that included assessing current and future needs, properly documenting the system user requirements, and correctly estimating time needed to collect and load data. The MKE system is capable of being Cloud based, but during the implementation it was decided not to put the system in the Cloud, mainly due to the additional data that the MKE system handles. MKE’s implementation choice was to use virtual machines in a controlled and secured local environment. Assets in CMMS MKE reviewed the short-term and long-term asset classes and the associated asset data that would be required to achieve full benefit from the system. Most of the asset classes were already located in MKE’s GIS system, and staff was already familiar with it. Soon after, MKE expanded the data collection and added assets to meet the needs of other departments. Additional assets and data were added by requests and staff discussions about how the assets benefited the CMMS. MKE works with the departments, collects the spatial locations of assets, collects the associated attributes, populates them into a mapping service, and publishes to the CMMS. Some of the other drivers in selecting the asset classes included the ability to meet the FAA GIS data requirements and meet the needs of the Maintenance and Operations staff. The following is the list of asset classes included: • Terminal buildings • Runway lighting facilities • Hangars • Parking garages • Pavement • HVAC • Electric • Power plant • Plumbing • Elevators • Escalators/moving walkways • Baggage handling system • Bridges

A-42 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports • Rolling stock (to be implemented as part of Storeroom/Inventory function in spring of 2018) • Utility/treatment facilities on site • Fueling system • Security system (partial) • Signage • Buried piping (water, sewer, gas, electric, etc.) • Storm water infrastructure (culverts, swales, inlets, basins, etc.) • Deicing system • Fire protection Data At MKE, the data structure/system hierarchy was organized around the FAA design. That design is not always the most useful structure for use within a CMMS. Two examples of this are Pavement and Utilities. The FAA hierarchy has nearly 12 layers of data that are all pavement. MKE built a pavement layer, which is a consolidation of the 12 layers into one layer for ease of use within the CMMS. Utilities are developed in-house at a greater level of detail than is required by the FAA. The structures of those data sets do not match the general structure of the FAA requirements, so MKE built a script to transfer between detailed datasets into the general FAA data set. MKE collects different types of data, which include data such as date and times (initiation of work, mitigation, in and out of pending, completions, closed), labor, equipment used, materials used, tasks involved, and links to associated work orders or service requests, links to operational log entries (incidents that trigger work), and PM dates and times. MKE has found that some of the most beneficial data for decision making includes work order timing. The times are developed through a series of calculations to determine average and unique times to mitigate issues, complete work, and times from initiation to close of work, and then those times are used as comparisons and in calculations to determine performance measures and KPIs. MKE has an ongoing data QA/QC process in place. Data is reviewed by departmental supervisors for incorrect data, and the data is scrubbed as part of developing the KPIs. Data with issues outside the parameters of expected results are flagged and reviewed to ensure data was entered properly. MKE uses an SQL database structure that is part of the CMMS database. MKE regularly analyzes all system data. Calculations within the database provide the values of times for mitigation, pending, completion, and close. Those values are compared against standard operating procedures (SOPs) within the dashboard KPI application to determine averages, percentages, etc., and values of success/failure are determined. Management has established goals for performance dependent on categories and type of work. Data points are reported to all levels of management through KPI dashboards and published documents. Data is automatically communicated to staff. The data is established automatically based on date/time entries within the work order. The data points that are communicated are supported by the following metadata: • Work order initiated date, time, and initiated by • Submitted to • In to pending (date/time), and pending reason • Out of pending • Completion date, time, and completed by • Closed date, time, and closed by • Time to mitigation • Time in pending

Appendix A A-43 • Time to completion • Time to close • Labor hours, crew hours (personnel list) • Associated tasks, coinciding with certain work orders • Associated LOGBOOK entries, service requests, and inspections Data is also integrated with data from other system via the KPI dashboard. Data is merged from multiple database tables and integrated for analysis. Analysis and updates are live. New work orders in the system constantly update the performance measures. CMMS Integration MKE’s CMMS is GIS-centric, embedded within the application. It is also the operational LOGBOOK, the reporting mechanism for Part 139 reporting, Wildlife Management, and Incident Management, and is linked to Property Management data. It will be used as the inventory (storeroom) function. Additional integrations include: • Security • Safety management • Wildlife Hazard Management Plan • Pavement management • Scheduling • Electronic logbooks • Incident management • Property management • Airfield lighting • Storerooms • Geographic information • Enterprise asset management (EAM) • Inspection application (Part 139) For the most part, the system integration is self-contained within the CMMS. Some integrations are connected via application programming interfaces within the application tied to database views and links. The overall drivers in developing these integrations were to eliminate duplicate applications and streamline data processing and management. MKE has obtained significant benefits from the development and implementation of system integrations, namely the ability to eliminate duplicate applications and centralization of data and data processing (reporting, analysis). Performance Measurement Primarily, MKE measures system performance through the use of KPIs and reporting. Various reports are used to measure overall productivity and gauge the system’s ability to meet MKE’s CMMS needs. KPIs and reports were developed by management and maintenance leaders, are used within the Maintenance Department, and are seen by executives at the Milwaukee County Department of Transportation. MKE does quarterly reviews of performance measures. For the most part, new KPI development, relative to performance measurement, is instigated by management and reviewed by CMMS and GIS staff to ensure the availability of the data required to calculate the KPI. Performance measures are reviewed by management and senior leadership. Any gaps determined are closed, which could result in a workflow change, change to an SOP, and or change in personnel responsible for the assets and work involved.

A-44 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Decision Making MKE’s CMMS is used on a regular basis to make cost-effective management decisions for capital, maintenance, and operations decisions. As part of the decision-making process, the following reports are used: • Performance measures – times to completion, percentage on time, reasons for not hitting measure • Work order priority analysis • Inventory • Supervisor work order performance • Supervisor/skill work order performance • Work order costs report • Completed work order performance • Asset repair history • Asset maintenance costs repair • Safety work order backlog • Stock item usage report • Work order waiting report • Preventive maintenance • Preventive maintenance overdue report Non-Airports One non-airport organization was included among the case studies. The findings with this organization are relevant in that the utility’s maintenance functions much as an airport in terms assets and facilities. Gwinnett County Department of Water Resources (GCDWR) About GCDWR Gwinnett County is in the state of Georgia, approximately 30 miles northeast of Atlanta. It comprises 16 municipalities, has an area of 437 square miles, and has a population of 859,304 (as of the 2013 Census). GCDWR is a ratepayer-funded utility that serves the county with water, wastewater, and stormwater services. GCDWR’s water and wastewater facilities consist of two water treatment plants with a total water production capacity of 248 million gallons per day (MGD), three wastewater treatment plants with a capacity of 98 MGD, 217 wastewater pump stations, 10 tanks, and nine booster stations. In addition, it has 8,000 miles of pipes and 32,000 facility assets that are worth $9 billion. GCDWR has 614 positions, 242,000 active water accounts, and 168,000 active sewer accounts. GCDWR has a strategic plan, developed in 2012, that is being updated. The utility’s mission is “To provide superior water service at an excellent value,” and its vision is “to be widely recognized as a leader in the water industry.” The utility is dedicated to protecting public health and strives to continuously improve through personnel commitment, innovation, efficiency, and education. Two main challenges that GCDWR faces are: • Keeping, developing, and harnessing institutional knowledge • Recruiting qualified technicians to the department GCDWR is working extensively on these two challenges by developing a platform to encourage its younger staff members to work and interact with seasoned employees and to increase their involvement and responsibilities. Positional cross training is available and encouraged for those employees who want

Appendix A A-45 to learn more about plant operations or maintenance. The county is changing its development program for maintenance technicians to include Qualification Cards to support employee retention and advancement. An example of a new qualification that supports job advancement is to pass the Certified Maintenance Reliability Technician or Certified Maintenance Reliability Professional exam. Organizational Background Organizationally, the CMMS is part of the Asset Reliability Section under the Facility Operations Business Unit. The Facility Operations team’s vision is to achieve “Maintenance, Operations, and Reliability Excellence (MORE).” In addition to the CMMS, the asset reliability section includes predictive maintenance, precision alignment, maintenance planning and scheduling, and reliability engineering. Additional responsibilities include asset criticality ranking, root cause failure investigations, RCM2 [Reliability-Centered Maintenance Mindset], asset management best practices implementation, and maintenance and KPI reporting. Figure A-16 presents the organizational structure for Facility Operations. Asset Reliability deals with various assets as a system from a criticality perspective and strives to ensure asset availability and reliability while having minimal impact and ensuring non-interruption of water operations and services. In 2014, GCDWR conducted a study, survey, and assessment about the condition of asset management best practices and its current gaps. Based on the results, a steering committee developed an asset management best practices roadmap and began implementing the changes it envisioned. The committee was assisted by five focus-area teams from different sections. Initially, maintenance activities were proactive in thinking, but reactive in nature. Currently, they are proactive both in thought and in action. Prior to 2014, anyone would have been able to approve and start a work order. Now it has shifted to become the responsibility of plant operations to review, prioritize, and approve the work orders prior to being planned and scheduled. The most recent statistics show that 92% of the work orders across all facilities are planned and scheduled. Figure A-16. Facility operations organizational chart.

A-46 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports CMMS Selection The implementation of the CMMS started in 2002/2003, driven by maintenance and financial considerations. Leadership and managers were involved in the selection and implementation of the CMMS. The CMMS was under consideration because GCDWR needed to document what assets it owned and how they were being maintained, to classify the assets based on their condition and to track them in terms of cost and functionality. This documentation allowed the maintenance team to have more real-time asset information and communicate with leadership and other sections about maintenance performance and its impact on operations, thereby being able to continue providing superior quality of services to the citizens of the county. GCDWR uses two types of the CMMS: one for vertical assets, and one for linear assets. The vertical asset CMMS is the system that is used within Facility Operations and it is the focus of the discussion in this case study. The CMMS is mainly maintained by the CMMS team that is under the Asset Reliability section of Facility Operations. The team is responsible for all aspects of the CMMS and utilizes vendors as needed for upgrades and enhancements. The current CMMS covers work order processing, materials management, inventory management, PM, predictive maintenance, reactive maintenance, contractor maintenance, personnel, crafts, and reports development. For reports, Facility Operations prefers to use reports customized to their data rather than the system’s built-in reports. It should be noted that more than 90% of the data for maintenance and reliability KPIs comes from the CMMS. System Requirements The functional requirements of the CMMS selection criteria included the ability to: • Track asset information such as cost, department, location, etc. • Allow for cost and repair information to be accessed at multiple asset levels • Save work orders to the asset history as one line of information or in full detail • Access all information in the asset history by sorting or building ad hoc reports • Provide a bill of materials for each asset • Provide user-defined screens for storing information relative to asset items, which also can be selected and sorted by reports The PM requirements that were considered in selecting the CMMS included the ability to: • Schedule PMs by calendar, readings, condition, operational parameters, etc. • Allow for an unlimited number of PMs per asset • Allow for multiple crafts scheduled on a PM • Schedule PMs for any specific date and/or day of the week • Forecast labor resources, material requirements, or special tools; for PMs due for any specified time period • Schedule PMs for assets or locations • Combine all PMs that due for an asset manually or by sequencing • Generate the PM work orders manually or allow the system to auto-generate them daily, weekly, or monthly The work order requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included: • Tracking information at the work order task level for planned versus actuals, for labor, materials, tools, contractors, and safety • Producing a report of all work orders which can be sorted by their current status in the work order workflow

Appendix A A-47 • Tracking work order backlog by craft, crew, department, planner, supervisor, or other categories • Updating work order status either manually or automatically vie workflow configurations or list • Providing user-defined screens for storing information relative to asset items/types, which also can be selected and sorted by reports The MRO inventory and procurement requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included the ability to: • Generate a spares reorder report when the quantity on hand drops below a minimum level • Manage multiple warehouses • Transfer items between storerooms and warehouses • Integrate inventory system with the vendors’ own purchasing system • Generate a purchase requisition if a reorder point is reached • Produce performance reports for purchasing section that include overdue purchase orders, inactive parts, or inventory valuation • Automatically track cost to the work order on an itemized basis The maintenance software analysis requirements that were considered when selecting the CMMS included the ability to: • Be operated by operations and maintenance personnel • Apply necessary modules to meet the organization’s needs (PMs, assets, work orders, purchasing, inventory, integration, etc.) • Provide single, semi-multi, or multi-user capabilities • Closely integrate all system modules • Archive files and retrieve files for reports spanning long time periods The implementation requirements that were considered in selecting the CMMS included the following: • The vendor performing full turn-key implementation, software implementation, data loading, system training, and user training • The vendor having software experts, maintenance experts, training experts, and airport operations subject matter experts on staff • The system requiring no customization • The ability to update software on a regular basis The preferred training method at GCDWR is to have the training conducted by the CMMS team and in- house users while having the vendor present for questions or clarifications. From experience, GCDWR does not prefer that the vendor conduct the training for the system because it is too rigid and does not meet the users’ specific needs or other implemented processes at GCDWR. The management reporting requirement was not part of the CMMS selection. It was not considered a key selection criterion because the system’s data capture and reporting meets GCDWR needs without customization. CMMS Implementation When implementing the CMMS, GCDWR followed an implementation flow consisting of the following steps: • Establish steering committee for the CMMS • Establish the site implementation team • Establish site project teams • Promote kick-off meeting for site and project teams

A-48 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports • Install hardware and the CMMS software • Initialize the CMMS software (create multiple system environments, including development, test, train, and production) • Provide initial training for the site and project teams • Define organizational procedures for the CMMS use • Develop written CMMS procedures • Begin developing various data collection formats • Use the formats to start data collection process (asset, stores, PMs, personnel, purchasing, accounting) • Begin data entry process • Establish stores stock levels • Begin user training on the CMMS • Begin using work order system • Monitor all usage of the CMMS • Conduct audits periodically, ad hoc, and at least once a year Data contained in the CMMS is mainly for asset condition and performance and does not include financial, budgeting, human resources, and time keeping for payroll. The data in the database covers more than 95% of the assets and within 12 months it contains 100% of GCDWR’s assets. Currently, 92% of all maintenance activities are formally planned and scheduled. Further, nearly 100% of the maintenance inventory and purchasing functions are documented in the system. During the CMMS implementation, the team faced the following challenges: • Assessing future current and needs (The team did not conduct this type of assessment efficiently, especially in communicating with employees about the system’s importance and how it will benefit their work and improve on it.) • Properly documenting the system user requirements or “getting user input” • Conducting a good search in the CMMS marketplace (The implementation team wished that it had done more research in the CMMS marketplace.) • Obtaining sufficient training and/or documentation from the vendor • Correctly estimating the time needed to collect and load data (At the beginning of the implementation, it took the team seven months to collect and document 2,200 assets in the database.) Assets in CMMS GCDWR defines an asset as any item that has a value greater than $5,000.00 and a useful life greater than 1 year. From a CMMS perspective, Facility Operations defines an asset more broadly and includes many assets that do not meet the department’s definition. The majority of the assets at GCDWR are managed through the CMMS. A CMMS is used to manage all Facility Operations assets. GCDWR has plans to add more assets, such as the central office facility, into a CMMS. These assets were chosen to be added and be part of a CMMS to: • Inventory the assets that GCDWR owns, operates, and maintains • Learn more about the assets in terms of operation and maintenance resource requirements • Develop the real maintenance cost • Analyze equipment reliability • Properly conduct root cause failure investigations on critical asset failures The process of documenting and adding these assets to the CMMS database started manually. The main questions that the team asked when documenting the asset were, “How do we respond when it fails? Do we repair or replace?”

Appendix A A-49 A New Asset Form template was developed for new assets. The template was designed to be generic so as to apply to a variety of asset types. It includes 173 attributes, as shown in Appendix B. As part of the submittal for new capital projects, the contractor completes and submits a New Asset Form to the project manager, who then forwards the form to the CMMS Administration Group to add to the CMMS. After Administration reviews the form for accuracy and data completeness, the asset IDs are assigned and added to the form, which is then sent to Finance so the CMMS data can match the Finance fixed asset registry. This asset documentation process by the Asset Management Group provides assets’ useful life estimates to Finance. Data Asset data that are collected by GCDWR cover 173 attributes (Appendix B). These attributes include the information for any type of asset. The collected data is mainly used to support the performance measures that are used as input into decision making. Collected data, prior to uploading and using it, is checked and cleansed through a QA/QC process: • Individual collecting and providing the data reviews it. • The CMMS group reviews the data. • Planners/schedulers review and audit the data, after it is uploaded. • Data is formally audited for accuracy. The CMMS uses three servers: (1) Database; (2) Production; and (3) Development. Data are backed up nightly and three days of back-ups are consistently maintained. Additionally, the asset manuals are saved on a three-terabyte storage array. As part of the advancement in data storage, GCDWR is considering a Cloud solution through a technology group and IT. The CMMS analysis team is responsible for loading, and cleaning the data, as well as providing quality control. Data from the CMMS is regularly queried, may be combined with other systems data, and used to develop actionable information. This type of information is produced in the periodic reports and updates. CMMS Integration At GCDWR, the CMMS is the main system used to manage maintenance activities. The data, information, and reports produced and managed via the CMMS are robust and reliable, and they encompass maintenance-specific activities and needs. At this time, GCDWR chooses not to integrate the CMMS with its other systems due to limited value added to the organization. Performance Measurement Facility Operations utilizes performance measures to manage and report the performance of the assets within GCDWR. Working with outside experts, GCDWR deputy directors, section managers, trades managers, and plant managers developed these performance measures, based on the utility’s gap analysis and improvement plan that formed the basis for its journey to excellence. A list of 18 performance measures are regularly measured and reported to leadership, then shared across facilities to all staff. These metrics illustrate how their performance is progressing, which metrics need more attention, and how these metrics can be improved. The list of these performance measures is presented in Table A-11. Appendix B presents figures of the historical data of the different performance measures. The majority of the data (>90%) coming out of the CMMS is reported to and used by Facility Operations Leadership. The CMMS data file (in Microsoft Excel) is shared monthly via e-mail, and regular meetings are held to update section heads and leadership about the work and progress. Additionally, the CMMS data and spreadsheets are available on a share drive, soon to be moved to a BI

A-50 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports platform. Additionally, the performance measures are communicated in a variety of reports: (1) monthly performance measures; (2) daily progress; (3) weekly number of assets down; (4) reactive maintenance; and (5) Red/Green. The Red/Green report is a weekly report that is produced every Monday, highlighting the following information: • Percentage of available labor schedule • Scheduled work orders • Incomplete work orders • Scheduled success • Percentage of break in work orders (mainly priorities 1, 2) Table A-11. Performance measures. Performance Measure Performance Target Leading/Lagging Asset Availability % Increasing Trend – 97% Lagging Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) in Hours/Minutes Increasing Trend Leading/Lagging Schedule Success % (Monthly Average) 80% Leading Ready to Schedule Backlog—Weeks 2–4 Weeks Leading % Proactive Labor Hours vs. Total Labor Hours (Proactive + Reactive) 80% Leading % of Predictive Maintenance Hours 15% Leading Average Mean Time to Repair in Hours Decreasing Trend Leading/Lagging Planned and Scheduled Maintenance Hours (%) 90% Leading Planned and Scheduled Maintenance Work Orders (%) 95% Leading % of Availability Hours Scheduled (Monthly Average) 100% Leading Order Cycle Time in Days < 1 Leading PM Compliance % 95% Leading/Lagging Facility Operations Craft Utilization (%) 75% Leading Stock Outs 0 Leading Maintenance Cost as a % of RAV 2-3.5% Lagging % of Emergency & Urgent Labor Hours vs. Total Labor Hours (All Work Types) < 7.5% Leading Total Deferred Maintenance Work Orders Decreasing Trend or (0) Leading Total Number Reported Maintenance Related Safety Incidents Last 12 Months No Incidents in Last Month Leading/Lagging Decision Making The CMMS is an integral part of the decision-making process at GCDWR. It is used, on regular basis, to make cost-effective management, capital, maintenance, and operational decisions. More specifically, the data from the CMMS assists GCDWR in identifying asset failure modes and maintenance activities. Ultimately, information from the CMMS drives decision making on the basis of performance, as measured by the various performance measures.

Appendix A A-51 The types of reports that the CMMS produces, are the following: • Work order priority analysis • Planner performance • Scheduling activities • Inventory • Completed work order performance • Work order backlog summary • Asset repair history • Asset maintenance repair costs • Safety work order backlog • Stock item usage report • Work order waiting report • PM • PM overdue • Predictive maintenance This information is reported to the leadership through performance reports, periodic reports, the dashboard, and regular briefings.

B-1 A P P E N D I X B Gwinnett County Department of Water Resources List of Asset Attributes, CMMS Workflow, Work Order Prioritization, and KPIs Table B-1. List of new asset attributes. Attributes Attributes Attributes DCS TAG_NO Gear Reducer Manufacturer Motor2 Manufacturer New Asset? Y or N Gear2Reducer Manufacturer Motor3 Manufacturer Structure Title Gear Model Motor4 Manufacturer Equipment Description Gear2 Serial Motor2 Type Manufacturer Gear Reducer Type Motor3 Type Vendor Gear2ReducerType Motor4 Type Model Number Gear Reducer Ratio Motor2 Horsepower Serial Number Gear2Reducer Ratio Motor3 Horsepower Purchase Price Gear Input-Output Motor4 Horsepower Installed Date (Substantial Completion) Gear2 Input-Output Motor2 Insulation Class Warranty Expiration date Gear Torque Motor3 Insulation Class Pro Rate/ Extend Warranty Gear2Torque Motor4 Insulation Class Useful Life (Years) Gear Speed Motor2 Enclosure Impeller Size Gear2 Speed Motor3 Enclosure Suction Line Size Gear HP Motor4 Enclosure Discharge Line Size Gear2 HP Motor2 Frame E_HP Gear Weight Motor3 Frame E_VOLT Gear2 Weight Motor4 Frame E_PHASE Diameter Motor2 Power Required E_AMPs Length Motor3 Power Required E_RPM Width Motor4 Power Required GPM Height Motor2 Amps MGD Check Valve Size Motor3 Amps TDH Check Valve Type Motor4 Amps Type Base Elevation Motor2 Service Factor E_CAPACITY Source Motor3 Service Factor Hose/Insert Type Actuator Manufacturer Motor4 Service Factor Hose/Tube Size Actuator Model Motor2 Speed

B-2 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Attributes Attributes Attributes Rated Pressure Actuator Size Motor3 Speed Service Actuator Serial No Motor4 Speed Capacity Per Revolution Actuator HP Motor2 FullLoad Body Style Actuator Base Motor3FullLoad Cast And Rotor Actuator Coupling Motor4FullLoad E_Weight Actuator Speed Motor2NoiseLevel Motor Manufacturer Actuator Torque Motor3NoiseLevel Motor Serial Actuator Temp Code Motor4NoiseLevel Motor Model Lubrication Motor2DesignTemp Motor Type Actuator Motor Rating Motor3DesignTemp Motor Horsepower Actuator Elect Class Motor4DesignTemp Motor Insulation Actuator Weight Motor2DriveType Motor Insulation Class NEMA Enclosure Motor3DriveType Motor Enclosure Construction Material Motor4DriveType Motor Frame Actuator Motor2Volts Motor Power Req Gear Box Motor3Volts Motor Amps Valve Size Motor4Volts Motor Service Factor Screw Diameter Motor2Phase Motor Speed Screw Length Motor3Phase Motor Full Load Flight Size Motor4Phase Motor Noise Level Screen Width Motor2Model Motor Design Temp E_Speed Motor3Model Motor Drive Type E1Type Motor4Model Motor Weight E2Type Motor2Serial Asset Location ID E1Manufacturer Motor3Serial Inventory Number E1Manufacturer Motor4Serial Asset Class E2Manufacturer Motor2Weight Sub Number E1ModelNo Motor3Weight E2ModelNo Motor4Weight E1SerialNo E2SerialNo

Appendix B B-3

B-4 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Figure B-2. Work order priorities. Figure B-3. KPI—proactive vs. reactive.

Appendix B B-5 Figure B-4. KPI—mean time between failures. Figure B-5. KPI—mean time to repair.

B-6 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Figure B-6. KPI—asset availability. Figure B-7. KPI—asset availability.

Appendix B B-7 Figure B-8. KPI—work orders by category. Figure B-9. KPI—planned/scheduled maintenance work orders.

B-8 Guidebook for Advanced Computerized Maintenance Management System Integration at Airports Figure B-10. KPI—planned/scheduled maintenance hours. Figure B-11. KPI—deferred PMs.

Appendix B B-9 Figure B-12. KPI—craft utilization hours. Figure B-13. KPI—estimated backlog labor hours.