Port of Seattle Aviation Division
Asset Management Gap Analysis Report
VERSION 3 - FINAL. December 14 th, 2018

Release Details
This Document
Release Date

December 14, 2018

Filename

20181214_Port of Seattle_Gap Analysis_Report v3_FINAL

Author

Reviewed and
Approved by

Name

Keyur Shah and Christopher Senesi

Title

Project Manager and Technical Lead, WSP

Name

Christian Roberts

Title

Principal-in-Charge, WSP

Version History
Rev.

Author

Reviewer

Status

Date

1
2
3

Christopher Senesi
Keyur Shah
Christopher Senesi

Keyur Shah
Christian Roberts
Christian Roberts

Internal Draft
Draft for client review
Final for client delivery

07/01/18
09/28/18
12/14/18

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Executive Summary
To address the asset management needs of the Port of Seattle Aviation Division, WSP conducted a gap
analysis to identify current asset management practices and provide recommendations for improvement.
Overview
This report presents the findings of an asset management gap analysis conducted
for the Port of Seattle Aviation Division (generally referred to as "the Port" in
this report). Its purpose is to present observations on current asset
management processes and practices in order to identify opportunities for
improvements in line with good industry practices and global standards.

Figure 1: Asset Management Eight Assessment Areas

Asset management is the optimized lifecycle management of physical assets
(fleet, facilities, and infrastructure). It is about being able to make the right
decisions based on facts, to do the right work in the right place, and to spend
money where it is most needed. To achieve a mature asset management
program, it is important to have clear organizational asset management
objectives that align key decisions as well as established asset management
processes that provide consistent working practices.

Approach
WSP used its proprietary Asset Management Capability Assessment Model
(am2c) to conduct this assessment. The model assesses the Port's asset
management practices against 267 questions that describe the broadest scope
of activities (subjects) that should be considered when optimizing the
management of assets. The subjects are grouped into eight assessment areas or
pathways that describe specific operational processes for asset management success.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

i

WSP held a series of interviews with over forty Port of Seattle Aviation Division staff
members between March and May 2018. WSP found the Port staff to be very engaged
during the process, and received additional reference material and clarification that was
used in this report.
As with all management system processes, the most mature asset management processes
are those that are clearly defined, applied, measured, integrated with other processes,
reviewed, and continuously improved. As outlined in Table 1, the assessment in this report
has awarded highest ratings (Excelling) to those aspects of the agency's management
systems that meet these criteria. Processes that were absent scored lowest (Innocent).
Processes that were compliant with industry good practice or the international standard
for asset management (ISO-55001:2014) received a median score (Competent). Processes
were assessed insofar as they contribute to an effective and mature asset management
system-not whether each process is effective and mature.

Table 1: Grade Description
Grade

Description

Innocent

The organization is starting to learn
about the importance of Asset
Management

Aware

The organization is aware of the
importance of Asset Management and
is starting to apply this knowledge

Establishing

The organization is developing its
Asset Management activities and
establishing them as business as
usual

Competent

The organization's Asset Management
activities are developed, embedded
and are becoming effective

Effective

The organization's Asset Management
activities are fully effective and are
being integrated throughout the
business

Excelling

The organization's Asset Management
activities are fully integrated and are
being continuously improved to
deliver optimal whole life value

Results and Key Findings
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division's asset management processes were overall scored as
"Establishing". As per the grading key in Table 1, this indicates that the Port has
established activities and processes in many of the assessment areas that form the overall
asset management system. However, many important processes are not yet properly
defined and embedded.
The overall grade and assessment area grades mask a wide variance between the
maturities across and within the 31 subjects that comprise the pathways. The scores are
detailed in the main body of this report along with identified recommendations, while a
summary of the scores for each of the eight assessment areas are shown in Figure 2.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

ii

Figure 2: Asset Management Maturity Scorecard Snapshot

The majority of the eight pathways were assessed at a grade of "Establishing" for the Port of Seattle Aviation Division. Capital Planning and
Delivery as well as Operations and Fault Management had the most mature grade at "Competent." While the Control of Assets and Asset
Management Planning received the lowest scores, a number of improvement initiatives already are underway to address the opportunities
identified in these pathways.

Next Steps
The recommendations identified in this report will be developed into a series of projects, forming the asset management improvement program
for the Port. The WSP team will next prepare a project brief for each recommendation, identifying an order of magnitude cost estimate,
benefits, schedule estimate, dependencies and other elements. The WSP team will then work with the Port staff to prioritize the
recommendations/projects and develop an improvement roadmap. The prioritized list of projects along with schedule, cost and resource
requirements will form the Port's implementation plan for asset management improvements.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

iii

Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................................i
Overview ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... i
Approach ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... i
Results and Key Findings ................................................................................................................................................................................. ii
Next Steps ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... iii
1

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Terms of Reference ................................................................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Document Relationship to Overall Project ............................................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Next Steps ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

2

Gap Analysis Approach ..................................................................................................................................................................................2
2.1 Overview................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Assessment Criteria................................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Sources of Evidence .................................................................................................................................................................. 4
Port of Seattle Aviation Division Evidence.................................................................................................................................. 4
Scoring the Assessment............................................................................................................................................................. 4

3

Gap Analysis Findings.....................................................................................................................................................................................6
3.1 Summary................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6
3.2 Alignment to Organizational Goals .......................................................................................................................................................... 9
Assessment Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 9

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

iv

Key Observations .....................................................................................................................................................................10
Best Practice Benchmark ..........................................................................................................................................................10
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................14
3.3 Control of Assets ................................................................................................................................................................................... 15
Assessment Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................16
Key Observations .....................................................................................................................................................................17
Best Practice Benchmark ..........................................................................................................................................................17
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................21
3.4 Asset Management Planning ................................................................................................................................................................. 23
Assessment Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................23
Key Observations .....................................................................................................................................................................24
Best Practice Benchmark ..........................................................................................................................................................24
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................29
3.5 Capital Planning and Delivery ................................................................................................................................................................ 30
Assessment Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................30
Key Observations .....................................................................................................................................................................31
Best Practice Benchmark ..........................................................................................................................................................31
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................34
3.6 Maintenance Planning and Delivery ...................................................................................................................................................... 35
Assessment Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................36
Key Observations .....................................................................................................................................................................37
Best Practice Benchmark ..........................................................................................................................................................37
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................42
3.7 Operations and Fault Management ....................................................................................................................................................... 44

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

v

Assessment Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................44
Key Observations .....................................................................................................................................................................45
Best Practice Benchmark ..........................................................................................................................................................45
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................47
3.8 Informed Decisions ............................................................................................................................................................................... 48
Assessment Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................48
Key Observations .....................................................................................................................................................................49
Best Practice Benchmark ..........................................................................................................................................................49
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................55
3.9 Resource Capabilities ............................................................................................................................................................................ 57
Assessment Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................57
Key Observations .....................................................................................................................................................................58
Best Practice Benchmark ..........................................................................................................................................................58
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................61
4

Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 63
4.1 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................................................ 63

Appendix A: Existing Information System Configuration .....................................................................................................................................75
A.1 Current Application Architecture............................................................................................................................................................. 75
A.2 Recommended (To-Be) Application Architecture ..................................................................................................................................... 78

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

vi

1 Introduction
This report presents the findings of an asset management gap analysis conducted for the Port of Seattle
Aviation Division by WSP.
1.1 Terms of Reference

1.2 Document Relationship to Overall Project

This report presents the findings of an asset management gap
analysis conducted for the Port of Seattle Aviation Division
(generally referred to as "the Port" in this report). It presents
observations on the Port's asset management processes and
practices and compares them to good industry practices to identify
gaps and to present recommendations for improvement.

This document represents the deliverable for the gap analysis (Task
2) and the information systems assessment task (Task 3) of the
project. The content is based on the outputs of interviews with over
forty staff members and document reviews conducted at the Port
between March and May 2018. This report will support developing
an implementation plan and business case for the improvement of
the Port's asset management capabilities.

This report:
·
·

·
·

Summarizes the analysis approach, including the breadth of
areas considered (Section 2)
Provides observations on current practices and an asset
management maturity scorecard grouped into eight
assessment areas, or pathways (Section 3)
Summarizes recommendations and next steps (Section 4)
Evaluates existing information system configuration and
presents recommendations (Appendix A)

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

1.3 Next Steps
This report is the principal deliverable from the 'Gap Analysis' stage
of the project. The observations and recommendations from this
deliverable will be used to develop an improvement program that
sets out the roadmap and projects for implementing the
recommendations from this report. The list of projects along with
schedule, cost and resource requirements will form the Port's
implementation plan and business case for asset management
improvements.

1

2 Gap Analysis Approach
WSP has used its industry-leading Asset Management Capability Assessment Model (am2c) to assess,
measure, evaluate, and benchmark the Port of Seattle Aviation Division's capability and support the
development of an asset management improvement program.
2.1 Overview
WSP has developed an industry-leading Asset Management Capability Assessment Model
(am2c) that draws on over 20 years of experience in managing critical infrastructure. The
model is mapped to global standards, industry best practices, and national industry
legislative requirements.
The model provides an assessment of an organization's asset management maturity based
on the degree of formality and optimization of processes and practices-from ad-hoc, to
formally defined steps, to managed results, to active optimization. Its output is used to
evaluate and benchmark an organization and support the development of an asset
management improvement program. This approach ensures consistent and repeatable
assessment and provides access to a significant global benchmark pool.

2.2 Assessment Criteria
The model assesses an organization against 267 questions that describe the broadest scope
of activities (subjects) that should be considered when optimizing the management of
assets. The subjects are grouped into eight assessment areas or pathways that describe
specific operational processes for asset management success (Figure 2-1).

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Mapped to best practice - including:
à Requirements set out in the International
Standard ISO-55001:2014 and BSI PAS55:2008, which we were contributing
authors of
à Recommendations in the ACHRP's Guide
for Airport Asset Management
à Best Practice laid out in the International
Infrastructure Management Manual, which
we were contributing authors of
à The Asset Management landscape as set
out by the Global Forum for Maintenance
and Asset Management
à Requirements for risk management set out
in ISO-31000:2009
à Reliability and Maintenance best practice
states as developed by our understanding
of best practice maintenance of critical
assets

2

Figure 2-1: Eight Assessment Pathways

ASSET MANAGEMENT PATHWAYS - structure of the am2c assessment model

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

3

Sources of Evidence

The questions in the assessment model are grouped into four
categories, and the forms of evidence identified in Table 2.1 were
typically used to support the maturity evaluation.
Table 2.1: Assessment Question Types and Evidence Sought
Type of Question

Source of Evidence

Completion: Establish
whether something exists or
not

Relevant documentation-processes,
plans, reports, and information system
content

Effectiveness: Establish how
well something is carried out
by the organization

Judgment or interviews

Integration: Establish how
well something is integrated
with other business and asset
management functions

Judgment and reviews of relevant
documentation

Commitment: Establish how
committed the organization is
and what is being done to
achieve best practice

Judgement and interviews to determine
how committed the organization is and
whether that is enforced
(documentation evidence) and reviewed
(documentation evidence)

Scoring the Assessment

The key difference between the maturity grades is the
definition and application of the processes.
WSP has used the industry standard for asset management maturity
scoring from the Institute of Asset Management and the
International Infrastructure Management Manual. Alignment to
requirements set out in ISO-55001:2014 would be achieved at the
higher end of the "competent" spectrum or higher.
The key difference between the maturity grades is the definition
and application of the processes related to asset management
activities. As shown in Figure 2-2, more novice agencies would score
lower, principally because while they may perform asset
management activities, their approaches are not always consistent,
standardized, and/or not documented. As an organization develops
its asset management maturity, its approach to asset management
activities becomes more consistent and more repeatable. The
approach can be formally defined and documented in a procedure
once it is repeatable. Beyond that, agencies can manage, integrate,
improve, and optimize their procedures.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division Evidence

Although some documents were shared to support comments made
during the workshops and meetings, much of the assessment was
conducted on an observational basis based on feedback from the
interviewees.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

4

Figure 2-2: Asset Management Maturity Scale

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

5

3 Gap Analysis Findings
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division's asset management processes and practices are at the ESTABLISHING
level of maturity.
3.1 Summary
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division currently performs at the
"Establishing" level of maturity in terms of its asset management
processes and practices. Figure 3-1 shows where the Port resides on
the asset management maturity spectrum and Figure 3-2 provides a
detailed asset management scorecard. The Port demonstrated a
clear understanding of the current and future forecast demand for
services; however, the translation into requirements for assets -
particularly aging infrastructure - is not clearly documented. The
Port has not established strategies for managing its existing
infrastructure assets. Asset class strategies would provide the
necessary direction for developing asset management plans.
Figure 3-1: Port of Seattle Aviation Division Result

Further, while performance metrics are in place to monitor asset
reliability and service performance, most areas reported that the

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

metrics are not meaningful and do not support performance
improvement analysis.
A key opportunity for improvement is risk management. Current
practices are focused on insurance against asset loss and liability.
There is no formal enterprise risk management program in place
that addresses asset and asset management risk. Most areas
reported having in place tactical risk approaches to prioritize
workload. However, there is a need to developed enterprise-wide
risk management processes that enable the capture of all asset and
asset management risks to inform whole-life asset decisions.
A further key opportunity is the development of asset management
plans. The general lack of asset management plans inhibits the Ports
ability to justify the need for asset investment and to ensure the
impact of its organization strategies and policies are adequately
planned for. A challenge to developing cost optimized plans will be
the lack of cost data as, in many areas, costs are not captured to
sufficient granularity to support analysis. This will impact the Ports
ability to undertake whole-life cost analysis in its asset management
plans.
To ensure asset activities are controlled, it is important to establish
standards, policies, processes and procedures. It is acknowledged

6

that the Port has developed and implemented a series of standards
and procedures for managing different lifecycle activities - including
for example design standards and asset commissioning procedures.
However, it was noted that the application of these processes is
inconsistent. Further, the Port needs to develop an overall
management system, with integrated processes and procedures
that cover all lifecycles stages and organization functions.
A significant issue facing the Port is poor quality information that
provides analytical or management support. While the Port has
invested in best-of-breed enterprise applications, the use of these
systems is not consistent. In addition, there is a lack of system
integration which results in manual reconciliation of data from
multiple data sets which is both time consuming and introduces
inaccuracies.

Across all asset areas and departments, we observed teams that are
very focused on doing everything necessary to deliver safe assets
and to maintain the highest levels of reliability possible. There was
some confusion between the departments regarding roles and
responsibilities for asset management.
Asset management is innately integrated, so it is important that the
Port thinks through how the organization should perform as a
collective and work to reduce silo-mentality at every opportunity. A
steering committee should be established to oversee the
implementation of the recommendations in this document.

We repeatedly observed departments with home-grown
applications, that, essentially provide collections of data to inform
work activities. Without a single source of truth for assets there is a
risk of inefficient and effective asset management decisions and
working practices. A digital strategy should be developed to
establish a path for how the application of technology and
information can be used to improve the Port's performance.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

7

Figure 3-2: Port of Seattle Aviation Division Asset Management Scorecard

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

8

3.2 Alignment to Organizational Goals
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division is graded as ESTABLISHING in the Alignment to Organizational Goals
assessment area.
The Alignment to Organizational Goals pathway assesses the extent to which the organization has processes and procedures in place to provide
clear management direction and minimize disconnects in alignment between stakeholder needs, business goals, and the activities and decisions
that contribute to asset management outcomes.
Three quality areas are assessed:
1. Business Planning and Management: Assesses the degree to which the organization has formal practices in place for understanding
stakeholder needs and setting a realistic business plan and goals. This area also considers the organization's frameworks for
management review and enterprise risk management and how they impact overall business planning.
2. Asset Management Direction: Assesses the practices related to establishing requirements for asset management capabilities aligned
to the organization's goals and objectives, including the asset management policy, objectives, and strategy.
3. Needs and Expectations of Stakeholders: Assesses the understanding of customer needs and regulatory and legislative requirements.
This includes the understanding of current and future demand and levels of service.

Assessment Summary

Figure 3-3: Alignment to Organizational Goals Assessment Results

Figure 3-3 shows the level of maturity for the Alignment to
Organizational Goals assessment area. Asset Management Direction
is the area with the greatest opportunity for improvement. This will
help align the asset management objectives with the Port's strategic
business objectives and ensure that all stakeholders understand the
direction for asset management improvements at the Port. This will
also help stakeholders understand the present and future demands
on the assets that are critical for delivering the Port's level of service
to its customers and the impetus behind the improvements.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

9

Key Observations
3.2.2.1

Business Planning and Management

Long-range planning includes short and long-term forecasts,
but lacks consideration of core infrastructure reliability.

The Port of Seattle uses a rolling five-year Long-Range Plan (LRP) to
address the various strategic objectives outlined in the Port of
Seattle's Century Agenda. The Century Agenda, as adopted by the
Board of Commissioners at the Port of Seattle, identifies specific
strategic objectives to accomplish the agency's mission of creating
jobs in Seattle and across the state. The LRP includes short-term and
long-term demand forecasting to help account for growth and
expansion at both the airport and seaport. However, this forecasting
and capacity analysis does not consider the condition of current
infrastructure and assets. Certain aspects of meeting customer
demand, such as amenities, are considered, but ensuring core
infrastructure asset reliability is not explicitly considered.
3.2.2.2

Asset Management Direction

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division has recognized the value of
assessing their asset management maturity before investing in a
program of change.

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division sets annual priorities, which are
prominently displayed across the airport's office building, and
conducting an asset management gap assessment is one of these
priorities. It is clearly understood that the Port must first understand
where it is, in terms of asset management, before it can begin
developing its comprehensive asset management program.

The Port of Seattle Sustainable Asset Management Policy needs to be
reviewed, supported and communicated by the Port's senior
management.
Asset management was first formally introduced at the Port through
the agency's Sustainable Asset Management Policy (last updated in
2013). The policy provides overarching guidance to incorporating
Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Best Practice Benchmark

Denver International Airport
Has defined asset management objectives, as identified by a strategic
asset management plan. The plan was developed by the Airport
Infrastructure Management department which is responsible for
asset management at the airport. The plan is linked back to agencywide objectives and the airport's asset management policy.
Gatwick Airport London
Has a comprehensive program to manage the business to ensure that
asset management processes meet the objectives of the business.
GAL uses a holistic measurement framework to track asset
requirements assuring governance in parallel to delivering
sustainable value improvements.
Schiphol Airport
Uses a dynamic strategic planning approach to master planning by
systematically identifying vulnerabilities (for example, demand for air
traffic grows more quickly than forecast), their mitigating actions, and
possible signposts or triggers.
Brisbane Airport
Infrastructure capacity analyses are based on peak demand, both for
the passenger traffic and aircraft movement. To reduce uncertainty in
the growth projections, the airport studies the trends in the airline
and aviation industry through a review of Airbus Industries and
Boeing forecasts and orders. This provides input into demand for
runway and terminal building requirements. The airport also reviews
internal operations to evaluate the capability of the existing
infrastructure to support future demand requirements. Standards for
passenger throughput and infrastructure performance are set against
which performance is monitored.

10

asset management at its airport (Aviation Division) and seaport
(Maritime Division), with implementation and execution falling to
each respective division. The policy has not been reviewed recently.
To have a successful asset management system in place, the Aviation
Division needs to embrace asset management as a way of doing
business. Executives and senior managers need to ensure there is
alignment between objectives set at the top of the Port of Seattle
organization and capital and operational decisions made at all levels.
For the policy to be effective it is important that it is now reviewed,
supported and communicated by senior management.

Uses community and stakeholder engagement as part of the capacity
planning process. A committee approach is used to undertake
community and stakeholder consultation and negotiation. The airport
also works with professional associations and local industry to build
relationships
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), New York
Asset Management Improvement Strategy aligns MTA headquarters'
priorities with agency operating objectives, network service levels,
asset lifecycle, and project delivery.

Connection between stakeholder needs and how the Ports assets serve Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), California
these needs would be improved through a strategic asset management Links asset and risk management strategy and analysis to its annual
budget development cycle.
plan.
There is widespread understanding that the Port's assets support its
primary mission, and many assets are either beyond their expected
life, or beyond capacity. A connection to how managing the assets
more efficiently will serve the stakeholders is currently missing.

A solid, widespread understanding of asset management requirements
exists, but the lack of a strategic asset management plan puts at risk
improvement initiatives.

We acknowledge that the Port of Seattle Aviation Division asset
management program and governance are developing as part of this
project and require early focus to ensure future success. Based on the
gap analysis interviews, it was evident that employees across the
airport understand the basic principles of asset management and the
ever-increasing importance it has in maintaining the airport's assets.
That said, the Port of Seattle Aviation Division currently does not
have a strategic asset management plan that describes the
organizations long-term approach to managing its assets (or more
correctly - its long-term approach for how it will extract value from
its assets). The plan should therefore provide two narratives - (1)
provide the line of site from the organizations goals, establish asset

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), Texas
Senior management review, adopts and supports the Agency-wide
AM policy and strategy. AM strategy is supported by the
organization's business processes.
ProRail, The Netherlands (the infrastructure manager for the Dutch
rail system)
Incorporates qualitative expectations set by the Dutch government
into its own organizational objectives for maintenance management,
lifecycle management, quality assurance, information, management
instruments, and staffing and organization.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), D.C.
Maintains an enterprise-wide performance management group with
dedicated staff. The organizational performance management
framework requires each department/group to develop performance
metrics and targets consistent with the organization's strategic
objectives.

11

management objectives, and provide direction, alignment and
prioritization for developing asset management plans and (2) provide
the description of the organizations asset management capabilities
and proposed improvements to meet the future requirements of the
organization.

A process for translating strategic initiatives, plans or goals into asset
requirements is missing. A strategic asset management plan would
translate business requirements into asset management requirements.

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), D.C.
WMATA's Transit Asset Management Office (TAMO) uses the
agency's AM Policy to introduce consistent working practices across
multiple asset classes.
Through the TAMO, departments/groups are integrating their
performance metrics into the Asset Management Plan development
process, linking the enterprise-wide performance management
framework to asset management planning processes.

The Port currently has no processes in place for translating strategic
initiatives, plans or goals into requirements for assets or asset
management. To achieve alignment from Port organization strategic
goals to asset class level decisions it is necessary to establish a
governance structure and planning framework to translate strategic
initiatives into asset management requirements.

Asset management objectives are limited to service performance.
Measures to assess progress towards asset management maturity,
efficiency/performance improvement, and the Port's strategic goals are
yet to be developed.

Asset management objectives should be established to provide a
measure of progress toward meeting division-wide strategic goals for
undertaking and improving asset management activities. The setting
of measurable objectives for the assets enables policy and strategy
implementation to be monitored and supports the further translation
of strategic goals into maintenance and investment plans. Asset
management objectives may take the form of specific performance
and condition targets, and can include measures of utilization,
reliability, functionality, capacity, safety, legislative or statutory
compliance. Further, as the Port of Seattle Aviation Division is in the
process of developing the asset management program, we would
recommend that objectives also consider progress toward improving
asset management maturity and driving maintenance and operations
efficiency.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

12

3.2.2.3

Needs and Expectations of Stakeholders

Regular feedback from key stakeholders informs the planning process.
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division regularly seeks and obtains
feedback from both its customers (passengers and tenants) and
employees. The Port measures customer satisfaction through
questionnaires, interviews and ongoing feedback surveys; these
results are then incorporated in the agency's long-range planning
process. In addition, the Port also conducts regular employee
engagement and culture surveys, to measure its employees'
satisfaction. Results from both the Airport Service Quality Index and
employee surveys are regularly shared with employees and acted on
through multiple avenues including but not limited to agency-wide
communications, all-hand meetings, and the employee innovation
program.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

13

Recommendations
Recommendation

Description/Scope

Review and Update Asset
Management Policy

The Aviation Division should review, support and communicate the Port of Seattle's Sustainable Asset
Management Policy at the earliest opportunity to demonstrate commitment to developing asset
management maturity. This will send a positive message to the business.

Develop a Strategic Asset
Management Plan

Develop a comprehensive strategic asset management plan setting the direction for how the agency and
its departments will manage the public's investment in its assets consistent to the agency's overall asset
management policy. While asset management is well understood at the Port, there is no formal document
that identifies the plan/direction for the Port's asset management program. A strategic asset management
plan will establish alignment with the agency's strategic business objectives, explain the benefits, the roles
of various stakeholders, and ensure that all Port divisions have a clear understanding of a path forward.

Develop Asset Management
Objectives

Asset management objectives should be developed. A series of measures should be developed, aligned to
the strategic goals of the Port, that monitor progress toward meeting division-wide strategic goals for
undertaking and improving asset management activities.

Integrate Business Planning
Processes with Asset Management

Integrate the strategic asset management plan outputs with the business planning process - to ensure
that the long-range plan considers the state of repair of existing assets, and their ability to support
stakeholder needs and Port objectives.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

14

3.3 Control of Assets
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division is graded as ESTABLISHING in the Control of Assets assessment area,
with key strengths in the areas of Asset Management System and Safety. Asset Risk Management and
Performance Management are key areas for improvement.
The Control of Assets pathway assesses the extent to which the organization has established policies and procedures to ensure it reliably
achieves its objectives, while managing risks and uncertainty and demonstrating compliance to standards. Good practice asset management
organizations are able to demonstrate an overall business framework that ensures all activities are harnessed toward the delivery of the service
and business objectives.
Six quality areas are assessed:
1. Asset Management System: Assesses the extent to which asset management practices are defined, established, documented, and
applied across the organization. This quality area also assesses the organization's approach to benchmarking and innovation and how it
continually improves its practices.
2. Asset Risk Management: Assesses the organization's approach to identifying, assessing, evaluating, and managing risks related to asset
utilization, operations, and management.
3. Performance Management: Assesses the organization's approach to identifying performance requirements and monitoring, managing,
and reporting asset performance.
4. Management Review: Assesses the extent to which the organization conducts management reviews of its management system and the
activities related to assurance of asset work activities.
5. Management of Change: Assesses the extent to which the organization manages changes to its asset management activities, as well as
changes to operations and assets, including configuration management.
6. Safety: Assesses the extent to which the organization has policies and processes for managing safety, including both job-related and
operations-related safety processes.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

15

Assessment Summary

Figure 3-4: Control of Assets Assessment Results

Figure 3-4 shows the level of maturity for the Control of Assets
assessment area. Asset Risk Management is the area with the
greatest opportunity for improvement. Currently, the Port of Seattle
Aviation Division does not conduct any risk-based asset management
and therefore may not consider all risks related to asset utilization,
operations, and management. Implementing a more formal approach
to asset risk management will allow the agency to identify, mitigate,
and manage asset risks more efficiently, ultimately reducing asset
failure and improving overall safety.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

16

Key Observations
3.3.2.1

AM Management System and Management Review

The capture of processes and procedures varies across the
organization. There is no integrated management system for asset
management. The Port of Seattle Aviation Division needs to develop an
overall management system, with integrated processes and procedures
that cover all lifecycle stages and organization functions.
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division has documented standards for
maintenance and design specifications and has standard operating
procedures for engineering and maintenance activities. These
documents provide the rules for interfacing with assets. However, it
was noted through the interviews that an overall asset management
- management system is not in place. Procedures for whole-life
management of assets need to be defined, including the roles and
responsibilities across the organization.

Asset management is an inherently integrated approach and cannot
be successfully implemented by managing individual assets or
different lifecycle stages (such as maintenance) in isolation.
Therefore, it is important that the Port of Seattle develop an overall
business model for all its assets and ensure this covers all lifecycle
stages and organization functions. An overall management system is
missing and should be developed. The Port would benefit from
applying a consistent structure both among operating divisions, as
well as at across asset classes within a division, particularly in the
areas that interface with other offices (for example risk or capital
planning). This needs to be developed to support performance
improvement, and in particular is a key enabler to removing many of
the risks and issues identified in this report.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Best Practice Benchmark

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
All of the facilities of the Port Authority have emergency plans that
address hurricanes and business continuity. Tabletop and full-scale
exercises are conducted in preparation of storms.
The agency's standard design guidelines are updated to ensure that
projects are more resilient to climate events. They comply with
updated resiliency codes, identify critical infrastructure, consider
federal, state, and local recommendations, and consider changes to
the climate (e.g. sea level rise, heat waves, etc.).
Brisbane Airport
Has a set of development objectives that are used in the evaluation of
asset options. These include facilitation of safe passenger, freight,
and aircraft movement, sound environmental management,
accessibility and land use, improvement of quality of services, sound
business management.
London Underground, United Kingdom
Has a comprehensive policies, processes and procedures framework
for all asset management and asset-related activities that is webenabled and accessible on the company intranet. It is integrated with
several other applications, which improves workflow. A key best
practice is the link between the EAM system and the document
management system such that work procedures can be pulled up
within the EAM system - which supports maintenance scheduling.
Maryland Transit Administration, Maryland
Established a register of processes and procedures that supports a
comprehensive review process wherein every process/procedure is at
least looked at annually and reviewed bi-annually; the approach also
considers whether the process/procedure is high risk - which
prompts a higher level of review.

17

3.3.2.2

Asset Risk Management

Enterprise risk management is focused on insurance against asset loss
and liability. There is no formal enterprise risk management program in
place that addresses asset and asset management risk.

Agency-wide, there is no defined Enterprise Risk Management (ERM)
program. The Port does have an ERM Group that focuses on
monitoring insurance, liability, and any claims to/from the Port. In
addition, the ERM Group does conduct one-off risk analyses based on
departmental requests or external impact factors. These have
included an earthquake risk analysis and a risk assessment for the
Facilities & Infrastructure department. Most localized risk
management at the Port focuses on weather or natural disasterrelated risks, not risks related to specific assets or managing them.

Network Rail, United Kingdom
Uses standards that are written by Network Rail ensuring compliance
with the Railway Group Standards (RGS) under the Railway
Interoperability Directive 2008/57/EC as published by the European
Union. Railway Group Standards (RGSs) are national safety rules and
national technical rules applicable to the mainline railway system. In
line with these Network Rail derives KPIs as well as performance
measures for safety, productivity, infrastructure failures by asset,
backlog, financial and compliance. In relation to managing potential
asset failures the target for speed restrictions is zero however this
does not limit the use of speed restrictions to migrate the risk to
safety of the line where appropriate.

Regular audits are a requirement by the regulator. These are
conducted internally to be monitored and presented to the regulator.
While most areas reported having in place tactical risk approaches to Network Rail uses an electronic system to manage the compliance of
prioritize workload, asset related strategic risk management processes audit actions and ensure transparency. Closure of major nonwere lacking.
compliances require review and sign off by the regulator. Minor nonEach department throughout the Port has its own processes and
compliances are managed internally and recorded in the system.
procedures for handling 'known concerns', but enterprise-wide risks
are not captured and as a result are not sufficiently monitored or
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), Georgia
considered in the planning cycle. This introduces a further risk of
Developed adaptation strategies for handling climate change for each
professional exposure for senior directors due to a lack of
of its functional units: first identified potential climate hazards,
identification, visibility and management of risks.
assessed risks, developed short- and long-term adaptation strategies.
3.3.2.3

Performance Management

Performance measures are established, but are not always monitored.
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division lacks a hierarchy of performance
measures to ensure all departments contribute to the strategic vision
and objectives.

The Port primarily measures performance through the Airport Service
Quality Index, which scores the airport based on customer
satisfaction. The Port uses these scores to help guide its long-range
plan and processes as well as benchmark its scores against other
airports. Further, individual departments have their own, identified
Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Metrolinx, Ontario
Has a well-developed enterprise risk management framework with
established risk management policies, procedures and monitoring
tools. The approach is systematic and managed by a dedicated team.
An enterprise risk management application is used to monitor
agency-wide risks and report on changes, etc. An annual risk health
assessment exercise is undertaken to seek areas for improvement
and to reduce risks.

18

metrics around maintenance, inventory, renewals, etc. However,
these indicators may not be formally tracked and shared across
departments. Several employees noted that current indicators are
not complete and may not track the right information needed. In
addition, stakeholders mentioned that the metric data being reported
may not be accurate because the data in the systems used to track
that data may not be accurate. There is also no comprehensive
dashboard or report capturing asset management metrics.
3.3.2.4

Management of Change

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division works closely with its stakeholders
and suppliers to identify opportunities for improvement - it has a strong
focus on innovation.

Crossrail, London, United Kingdom
Has an established enterprise risk management system that is
implemented across the organization and mandated across its supply
chain to its major tier one contracting organizations. The system
provides portfolio-wide risk visibility, ensuring that all the various
project management teams understand their risks and can take steps
to mitigate them.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), D.C.
Current plans consider risk mitigation strategies for both strategic
asset management risks (organizational, investment, etc.) and asset
risks (obsolescence, performance, etc.); risk is being introduced as a
key consideration in the capital planning approach.

A key component to an asset management system is continuous
improvement and how the organization fosters innovation across the
business. While not yet specific to asset management, the Port
focuses heavily on innovation, working closely with its vendors to
identify potential opportunities to improve business and operational
performance, as well as the Employee Innovation Program, which
allows employees to submit ideas to advance their department
and/or the entire agency.

The lack of formal change control processes for asset management
introduces risks - both with driving successful change, and ensuring the
change does not adversely impact other parts of the organization
It was identified that there is no formal process to manage changes to
management systems and practices. This includes communicating the
change and the "why", "what" and "how" behind those changes. It
also includes the governance of changes to ensure that anything
introduced goes through a comprehensive review cycle to reduce risk
of adverse impact on other parts of the organization. Processes for
management systems and practices change, should be introduced
across the organization - not just maintenance and engineering.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

19

3.3.2.5

Safety

A strong safety culture exists which is well integrated across
departments.

The Port of Seattle has an overarching safety policy that is primarily
based on the Century Agenda. Safety is well integrated across the
agency and imparted across departments through the Health and
Safety Program Managers. Safety hazards and incidents are reviewed
within departments, and actions are identified and executed to
resolve any potential hazards. The Port reviews all state and federal
regulations around safety to ensure compliance. Safety Committees
exist in each department and are responsible to meet regularly to
review their specific safety policies and procedures, as well as any
applicable hazards or incidents that might have occurred.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

20

Recommendations
Recommendation

Description/Scope

Develop Asset Management
Business Architecture

Develop the Port of Seattle business architecture to support the integration of multiple planning horizons
and align organization strategic objectives with asset class tactical demands.

Develop Asset Management
Develop and document key business processes and procedures for the whole-life management of assets.
Business Processes and Procedures These should include the integration between existing long-term planning efforts and tactical asset
planning efforts, as well as the development of processes for integrating risk management in the planning
cycle. The architecture should also consider the transition of assets across life-cycle stages - such that any
changes to the asset or asset management are controlled.
Define Asset Owners

Develop and define owners of various assets as an extension of defining roles and responsibilities. Upon
the completion of capital projects, an asset transfer form is completed to transfer the ownership of the
asset from the Project Management Group to the appropriate division that will serve as that specific asset
owner. However, there is no documented, comprehensive list identifying asset responsibilities by
department or class during construction, maintenance or disposal. This includes, among others,
responsibilities for defining design and construction standards, asset onboarding, defining an asset
lifecycle plan, tracking all work on the asset and conducting reliability analysis on assets. Defined asset
ownership will ultimately improve the relationship and collaboration between various departments.

Create an Asset Class Common
Framework

A common framework for asset class procedures should be developed setting out the minimum
documentation requirements for each asset class. This should be consistent with current operating
requirements and ISO-55001:2014. Existing asset class specific procedures should be reviewed against the
developed common framework. Procedures for operations, maintenance and management should be
developed to satisfy both the common framework requirements as well as asset class specific
requirements.

Establish an Audit Program for the
Asset Management (AM)
Management System

An audit program should be established to monitor the performance and consistent application of the
asset management - management system. This will be a key driver for ensuring changes to the way the
Port manages assets are consistently applied and that any issues can be addressed as part of a continuous
improvement program.

Develop a Risk Management
Framework

An Enterprise Risk Management Framework should be developed. The framework should include a risk
policy, risk management procedures and the process to develop a risk register. The procedures should
consider how risks are identified, evaluated, monitored and when risks should be escalated.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

21

Recommendation

Description/Scope

Develop Asset Management KPIs

Develop asset management key performance indicators (KPIs) to better measure asset management
outcomes. The Port should review current KPIs and metrics across Facilities & Infrastructure, Maintenance,
and other departments and identify a collective set of KPIs for asset management tracking and reporting.
The Port should also review the effectiveness of the current metrics and the quality of data to ensure that
the right metrics are in use, and the data reported is accurate. This will result in enhanced data to manage
maintenance decisions and programs, provide a comprehensive KPI dashboard for senior leaders, and help
track and demonstrate progress of the asset management program.

Develop Asset Management
Reporting Framework and
Processes

Develop a template and produce a high-level quarterly or annual asset management report with
executive-level metrics and reporting on key benefits, outcomes, and impacts along with a summary of key
initiatives and status. Currently, specific asset management metrics are not routinely tracked nor are
related metrics captured comprehensively across the Aviation Division. Further, there is no consistent
message around asset management and its impacts to the agency. Through creating defined reporting
processes and standards, the Port will foster greater visibility and transparency of asset management, a
clear link to elements of the Airport Service Quality Index, as well as provide an avenue to communicate
progress, benefits, and impacts to key stakeholders.

Establish a Continuous
Improvement Program of Asset
Management

Establish a continuous improvement program for asset management, including reviewing the asset
management roadmap and maturity every few years. As the Port develops its asset management strategy
and a roadmap, a continuous improvement program will allow the Port to confirm that its maturity is
improving consistent with its improvement plan and change its program based on additional information
or changes as time progresses.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

22

3.4 Asset Management Planning
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division is graded as ESTABLISHING in the Asset Management Planning
assessment area. Efforts are currently being led by Facilities & Infrastructure to address many of the gaps
identified in this area.
The Asset Management Planning pathway assesses the extent to which the organization has put in place processes and practices to establish
strategies that determine the most appropriate intervention activities that result in work plans that efficiently deliver performance improvement
and effectively manage risk.
Two quality areas are assessed:
1. Asset Management Decision Making: Assesses the extent to which the organization considers asset condition, risk, performance,
whole life cost analysis, and other factors to ensure its asset policies/strategies represent the most appropriate range of activities for
achieving service and performance objectives.
2. Asset Management Plans: Assesses the extent to which the organization has developed asset management plans and the extent to
which it monitors, reviews, and continually improves the implementation of the plans.

Assessment Summary

Figure 3-5: Asset Management Planning Assessment Results

Figure 3-5 shows the level of maturity for the Asset Management
Planning assessment area. Currently, the Port does not have formal
asset management plans for its assets. Moving forward, it will be
critical for the agency to formally adopt an asset management plan
template and develop lifecycle management plans for all major
asset classes incorporating inspection and maintenance strategies,
reliability targets, performance metrics, and long-term renewal and
replacement.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

23

Key Observations
3.4.2.1

Asset Management Decision Making

Long-term planning at the Port of Seattle Aviation Division focuses on
demand for new infrastructure and not the maintenance or condition of
its aging infrastructure.
The Port is currently developing a Sustainable Airport Master Plan
(SAMP), which is addressing critical needs to meet future regional
demand. In addition to considering forecasted passenger and cargo
demand, the master plan takes into account current facilities,
infrastructure, and operations - looking at scenarios 5, 10, and 20
years in the future. It includes air quality, energy and water
conservation, recycling, and other strategic environmental goals, and
will align with the Port's sustainability and energy-efficiency goals.
The Port of Seattle does have a fully integrated sustainability strategy
as part of their master planning efforts. Guided by the Port of
Seattle's Century Agenda and overseen by the Sustainability &
Environment Group, the airport is committed to reducing
environmental impacts, ensuring economic performance, and
working closely with local communities on sustainable practices.
That said, long-term planning at the Port focuses more on passenger
and cargo demand resulting in new infrastructure and does not
necessarily consider the maintenance or condition of its aging
infrastructure. A large gap exists between airport growth and the
resources needed to ensure delivery of work programs for asset
management. The airport is aware of this gap and is developing
processes to improve asset condition tracking and
renewal/replacement.

Best Practice Benchmark

Greater Toronto Airport Authority
The Greater Toronto Airport Authority undertakes business case
analysis on an asset to determine the most appropriate investment in
airside pavements, people moving equipment (escalators, elevators,
moving walkways, etc.), bridge structures, for example. Each of the
investments in maintenance, rehabilitation or replacement are
identified and prioritized and then passed on to a higher-level crossasset evaluation and life-cycle benefits using a software application
(ReCAPP).
Sarasota/Bradenton International Airport
Lifecycle costing of project alternatives include all standard
operations, maintenance, and capital component assessments, with
the addition of comparison of delivery mechanisms, such as turnkey
and annual maintenance contracting.
London Underground, United Kingdom
Asset management plans have gone through close to ten years of
iterative refinement and consider a one year 'look back' on
performance and a nine year "look forward" for capital programs and
maintenance activities.
In many instances plans are supported by decision support tools that
guide the intervention requirements. Its ESTEEM tool is used to
develop optimized strategic plans that account for the lifecycle costs
of all assets and the risks associated with each. ESTEEM not only links
to inspections and work orders, but also provides an uncertainty
probability for the degradation and costs of assets. In addition, it can
serve as a data management system.

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division has not established strategies for
managing its existing infrastructure assets. Asset class strategies would A key best practice is the 'AMP-On-A-Page' concept - which provides
provide the necessary direction for developing asset management
a period (4-week) summary of the maintenance and capital works
plans.
that were planned along with forecast performance metrics;

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

24

Currently the Port does not have in place life-cycle strategies for each
asset class, that define the maintenance, rehabilitation and
replacement cycles. The development of asset class strategies would
provide the necessary direction for developing asset management
plans that set out the operational and capital programs necessary to
meet organization goals and strategies. They also provide
transparency, ensuring confidence in decisions at all levels. The
upward and downward linkage between these tiers is absolutely
critical to ensuring that decisions deliver their intended benefits and
where not appropriate actions can be taken.
Asset class strategies set out what needs to be done to each asset
group to achieve the long and medium-term objectives. This is
consistent with global best practices. The strategies must be defined
based on the following types of analysis:
· Definition of asset base
· Historical analysis of performance and condition
· Understanding of asset criticality and risk
· Performance and condition requirements
· Review of degradation rates, failures and consequences
· How each asset is managed through its lifecycle
· Maintenance intervention options
· Capital investment optimization
· Lifecycle considerations
· Asset knowledge and information requirements
· Application of technology and best industry practices
Development of asset class strategies and asset management plans
will require resource to undertake the above analyses and
importantly harmonize these plans with existing investment planning
and project delivery cycles. It should be recognized that these
analyses and the associated condition/ performance/ cost data have
a large implication from the capital planning perspective and will
require additional work to meaningfully establish capital priorities

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

management reviews these one-page documents to determine
whether any corrective actions are needed.
Metrolinx, Ontario
Currently developing baseline Asset Strategies and Asset Plans for
every major asset class that will provide a starting point for future
development - including the introduction of improved maintenance
definition (RCM, RBM, etc.) and maintenance delivery capabilities.
The effort is being aligned to the agency's annual budgeting process.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), D.C.
Has established baseline Transit Asset Management Plans that
consider both the asset strategy and the asset plan for each major
asset. The planning approach includes risks and enhancements,
considers where possible the current condition and performance of
the asset, and identifies key action plans designed to improve
performance and the robustness of the plans.
King County Metro Transit, Seattle, Washington
Has established a Transit Asset Management Plan for its fixed
transportation system assets that derives from the Metro mission
statement, defines the state of good repair, provides an asset
inventory, lays out roles and responsibilities, describes business
processes, and documents its asset management work plan for the
following six years.
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), Georgia
Established asset management plans, developed using information
held within MARTA's EAM system, are integrated into its capital
planning and maintenance planning capabilities.

25

across asset classes, as well as link processes for capital planning in
the current constrained funding environment.

Current asset decisions lack whole-life cost analysis as, in many areas,
costs are not captured to sufficient granularity to support analysis.
These plans do not consider whole life cost analysis and include
details to maintain an asset through its lifecycle and ensure that the
Port can use the asset for its expected life. In most cases,
documented asset lifecycle costs are not available because
departments lack the structure and tools to capture and report full
lifecycle costs for assets.

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division recognizes the challenges it faces
in establishing renewal strategies - and is working to improve its
approach through better condition assessment and improving data
capture.
Facilities & Infrastructure (F&I) is responsible for tracking asset
condition and assigning a replacement plan based on age, but this
method is incomplete and not incorporated holistically when looking
at the asset's entire life. F&I is working to improve its asset renewal
strategies and processes, as well as developing lifecycle cost analyses
for all asset classes. Preventive maintenance (PM) schedules exist for
assets and are loaded into Maximo during onboarding. However, the
PM schedules are not tied to performance or service level nor are
maintenance strategies used in investment forecasting.
3.4.2.2

Asset Management Plans

Asset management plans consistent with the requirements of the ISO55001:2014 standard are not in place.
Across all the Port's asset classes, asset management plans do not
exist. The Port has what are known as "asset plans;" however, these
are not the same as a formal asset management plan (AMP), as
defined by industry best practice. At the Port, asset plans are used to
book assets (including installation/replacement cost allocations) in

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

26

their enterprise resource planning (ERP) system, PeopleSoft. Prior to
asset onboarding, the project manager of the respective capital
project is responsible for populating the asset plan and identifying the
individual valued assets (assets valued at $20,000 or greater) to be
booked and tracked in PeopleSoft. The goal is to begin asset plans at
the start of a project, but typically these are not created until the final
stages of the project, just before the assets are placed in service.

The general lack of asset management plans inhibits the ports ability to
justify the need for asset investment and to ensure the impact of its
organization strategies and policies are adequately planned for.
Asset management plans document the coordinated approaches to
delivering the objectives and goals of the organization. They present
the 'when and where' for maintenance and capital expenditure, as
defined by the 'how and why' set out in the asset class strategies,
described above. Typically, at a minimum, plans should contain basic
information on assets, service levels, planned work and financial
forecasts. Asset management plans are also a key requirement of ISO55001:2014.

Asset management plans would improve coordination across the
organization and demonstrate the right level of resourcing.

The asset management plans are important documents for defining
the activities necessary to meet the required level of service at the
airport. It would encourage a more "joined-up" approach to whole
life asset management decisions. This includes the capital investment
program, maintenance of assets, and disposal or rationalization of
assets. The plans also sets out the resources necessary to deliver the
activities, including human, financial, or others. For the Port this is a
particularly relevant exercise as all asset classes reported both
manager and technical staff shortages. The plans would provide the
justification for expenditure and would ensure that future
maintenance or capital deficits are controlled.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

27

Asset management plans would further reinforce the alignment between
maintenance and capital planning.
It was reported in some asset classes that alignment between capital
planning and maintenance could be improved. In many areas, capital
needs are determined by Engineering with little input from the asset
supervisors who manage the asset on a day-to-day basis. Though
operating departments and engineering groups develop condition
ratings, this process is somewhat independent from other
performance assessments. The ratings are only used for the capital
program and do not have a direct impact on maintenance practices,
though they reflect the overall condition of an asset at the capital
investment level. Similarly, in many instances information used to
support maintenance interventions are not made available to
monitor future capital replacement need. An asset management
planning process that worked to integrate maintenance, capital
planning and long-term planning would ensure alignment between
Port strategic objectives and asset activities.

Implementation and monitoring processes for asset management plans
need to be established.
In those areas were some level of planning is established it was
reported that they are not well followed. To ensure the value of an
asset management plan is achieved, it is important to establish
monitoring and review processes. To be effective, the asset
management plans should be reviewed on an ongoing basis. An
effective means of achieving this is to develop month-by-month
summarized versions of the plans (some agencies refer to these as
'one-page AMPs'), which are integrated into a review cycle to
increase integration of the asset management plans in the Port's
management processes.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

28

Recommendations
Recommendation

Description/Scope

Develop Asset Class Strategies

Develop Asset Class Strategies for each asset class. The strategies should demonstrate the work necessary
at the asset class level to implement the Port of Seattle's strategic plan (business plan) and the strategic
asset management plan. Asset Class Strategies should also consider the system interfaces between assets
and how conditions or changes of an asset impact another. For example, new high technology
procurements will have a different load requirement on power assets.

Develop Asset Management Plans

Produce a uniform template and pilot the development of formal asset management plans that address
inspection and maintenance strategies, rehabilitation/overhaul programs, reliability targets, performance
metrics, and capital renewal and replacement. The Port of Seattle Aviation Division does not consistently
consider lifecycle costs in renewal/replacement and maintenance decisions. In most cases, documented
asset lifecycle costs are not available because departments lack the structure and tools to capture and
report full lifecycle costs for assets. Comprehensive lifecycle plans will result in greater adherence to
inspection and PM programs, enhanced long-term capital budget and financial forecasts as well as
improved tracking, reporting, and accountability of asset lifecycle data. These plans should be considered
accompanying plans or subsets of the strategic asset management plan (recommended earlier in this
chapter).

Develop Management Review and
Monitoring Processes for Asset
Management Plans

Processes should be developed to establish a management review mechanism for monitoring progress in
plan delivery. This could take the form of the period (monthly or quarterly) summary of planned activities
or forecast performances compared to actuals. The processes to be defined should integrate ongoing
review of the asset management plans in the internal management review cycle.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

29

3.5 Capital Planning and Delivery
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division is graded as COMPETENT in the Capital Planning and Delivery assessment
area and is consistent across all assessment subjects.
The Capital Planning and Delivery pathway assesses the extent to which the organization has processes and procedures in place to ensure capital
expenditure is optimized to support delivery of the organization's strategic goals and program development practices and to effectively prioritize
investments. The pathway also considers the management and delivery of capital projects.
Four quality areas are assessed:
1. Capital Expenditure Evaluation: Assesses the organization's approach to developing investment criteria and the processes and practices
for capital evaluation.
2. Capital Program Development: Assesses the practices for developing capital requirements and the organization's approach for
prioritizing and approving capital programs.
3. Capital Program Management: Assesses the project development and management capabilities and the extent to which the
organization monitors, manages, and reviews capital program delivery.
4. Capital Program Delivery: Assesses the processes and practices related to procurement and execution of capital projects and the
commissioning and handover of new/refurbished assets.

Assessment Summary

Figure 3-6: Capital Planning and Delivery Assessment Results

Figure 3-6 shows the level of maturity for the Capital Planning and
Delivery assessment area. Overall, the Port of Seattle Aviation
Division scored well in this area. One key area for improvement
includes ensuring asset maintenance and condition data is
incorporated into the annual capital project identification. Further,
the agency should review its asset commissioning process, ensuring
asset data is being properly captured and transferred during
onboarding.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

30

Key Observations
3.5.2.1

Capital Expenditure Evaluation and Capital Program
Development

A structured approach, with a defined set of prioritization criteria
produces a rolling five-year Capital Improvement Program.

The Port has a rolling five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
supported by well-defined processes for identifying, prioritizing, and
monitoring capital projects at the airport. The CIP is overseen by a
group of seven who provide oversight and support to all projects,
from initiation through design and construction. The Port follows a
defined set of criteria to prioritize CIP projects, which includes a
variety of factors such as run-to-fail, business needs, physical wear
and tear, regulatory, and nice-to-have's.

An extensive business case process ensures projects provide value for
money.

All prospective CIP projects go through an extensive review and
justification process (business case). The CIP also uses net-present
value analysis as needed/required. Based on submitted projects, the
Capital Program department may conduct additional studies or will
ask for additional information/evidence to support the project. All CIP
projects are reviewed extensively and various scenarios are
developed to ensure the proposed project is the most appropriate
solution.

While asset condition and maintenance history is considered, the
process is laborious due to limitations with the data and its structure. As
a result, this at times results in inefficient work practices.
A major input into the Port's CIP is asset renewals and replacements,
which, for airport assets, is the responsibility of F&I. Currently, F&I
identifies asset renewals and replacements based primarily on
remaining useful life. This data is only tracked in Microsoft Excel and
is not linked to maintenance history (which is captured in Maximo).
When assessing renewals and replacements, condition and

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Best Practice Benchmark

Greater Toronto Airport Authority
The airport's facilities asset management system supports the overall
capital planning process by providing a technically prioritized listing of
required restoration requirements for all fixed assets. A high-level
planning and capital expenditure tool is used to understand the
condition of the airport's physical assets, their replacement costs,
lifecycle costs, and the implication of deferred investments called
Renewal Capital Asset Planning Process (ReCAPP). ReCAPP includes a
fixed asset ledger, asset valuation and condition deterioration and
weighting tools, minimum condition thresholds and requirements,
and financial reporting to assist in programming asset renewal.
Long Beach Transit, California
Long Beach Transit prioritizes projects using its asset criticality
measure "code" based on the likelihood and severity of an asset's
failure. Managers then rank and prioritize funding for all capital
projects based on the code.
King County Metro Transit, Seattle, Washington
Replacements are optimized based on maintenance records and
expected lifecycles.
Los Angeles Country Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA
Metro), California
Capital investment decision process uses eight categories, with the
most important category-"is the project mission critical?"-counting
for 20 percent. A Resiliency Indicator Framework builds on existing
climate change adaptation work to prioritize and evaluate adaptation
implementation alternatives in two dimensions: technical/asset and
organizational.

31

maintenance data must be compared manually. Stakeholders shared
anecdotes where major components of assets were replaced a year
before replacing the entire asset - something that could have been
avoided if maintenance history and renewal/replacement plans were
integrated and stored in Maximo. Integrating the maintenance
history into the lifecycle needs assessment will allow the Port to
make more informed capital planning decisions considering factors
such as cost to maintain and risk of failure.
3.5.2.2

Capital Program Management and Delivery

Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), Georgia
A fully integrated TAM model includes various modules include for
capital decision-making, project decision-making, and project delivery
and control. The decision-support module prioritizes capital
investments based on consideration of weighted criteria such as
customer service, funding optimization, financial impact,
environmental stewardship, and project deliverability. Field
condition assessments are combined with replacement and
rehabilitation cost and useful life information to predict capital
investment needs over a 40-year period.

Capital projects are managed consistently, with progress monitoring
and stakeholder who are informed through the delivery.

Regional Transit Authority (RTA), Chicago, Illinois
A Capital Optimization Support Tool (COST) collects and prioritizes
Once projects are approved, the projects are transferred to the
Project Management Group (PMG) and a project manager is assigned. needs based on funding and long-term strategic goals; its multicriteria decision analysis process assigns weights to each criterion -The PMG is responsible for monitoring projects and ensuring the
asset age and condition, riders impacted, service reliability, safety
asset owners/project sponsors are kept up-to-date throughout
and security, and operating and maintenance costs -- and the
delivery. The PMG creates regular project status reports on all
weighted average is used to score a candidate project.
projects.

Design standards have been developed, however are not always
adhered to - impacting the agency's ability to optimize through life
costs of the asset.

Through F&I, the Port has defined design standards that must be
adhered to throughout construction; however, sometimes these
standards are not adhered to. While with good intentions, a
contractor may identify a "cost-saving" measure during construction
which is approved by the PMG. These might cause the Port to
ultimately spend more due to lower life expectancy, mismatch with
current assets in place, available spare parts, and/or
repair/maintenance expertise.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Network Rail, United Kingdom
Train planning and track access are agreed upon three years out.
GRIP (Governance for Rail Investment Projects) is used which includes
Go/No Go Stage Gates.
For capital renewals ("capital maintenance"), the engineer creates a
plan based on the work bank captured in Ellipse and root cause
analysis on failures of the specific asset. This plan is presented to and
agreed to by the Route Asset Manager.
The commissioning/handover process includes a "takeover
certificate" for handing over assets to contractors and taking them
back from contractors. Before the agency accepts the hand back of
an asset after the contractor has renewed it, Network Rail engineers
ensure that the asset and site are exactly what was sought or is
corrected before acceptance and final payment.

32

Contracts include the requirement that contractors add asset data,
Well defined processes for asset commissioning exist - but are not
always followed, resulting in a lack of information to support the efficient attributes, and maintenance information into Ellipse before handing
the asset back to Network Rail.
management of the asset.
The Port has well-defined processes in place for asset commissioning
and handover; however, actual execution does not always follow the
documented processes. For example, asset plans (used to book assets
into PeopleSoft) are a major component of the asset commissioning
process and must be completed prior to the asset being placed in
service. Upon project completion, an asset transfer form is completed
to transfer ownership of the asset from the PMG to the division that
will serve as the asset owner throughout its life. The Port ensures
operational and maintenance training is conducted on all new assets,
which is provided by the manufacturer or contractor. In addition, the
Port ensures receipt of all supporting asset data (drawings, manuals,
etc.) for new assets.

ProRail, The Netherlands
A 'yardstick' tool is used to assess the condition of track as it
approaches its expected lifespan. The decision of whether to
maintain the track or replace it is based on a lifecycle cost model.
Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), New York
The Track group's renewal strategy is based on a data-driven
approach that considers usage (annual tonnage, loading, etc.) to
prioritize renewal programs.

Stakeholders mentioned that it is generally difficult to get complete
asset plans from various team members due to the workload and
perceived value of the plans. The asset plans are typically not
completed on time. This results in the assets being setup in various
systems with limited information, and the complete information is
never populated in the electronic systems (PeopleSoft, Maximo). The
information collected on these forms does not always provide the
right details for maintenance, not does it provide an easy way to add
more details once transferred to maintenance. Also, in many cases,
the documents that are provided by the contractor upon project
closeout (as-builts, OEM manuals) are not in the data format
requested by the Port. Defining asset owners and roles and
responsibilities (a recommendation presented earlier in this chapter)
will help the Port improve coordination between different
departments during design and construction.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

33

Recommendations
Recommendation

Description / Scope

Integrate Maintenance and
Condition Data with CIP

Establish a defined process to integrate maintenance and condition data into capital needs evaluation. A
major input into the Port's CIP is asset renewal and replacement plan for asset, which is primarily based
on remaining useful life. This data is tracked only in Microsoft Excel and is not linked to maintenance
history. Integrating the maintenance history into the lifecycle needs assessment (and storing this in
Maximo, the Port's asset management system), will allow the Port to make more informed capital
planning decisions considering factors such as cost to maintain and risk of failure.

Enhance Asset Commissioning
Process

Review and document the asset commissioning process and add additional rigor for asset definition,
hierarchy, and booking assets via asset plans. The Port has well-defined processes in place for asset
commissioning and handover; however, actual execution does not follow the documented processes and
there are some opportunities for improvement. These include adding more specifics around roles and
responsibilities and updating the level of detail of the information required to match maintenance needs
will save the Port time and money during an asset's life. This recommendation is tied to two others
presented in this chapter - defining asset owners and their roles and responsibilities (presented
previously) and preparing detailed asset hierarchies (presented later in this chapter).

Establish Audit Processes for CIP
Delivery and Handover

Audit processes should be established to ensure design standards and asset handover processes are
followed consistently.

Update Maintenance with Penalty
Clauses for Failing to Follow
Standards

Maintenance contracts should be updated to include penalty clauses for failing to follow design standards
or for failing to follow asset commissioning processes.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

34

3.6 Maintenance Planning and Delivery
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division is graded as ESTABLISHING in the Maintenance Planning and Delivery
assessment area. Of the eight assessment pathways, this offers the greatest opportunity for improvement, and
we recognize that this is already an improvement focus for the Port.
The Maintenance Planning and Delivery pathway assesses the extent to which the organization demonstrates clearly defined processes for the
definition, planning, and delivery of maintenance activities. It also considers the organization's approach to asset inspection and assessment.
Five quality areas are assessed:
1. Asset Inspections and Assessments: Assesses the extent to which the organization monitors asset performance and condition and
uses this information for maintenance scheduling.
2. Maintenance Planning/Definition: Assesses the extent to which the organization ensures that maintenance and inspection activities
are clearly defined and focused on achieving specified levels of performance and risk for a given cost. This area considers both the
operational impact of maintenance and the organization's use of advanced techniques, such as risk-based or reliability-centered
maintenance to guide maintenance definition. (Maintenance definition is 'doing the right thing.')
3. Maintenance Management: Assesses the extent to which the organization has defined delivery strategies and put in place
documentation and performance reviews to ensure maintenance is undertaken correctly and delivers intended results.
4. Maintenance Delivery: Assesses the extent to which the organization delivers maintenance and inspection activities efficiently and
effectively. It considers the extent to which a maintenance scheduling function is utilized. (Maintenance delivery is 'doing things right.')
5. Inventory Management: Assesses the extent to which the organization plans and optimizes its inventory (stock/spares) holdings,
including consideration of how well stock levels are integrated into planned maintenance programs.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

35

Assessment Summary

Figure 3-7: Maintenance Planning and Delivery Assessment Results

Figure 3-7 shows the level of maturity for the Maintenance Planning
and Delivery assessment area. Asset Inspection and Assessments is
the area with the greatest opportunity for improvement. Currently,
F&I only conducts asset condition assessments on an ad-hoc basis
and there is no consistent assessment methodology across the
agency. Further, of the assets that are assessed, the data is only
stored in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets and not linked to the asset
record in Maximo. Properly conducted assessments and tracked data
will significantly improve the Port's ability to identify and prioritize
critical needs for asset renewal and replacement.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

36

Key Observations
3.6.2.1

Asset Inspection and Assessments

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division has introduced condition
assessment processes that consider observed condition and remaining
useful life. However, the assessment does not consider the
maintenance history - or other asset related data - including for
example whether the asset has become obsolete.
The responsibilities of maintenance planning and delivery are split
across two departments-F&I and Maintenance-with the
responsibility of asset condition assessments falling under F&I, and
general maintenance, inspections, and materials management all
falling under the Maintenance department.

It was not until recently (about seven years ago) that the Port
formally started tracking the condition of its assets. Currently, F&I
conducts visual condition assessments on assets using a three-point
scale, where the score is based on observed condition and its
remaining useful life. These assessments do not consider any
historical maintenance on the asset through either a review of data in
Maximo or discussions with the maintenance staff.
The data is collected and stored in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets and
is not linked back to the asset records in the Port's enterprise asset
management (EAM) system, Maximo. F&I uses these spreadsheets
for its renewal and replacement program and as an input to the
capital improvement program.

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division's condition assessment
methodology is not documented to the extent necessary to ensure
consistency.

There is no documented methodology for conducting these visual
condition assessments, which can lead to variations in scores based
on the assessors. The asset breakdown (hierarchy) used for the
condition assessments is high-level and not setup based on any
industry standards or best practices. This makes aggregating the data

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Best Practice Benchmark

Gatwick Airport London
Intelligent monitoring techniques have been introduced as part of the
refurbishment of a bridge over the railway. This bridge will have builtin condition monitoring to avoid some of the need for railway
possessions to undertake inspections.
At Gatwick, maintenance comprises statutory inspections (SI) and
maintenance (SM), corrective maintenance, and planned
maintenance. The information system provides a readily available
measure of the status of SIs and SMs that, when published, proved
effective in increasing the level of compliance because there should
not have been a backlog. The SIs are now achieving 100 percent and
the SMs are at 95 percent and improving.
Greater Toronto Airport Authority
Regular formal condition assessments are conducted to establish
performance models for the assets. The performance data is used to
determine investment needs, which are then fed into the agency's 5year capital restoration plan.
King County Metro Transit, Seattle, Washington
In addition to their six-year plan, King County Metro Transit also
produces an annual Facilities Condition Report which discusses asset
conditions and recommendations for replacement or refurbishment.
Replacements are optimized based on maintenance records and
expected lifecycles. To prioritize facilities projects for inclusion in the
annual capital plan, metro brings together a team of staff members
from different departments and also seeks the perspective of
stakeholders.
Network Rail, United Kingdom
Maintenance and refurbishment planning process starts 3+ years in
advance. An initial plan for a specific work activity, including staffing,
materials and equipment needs and track access is identified 26
37

difficult and to compare similar high-level assets. Additionally, not all
Port's assets are in Maximo.

weeks out; at 13 weeks out, the plan is reviewed by all departments
to understand clashes and priorities; and at 6 weeks out, the plan is
locked down. Last minutes changes may be accommodated in
extraordinary circumstances, but safety of assets always takes priority
with the discipline engineer holding accountability.

Due to misalignments between data sets, inspections may result in the
discovery of assets - the Port of Seattle Aviation Division has a process
for recording these assets but it is not fully adopted across the agency. Asset inspections are used to identify the work required as per the
For condition assessments, the Port uses the Maximo asset list and
the PeopleSoft asset list as a list of assets to inspect. When assets are
"discovered" in the field during inspections, the process for adding
these assets should be reviewed and updated to ensure full adoption.

It was reported that there is a lack of resource supporting condition
assessments.

Further, there is no individual or group fully dedicated to asset
condition tracking. F&I started collecting condition data on its assets
about seven years ago and to date (since this is only a secondary
responsibility), condition data has only been collected for about 60
percent of the airport's assets. Typically, condition assessments need
to be conducted more frequently to ensure that the data is not
obsolete. This typically requires dedicated staff or contracted staff
that follow a pre-defined condition assessment methodology.
3.6.2.2

Maintenance Planning/Definition

Maintenance resource levels require review, as aging assets and
additional assets create a greater demand on the workforce.

Existing maintenance workforce requirements are based on historical
staffing level and anticipated workload for new infrastructure. It was
reported that maintenance employees are regularly pulled in to
support capital development. As airport demand increases, capital
growth and aging assets will increase the demand on maintenance
staff and as such staffing levels should be continually reviewed.

Maintenance scheduling is coordinated across asset classes. Maximo
is used to support scheduling activities.
Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Network Standards. These jobs are entered into Ellipse to create a
work bank. The work bank is reviewed in Ellipse by the Section
Manger to plan and prioritize.

The Maintenance Engineer reviews the work bank with the Section
Manger to ensure compliance with standards.
The Maintenance Engineer also reviews the work bank to create an
annual plan for the volume of work that needs to be delivered. Using
the current and historic work banks in Ellipse, the efficiency and
quality of previous maintenance undertaken, along with failure
trends and asset condition analysis using the Optram based system
LADS, the Maintenance Engineer is able to make an informed
decision on the maintenance, refurbishment or renewal requirements
of an asset.
A Section Manager can reprioritize work 6 times; on the 6 th
reprioritization, the discipline engineer's review and approval is
required.
Planners meet weekly to review the planning milestones and ensure
no clashes have occurred between departments. Engineers are
consulted on any major changes that are required.
With increasing maturity of the organization's processes, risk based
maintenance can be undertaken based on the condition of an asset.
This is underpinned by the Business Critical Rules. This allows local
discipline engineers to make informed decisions and changes to the
application of standard such as a change to the frequency of
inspection of a particular asset following a risk assessment.

38

Within the Maintenance department, a Maintenance Planning Group
is responsible for working with the various maintenance shops to
review and update maintenance plans & PM schedules. The group
meets weekly to review past work and planned work for the
forthcoming week to properly allocate and schedule resources and
tools. The group uses Maximo to plan and schedule work.
3.6.2.3

Maintenance Management

Tracking of maintenance activities and closing out work orders is
lacking - largely driven by the resource levels and a lack of time.
Improving the data would ensure a better work history is available to
support lifecycle decisions.

The Maintenance department is responsible for maintaining all assets
at the airport except for conveyances (elevators, escalators, and
moving walkways), which are maintained by contractors.
Maintenance foremen are responsible for tracking their work in
Maximo. The Maintenance department classifies work into three
major categories: emergency work (to be addressed immediately),
corrective work (to be addressed as soon as possible), and preventive
work (planned work).
Various stakeholders reported while all work is tracked, it may not be
tracked against the appropriate asset but assigned to a high-level
asset or a "catch-all" asset. This is due in part to time constraints but
also due to the incomplete data set. While it is difficult to gauge a
percent, when a full inventory is not known, based on our interviews,
it was a general understanding that approximately 70% of the assets
are captured in Maximo. As a result, the EAM records do not
accurately represent the work conducted by the maintenance staff or
the assets requiring the work. Stakeholders shared anecdotes on how
prior failures could not be resolved quickly because according to the
electronic systems, there were no assets at the location of failure,
and the staff members had to review as-built drawings to try and
identify assets in place.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Defects found using train-borne and manual ultrasonic testing are
automatically loaded into a Defect Management System. The actions
required are loaded into Ellipse, forming part of the work bank.
Due to the investment in asset databases and the tools to analyze the
data, Network Rail can make informed decisions on asset
management policy by identifying the deterioration rates and failure
modes of assets. The data and tools allow for root cause analysis to
be performed and for trends to be identified and monitored.
London Underground (LU), United Kingdom
Fault tracking is managed through a comprehensive Fault Reporting
and Corrective Action System (FRACAS). This system, which
schedules repairs and monitors trends is integrated into the EAM
information system. A feedback loop is provided wherein all faults
are discussed and closed out at a morning meeting.
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), California
Strategic Maintenance Program (SMP) focuses on a reliabilitycentered maintenance program intended to gradually achieve more
planned and scheduled maintenance, moving away from reactive
maintenance. The data acquired from the program are used to inform
maintenance cycle timings. As a result, the amount of time spent on
unscheduled maintenance has gone from more than 80% to less than
40%. Also, scheduled maintenance has provided greater stability for
staff work.
RailCorp, Sydney, Australia
Uses the RCM approach for its signaling and infrastructure assets to
identify failure modes and mitigation tasks.
Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), Texas
Uses a modified failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis (FMECA)
methodology to inform a comprehensive Reliability Centered
Maintenance approach to defining maintenance requirements.

39

3.6.2.4

Maintenance Delivery

Asset performance is not currently tracked - improving this would also
support optimized lifecycle decisions.

KPIs are in place to monitor work activities, but targets are not yet
fully developed. Data quality is still undergoing improvements.
Maintenance currently tracks work orders, both corrective and
predictive, and has begun tracking other maintenance and work
information in Maximo to help analyze maintenance performance.
Asset performance, however, is not tracked. Maintenance has started
to track failure cause for some work orders on certain assets. In this
case, the foreman is required to identify the cause of failure before
closing the work order. The Port does not currently have a
comprehensive reliability-centered maintenance program but is
starting to track reliability of some assets, specifically using Maximo's
Asset Health Insights.

NedTrain, The Netherlands
Analyzed and modified its vehicle wheel set maintenance criteria
using a failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis (FMECA),
resulting in improved preventive maintenance planning and a savings
of 40% of associated maintenance costs.
Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), New York
Maintenance of Equipment (MofE) group introduced a modified
failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis (FMECA) methodology to
inform a comprehensive Reliability Centered Maintenance approach
to defining maintenance requirements.

There is limited flow of information from contractors to the Port of
Seattle Aviation Division - resulting in little knowledge of the work
completed on port assets.

As noted above, the only major assets maintained by contractors are
conveyances. Only minimal asset and maintenance data is shared
with the Port from the contractors for these assets. Further, the data
that is shared is not added to any of the Port's system, such as
Maximo, and is only captured through electronic PDFs. The Port
tracks service requests that come in for conveyance-related issues
but again there is no link back to the unique asset.
3.6.2.5

Inventory Management

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division operates one central warehouse
and over 30 satellite storerooms - this impacts the ability to track and
maintain sufficient stock levels for all variations of parts.
The airport's Inventory Management group (also part of
Maintenance) is responsible for overseeing the airport's inventory

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

40

stock to support emergency, corrective, and planned work volumes.
There is one central warehouse (approximately 50,000 square feet)
and over 30 satellite storerooms scattered across the airport's
property. For inventory, min/max levels are assigned and monitored
in Maximo. Purchase orders are automatically generated when limits
are reached. Monthly and annual cycle counts are conducted and the
Port has also adopted the use of mobile devices for component
tagging. All new assets are tagged with bar codes or QR codes. The
airport reviews its spare part requirements and is working to
minimize holding costs.

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division is improving their processes for
managing parts obsolescence.
Inventory Management is also reviewing its obsolescence issues and
recently implemented an annual inventory validation process to
identify obsolete inventory and inventory that has not been used for
more than a 12-month period. Through this process, the
maintenance shops will request disposition of obsolete materials,
and/or justify the need to keep materials that have had minimal
usage. Further, it was noted that the Port assets vary greatly by
manufacturer and manufacture year, making it difficult for Inventory
Management to track and maintain sufficient stock levels for all
variations of parts and components.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

41

Recommendations
Recommendation

Description/Scope

Update/Develop Standardized
Condition Assessment and Scoring
Guidelines across All Asset Classes

Develop/update condition assessment and scoring guidelines for all asset classes. This includes
establishing a condition scale and assessment framework for each asset class. The Port can build upon the
condition assessment framework being used by F&I for facilities as a start, and update it for facilities using
a more detailed hierarchy, a 5-point rating scale with definitions for each rating, and a way to incorporate
maintenance data into the assessment. The framework can then be applied to other asset classes - which
will require asset hierarchies, rating guidelines and a methodology to incorporate maintenance data.
These guidelines can then be a part of a risk-based approach to investment decision making and
prioritization. Applying a condition assessment methodology to all assets will ensure that the Port can
consistently understand and compare the condition of its assets across the entire airport.
Note: Updating/developing detailed asset hierarchies for all asset classes is recommended later in this
section.

Conduct Condition Assessments
across All Asset Classes

The Port should conduct comprehensive condition assessments on all assets at the airport (including
updating condition for facilities with data older than four years) once consistent condition assessment
guidelines are created. We also recommend that the Port store the condition data in Maximo to expand
the use of the system from a maintenance tracking system to a true enterprise asset management system.
The condition assessments will allow the Port to prepare more informed lifecycle management plans (a
previous recommendation in this chapter) and a more informed capital plan. Understanding condition will
also improve the efficiency of maintenance work prioritization.

Improve Asset Data

Improve the quality of maintenance records data in Maximo. This includes having an accurate record of
each trouble ticket in Maximo, related work order(s), failure codes, remedy, when it was closed, and the
amount of effort and materials required for the work order. This includes recording work to the lowest
maintainable unit in the asset hierarchy along with the proper failure codes and remedy codes. We also
recommend that any work orders that are not worked on (not conducted) are either left open in the
system, or closed with a special code to indicate that the work was not conducted - and a reason for it
(e.g. staffing limitations, not required due to asset's planned replacement, not required since a new
inspection work order is open due to frequency, work recently performed) This will result in improved
accuracy of data in Maximo and will allow the Port to move towards reliability-centered maintenance.

Update Process for Adding
"Discovered" Assets in the Field

Update the process for adding new assets into Maximo when they are "discovered" in the field. The Port
has assets that have been in place for over 70 years, and systems and records have changed over time. As

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

42

Recommendation

Description/Scope

a result, sometimes assets are "discovered" in the field; assets are in place but there are no electronic
records of the asset in Maximo or PeopleSoft.
Implement Reliability-Centered
Maintenance Philosophy

Implement a reliability-centered maintenance philosophy, including performance and reliability KPIs for all
assets. The Port does not currently conduct reliability-centered maintenance and is not tracking sufficient
reliability data to properly identify maintenance needs. Through reliability-centered maintenance, the Port
will have the ability to analyze past failures (including their causes and remedies), address systematic asset
issues through maintenance or the CIP, reduce lifecycle costs, and reduce the amount of emergency and
corrective work.

Develop Guidelines to Align Future Develop guidelines to align future maintenance contract agreements with the Port's asset management
Contract Maintenance Agreements standards. This includes: 1) use of Maximo by contractors, 2) record corrective work in Maximo, 3) define
with Asset Management Standards PM and inspection programs for the assets, 4) perform condition assessments before and after the
contract period, 5) develop formal asset management plans, and 6) conduct annual performance reviews
and audits. This will improve contractor performance and compliance along with the assurance that assets
are maintained and delivered in acceptable condition. Currently, the only major assets maintained by
contractors are conveyances, which include elevators, escalators, and moving walkways. At this time, only
minimal data is shared between the Port and the contractors for these assets, and the data is not added in
Maximo or any other Port's systems.
Enhance Inventory Efficiency

Review current inventory levels, including what parts, components, and assets are stored in inventory.
Ensure all inventory items are intentional and that obsolete parts are removed from inventory. Implement
new procedures to continually monitor parts usage, min/max levels, obsolescence and other key elements
of inventory management. This will allow the Port to maintain an inventory that is based on expected
usage and its risk profile.

Update Obsolescence Strategy

As part of the asset class strategies, review the risk of obsolescence on components and assets and
establish strategies for mitigating the risk through campaign overhaul, asset replacement or revised
operating procedures.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

43

3.7 Operations and Fault Management
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division is graded as COMPETENT in the Operations and Fault Management
assessment area.
The Operations and Fault Management pathway assesses the organization's practices related to asset operations and the capability of the
organization to identify, respond to, and manage asset incidents. The pathway also considers the processes related to business continuity
planning in the event of an incident.
Three quality areas are assessed:
1. Operations Management and Control: Assesses the extent to which the organization has established strategies, policies, and
procedures for the management of asset operations, including consideration of access and operational demand management during
maintenance outages.
2. Fault Management: Assesses the extent to which the organization has defined processes and practices for fault identification,
response, management, investigation, and close out. It also considers the extent to which costs and claims related to the faults are
managed.
3. Business Continuity Planning: Assesses the extent to which the organization has established strategies, policies, and procedures that
consider an appropriate range of threats and risks and establish management action plans to ensure asset operations can continue or
can rapidly return to normal function in the event of an incident.

Assessment Summary

Figure 3-8: Operations and Fault Management Assessment Results

Figure 3-8 shows the level of maturity for the Operations and Fault
Management assessment area. Overall, the Port of Seattle Aviation
Division scored well in this area. It was noted, however, that an
agency-wide asset criticality framework does not exist and therefore
should be a key priority. This framework will not only support
maintenance prioritization but also provide a more comprehensive
input into and alignment with the capital plan.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

44

Key Observations
3.7.2.1

Operations Management and Control

While operational needs take priority, the Port of Seattle Aviation
Division does have processes for managing outages and shutdowns.

Operations at the airport are categorized into three areas based on
location: airfield (taxiways, runways, etc.), landside (public roads,
parking garage, drop-off area, etc.), and the terminal (operations
inside the terminal). Shutdowns for preventive and corrective
maintenance are performed when needed with priority given to
operational needs. For major outages that impact airfield operations
(e.g., runway, taxiway, and apron work), preventive work is
coordinated between maintenance and operations through a preplanned scheduling process.
In most cases, Operations employees are responsible for entering
work requests directly into Maximo, when issues are identified. The
Maintenance department is then responsible for reviewing the work
requests, and if Maintenance identifies the issue as something it
cannot fix due to complexity or scope, the responsibility falls back to
Operations, which then typically is addressed through Operations
budget or capital projects. The Port does not have a defined
framework to prioritize most critical work based on the asset
function, other than by the three location-based areas. This may
prevent work from being conducted in the most effective manner to
reduce operational or other risks.

With no asset criticality processes in place, priority is typically given to
the airfield assets.

Typically, priority is given to the airfield assets, primarily because of
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. There is no
consistent asset criticality framework across the agency for all assets.
As a result, landside assets may not be addressed in a timely fashion
or at all.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Best Practice Benchmark

Gatwick Airport London
There has been a change in the way the business is driven, with
operations taking a much more significant role in contributing to
setting the direction for asset management decisions that ultimately
support service delivery. There is the recognition that operations is
the final service delivery interface with the customer, and the
business is entirely dependent upon retaining customers.
Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Texas
DART has a preventive maintenance schedule for its asset. In
addition, DART uses a predictive failure modelling tool, RelCode,
which is applied to a subset of assets and then used to analyze the
failure of all assets.
Network Rail, United Kingdom
All incidents and failures are logged in a Failure Management System
to be reviewed and analyzed.
A hierarchy of approvals is used to manage last minute changes to
the plan with safety always taking priority. This requires liaison with
stakeholders and train operating companies.
Merseyrail, United Kingdom
Introduced a defect reporting system that prompts train operators to
report defects as part of the shift sign-off process together with a
culture change training program to encourage more accurate
information capture. This resulted in an 84% improvement in
performance.

45

3.7.2.2

Fault Management

The airport has well-defined processes for responding to
faults/incidents.

Airport Duty Managers and Operations Supervisors are trained to
handle and report incidents appropriately. All incidents are called into
the Airport Communication Center and are then documented in the
Port's incident tracking system, Origami. Airport Duty Managers are
also responsible for contacting the authorities based on the level of
severity. Incident response processes appear widely understood
across the airport. Staff and tenants are alerted via email and mobile
phones as necessary. The public is made aware of incidents through
the airport's public-address system, local news media, and the Port's
website.

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division investigates incidents in a timely
manner and seeks ways in which future incidents can be avoided.

The Port has both a hazard and incident reporting portal and detailed
processes to review and address these issues. Adjustments to
preventive maintenance occur on a case-by-case basis after particular
failures but not systematically. Results from incident investigations
are sometimes communicated to relevant stakeholders; however,
frequency varies and it is not done consistently. Recording and
tracking asset information related to incidents is improving, but
currently there is no integration between Maximo and Origami
(linking incident data to specific assets).
3.7.2.3

Business Continuity Planning

Established Business Continuity Plans exist.

The Port has a Contingency of Operations Plan (COOP), which outlines
the agency's strategy, policies, and procedures in the case of major
incidents, threats, and risks to operation. The plan is available to all
employees and routinely updated. The plan includes action steps to
ensure asset operations can continue or can rapidly return to normal
function in the event of an incident.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

46

Recommendations
Recommendation

Brief Description

Develop Asset Criticality
(Consequence of Failure) Criteria

Identify the assets that are most critical to the Port, understanding the consequences of failure and
informing a risk-based approach to prioritization. This framework should include a scoring and ranking
methodology for social, financial, and environmental impacts, as well as a methodology for assessment of
system redundancy to factor into risk calculations. This risk/criticality score should then be embedded in
Maximo to help prioritize work when issues arise. This will not only support maintenance prioritization
but also provide a more comprehensive input into and alignment with the capital plan.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

47

3.8 Informed Decisions
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division is graded as ESTABLISHING in the Informed Decisions assessment area.
Asset Information is the area with the most opportunity for improvement.
The Informed Decisions pathway assesses the extent to which an organization has established requirements for, developed, maintained, and
provided access to asset and asset management-related information to support whole life decision making.
Four quality areas are assessed:
1. Asset Accounting: Assesses the organization's approach to asset valuation and the extent to which the organization captures costs
related to asset management activities, including maintenance and capital spend.
2. Asset Information: Assesses the extent to which the organization has defined, developed, captured, and maintained information about
the asset and about asset activities. It also considers whether data standards and governance have been put in place.
3. Technology Systems Strategy: Assesses the extent to which the organization has developed and deployed a technology strategy for
integrating various applications to support effective asset management.
4. Technology Applications: Assesses the extent to which the organization has implemented effective finance, human resources,
procurement, materials management, asset planning and scheduling, and asset management technology applications.

Assessment Summary

Figure 3-9: Informed Decisions Assessment Results

Figure 3-9 shows the level of maturity for the Informed Decisions
assessment area. The Port has a dedicated IT team that supports the
various departments across the agency and is guided by a detailed IT
strategy and development roadmap. While the Port has up-to-date
systems, there is little to no integration between systems. Further,
asset data is not consistent and incomplete across departments and
maintenance shops.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

48

Key Observations
3.8.2.1

Asset Accounting

Consistent definition of an "asset" would improve cross department
integration.

A core component of asset management - the definition of an "asset"
is not consistent. Maintenance and finance use definitions that are
different and there is a need to align them and communicate it widely
among the Port.

The Accounting department uses PeopleSoft to track assets. Useful life
indices are assigned by Accounting which may not be applicable to the
assigned asset and may not align to the expectations of maintenance.
The Port has multiple asset inventories, all tracked in different
systems (Maximo, PeopleSoft, etc.) and managed by different
departments. The Accounting department uses PeopleSoft to track
the airport's fixed assets. Assets are defined by Accounting as a
physical item that:
· Is owned by the Port of Seattle
· Has a useful life of 3 years or more
· Has a total capital project cost of $20,000 or more

Assets are booked in PeopleSoft during onboarding as part of the
Port's asset plans. Further, the Accounting department is responsible
for assigning the useful life to the fixed asset based on a list of
predefined asset profiles. These asset profiles, similar to asset
categories, all have an associated useful life that then gets applied to
the asset during onboarding. The useful life may not be applicable to
the actual assigned asset and, in many cases, the asset profiles do not
cover all types of assets at the airport.

Not all assets are included in PeopleSoft, it was estimated that only a
third of the airports assets are considered by finance.
Accounting also oversees an annual inventory update of
approximately one-third of the airport's fixed assets. Accounting

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Best Practice Benchmark

Denver International Airport
Is implementing an Enterprise GIS and notes three elements critical to
the success of new information systems roll out-communication,
training, and incentives. Denver is also using Maximo's route
capability as a means to improving productivity by avoiding missed
PMs and ensuring that all assets are managed.
Miami International Airport
Is introducing a detailed cost accounting structure to enable typing
costs to the provision of a service (e.g., linking facility management
costs to the user of a leased space within the airport terminal). This
also enables the identification of preventive maintenance that is
appropriately cost justified.
Gatwick Airport London
Intelligent monitoring techniques have been introduced as part of the
refurbishment of a bridge over the railway. This bridge will have builtin condition monitoring to avoid some of the need for railway
possessions to undertake inspections.
Greater Toronto Airport Authority
The Authority requires that all as-built project data be delivered to
the agency's data center in accordance with pre-established CAD and
GIS position standards. This includes all buildings, paved surfaces,
fence lines, utilities, etc.
Has a fairly advanced system in place for information management.
The airport has recently gone through a major development program
replacing two of the three original terminals, adding a new runway,
central de-icing facility, and associated taxiway and apron
development. The asset inventory is managed using Oracle Spatial
and CAD, and good standards are in place to maintain this
information.

49

distributes Microsoft Excel spreadsheets to the various asset owners,
who are then responsible to populate the spreadsheets with basic
asset information. The annual updates are focused on assets that are
listed in PeopleSoft. As a result, assets not listed in PeopleSoft are not
verified. Based on our conversations with stakeholders, it is widely
believed that about 30% of the Port-owned assets (using the
Accounting definition) are not in PeopleSoft.

Asset lifecycle costs are not available as the Port of Seattle Aviation
Division lacks the data structure and tools to capture costs at the asset
level.
In most cases, documented asset lifecycle costs are not available
because departments lack the structure and tools to capture and
report full lifecycle costs for assets. The information that is collected
is contained in separate, unintegrated spreadsheet files (rather than a
single asset inventory), often on paper, and is incomplete for
purposes of asset management. Work conducted on assets is
recorded in Maximo, but as previously reported the data is not
always accurate (e.g., work orders show as "complete" when they
were "closed" because of elapsed time or reasons other than the
work being done, and work orders reported against high level asset
codes rather than actual assets due to inaccuracy in the inventory
data).

Uses ProjectWise software for content management and
collaboration with all parties requiring access to asset data. Data
records are nearly 100 percent complete for all recent development.
London Underground (LU), United Kingdom
Asset registers are available for all assets (with component and
subcomponent level available for complex assets). The asset
inventory also records data collection protocols.
Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), New York
The Maintenance of Equipment unit developed asset hierarchies for
fleet down to the lowest maintainable item, initially to support fault
analysis and maintenance scheduling. Over time, the hierarchies have
been further developed to support more comprehensive reliability
centered maintenance
Swiss Federal Railways (SBB CFF FFS), Switzerland
Asset-specific files, such as drawings and equipment configuration
details, can be linked to the integrated asset information
management system

Network Rail, United Kingdom
After failing to justify the level of funding it sought, Network Rail
invested heavily in upgrading its asset management databases. Using
A similar position was observed with capital costs; project costs are an Optram based system which linearly maps multiple data streams,
accurately tracked; however, they are not allocated to individual assets the asset policy can be assessed and changed based on quality data
and failures trend analysis leading to a clearer understanding of
within a project.
whole life costing.
Actual capital costs are captured at the project level and are not
allocated to individual assets within a project. Understanding the
Use of Ellipse as the EAM information system (after many years of
cost breakdown for multiple asset purchases as part of one project is development) is central to agency's business (maintenance, capital,
difficult. More could be done to capture a more detailed breakdown
financial, etc.) and information/data drives functions
of capital acquisition costs of assets.
Ellipse is used to manage the work bank/scheduled work and
captures productivity, maintenance unit cost, and previous work

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

50

history which allows engineers to review and authorize reprioritizing
of jobs in the work bank
3.8.2.2

Asset Information

The Maintenance department use the EAM system Maximo to manage
asset activities. Not all assets are included in Maximo, it was estimated
that about 70% of the airports assets are included.
The Maintenance department primarily uses Maximo to track the
maintainable assets at the airport. An asset is defined by
maintenance as something that:
· Is tangible property or component (regardless of its financial
value)
· Requires regular maintenance (or is identified as 'run to fail'
item)
· Gets repaired upon failure

RailCorp, Sydney, Australia
For financial management of its assets, an Ellipse system relates cost
information to asset management work, allowing the agency to
conduct lifecycle cost analysis
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), Georgia
Employs a systems approach in which asset hierarchies, inspections,
and maintenance activities are directly related to the overall
performance of the MARTA system, as well as to demonstrate
compliance with regulatory requirements.

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), D.C.
Employs the Maximo EAM system, with the Asset Configuration
Manager, which facilitates performance measurement propagation to
asset components, tracks life usage of repairable components, and
alerts maintenance based on mileage thresholds. It also provides a
view of an asset's availability based on configuration and
Outside of Finance and Maintenance - other departments have
maintenance, and can be linked with Optram for right-of-way asset
generated lists of assets and asset information to support their business visualization. WMATA undertook a trial project with the use of mobile
needs.
devices and is currently expanding the trial over a much broader area.
F&I uses Maximo and PeopleSoft assets to populate its Microsoft
Utah Transit Authority (UTA), Salt Lake City, Utah
Excel spreadsheets that are used to record the condition of those
Uses a comprehensive asset management system that includes three
assets. The condition data is used as an input into the capital
modules: an inventory module, which is a GIS based system of all
improvement program for asset renewals and replacements. Other
critical assets; an inspection module that allows for paperless
departments, such as the Enterprise Risk Management group, have
uploading of inspection results; and a budget module that correlates
their own list of assets for tracking purposes in Origami Risk.
replacement and rehabilitation costs with deterioration models to
provide financial projections
It is widely believed that about 70 percent of the airport's assets are
listed in the system. This number could be as low as 50% for
underground assets, and as high as 99% for fleet assets, with other
assets somewhere in between.

ESRI ArcGIS is being implemented but is not at the stage where it is
fully integrated. GIS records are not consistent with other systems.
The Port uses a ESRI ArcGIS as its geographic information system
(GIS), but it is not yet fully integrated to meet the division's asset

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

51

management needs. Currently, the GIS maps are populated by using
data from the Engineering department (based on GPS coordinates in
their engineering drawing). The GIS records are not consistently
linked to records in Maximo or PeopleSoft.

Additional asset data - including master record drawings - are not all
available digitally.
The Port also maintains master record drawings, but not all drawings
are available digitally, and the assets shown on the drawings are not
labeled on the field with a common number to identify them. As a
result, staff members spend valuable time identifying the asset during
emergency or other work. The Port uses some asset monitoring
systems, specifically in support of its HVAC mechanical systems. It
does not currently use SCADA or other monitoring systems to
monitor its other assets but would like to in the near future.

Asset data is not consistently structured. The lack of an asset
breakdown structure (asset hierarchy) impacts the roll-up of cost
information, failure analysis and other analytical capabilities to support
asset management decisions.
Due to these multiple systems, there is no one "source of truth" for
asset data at the airport. Furthermore, assets in PeopleSoft cannot be
easily "linked" to assets in Maximo since they do not follow a similar
classification system (a hierarchy). The Port does not have a standard
asset hierarchy that identifies parent-child relationships between
assets, which makes reconciliation between the systems difficult.
Each department and maintenance shop may have its own way of
classifying assets, but there are no Port-wide standards. For example,
Maximo asset records for plumbing follow a different classification
than the records in F&I's condition assessment workbooks that have
a combination of PeopleSoft and Maximo records.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), Boston,
Massachusetts
The state of good repair database provides a comprehensive
inventory of the agency's transit assets and calculates the current
state (i.e., the backlog - total cost to renew or replace those beyond
useful life). It also identifies measures/funding levels to remove the
backlog and analyzes impacts of funding and policy scenarios.
MTR, Hong Kong
The agency's Enterprise Asset Information System is used at all
phases of the supply chain and records all maintenance activity,
providing consistent information throughout the supply chain and
across assets. The EAM system is linked with Oracle Financials, which
is where unit cost information is stored.
Regional Transportation Authority (RTA), Chicago, Illinois
A decision support tool guides state of good repair priorities, using
multi-criteria decision analysis, assigning weights to each criterion
and then taking the weighted average to score a candidate project.
The criteria considered include asset age and condition, riders
impacted, service reliability, safety and security, and operating and
maintenance costs.

52

A digital strategy should be developed to establish a path for how the
application of technology and information can be used to improve the
Port of Seattle Aviation Division's performance.

While asset information is available and captured throughout these
various systems listed here, the data is siloed and employees typically
do not know how to access the information. Employees have varying
levels of access to these systems, also making it difficult to obtain.
Additionally, it was acknowledged that information is not always
available to support asset management decisions.
A digital strategy should be developed to focus on the use of asset
and asset related technology and information to drive more efficient
and effective decisions and management actions through the assets
lifecycle.
A digital strategy also provides the first level of data governance,
establishing both the landscape of information that needs to be made
available and the functional requirements for technology to support
full use of the information.
The digital strategy DOES NOT EQUAL an IT Strategy. An
organization's IT strategy focuses on technology enablement for
existing practices. IT strategies treat technologies in isolation and do
not define the information requirements. Instead IT strategies focus
on software and application strategies, hardware strategies, cloud
and mobile strategies to better support existing practices.

Data governance processes for managing asset information need to be
developed.
Standards for asset information were found to be lacking. An asset
information standard should be developed that sets out how
information will be structured and maintained, what information
should be collected, how it should be collected and how it will be
accessed.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

53

3.8.2.3

Technology Systems Strategy and Technology Applications

The Port of Seattle Aviation Division utilizes various "best of breed"
commercial systems to support its business.

An application architecture for asset management-related systems is
presented in Appendix A. The primary systems related include:
· Oracle PeopleSoft for accounting and finance (Enterprise
Resource Planning)
· IBM Maximo for maintenance management/asset
management
· Origami Risk for risk management
· ESRI ArcGIS and Open Source for GIS
· PROPworks for property and tenant revenue management
· Tableau for reporting
The Port does not license a Building Information Modeling (BIM)
software, though various vendors have provided BIM data to the Port
using Revit BIM, Autodesk BIM 360 and/or other software.

The lack of system integrations results in a need for manual
reconciliation of data which is both time-consuming and introduces data
accuracy risks.
The biggest limitation for asset management is that these various
systems are not linked through interfaces. The data between the
systems has to be reconciled, shared or aggregated manually. This
results in the Port possessing a lot of data, but without the ability to
easily analyze the data to make more informed decisions.
The Port IT group has a well-defined systems strategy that tracks the
software versions, maintenance agreements and other information,
and ensures that systems are upgraded regularly. As a result, the
software versions of the key systems in use are being actively
supported by the manufacturers. The IT group considers other
departments its clients, and is always working on ensuring that its
clients have the right tools to efficiently and effectively do their jobs.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

54

Recommendations
Recommendation

Description/Scope

Create Common Asset Definition

Create a common/consistent definition of an "asset" that is used across the Port, linking the financial and
maintenance definitions. The definition of an "asset" is critical to establishing a consistent understanding
of "asset management" across the Port and ensure that related processes are all aligned. The different
"asset" definitions in maintenance and finance lead to inconsistencies in how stakeholders understand
assets and asset management. A common definition will also ensure consistency of asset referencing and
naming conventions across departments.

Digital Strategy

Develop a digital strategy to focus the use of asset and asset related technology and information to drive
more efficient and effective decisions and management actions through the assets lifecycle. A Digital
Strategy also provides the first level of data governance, establishing both the landscape of information
that needs to be made available and the functional requirements for technology to support full use of the
information.

Establish Data Governance
Standards

A data governance framework for Port of Seattle asset management including policies, processes and
procedures for the capture, management and control of asset related information should be developed.
These should include both asset attribute and condition/performance information. This will also support a
more effective asset creation/handover process.

Update/Develop and Implement
Enterprise Asset Hierarchies

Update/develop and implement formal asset hierarchies (asset, process area, system, sub-system, etc.)
along with applicable attributes consistently across all airport infrastructure. We recommend starting with
the existing hierarchies for facilities and updating them based on best practices. The Port should develop
hierarchies for other (non-facility) assets using best practices from other agencies with similar assets.
Implementing asset hierarchies (along with prior recommendation to have a common asset definition) will
allow the Port to setup data consistently in different systems, and allow for easy analysis of this
information. For example, PeopleSoft may list a facility and its key systems (e.g. HVAC), while Maximo may
break down HVAC into various other assets (down to the lowest maintainable unit) - but the data could be
collated, reconciled, shared and analyzed easily. Further, the asset hierarchies are required to implement
other recommendations such as identifying most critical assets and conducting a comprehensive condition
assessment.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

55

Recommendation

Description/Scope

Conduct Airport-Wide Asset
Inventory Collection

Conduct an airport-wide asset inventory collection. This inventory should identify assets that are visible
(above ground) through a physical review/check, and assets that are invisible (belowground) by using asbuilt drawings and any other available information. The airport assets are currently not clearly identified in
any one system, and it is widely accepted that the Port of Seattle Aviation Division has documented about
70% of the assets it owns. An inventory of all assets (in conjunction with standard asset hierarchies) will
ensure that conducted work is assigned to the correct assets, allowing the Port to track the assets, their
condition and their performance more accurately.

Align and Integrate
PeopleSoft/Maximo

Improve alignment and integration between PeopleSoft assets and Maximo. This will allow for automated
transfer of information, reduce data duplication or data entry errors, allow for easier tracking of current
asset value and expected life and plan for replacements.
The Port should also review its overall application architecture to identify other opportunities for
integration.

Integrate GIS with Maximo

Integrate Port's GIS systems with Maximo. This will allow users to view asset location graphically and
identify certain trends more easily. It will also allow users to identify root causes of issues easily and
address critical faults faster. Currently, the GIS maps are populated by pulling data from the Engineering
department (based on GPS coordinates in their engineering drawing) and the data is not integrated with
Maximo.

Develop Electronic Master Record
Drawings

Develop a comprehensive set of electronic master record drawings for the entire airport that can be easily
accessed from a computer or tablet. Currently, master record drawings are not all available electronically,
and the assets shown on the drawings are not labeled on the field with a common number to identify
them. Improved access to these master record drawings (combined with viewing data on a map and
consistent hierarchies) will allow staff to locate assets more efficiently as well as improve work response
time.

Assess/Enhance SCADA/Asset
Health Monitoring Systems

Perform a comprehensive assessment and develop an improvement plan for SCADA/automated asset
health monitoring system(s) for key equipment/assets (elevators, escalators, boilers, chillers, etc.). The
airport does not currently use SCADA to monitor its assets but does use some asset monitoring systems,
specifically on the HVAC mechanical systems. The use of these asset monitoring tools can greatly improve
efficiency in monitoring their condition, maintaining assets as well as reduce failure/breakdown rates and
inspection/ maintenance costs.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

56

3.9 Resource Capabilities
The Port of Seattle Aviation Division is graded as ESTABLISHING in the Resource Capabilities assessment area.
The Resource Capabilities pathway assesses the extent to which the organization understands resource requirements and has established an
organization that is aligned to deliver the asset management activities to ensure it successfully achieves its organizational goals.
Four quality areas are assessed:
1. Workforce strategy: Assesses the extent to which the organization has reviewed its workforce needs and established strategies for
delivering its asset management objectives and strategies.
2. Organization: Assesses the extent to which the organization has clearly defined the roles and responsibilities related to asset
management and how it considers the value and culture in introducing management changes and improvements.
3. Workforce Management: Assesses the extent to which the organization has processes and practices for succession planning, skills
development, and competency/certification management.
4. Supplier Management: Assesses the extent to which the organization has established processes and practices for the successful
management of suppliers (vendors and contractors).

Assessment Summary

Figure 3-10: Resource Capabilities Assessment Results

Figure 3-10 shows the level of maturity for the Resource Capabilities
assessment area. In terms of asset management, the Port does not
have a set of dedicated roles and responsibilities for asset
management. Further, there is no asset management training nor
communication plan to convey asset management benefits and goals
across the agency. Going forward, it will be important to ensure
employees are well aware of asset management, its key benefits, and
how asset management fits into their specific job responsibilities.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

57

Key Observations
3.9.2.1

Workforce Strategy

A study to establish the right level of resourcing is necessary.
All asset classes and F&I, engineering and maintenance functions
reported both manager and technical staff shortages. While
processes are in place to review resource levels, it can be difficult to
match the needed number of employees across departments.
Remedying this is particularly necessary given the aging assets at the
Port (which require more attention) and the construction of newer
assets (which will require additional manpower).

Asset management is innately integrated - a steering committee should
be established to oversee improvements.
There also is no overarching role dedicated to directing and managing
asset management comprehensively across the airport. A steering
committee should be established to ensure the needs of all users is
considered.
3.9.2.2

Organization

There was some confusion between the departments regarding roles
and responsibilities for asset management.

While a few positions focus primarily on asset management at the
airport, in most cases these responsibilities are still "secondary" and
asset management roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined.
Currently, in terms of asset management responsibilities, F&I is
responsible for tracking asset condition and identifying asset
renewal/replacement, and Maintenance is responsible for tracking
and monitoring the maintenance of the airport's assets. Maintenance
has a few positions dedicated to asset management, including an
Asset Manager who is responsible for asset data and integrity in
Maximo. Further, F&I is currently seeking an Asset Manager of
Renewal and Replacement.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Best Practice Benchmark

Gatwick Airport London
The responsibility for implementing the asset management system
rests with the chief operating officer (COO). The head of asset
management supports the COO and is responsible for project
definition, providing maintenance, operations, and integration
services for the full project lifecycle. The COO signs off on these
projects.
Brisbane Airport
Brisbane Airport outsources the majority of the design and
procurement of infrastructure assets. To limit the risk to the
organization, quality assurance measures are in place to ensure the
quality of contract documentation and specification, and to ensure
the quality of contractors. Contractor performance is assessed in
terms of safety record, relationships with stakeholders, and
consistency in performance. An approved contractor database is
maintained.
Greater Toronto Airport Authority
Uses performance-based contracts, for example, their baggage
handling system operation and maintenance contract is evaluated on
availability daily, and a monthly contract payment factor is
determined and applied to contractor invoices.
Network Rail, United Kingdom
Each discipline (Track, Signaling, Electric Traction) is led by an
engineer with clear roles and responsibilities including safety of the
line.

58

There clearly is a desire to implement asset management at the airport.
Most employees are aware of the purpose and value of asset
management but cite the need for dedicated staff as a major hurdle
to improvements. Overall, employees are keen to see improvements
made to planning, scheduling, and management of assets, as well as
access to data and information that supports the execution of their
job. That said, there is no governance structure to help with asset
management improvements, which can significantly hinder progress
on improvements.

Internal communications processes for asset management were cited
by staff as being a major gap.

Communications with respect to comparing and prioritizing asset
needs across departments using a common platform is crucial and
does not currently exist as best practice. Further, there is no
consistent message around asset management and its impacts to the
Port. While most employees understand the concept of asset
management, there is no ongoing means to communicate progress
and its benefit to the organization. Employees acknowledged the
need for staff to coordinate across departments and functions for
asset management to be successful. With that said, the Port clearly
communicates its overarching organizational strategy and priorities
to its employees. This is good practice and will provide a solid avenue
to introduce asset management communication.
3.9.2.3

Workforce Management

Currently, there is no regular training for asset management, either
introductory or ongoing.

The Port of Seattle Seaport Division, however, has begun to
implement asset management training with its employees, which
could be easily transferred to the airport as appropriate. The Aviation
Division regularly conducts operation and maintenance training for its
assets, and these procedures are well-documented.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Organization:
· Clear accountable roles and responsibilities
· Frontline staff receive asset management analysis tools to
help them assess the asset and improve performance using
the latest mobile technology
· Budget responsibility for each route is managed by a Route
Director who is accountable for expenditure.
· Local Section managers have core responsibility for
maintenance refurbishment delivery. Section managers have
resources, including planners who report directly to them.
· Maintenance Engineers have overall accountability and high
level influence on resources and budgets. They are
responsible for identifying renewal requirements of assets
which are submitted to the Route Asset Manager.
Workforce:
· Apprenticeship and graduate programs
· Promotes people based on skills and ability as per a skills
competency matrix instead of seniority
· Is employer of choice, perception of good jobs/benefits,
skilled people
· Offers choice of potential career advancement paths;
provides coaching, mentorships
· Works with the unions to support change; focus on what
changes are happening, what's good for the industry and
what's best for union members
· Developed its own values and leadership training to help all
levels of staff understand the organization and to create a
teamwork environment
· Annual succession planning effort. A plan is created for all
vacancies; succession plans consider each individual currently
in the role and the career goals of candidates for those
positions

59

A formal succession planning program should be established that also
considers the needs of the future.
The Port does not have a formal succession planning program;
however, managers and supervisors are aware of the skill gaps and
current employee attrition. Further, the Port does not have any
formal knowledge management techniques in place, but managers
and senior leaders do consult with other airports informally to
capture best practices and apply this knowledge to their roles. The
airport is looking to implement a more formalized program for
knowledge capture and transfer across its staff.
3.9.2.4

Supplier Management

Existing contracts lack requirements for the provision of information.

The Port has well defined processes in place for contracting, managed
by its central procurement office. The asset-management specific
contracts to maintain elevators, escalators and some other assets do
not provide details on the maintenance work conducted to the Port in
an easy to analyze electronic format. Reviewing future contracts,
(while considering authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) requirements
for the Port's Maintenance Control Program (MCP)), to obtain
necessary asset data will allow the Port to store an asset's history and
use it to move towards reliability-centered maintenance in the future.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

·

Competencies are held in a database. Can scan an ID card
and see the competencies of that person in order to
determine whether or not they have the qualifications to do
the work

SMRT, Singapore
Cultivates a sense of ownership among its staff by ensuring staff
understand how their work is helping to achieve SMRT's corporate
objectives
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), California
Includes staff in discussions and cultivates a sense of ownership;
through this collaborative approach, staff provide helpful
improvement suggestions regarding maintenance and work stations
Instituted a training program for staff, and established a reliability
performance effort, encouraging teams to take responsibility for their
work.
London Underground, United Kingdom
Similar in some ways to Network Rail, has appointed 'Professional
Heads' for each asset discipline. Their role is to ensure the expected
performance resulting from operating and capital programs is
achieved -- and where not, to ascertain the reason. LU's Professional
Heads work to review asset condition and performance and
recommend changes to the capital and maintenance divisions to
ensure performance. This can also include changes to capital design
to ensure recurring issues are addressed. They also work to
understand current and future technologies and consider how these
may be deployed within the organization.

60

Recommendations
Recommendation

Description / Scope

Undertake a Workforce ResourceLevel Study

A study should be conducted to determine resource requirements across departments. This should be
consistent with the asset management plan development, which will forecast needed work. The study
should then determine what resources are needed to deliver this work (i.e., focus on the work needed for
an asset to deliver the service, and then the resource needs to support this) including both capability and
capacity requirements to support asset management activities.

Establish a steering committee

A steering committee should be established to ensure all departments needs are addressed through the
development and delivery of the asset management improvement program.

Establish Asset Management
Leadership & Authority

An asset management leader should be appointed within the Port of Seattle, with overall responsibility
for establishing, managing and monitoring the effectiveness of the asset management system. In
addition, asset class leaders should be appointed, who have overall through life planning responsibility
for the assets under their control. Management performance reviews should include goals for improving
the management of assets, including reducing costs, risks and increasing performance and should not
focus on productivity.

Develop and Define AM Roles and
Responsibilities

Define an organizational structure and clear roles and job descriptions for asset management across the
Port of Seattle (specifically at the airport). This should include developing a position for overall AM
coordination and implementation across the airport. By developing key asset management roles and
responsibilities, the Port will begin fostering a more asset-focused culture along with a shared
understanding of how asset management is integrated across the agency and among individual roles. This
recommendation, in conjunction with defining asset owners (recommended earlier in this chapter) will
ensure a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities, and the part various stakeholders play in
managing the assets efficiently.

Develop EAM Stakeholder
Engagement Plan

Develop an EAM stakeholder engagement plan, including identifying stakeholder groups and their
requirements with regard to asset management. This includes creating the best channels for
communicating with each group, and executing stakeholder awareness and involvement strategies
beyond the gap assessment project. We also recommend developing and implementing a robust
communications strategy for engaging all airport staff at all levels in considering their respective
individual roles in achieving the benefits of improved asset management.

Develop Introductory and Ongoing
Asset Management Training

Develop the material and implement asset management training for employees. Currently, there is no
dedicated training for asset management; however, the Port of Seattle Seaport Division has begun to

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

61

Recommendation

Description / Scope

implement this type of training, which could be applicable to the Aviation Division. A more complete
asset management training program will help improve asset management awareness and understanding
across employees, as well as increase employee engagement around asset management implementation.
Review Contract Language

Contract language should be reviewed to ensure it fully aligns to the strategic asset management plan.
This will ensure that information is made available to the Port to inform long-term decisions on assets
managed by contractors.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

62

4 Recommendations
Forty-five recommendations were identified through the gap analysis exercise. These recommendations will
inform the development of the Port of Seattle Aviation Division's asset management improvement program.
4.1 Recommendations
Table 4.1 lists all the recommendations identified across the eight assessment areas, or pathways.
Table 4.1: Port of Seattle Aviation Division Asset Management Recommendations
No.

Recommendation

Pathway

Description/Scope

1

Review and Update Asset
Management Policy

Alignment to
Organizational
Goals

The Aviation Division should review, support and communicate the Port of
Seattle's Sustainable Asset Management Policy at the earliest opportunity to
demonstrate commitment to developing asset management maturity. This will
send a positive message to the business.

2

Develop a Strategic Asset
Management Plan

Alignment to
Organizational
Goals

Develop a comprehensive strategic asset management plan setting the
direction for how the agency and its departments will manage the public's
investment in its assets consistent to the agency's overall asset management
policy. While asset management is well understood at the Port, there is no
formal document that identifies the plan/direction for the Port's asset
management program. A strategic asset management plan will establish
alignment with the agency's strategic business objectives, explain the benefits,
the roles of various stakeholders, and ensure that all Port divisions have a
clear understanding of a path forward.

3

Develop Asset Management
Objectives

Alignment to
Organizational
Goals

Asset management objectives should be developed. A series of measures
should be developed, aligned to the strategic goals of the Port, that monitor
progress toward meeting division-wide strategic goals for undertaking and
improving asset management activities.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

63

4

Integrate Business Planning
Processes with Asset
Management

Alignment to
Organization
Goals

5

Develop Asset Management
Business Architecture

Control of Assets Develop the Port of Seattle business architecture to support the integration of
multiple planning horizons and align organization strategic objectives with
asset class tactical demands.

6

Develop Asset Management
Business Processes and
Procedures

Control of Assets Develop and document key business processes and procedures for the wholelife management of assets. These should include the integration between
existing long-term planning efforts and tactical asset planning efforts, as well
as the development of processes for integrating risk management in the
planning cycle. The architecture should also consider the transition of assets
across life-cycle stages - such that any changes to the asset or asset
management are controlled.

7

Define Asset Owners

Control of Assets Develop and define owners of various assets as an extension of defining roles
and responsibilities. Upon the completion of capital projects, an asset transfer
form is completed to transfer the ownership of the asset from the Project
Management Group to the appropriate division that will serve as that specific
asset owner. However, there is no documented, comprehensive list identifying
asset responsibilities by department or class during construction, maintenance
or disposal. This includes, among others, responsibilities for defining design
and construction standards, asset onboarding, defining an asset lifecycle plan,
tracking all work on the asset and conducting reliability analysis on assets.
Defined asset ownership will ultimately improve the relationship and
collaboration between various departments.

8

Create an Asset Class
Common Framework

Control of Assets A common framework for asset class procedures should be developed setting
out the minimum documentation requirements for each asset class. This
should be consistent with current operating requirements and ISO55001:2014. Existing asset class specific procedures should be reviewed
against the developed common framework. Procedures for operations,
maintenance and management should be developed to satisfy both the
common framework requirements as well as asset class specific requirements.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Integrate the strategic asset management plan outputs with the business
planning process - to ensure that the long-range plan considers the state of
repair of existing assets, and their ability to support stakeholder needs and
Port objectives.

64

9

Establish an Audit Program
for the Asset Management
(AM) Management System

Control of Assets An audit program should be established to monitor the performance and
consistent application of the asset management - management system. This
will be a key driver for ensuring changes to the way the Port manages assets
are consistently applied and that any issues can be addressed as part of a
continuous improvement program.

10

Develop a Risk Management
Framework

Control of Assets An Enterprise Risk Management Framework should be developed. The
framework should include a risk policy, risk management procedures and the
process to develop a risk register. The procedures should consider how risks
are identified, evaluated, monitored and when risks should be escalated.

11

Develop Asset Management
KPIs

Control of Assets Develop asset management key performance indicators (KPIs) to better
measure asset management outcomes. The Port should review current KPIs
and metrics across Facilities & Infrastructure, Maintenance, and other
departments and identify a collective set of KPIs for asset management
tracking and reporting. The Port should also review the effectiveness of the
current metrics and the quality of data to ensure that the right metrics are in
use, and the data reported is accurate. This will result in enhanced data to
manage maintenance decisions and programs, provide a comprehensive KPI
dashboard for senior leaders, and help track and demonstrate progress of the
asset management program.

12

Develop Asset Management
Reporting Framework and
Processes

Control of Assets Develop a template and produce a high-level quarterly or annual asset
management report with executive-level metrics and reporting on key
benefits, outcomes, and impacts along with a summary of key initiatives and
status. Currently, specific asset management metrics are not routinely tracked
nor are related metrics captured comprehensively across the Aviation Division.
Further, there is no consistent message around asset management and its
impacts to the agency. Through creating defined reporting processes and
standards, the Port will foster greater visibility and transparency of asset
management, a clear link to elements of the Airport Service Quality Index, as
well as provide an avenue to communicate progress, benefits, and impacts to
key stakeholders.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

65

13

Establish a Continuous
Improvement Program of
Asset Management

Control of Assets Establish a continuous improvement program for asset management, including
reviewing the asset management roadmap and maturity every few years. As
the Port develops its asset management strategy and a roadmap, a continuous
improvement program will allow the Port to confirm that its maturity is
improving consistent with its improvement plan and change its program based
on additional information or changes as time progresses.

14

Develop Asset Class
Strategies

Asset
Management
Planning

Develop Asset Class Strategies for each asset class. The strategies should
demonstrate the work necessary at the asset class level to implement the Port
of Seattle's strategic plan (business plan) and the strategic asset management
plan. Asset Class Strategies should also consider the system interfaces
between assets and how conditions or changes of an asset impact another. For
example, new high technology procurements will have a different load
requirement on power assets.

15

Develop Asset Management
Plans

Asset
Management
Planning

Produce a uniform template and pilot the development of formal asset
management plans that address inspection and maintenance strategies,
rehabilitation/overhaul programs, reliability targets, performance metrics, and
capital renewal and replacement. The Port of Seattle Aviation Division does
not consistently consider lifecycle costs in renewal/replacement and
maintenance decisions. In most cases, documented asset lifecycle costs are
not available because departments lack the structure and tools to capture and
report full lifecycle costs for assets. Comprehensive lifecycle plans will result in
greater adherence to inspection and PM programs, enhanced long-term
capital budget and financial forecasts as well as improved tracking, reporting,
and accountability of asset lifecycle data. These plans should be considered
accompanying plans or subsets of the strategic asset management plan
(recommended earlier in this chapter).

16

Develop Management
Review and Monitoring
Processes for Asset
Management Plans

Asset
Management
Planning

Processes should be developed to establish a management review mechanism
for monitoring progress in plan delivery. This could take the form of the period
(monthly or quarterly) summary of planned activities or forecast performances
compared to actuals. The processes to be defined should integrate ongoing
review of the asset management plans in the internal management review
cycle.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

66

17

Integrate Maintenance and
Condition Data with CIP

Capital Planning
and Delivery

Establish a defined process to integrate maintenance and condition data into
capital needs evaluation. A major input into the Port's CIP is asset renewal and
replacement plan for asset, which is primarily based on remaining useful life.
This data is tracked only in Microsoft Excel and is not linked to maintenance
history. Integrating the maintenance history into the lifecycle needs
assessment (and storing this in Maximo, the Port's asset management
system), will allow the Port to make more informed capital planning decisions
considering factors such as cost to maintain and risk of failure.

18

Enhance Asset
Commissioning Process

Capital Planning
and Delivery

Review and document the asset commissioning process and add additional
rigor for asset definition, hierarchy, and booking assets via asset plans. The
Port has well-defined processes in place for asset commissioning and
handover; however, actual execution does not follow the documented
processes and there are some opportunities for improvement. These include
adding more specifics around roles and responsibilities and updating the level
of detail of the information required to match maintenance needs will save
the Port time and money during an asset's life. This recommendation is tied to
two others presented in this chapter - defining asset owners and their roles
and responsibilities (presented previously) and preparing detailed asset
hierarchies (presented later in this chapter).

19

Establish Audit Processes for
CIP Delivery and Handover

Capital Planning
and Delivery

Audit processes should be established to ensure design standards and asset
handover processes are followed consistently.

20

Update Maintenance with
Penalty Clauses for Failing to
Follow Standards

Capital Planning
and Delivery

Maintenance contracts should be updated to include penalty clauses for failing
to follow design standards or for failing to follow asset commissioning
processes.

21

Update/Develop
Standardized Condition
Assessment and Scoring
Guidelines across All Asset
Classes

Maintenance
Planning and
Delivery

Develop/update condition assessment and scoring guidelines for all asset
classes. This includes establishing a condition scale and assessment framework
for each asset class. The Port can build upon the condition assessment
framework being used by F&I for facilities as a start, and update it for facilities
using a more detailed hierarchy, a 5-point rating scale with definitions for each
rating, and a way to incorporate maintenance data into the assessment. The
framework can then be applied to other asset classes - which will require
asset hierarchies, rating guidelines and a methodology to incorporate

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

67

maintenance data. These guidelines can then be a part of a risk-based
approach to investment decision making and prioritization. Applying a
condition assessment methodology to all assets will ensure that the Port can
consistently understand and compare the condition of its assets across the
entire airport.
Note: Updating/developing detailed asset hierarchies for all asset classes is
recommended later in this section.
22

Conduct Condition
Assessments across All Asset
Classes

Maintenance
Planning and
Delivery

The Port should conduct comprehensive condition assessments on all assets at
the airport (including updating condition for facilities with data older than four
years) once consistent condition assessment guidelines are created. We also
recommend that the Port store the condition data in Maximo to expand the
use of the system from a maintenance tracking system to a true enterprise
asset management system. The condition assessments will allow the Port to
prepare more informed lifecycle management plans (a previous
recommendation in this chapter) and a more informed capital plan.
Understanding condition will also improve the efficiency of maintenance work
prioritization.

23

Improve Asset Data

Maintenance
Planning and
Delivery

Improve the quality of maintenance records data in Maximo. This includes
having an accurate record of each trouble ticket in Maximo, related work
order(s), failure codes, remedy, when it was closed, and the amount of effort
and materials required for the work order. This includes recording work to the
lowest maintainable unit in the asset hierarchy along with the proper failure
codes and remedy codes. We also recommend that any work orders that are
not worked on (not conducted) are either left open in the system, or closed
with a special code to indicate that the work was not conducted - and a
reason for it (e.g. staffing limitations, not required due to asset's planned
replacement, not required since a new inspection work order is open due to
frequency, work recently performed) This will result in improved accuracy of
data in Maximo and will allow the Port to move towards reliability-centered
maintenance.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

68

24

Update Process for Adding
"Discovered" Assets in the
Field

Maintenance
Planning and
Delivery

Update the process for adding new assets into Maximo when they are
"discovered" in the field. The Port has assets that have been in place for over
70 years, and systems and records have changed over time. As a result,
sometimes assets are "discovered" in the field; assets are in place but there
are no electronic records of the asset in Maximo or PeopleSoft.

25

Implement ReliabilityCentered Maintenance
Philosophy

Maintenance
Planning and
Delivery

Implement a reliability-centered maintenance philosophy, including
performance and reliability KPIs for all assets. The Port does not currently
conduct reliability-centered maintenance and is not tracking sufficient
reliability data to properly identify maintenance needs. Through reliabilitycentered maintenance, the Port will have the ability to analyze past failures
(including their causes and remedies), address systematic asset issues through
maintenance or the CIP, reduce lifecycle costs, and reduce the amount of
emergency and corrective work.

26

Develop Guidelines to Align Maintenance
Future Contract Maintenance Planning and
Agreements with Asset
Delivery
Management Standards

Develop guidelines to align future maintenance contract agreements with the
Port's asset management standards. This includes: 1) use of Maximo by
contractors, 2) record corrective work in Maximo, 3) define PM and inspection
programs for the assets, 4) perform condition assessments before and after
the contract period, 5) develop formal asset management plans, and 6)
conduct annual performance reviews and audits. This will improve contractor
performance and compliance along with the assurance that assets are
maintained and delivered in acceptable condition. Currently, the only major
assets maintained by contractors are conveyances, which include elevators,
escalators, and moving walkways. At this time, only minimal data is shared
between the Port and the contractors for these assets, and the data is not
added in Maximo or any other Port's systems.

27

Enhance Inventory Efficiency

Review current inventory levels, including what parts, components, and assets
are stored in inventory. Ensure all inventory items are intentional and that
obsolete parts are removed from inventory. Implement new procedures to
continually monitor parts usage, min/max levels, obsolescence and other key
elements of inventory management. This will allow the Port to maintain an
inventory that is based on expected usage and its risk profile.

Maintenance
Planning and
Delivery

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

69

28

Update Obsolescence
Strategy

Maintenance
Planning and
Delivery

As part of the asset class strategies, review the risk of obsolescence on
components and assets and establish strategies for mitigating the risk through
campaign overhaul, asset replacement or revised operating procedures.

29

Develop Asset Criticality
(Consequence of Failure)
Criteria

Operations and
Fault
Management

Identify the assets that are most critical to the Port, understanding the
consequences of failure and informing a risk-based approach to prioritization.
This framework should include a scoring and ranking methodology for social,
financial, and environmental impacts, as well as a methodology for assessment
of system redundancy to factor into risk calculations. This risk/criticality score
should then be embedded in Maximo to help prioritize work when issues arise.
This will not only support maintenance prioritization but also provide a more
comprehensive input into and alignment with the capital plan.

30

Create Common Asset
Definition

Informed
Decisions

Create a common/consistent definition of an "asset" that is used across the
Port, linking the financial and maintenance definitions. The definition of an
"asset" is critical to establishing a consistent understanding of "asset
management" across the Port and ensure that related processes are all
aligned. The different "asset" definitions in maintenance and finance lead to
inconsistencies in how stakeholders understand assets and asset
management. A common definition will also ensure consistency of asset
referencing and naming conventions across departments.

31

Digital Strategy

Informed
Decisions

Develop a digital strategy to focus the use of asset and asset related
technology and information to drive more efficient and effective decisions and
management actions through the assets lifecycle. A Digital Strategy also
provides the first level of data governance, establishing both the landscape of
information that needs to be made available and the functional requirements
for technology to support full use of the information.

32

Establish Data Governance
Standards

Informed
Decisions

A data governance framework for Port of Seattle asset management including
policies, processes and procedures for the capture, management and control
of asset related information should be developed. These should include both
asset attribute and condition/performance information. This will also support
a more effective asset creation/handover process.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

70

33

Update/Develop and
Implement Enterprise Asset
Hierarchies

Informed
Decisions

Update/develop and implement formal asset hierarchies (asset, process area,
system, sub-system, etc.) along with applicable attributes consistently across
all airport infrastructure. We recommend starting with the existing hierarchies
for facilities and updating them based on best practices. The Port should
develop hierarchies for other (non-facility) assets using best practices from
other agencies with similar assets. Implementing asset hierarchies (along with
prior recommendation to have a common asset definition) will allow the Port
to setup data consistently in different systems, and allow for easy analysis of
this information. For example, PeopleSoft may list a facility and its key systems
(e.g. HVAC), while Maximo may break down HVAC into various other assets
(down to the lowest maintainable unit) - but the data could be collated,
reconciled, shared and analyzed easily. Further, the asset hierarchies are
required to implement other recommendations such as identifying most
critical assets and conducting a comprehensive condition assessment.

34

Conduct Airport-Wide Asset
Inventory Collection

Informed
Decisions

Conduct an airport-wide asset inventory collection. This inventory should
identify assets that are visible (above ground) through a physical
review/check, and assets that are invisible (belowground) by using as-built
drawings and any other available information. The airport assets are currently
not clearly identified in any one system, and it is widely accepted that the Port
of Seattle Aviation Division has documented about 70% of the assets it owns.
As a result, various staff have to spend valuable time to identify the assets
when issues arise. An inventory of all assets (in conjunction with standard
asset hierarchies) will ensure that conducted work is assigned to the correct
assets, allowing the Port to track the assets, their condition and their
performance more accurately.

35

Align and Integrate
PeopleSoft/Maximo

Informed
Decisions

Improve alignment and integration between PeopleSoft assets and Maximo.
This will allow for automated transfer of information, reduce data duplication
or data entry errors, allow for easier tracking of current asset value and
expected life and plan for replacements.
The Port should also review its overall application architecture to identify
other opportunities for integration.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

71

36

Integrate GIS with Maximo

Informed
Decisions

Integrate Port's GIS systems with Maximo. This will allow users to view asset
location graphically and identify certain trends more easily. It will also allow
users to identify root causes of issues easily and address critical faults faster.
Currently, the GIS maps are populated by pulling data from the Engineering
department (based on GPS coordinates in their engineering drawing) and the
data is not integrated with Maximo.

37

Develop Electronic Master
Record Drawings

Informed
Decisions

Develop a comprehensive set of electronic master record drawings for the
entire airport that can be easily accessed from a computer or tablet. Currently,
master record drawings are not all available electronically, and the assets
shown on the drawings are not labeled on the field with a common number to
identify them. Improved access to these master record drawings (combined
with viewing data on a map and consistent hierarchies) will allow staff to
locate assets more efficiently as well as improve work response time.

38

Assess/Enhance
SCADA/Asset Health
Monitoring Systems

Informed
Decisions

Perform a comprehensive assessment and develop an improvement plan for
SCADA/automated asset health monitoring system(s) for key
equipment/assets (elevators, escalators, boilers, chillers, etc.). The airport
does not currently use SCADA to monitor its assets but does use some asset
monitoring systems, specifically on the HVAC mechanical systems. The use of
these asset monitoring tools can greatly improve efficiency in monitoring their
condition, maintaining assets as well as reduce failure/breakdown rates and
inspection/ maintenance costs.

39

Undertake a Workforce
Resource-Level Study

Resource
Capabilities

A study should be conducted to determine resource requirements across
departments. This should be consistent with the asset management plan
development, which will forecast needed work. The study should then
determine what resources are needed to deliver this work (i.e., focus on the
work needed for an asset to deliver the service, and then the resource needs
to support this) including both capability and capacity requirements to support
asset management activities.

40

Establish a steering
committee

Resource
Capabilities

A steering committee should be established to ensure all departments needs
are addressed through the development and delivery of the asset
management improvement program.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

72

41

Establish Asset Management
Leadership & Authority

Resource
Capabilities

An asset management leader should be appointed within the Port of Seattle,
with overall responsibility for establishing, managing and monitoring the
effectiveness of the asset management system. In addition, asset class leaders
should be appointed, who have overall through life planning responsibility for
the assets under their control. Management performance reviews should
include goals for improving the management of assets, including reducing
costs, risks and increasing performance and should not focus on productivity.

42

Develop and Define AM
Roles and Responsibilities

Resource
Capabilities

Define an organizational structure and clear roles and job descriptions for
asset management across the Port of Seattle (specifically at the airport). This
should include developing a position for overall AM coordination and
implementation across the airport. By developing key asset management roles
and responsibilities, the Port will begin fostering a more asset-focused culture
along with a shared understanding of how asset management is integrated
across the agency and among individual roles. This recommendation, in
conjunction with defining asset owners (recommended earlier in this chapter)
will ensure a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities, and the part
various stakeholders play in managing the assets efficiently.

43

Develop EAM Stakeholder
Engagement Plan

Resource
Capabilities

Develop an EAM stakeholder engagement plan, including identifying
stakeholder groups and their requirements with regard to asset management.
This includes creating the best channels for communicating with each group,
and executing stakeholder awareness and involvement strategies beyond the
gap assessment project. We also recommend developing and implementing a
robust communications strategy for engaging all airport staff at all levels in
considering their respective individual roles in achieving the benefits of
improved asset management.

44

Develop Introductory and
Ongoing Asset Management
Training

Resource
Capabilities

Develop the material and implement asset management training for
employees. Currently, there is no dedicated training for asset management;
however, the Port of Seattle Seaport Division has begun to implement this
type of training, which could be applicable to the Aviation Division. A more
complete asset management training program will help improve asset
management awareness and understanding across employees, as well as
increase employee engagement around asset management implementation.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

73

45

Review Contract Language
review

Resource
Capabilities

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Contract language should be reviewed to ensure it fully aligns to the strategic
asset management plan. This will ensure that information is made available to
the Port to inform long-term decisions on assets managed by contractors.

74

Appendix A: Existing Information System Configuration
A.1 Current Application Architecture
The following diagram and table define the current application architecture at the Port of Seattle Aviation Division.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

75

Current Application Architecture - Inventory & Interfaces
*Note this list of applications and interfaces is not inclusive of all systems used by the Port of Seattle Aviation Division. Applications and interfaces
listed below are primarily focused on asset management and asset management-related interfaces.
System or Tool

Description

Interfaces

IBM Maximo
(Version 7.6)

An Enterprise Asset Management (EAM)
software solution designed to help the Port of
Seattle Aviation Division manage its physical
assets through asset tracking, maintenance
scheduling and workflow management.

Oracle PeopleSoft
· GL codes pulled from PeopleSoft (manual)
· Timekeeping data pushed to PeopleSoft (automatic)
· Fixed asset reconciliation with PeopleSoft (manual)
Origami Risk
· Incident data from Origami to populate work requests (manual)
· Work data pushed to Origami for risk analysis (manual)
As-Builts / Record Drawings
· Drawing files linked or embedded to asset record in Maximo
(manual)
F&I Condition Assessment Spreadsheets
· Asset ID and other high-level data (name, location, etc.) pulled from
Maximo (manual)
ESRI and Open Source GIS
· Some asset attribute data (not location data) pushed to help
populate information on maps (manual)

Oracle PeopleSoft
(Currently upgrading to Version
9.2)

An Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software IBM Maximo
solution used by the Port of Seattle Aviation
· GL codes pushed to Maximo (manual)
Division for financial management and human
· Timekeeping data pulled from Maximo (automatic)
resources management.
· Fixed asset reconciliation with Maximo (manual)
Primavera Unifier
· New asset data entered via asset plans (manual)
Accounting Annual Asset Review Spreadsheets
· Updated asset attributes entered via spreadsheets (manual)
F&I Condition Assessment Spreadsheets
· Asset data (ID and cost data) pushed to F&I Condition Assessment
Spreadsheets (manual)

Primavera Unifier

A project lifecycle management solution for
capital planning, project delivery and cost

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

Oracle PeopleSoft
· New asset data entered via asset plans (manual)

76

System or Tool

Description

Interfaces

control. The tool is used specifically by the
Project Management Group (PMG) at the Port
of Seattle to track and monitor capital projects
through design and construction.
Origami Risk

A Risk Management Information System (RMIS) IBM Maximo
software solution that provides workflow,
· Incident data pushed to Maximo to populate work requests
reporting and analysis support for risk
(manual)
management.
· Work data pulled from Maximo for risk analysis (manual)

ESRI and Open Source GIS

A geographic information system (GIS) mapping IBM Maximo
software.
· Some asset attribute data (not location data) pulled to help
populate information on maps (manual)
As-Builts / Record Drawings
· Asset location data pulled from drawings to populate asset location
(manual)

As-Builts / Record Drawings
(Microsoft SharePoint)

A web-based document management including
inventory of as-builts and engineering record
drawings.

IBM Maximo
· Drawing files linked or embedded to asset record in Maximo
(manual)
ESRI and Open Source GIS
· Asset location data pushed from drawings to populate asset
location (manual)

Accounting Annual Asset Review
Spreadsheets
(Microsoft Excel)

Microsoft Excel Spreadsheets used by the
Accounting department to capture updated
asset information and attributes, to then
populate asset details in Oracle PeopleSoft.

Oracle PeopleSoft
· Updated asset attributes entered via spreadsheets (manual)

F&I Condition Assessment
Spreadsheets
(Microsoft Excel)

Microsoft Excel Spreadsheets used by F&I to
capture asset condition which is then used to
identify asset renewal and replacement.

IBM Maximo
· Asset ID and other high-level data (name, location, etc.) pulled from
Maximo (manual)
Oracle PeopleSoft
· Asset data (ID and cost data) pushed to F&I Condition Assessment
Spreadsheets (manual)

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

77

A.2 Recommended (To-Be) Application Architecture
The following diagram and table define the to-be application architecture for the Port of Seattle Aviation Division.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

78

To-Be Application Architecture - Inventory & Interfaces
*Note this list of applications and interfaces is not inclusive of all systems used by the Port of Seattle Aviation Division. Applications and interfaces
listed below are primarily focused on asset management and asset management-related interfaces.
System or Tool

Description

Interfaces

IBM Maximo
(Version 7.6)

An Enterprise Asset Management (EAM)
software solution designed to help the Port of
Seattle Aviation Division manage its physical
assets through asset tracking, maintenance
scheduling and workflow management.

Oracle PeopleSoft
· Asset and work data (remaining life, disposition, and timekeeping)
pushed to PeopleSoft, as needed (automatic)
· Asset data (attributes, GL codes, etc.) pulled from PeopleSoft, as
needed (automatic)
Origami Risk
· Incident data from Origami to populate work requests (automatic)
· Work data pushed to Origami for risk analysis (automatic)
ESRI and Open Source GIS
· Asset attribute data pushed to help populate information on maps
and linked to location data via as-builts/record drawings
(automatic)
FUTURE: Content Management System
· Drawing files linked to asset record in Maximo (automatic)
FUTURE: Building Information Modeling (BIM)
· Asset ID and other high-level data (name, location, etc.) shared
with Maximo (automatic)

Oracle PeopleSoft
(Currently upgrading to Version
9.2)

An Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
software solution used by the Port of Seattle
Aviation Division for financial management
and human resources management.

IBM Maximo
· Asset data (attributes, GL codes, etc.) pushed to Maximo, as
needed (automatic)
· Asset and work data (remaining life, disposition, and timekeeping)
pulled from Maximo, as needed (automatic)
Primavera Unifier
· New asset data pulled from Unifier (automatic)

Primavera Unifier

A project lifecycle management solution for
Oracle PeopleSoft
capital planning, project delivery and cost
· New asset data pushed to PeopleSoft (automatic)
control. The tool is used specifically by the
Project Management Group (PMG) at the Port
of Seattle to track and monitor capital projects
through design and construction.

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

79

System or Tool

Description

Interfaces

Origami Risk

A Risk Management Information System
(RMIS) software solution that provides
workflow, reporting and analysis support for
risk management.

IBM Maximo
· Incident data pushed to Maximo to populate work requests
(automatic)
· Work data pulled from Maximo for risk analysis (automatic)

ESRI and Open Source GIS

A geographic information system (GIS)
mapping software.

IBM Maximo
· Asset attribute data pulled from Maximo to help populate
information on maps and linked to location data via asbuilts/record drawings (automatic)
Content Management System
· Asset location data pulled from drawings to populate asset location
(manual)

FUTURE: Content Management
System

An updated content/document management
system where, specific to asset management,
all as-builts and engineering record drawings
are housed.

IBM Maximo
· Drawing files linked or embedded to asset record in Maximo
(automatic)
ESRI and Open Source GIS
· Asset location data pushed from drawings to populate asset
location (manual)
FUTURE: Building Information Modeling (BIM)
· Engineering specifications shared between systems (automatic)

FUTURE: Building Information
Modeling (BIM)

A software solution providing a digital
representation of physical and functional
characteristics of a facility.

IBM Maximo
· Asset ID and other high-level data (name, location, etc.) shared
with Maximo (automatic)
Content Management System
· Engineering specifications shared between systems (automatic)

Port of Seattle Aviation Division | AM Gap Analysis

80