nv 2004 annual maintenance plan

8/2/2019 NV 2004 Annual Maintenance Plan

1/15

1June 19, 2003

Annual Maintenance Plan

NSO/BN Success Story


2/15

2June 19, 2003

Status of Federal Facilities

1990s GAO & Federal Facility Council studies

Demo of Unneeded Buildings Can Avoid Op Costs (GAO)

Real Property Management Needs Improvement (GAO)

Budgeting for Facilities Maintenance and Repair (FFC)

Maintenance and Repair of Public Buildings (FFC)

Basic conclusion: Federal government not spending enough on facility

maintenance
http://books.nap.edu/catalog/9226.htmlhttp://books.nap.edu/catalog/9807.html


3/15

3June 19, 2003

Findings

GAO study INEEL

$ facility maintenance used for ops

No Site Maintenance Plan

No standards or performance goals

No CMMS

Conclusion

INEEL had NOT maintained facilities in a safe manner


4/15

4June 19, 2003

Congressional action

Began to require comptroller statements

Began to question use of funds

Began to threaten to withhold funds

DOE had budget of $6B to fund facilities Could not account for $4B

FY03 Congress fenced FY04 maintenance funds

DOE had language amended


5/15

5June 19, 2003

DOE/NNSA Actions

1998 began to require reporting of deferred, actual andrequired maintenance $ in FIMS

2000 required an Annual TYCSP No specific guidance until 2003

2001 required F&I crosscut reporting 2004 LCAM revised to RPAM

Requires Sustainment Plan equivalent to our Annual MaintenancePlan

2004 NA-10 continues to drill-down Independent review of deferred maintenance DP will require Annual Maintenance Plan (in to-be-released letter

from Dr. Beckner)


6/15

6June 19, 2003

NSO/BN History

2001 began discussing with EAMD the concept of AMP No examples in the complex (Good or otherwise)

Unsure of content requirements

2002 Maintenance Plan requested in NSO task plan tosupport the TYCSP Content to revolve around actual, deferred, & required

maintenance

2003 AMP requested as standalone document General format was agreed upon

Unofficial feedback and acceptance

Customer did not like

2004 AMP broadened, included as requirement Became a funded activity

Initial feed back positive


7/15

7June 19, 2003

FY03 Challenges

No direct funded maintenance in initial plan

NNSA/NSO wanted complete picture of maintenance

Fiscal tools not in place

Planning process hugely labor intensive


8/15

8June 19, 2003

FY03 Actions

Data integration project

Align fiscal reporting - TYCSP, AMP and the Quarterly Crosscut

reported the same data

All are connected to the data in the Oracle financial system

Identify a single POC for financial reporting and forInfrastructure reporting

By the end of FY03 established a common mechanism for

reporting direct and indirect maintenance contributions


9/159June 19, 2003

FY04 Actions

Coordinate AMP w/TYCSP

Integrate Infrastructure and

Maintenance planning efforts

Instituted the FISWGimproved efficiency Develop requirements document

Consistent w/430.1B (RPAM)

Develop FY05 requirements for budget cycle

Publish draft FY05 AMP 1Nov04 15 May 15 July? NA-10 Guidance coming

Final in parallel w/TYCSP


10/1510June 19, 2003

NA-10 Guidance

Methodology and criteria used to identify and prioritize assets

Method to sustain assets

Site Condition Assessment Program

Process for identifying periodic recapitalization needs

Site planning and budgeting process descriptions pertaining to

Maintenance and maintenance backlog prioritization Project scope and estimation

Long-term investment planning

Funding needs for RTBF direct-funded assets - FY2005-2010 period;

Funding mechanisms designed to prioritize

Facility operations

Maintenance of existing facilities and infrastructure Maintenance of completed line item construction projects

Project Execution Program

Discussion of how projects are included in the program

How Site establishes priorities among projects

Quality management practices used to control and improve maintenance processes

Show me your annual maintenance plan Oh by the way it should contain


11/1511June 19, 2003

FY04 AMP Components

The Maintenance Process

FY04 Budgeted Maintenance

FY05-09 Sustainment and Recapitalization

Acronyms Definitions

Planning Assumptions

FY04 Budgeted Maintenance by Facility

FY04-09 Planned Maintenance FY05-09 DM Buy Down

Deferred Maintenance Summary

Utility Management Plans


12/1512June 19, 2003

Deferred Maintenance Buy-down

AMP Appendix F buy down plan

Categorized Facilities and Infrastructure Mission EssentialSDSC

Mission SupportOperating but not ME

Balance of PlantNot operating

Applied indirect funding to worst FCIs in pool>$20K chunks - $2.5M budgeted

Applied M&R funding to worst FCIs in pool Used for larger projects

Applied FIRP/LI listed projects FIRP - $

LI - $

Applied proposed GPP/R-I-K to worst direct funded facility FCIs Initial application of ~50% of allocation

Grows in out years

Facility Condition Index (FCI)=

Deferred Maintenance (DM)Replacement Plant Value (RPV)


13/1513June 19, 2003

Deferred Maintenance Summary

First attempt at quantifying annual growth of deferred

maintenance

Only included operating buildings

Infrastructure has little or no data

Bottom line about 2.2% growth

Equates to little or no recapitalization

Current deferred maintenance about $330M

Doesnt include roofs

Only about $75M in facilities deficiencies


14/1515June 19, 2003

Deferred Maintenance by System

16.2

28.2

11.3

4.48.2

24.7

0.10.7 0.00.1 1.0 1.0

135.2

20.2

84.9

1.4-

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

A10/

Foundations

A20/Basement

Construction

B10/

Superstructure

B20/

ExteriorClosure

B30/Roofing

C10/Interior

Construction

C20/Interior

Stairs

C30/Interior

Finishes

D10/Conveying

Systems

D20/Mechanical

-Plumbing

D30/Mechanical

-HVAC

D40/Mechanical

-FireProtection

D50/Electrical

Systems

F10/Specialty

Systems

G20/Sitework

Improvements

G30/Sitework

MechanicalUtil.

G40/Sitework

ElectricalUtil.

G90/Sitework

Other

DeferredMaintenan

ce($M)

OSF

BLDG/TRAILER


15/15

What is our situation?Facility Age Mix

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51

Age

No.

Facilities

Averageage is 31

years

Electrical andmechanicalsystems are

worn out at 30years

Structuralsystemsrequire

renewal at

50 years

We need to beginplanning for

replacement of

electrical and

mechanical systems in

these buildings now!

nv 2004 annual maintenance plan

Documents