Estate Appraisal Policy - Defence
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Estate Appraisal Policy
Version Control
Date 1st July 2018 Version 2.2
CONTENTS
Introduction 1
Authority for Estate Appraisal Policy 1
Background and Key Concepts 1
Objectives 2
Summary of EA Process 4
Confirm Criticality and Performance Standards 5
Schedule Appraisals 8
Undertake Appraisals 13
Work Packages 18
Glossary 19
Version 2.2 Page 1GLOSSARY
Term Definition
Criticality Asset criticality is a measure of the importance of an individual asset or asset
system to Defence Capability.
This includes:
the contribution of the asset to the capability of the ADF; defined as the
Contribution Factor.
the contribution of the asset to the general operations of the base.
the risk the operation of the asset presents to Defence as the owner.
The importance of the asset sets the degree of availability and reliability required
which in turn sets the level of maintenance priority.
Critical assets include both operational assets and support assets that are seen as
critical due their function, level of use, or other assets they support.
Asset Deficiencies Central to the application of the estate appraisal process is the identification of
deficiencies against the performance standards covering integrity, and
functionality. This can occur through physical inspections, technical
consultancies, or other asset audit activities.
Target Performance Assigned Performance Standards are predefined levels at which an asset or asset
Standards system should perform based on its use and criticality. These are determined
centrally.
Asset performance standards cover two attributes; Integrity and Functionality.
Assessed Performance Assessed Performance Standards are the result of an appraisal being undertaken.
Standards The outputs are scores again the attributes of Integrity and Functionality.
CFI Capital Facilities and Infrastructure Branch
Desktop Review A consolidation and review of available data and information relating to a specific
asset, site or system. Desktop reviews are a validation activity and not meant to
assess the condition of the asset or system under review.
DEC Defence Estate Committee
E&IG Estate & Infrastructure Group
EA Estate Appraisal
EMP Estate Maintenance Program. The program of works that funds estate
maintenance outcomes, including general maintenance and non-Major Capital
works projects: includes the Estate Works Program.
EP Estate Planning Branch of ID
FP&E Fixed Plant and Equipment typically maintained by EMOS contractor under Estate
Upkeep service
GEMS Garrison Estate Management System.
DEWPO Directorate Estate Works Program Office
NPS National Program Service. A contracted service supporting the management of
the Estate Maintenance Program in the Base Services Contracting Model.
PDS Project Delivery Service. A contracted service under the Base Services
Contracting Model.
Version 2.2 Page 2Introduction
1. The objective of the Estate Appraisal (EA) policy is to describe the requirements of the EA process. This
policy builds on the foundations of the Infrastructure Appraisal (IA) process, introduced in 2006, enhancing it to
meet the changing requirements in Defence management of the estate. EA is based on a comparison between
target and actual performance standards for all elements on the estate. It incorporates condition, functionality
and compliance in a more explicit manner than in the previous Infrastructure Appraisal process.
2. This policy document is supported by accompanying guidance documents that provide detail for key
elements of EA:
a. Attachment 1 - Criticality Rating;
b. Attachment 2 - Frequency of Physical Appraisals; and
c. Attachment 3 - Estate Appraisal Data Model.
3. The EA process is designed to assess the integrity, functionality and compliance of all assets and systems
across the Defence estate against defined performance standards. It is the core information gathering process for
the estate maintenance program and a major input into longer term base planning.
4. Through the diligent application of EA, information that is comprehensive, consistent and prioritised will
be provided to key decision makers responsible for investment in the Defence estate.
Authority for EA Policy
5. The EA process and the supporting procedures are administered by E&IG under the authority of the First
Assistant Secretary, Service Delivery Division (FAS SD). The Assistant Secretary Estate Planning (ASEP) is a
key stakeholder for the use of EA information in determining funding guidance for the Estate Maintenance
program as an input into the development and prioritisation of Facilities Investment Plan (FIP) reinvestment
project proposals.
6. E&IG Zones, Contract Authorities, Estate Maintenance and Operations Services Contractors (EMOS),
National Program Services Contractor (NPS) and Project Delivery Services contractors (PDS) are key users of
this policy. Other providers of specialist appraisal activity in the areas of asbestos, fire safety and high risk plant
are also users of this policy.
Background and Key Concepts
7. Defence has a legislative responsibility to maintain estate elements (buildings, infrastructure, equipment,
land spaces and the environment) located at all properties in a safe, serviceable and compliant condition.
8. Identification and prioritisation of maintenance actions are according to a facilities’ contribution to
capability, i.e. Contribution Factor (CF) and the estate class (EC). The EA process introduces Criticality Rating
(CR) which has a direct relationship with a facility CF.
9. The EA process includes all plant and equipment assets, equipment systems, land spaces and hazards on
the estate (leased or owned by Defence).
10. EA has also been integrated with the Estate Upkeep service in the Base Services contracts (BSC). Whilst
management of the EA process is seen as a dedicated service, Defence expects that the majority of EA
assessments, particularly plant and equipment and general condition assessments, will be ongoing and done as
part of business as usual maintenance and service delivery, not as an ongoing separate activity.
Objectives
11. The key objectives for the EA process are to:
a. collect data to facilitate effective management of estate maintenance;
b. implement an effective and efficient process for collecting Defence estate maintenance data;
Version 2.2 Page 3c. collect estate maintenance data that enables informed decisions on asset condition, functionality,
and compliance issues with reference to the Building Code of Australia (BCA), Manual of Fire
Protection Engineering (MFPE), WHS, environmental and heritage obligations;
d. inform Defence estate planning activities and reinvestment prioritisation and programming;
e. assess the condition and performance of assets and systems against a set of Defence assigned
performance standards, to accurately reflect the fitness for purpose of the estate to support
capability;
f. identify asset deficiencies in order to give a consistent and holistic understanding of the extent of
maintenance required on the Estate;
g. encourage identification of effective solutions to address deficiencies, including operational and
management solutions that don’t necessarily involve an estate maintenance requirement;
h. risk assess the compliance of assets, and if non-compliant the consequence of this to Defence;
i. assess assets against compliance standards to ensure Defence meets its compliance obligations;
j. provide scheduling guidance to support compliance solutions and deficiency rectifications;
k. prioritise works using a consistent risk based approach;
l. use the extent of the deficiency as an indication of risk to Defence and the primary mechanism for
the prioritisation of maintenance works, resulting in the prudent allocation of limited maintenance
funding; and
m. clearly understand the risk to workplace health and safety any deficiency presents.
Strategic Asset Management
12. Defence applies a strategic approach to asset management where taking future capability requirements
into account, assets are created, managed and maintained to directly support Defence activities. Understanding
how an asset is to effectively support a particular Defence capability is central to strategic asset management.
This enables consistent identification of deficiencies and the associated risk of deferral.
13. The risk associated with not undertaking a maintenance task is central to the prioritisation of limited
funding. Works that have a higher level of risk are a higher priority and will be prioritised for funding before
works with a lower level of risk.
EA Key Concepts
14. The EA process uses the concept of asset criticality, EC and allocation of target performance standards
for all elements on the estate. Initial determination of target performance standards is based on a combination of
the existing CF and EC as documented in the Estate Register Information Model (ERIM). Nationally consistent
target standards are defined by required condition and required functionality rules, noted elsewhere in this
policy.
15. The EA process assesses the actual condition and functionality which then facilitates identification of
actions to resolve the gap between target and actual condition and functionality. Management responses for
addressing deficiencies are also to be identified in this process. The prioritisation of identified actions uses a
scoring system derived from the difference between the target and assessed performance ratings.
16. EA is undertaken primarily by the EMOS contractor who is responsible for the following actions:
a. Manage the delivery of EA.
b. Maintain criticality and target performance standards for all elements on the estate.
c. Provide advice on strategic impacts.
Version 2.2 Page 4d. Plan and maintain a schedule of EA activity, including the mix of ongoing condition assessments,
annual desktop reviews and prescribed frequency physical appraisals.
e. In conjunction with the delivery of EMOS services, provide condition assessments on elements on
the estate where such EMOS services are delivered.
f. Provide an annual desktop review of EA information and update as necessary.
g. Provide physical appraisal assessments on all items on the estate in accordance with frequency and
scope requirements prescribed in legislation and the EA policy.
h. Provide support to EA by others including fire safety surveys (FSS) conducted by Defence
engaged specialist surveyors and other detailed appraisals that may be undertaken by Defence or
others.
i. Schedule and deliver audit, inspection and reporting of asbestos on the estate in accordance with
Defence policy ie, the Asbestos Management Plan (AMP), including requirements for inspections
and inspection frequencies. Asbestos Containing Materials data should include location,
condition, survey date and information on the last inspection conducted for identified asbestos on
the estate.
j. Validate and incorporate EA related information into the applicable Defence Estate Information
System (GEMS).
k. Provide advice on effectiveness and priority of work packages and project concepts prepared by
the NPS contractors and others for consideration in the program development process.
l. When requested by Defence, conduct specialist inspections and/or appraisals on the Defence
estate.
17. Defence estate personnel are to be involved in the consideration of capability and planning impacts,
providing advice on prioritisation and packaging of works arising from the appraisals.
18. Specialised appraisals may be undertaken by other parties, for example, FSS and Airfield Pavement
Inspections are delivered by specialist providers who are separate to Base Services contractors. Such appraisals
are to be conducted in accordance with EA policy for consistency and integration with EMOS provided appraisal
activity.
19. Actions identified through EA will be used as inputs for estate planning, maintenance planning,
occupancy and use management, regulatory compliance assessment, service optimisation and delivery of E&IG
base management responsibilities. Profile information is used to inform reinvestment planning on the estate and
for assessing performance of the estate maintenance and other estate investment programs.
20. EA is to provide a clear understanding of the condition of the estate. For funding prioritisation purposes,
the focus is on identifying significant maintenance works for forming into work packages. For practicality and
efficiency, the minimum cost threshold for EA works items is $10,000.
Summary of EA Process (insert diagram here)
Version 2.2 Page 5Confirm Criticality and Performance Standards
21. Criticality Rating. Criticality Rating (CR) is an overall measure of the importance from a capability or
risk perspective, of an asset or an asset system to Defence and the degree of reliability and availability required.
CR is assigned by translation from the CF.
22. The other criticality aspects (support, safety, compliance etc) are then applied; firstly by EC and secondly
by location. For example, an Electrical Reticulation system may have a CF of 3, but if it provides electricity to
headquarters buildings or airfield lighting systems on a particular airfield, it should be rated as Highly Critical.
Classification based assignment of CR then needs to be validated on site as there will be local factors that may
result in a change in CR rating from the default rating. CRs are to be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that
they remain accurate and are an appropriate basis for the conduct of EA.
23. The initial activity in the conduct of EA is to confirm the existing CR and target performance standards.
The particular circumstances of the item on the estate may have changed since the last appraisal. Criticality is
rated on a five point scale.
Criticality Rating
1 Highly Critical / Major Importance
2 Critical or Important
3 Support
4 General Purpose
5 Low Importance
24. The factors used for determining criticality are:
a. EC - provides an indication of the nature of the asset;
b. Capability - the contribution to Defence capability;
c. Support - support assets for the effect of failure on capability;
d. Safety - hazardous assets for the effect of failure on safety;
e. Personnel – living in accommodation (LIA) and associated support assets;
f. Environment - assets for the effect of failure on the environment; and
g. Compliance - assets for the risk of non-compliance.
25. The capability driver is the most common determinant for criticality ratings. It provides a measure of the
link between the activity provided by the facility and the primary outcomes of Defence.
26. Support assets are prominent in the criticality model. These are assets where the effect of failure is
significant on the functions they support. Key areas of infrastructure such as electricity, communications and
water supply are critical assets.
27. Assets where hazards are common are also critical. These are assets where the effect of failure is
significant in terms of safety and realisation of risks associated with the hazards. Assets such as chemical stores,
Defence fuel installations and fall from height type facilities are critical for this reason.
28. Assets that are closely governed by legislation and/or Defence policy are also critical, where failure
would result in significant consequences in terms of breaches in legislation or Defence policy e.g. Defence
security policy. This includes assets such as fire systems, contaminated sites and airfields.
29. CRs are updated by agreement between the capability manager, estate stakeholders and managed
centrally by the EMOS to provide consistency across the estate.
Version 2.2 Page 630. Examples of elements on the estate are provided in the following table to illustrate the multi-dimensional
nature of the CR.
Criticality Type Asset Type
Capability Wharves
Airfield Pavements
Airfield Lighting
Headquarters Buildings
Communications Facilities
Tactical targetry and Pre-Deployment Training Facilities
Fuel Installations
Armouries
Explosive Ordnance Store
Support Sewerage Treatment Plants
Emergency Power Systems
High Voltage Reticulation Systems
Ship Lifts
Communications Infrastructure
Water Treatment Plants
Fuel Hydrant Lines
Air Traffic Control Systems
Drainage Systems
Building Management Systems
Safety Hazardous Chemicals Store
Lighting Systems
Compressed air Systems
Cyclone Rated Buildings
Compliance Medical Treatment Systems
Fire Detection and Suppression Systems
Masts and Towers
Security Systems
Environment Contaminated Sites
Endangered Species Communities
Soil Management Areas
Bushfire Management Areas
Personnel LIA in remote areas
Messes and recreational facilities in remote areas
31. CR provides a broader basis for highlighting maintenance risks in the estate. Attachment 1 provides a
more detailed explanation of the basis and rules for allocation of criticality.
Target Performance Standards
32. Target performance standards are assigned by Defence based on the CF and managed by the EMOS
centrally to provide consistency across the estate. Defence is not able, nor does it need to, maintain all assets in
‘as new’ condition. This is consistent with a strategic approach to asset management where assets should only
be maintained to a level appropriate to the intended use and importance to Defence activities. Defined and
common performance standards allow EA assessments to be more appropriate, realistic and to facilitate
consistency across the estate.
33. Target performance standards define the standard at which an asset should be performing and provide a
benchmark for assessment of actual performance. Target performance standards have two dimensions:
Condition and Functionality.
34. Target condition relates to the integrity of the asset and provides a measure of acceptable levels of wear
and tear or deterioration. Target condition ratings are defined as:
1 – Maximum. As new, no signs of wear and tear.
Version 2.2 Page 72 – High. Minor signs of deterioration that do not detract from overall appearance or impact on integrity
are acceptable.
3 – Standard. Some deterioration acceptable with non-critical impacts on integrity.
4 – Minimum. Visual appearance unimportant, significant signs of deterioration acceptable.
5 – Mothballed. The appearance is unimportant, external fabric must only be secure and safe.
35. Target functionality provides a measure of the requirement for the facility to perform its primary function
i.e. the level at which the asset is required to operate. It provides a sliding acceptance scale from Maximum
where all functions must be provided through to Minimum where only some functions are supported. The
functionality score of five (Non-Functioning) is not typically used for target functionality, unless the facility is
about to be replaced or disposed.
36. Target functionality ratings are defined as:
1 – Maximum. Must be fully functional at all times.
2 – High: Mostly fully functional, minor functional issues are acceptable.
3 – Standard. Some functional issues acceptable.
4 – Minimum. Can be made functional if required.
5 – Mothball. Functionality not required.
37. Target condition and functionality standards are also rated on a five point scale. By default, target
condition and target functionality is determined based on CR as the following table shows.
Criticality Rating Target Condition Target Functionality
(1) Highly Critical / Major (1) Maximum (1) Maximum
Importance
(2) Critical or Important (2) High (2) High
(3) Support (3) Standard (3) Standard
(4) General Purpose (4) Minimum (4) Minimum
(5) Low Importance (5) Mothballed * (5) Non-Functioning *
Note: * Target Condition = Mothballed and Target Functionality = Non-Functioning are only used when the
facility is about to be replaced or disposed.
38. In most cases, an asset will be given a target performance standard consistent with the CR. For example
if an airfield is assigned a CR of 1 then the performance standards (Condition and Functionality) for component
assets and systems would most likely also be assigned a score of 1. There will always be exceptions to the rule
and these will be determined on a case by case basis. Circumstances for localised allocation of criticality and
target standards include allowances for personnel comfort in remote areas, cyclone proofing of particular
facilities on a base, specific one-off capability on a site, such as the swimming pool supporting the Helicopter
Underwater Escape Trainers.
39. Target performance standards will be initially assigned centrally by Defence for consistency across the
Estate. They may be updated as necessary or at least annually through an approval process on recommendation
of EA practitioners and other key estate stakeholders.
Scheduling of Appraisals and Reviews
40. As required by the EMOS contract, it is expected that condition assessments will be integrated into the
EMOS day to day operations. Particularly, plant and equipment and general condition assessments will be
ongoing and done as part of usual maintenance and service delivery, not as a separate activity. Appraisals that
are not covered by day to day operations would range from annual appraisals of strategic or highly critical assets
to defined frequencies for all other assets.
Version 2.2 Page 841. Physical appraisals are to be planned and scheduled for all parts of the estate and includes buildings,
structures, infrastructure, linear assets, equipment, land and environment assets.
42. Desktop reviews are performed annually and are to focus on currency of criticality and target
performance ratings and identified work orders. There are many changes occurring on the estate, including those
arising from maintenance, changes in use and investment decisions, commonly known as “strategic impacts”.
Such changes are to be incorporated into the EA information to ensure that the process represents the current and
most effective maintenance forecasts.
43. Individual estate items that are serviced and maintained as performance based maintenance or scheduled
maintenance items are to be assessed and updated in the EA database as part of the ongoing maintenance
program.
44. Where separate whole of structure, infrastructure, or building appraisals are required they are to be
scheduled at appropriate intervals depending on their criticality, availability of specialists and location. The
EMOS are responsible for the scheduling of appraisals in consultation with Zone and Service representatives.
Scheduling appraisal activities must be completed in an efficient manner and in accordance with the defined
schedule. If external resources are to be used, consideration should be given to undertaking multiple appraisals
at a single base at one time.
45. The EA process also covers consultancies on complex, high risk, technical, compliance and
environmental aspects of the estate. There is to be a rolling program, again developed by EMOS in consultation
with the Zones, of specialist surveys and appraisals and the results of these surveys should be incorporated into
the EA data base. Other types of surveys and inspections that may be included in the EA data base include:
a. asbestos inspections;
b. FSS and BCA compliance surveys;
c. hazardous area appraisals and compliance audits;
d. legislative audits and registers. e.g. Joint Special License, cooling tower systems, gas systems,
masts and towers etc; and
e. wharf and airfield condition surveys.
46. It is essential when commissioning specialist technical appraisals that requests for services specify that
the technical reports document work items in a format that permits them to be entered into GEMS as a WO or
developed into a management or maintenance plan e.g. the recommendations from an asbestos inspection may be
the removal of asbestos from a number of buildings on a base. The asbestos removal and making good of each
building would be entered as a separate WO and then these would be grouped to form an asbestos removal work
package through DEWPO.
47. It is important that the results of the technical consultancies are entered as work items to build a complete
and consistent understanding of the condition of the estate and the extent of any maintenance backlog.
Frequency of Physical Appraisals
48. Attachment 2 Frequency of Physical Appraisals provides a list based on EC, the maximum period of time
between physical inspections on facilities within the footprint of the BSC and in accordance with EA policy.
Inspections should, where possible, be performed in conjunction with other maintenance activities. Where this is
not possible or appropriate, Attachment 2 Frequency of Physical Appraisals shows the maximum period between
the conduct of physical inspections according to EC and CR.
49. Where applicable legislation or Defence policy require more frequent inspections than defined in the EA
Policy, the more frequent requirement takes precedence. Requirements for inspections and other appraisal-like
activity in other EMOS service packages including Estate Upkeep, Land Management and Pest and Vermin may
present opportunities for efficiencies in the conduct of physical appraisals.
50. Highly critical assets are to be physically appraised on an annual basis. In accordance with the definition
of CR, there are many EC and CR combinations that do not apply. These are shown as not applicable (N/A) in
the table. A number of other frequency codes are used and are explained in the table below.
Version 2.2 Page 9Frequency Code Guidance Notes
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 Maximum number of years between physical appraisals.
N/A Not applicable. By definition, items of this estate classes
are not expected to have this CR.
Defer to Parent Building Frequency designated by the parent building (physical
parent).
Defer to Parent Equipment System Frequency designated by the functional parent equipment
system.
Defer to Parent Infrastructure System Frequency designated by the functional parent
infrastructure system.
Defer to Parent Infrastructure Frequency designated by the parent infrastructure item
(physical parent).
As per the Legislative Requirement Frequency is defined in the legislation applicable to this
EC, e.g. AS1851 for Fire
EA Undertaken By Others Physical Appraisals for this EC are conducted by others.
EMOS to support this per EM00.15.008.
In accordance with Defence Policy Frequency is defined in the Defence Policy applicable to
this EC e.g. Masts and Towers.
In conjunction with Estate Upkeep Service Physical appraisals are to be conducted in conjunction
with Estate Upkeep services.
In conjunction with Land Management Service Physical appraisals are to be conducted in conjunction
with Land Management services.
In conjunction with Pest & Vermin Service Physical appraisals are to be conducted in conjunction
with Pest & Vermin services.
51. Appraisals of Equipment Systems, Infrastructure Systems and Infrastructure include but are not limited to
all of the associated child estate elements as defined in the ERIM. The frequency of physical appraisals for those
EC is depicted in Attachment 2 using the frequency codes above. Where a conflict in EA frequency arises
between that of a building and the equipment system and/or equipment within the building the more frequent
period is to be applied to the applicable items.
52. Defence airfields as a whole are to be appraised on an annual basis. Such airfields are indicated in the
estate data as Properties where Function = Airfield and Tenure = Owned. The applicable airfields are listed in
the following table.
Region Airfield Property State
QLD Army Aviation Centre Oakey 0207 QLD
QLD RAAF Base Amberley 0861 QLD
QLD RAAF Base Townsville 0874 QLD
QLD RAAF Base Scherger 1218 QLD
NNSW RAAF Base Richmond 0902 NSW
NNSW RAAF Base Williamtown 0908 NSW
SNSW HMAS ALBATROSS 0026 NSW
SNSW Jervis Bay Range Facility 0021 NSW
VT RAAF Base Williams 0932 VIC
VT RAAF Base East Sale 0937 VIC
CW RAAF Base Edinburgh 0939 SA
CW RAAF Base Curtin 0954 WA
CW Gin Gin Airfield 0958 WA
CW RAAF Base Learmonth 0960 WA
CW RAAF Base Pearce 0967 WA
CW RAAF Base Tindal 0990 NT
Version 2.2 Page 10CW RAAF Base Darwin 1302 NT
53. Defence has separate arrangements for appraisal of all airfield pavements and are therefore not included
in EA inspections, as indicated by the frequency code EA Undertaken by Others.
54. Physical appraisals of live firing ranges are to incorporate recommendations arising from Range Safety
Inspections (* indicates in the list at Attachment 2).
55. Appraisals are to be scheduled using the maintenance plan function in the DEIS. A description of the
appraisal is entered, the estimated cost, the type e.g. asbestos inspections, FSS, BCA compliance surveys, or
hazardous area compliance audits. The planned date for the appraisal is to be recorded.
Treatment of Linear Assets
56. Assets can be broadly divided into two categories namely linear and non-linear:
a. non-linear assets are structures, buildings, and equipment and they conform to a size and specific
location; and
b. linear assets are those that are geographically dispersed and connected to each other via a network,
such as roads, pipelines, electrical transmission infrastructure, telecommunication lines etc.
57. Linear assets typically have particular maintenance challenges as the assets may be distributed across
various geographical locations and identification of the assets and the network is difficult since the assets are
often underground and layered. The monitoring and maintenance of linear assets is usually important to
maintaining critical systems because linear assets often form a significant part of these systems. For example a
sewerage treatment plant or a high voltage reticulation system will cease to operate if the pipes and/or cables are
not maintained and working.
Asset Segmentation
58. The main way of managing and maintaining linear assets is through segmentation which involves
dividing the linear asset in a logical way from both an operational and maintenance point of view. Additional
information is also included to locate the segment as well as the inclusion of all equipment and support
infrastructure that is installed along the linear asset. The equipment and support infrastructure are the constituent
parts that make up the system.
59. The location information will vary depending on the asset type, eg:
a. Roads. Markers, distance points between start and end points, or between bridges, intersections,
signs etc.
b. Pipelines. Markers, pipe joints, or distance from pumping stations, valves, junctions etc.
60. For the purposes of EA, the degree of segmentation should relate to the criticality of the asset and its use.
For example the stormwater drainage system situated around a heavily used airfield will need to be assessed at
greater level of detail than the drainage system around a large training range. Therefore the airfield drainage
system is likely to have more segments and a greater degree of detail.
Application of EA on Linear Assets
61. The objectives of undertaking EA on linear assets are the same as for other built and infrastructure assets,
ie to:
a. Assess asset segments and associated system equipment against predetermined asset performance
standards to highlight asset deficiencies.
b. Identify asset deficiencies to give a consistent and holistic understanding of the extent of
maintenance required so that the linear system performs at the required level. This will also
highlight the extent of the maintenance backlog.
c. Encourage identification of operational or management solutions to address asset deficiencies.
Version 2.2 Page 1162. Criticality standards are assigned as per the EA process. Given that in most instances linear assets are a series of linked segments and equipment, all elements within the system will be assigned the same level of criticality. 63. The EA condition assessments will be ongoing and done as part of usual maintenance and service delivery, not as a separate activity where possible. This particularly applies to assets that can be observed and where technical expertise is not required to assess integrity or functionality, e.g. roads as opposed to a sewerage plant electrical distribution system. 64. Linear assets or equipment that forms part of the linear system that are serviced and maintained as performance based maintenance or scheduled maintenance items are to be assessed and updated in the EA database as part of the ongoing maintenance program. 65. Linear asset appraisals are to be scheduled at intervals depending on asset use, CR, availability of specialists and location. Scheduling appraisal activities should occur in an efficient manner, eg, if external resources are to be used, consideration should be given to undertaking multiple appraisals at a single base at one time. Undertake Appraisals 66. The core activity of the assessors is to assess the current condition, functionality and compliance of an asset or asset system. The day to day condition assessments are aimed at identifying obvious condition related deficiencies on the estate. Recommendations arising from condition assessments are to be considered as part of the overall estate appraisal process. Depending on the scope and priority of the recommendation, some work orders may be routed through the responsive maintenance process. Information Management 67. The physical inspection is undertaken by assessors who record the EA assessments directly into the EMOS IT system. The subsequent upload to GEMS will preload with information relating to the asset being assessed. This includes the assigned CR, target performance standards and current work order scheduled against the asset. 68. Specialist technical inspectors undertaking assessments must be provided with and supply in return, information in the appropriate format for loading into GEMS. 69. Strategic impacts relating to the asset are intended to be held on the system. These will be an additional guide for the assessor that indicates known events that may influence maintenance forecasts for the asset and can include information such whether the asset is planned for demolition or if a potential future project is scheduled. 70. The data used in EA and examples of how it interacts is at Attachment 3 - Estate Appraisal Data Model. Assess Condition and Functionality 71. Condition and functionality are assessed against the target performance standard using the same rating scale as for target condition and performance. Existing “assessed” condition and “assessed” functionality ratings are reviewed and updated as required, usually at the annual desktop review. This will typically require detailed inspection and or liaison with users and maintainers. 72. If the assessed performance is lower than the assigned standard a ‘deficiency’ is highlighted. The extent of the difference between the target and assessed performance standards, combined with the CR becomes a measure of the risk to Defence of not addressing the deficiency. This is used as the basis for prioritising works and later grouping of works into work packages and projects. Assess Compliance 73. Compliance is the other aspect of asset performance that is assessed in the EA process and is approached in a different way to integrity and functionality. An assessment is made on whether an asset is compliant, and if non-compliant, an assessment of the nature of the non-compliance and the consequence of the non-compliance. Version 2.2 Page 12
74. The compliance requirements of an asset are determined through legislation and relevant Defence policy.
Unlike asset condition and functionality, where differing levels are acceptable depending on use, an asset is
either compliant or non-compliant. If an asset is non-compliant the key issue is the nature and consequence of
the non-compliance. Known compliance issues associated with the asset are reviewed and updated. A
compliance status of compliant, non-compliant or not assessed is recorded. If an asset is non-compliant the
reason for the non-compliance is recorded (WHS, fire safety, environmental, heritage etc).
75. The consequence is then rated on a five point scale, covering legislation, environment and safety, as
summarised below. If the consequence is rated at different levels for legislation, environment or safety, the
greater consequence is recorded. For example if the consequence is ‘Major’ for legislation and ‘Moderate’ for
safety then the consequence rating would be Major. This, along with the gap between target and assessed
condition and performance is used to inform the priority for the identified deficiency.
76. Non-compliance consequence ratings are:
1 – Negligible Legislation - minor technical breach of legislation and/or Defence policy, no exposure
to damages.
Environment - Negligible damage that is contained on-site. The damage is fully
recoverable with no permanent effect on the environment or the asset; it will take less
than six months for the resource to fully recover.
Safety -Minor injury or ailment that does not require medical treatment by a physician
or a qualified first aid person.
2 - Minor Legislation - minor technical breach of legislation and/or Defence policy, limited
exposure to damages.
Environment - Minor damage to the environment or heritage asset or area that is
immediately contained on-site. It will take less than two years for the resource or
asset to fully recover or it will only require minor repair. Disturbance to scarce or
sensitive environmental or heritage resources.
Safety - One or more injuries or illness requiring treatment by a qualified first aid
person. Exposure of public and staff to a hazard that could cause minor injuries or
minor adverse health effects.
3 – Moderate Legislation - breach of legislation leading to some exposure to damages or legal
constraints, breach of Defence policy.
Environment - Moderate damage to the environment or a heritage listed asset or area,
which is repairable. The resource or asset will take up to 10 years to recover.
Safety - One or more injuries or illness requiring hospitalisation. Public or staff
exposed to a hazard that results in hospitalisation.
4 - Major Legislation - significant breach of legislation leading to high exposure to
prosecution/damages.
Environment - Significant damage is caused to a Heritage Listed area or asset
environmentally significant (as per the EPBC Act) that involves either extensive
remediation or will take more than 10 years to recover.
Safety - One or more major injuries or illness requiring major surgery or resulting in
permanent disablement. Public or staff exposed to a hazard that results in major
surgery or permanent disablement.
5 – Severe Legislation - extreme breach of legislation leading to very high exposure to
prosecution/damages.
Environment - Irreversible and extensive damage is caused to a World Heritage Listed
Area, or Matter of National Environmental Significance under the EPBC Act,
Commonwealth Heritage Listed Site, National Heritage Listed Site, Register of the
National Estate Site or a Defence Heritage Listed area or asset.
Safety - One or more fatalities or life threatening injuries or illness. Public or staff
exposed to a severe, adverse long-term health impact or life-threatening hazards.
Cause
Version 2.2 Page 1377. A deficiency exists if the assessed performance is below the assigned performance standard for integrity
and functionality, or a non-compliance is identified. The cause for the deficiency is to be recorded using the
following options:
a. Maintenance - General maintenance caused by age, wear and tear.
b. Change in Compliance - due to a change in compliance requirements, i.e. legislation or changes in
Defence policy have subsequently made the asset non-compliant.
c. Change in Capability - due to a change in capability requirements, the asset is require to perform at
a higher level, or for a different purpose.
d. End of Life – the asset is at the end of its useful life and requires replacement.
Work Orders
78. The WO is a description of the task required to bring the asset up to the assigned performance standard.
The work item is the core element of the EA process and is the initiating information for the following
rectification processes:
a. responsive maintenance – through Estate Upkeep EMOS arrangements;
b. operational solution - changes to work practices, process or procedural changes can be
implemented to rectify the deficiency; or
c. EA WO - the work is above $10,000, not a responsive maintenance task and is subsequently
considered for treatment via an estate solution.
79. WO comprise information to finalise the outstanding deficiency and the full details of the data
requirements for work orders are described at Attachment 3 - Estate Appraisal Data Model. Some key aspects
are:
a. indication of the proposed action (reactive maintenance task, operational solution, or trade type);
b. the year that the action should be completed in (enables identification of proactive maintenance
plans for an asset);
c. cost estimate;
d. reason for work (maintenance, change in capability, change in compliance requirements, or end of
life replacement); and
e. value for money assessment, i.e. will the work become costlier if it is delayed.
80. The WO is created to document the recommended actions for rectifying the identified deficiency or for
mitigation of the identified risk. WO arising from previous appraisals are to be reviewed and updated in the
appraisal process.
Responsive Maintenance Tasks
81. During the course of the EA, responsive maintenance tasks may be identified. The assessor is to ensure
that such works are incorporated into Responsive Maintenance services in Estate Upkeep.
82. During the course of the EA tasks may be identified that require urgent attention. Where a matter is
deemed of an urgent nature or life threatening in nature the assessor is to act in accordance with guidance
provided for urgent responsive maintenance through the EMOS contractor and their own Standard Operating
Procedures (SOP).
Operational or Management Solutions
83. In the first instance, operational changes should be considered for the treatment of risks associated with
the identified deficiencies. Deficiencies caused by operations, work practices or management practices can be
Version 2.2 Page 14rectified through process or procedural changes. Such changes may be facilitated through contractor managed
services, contract management, base management, regional management, regulatory policy and training.
84. Where a deficiency is as a result of a change in use or the conduct of activities, operations, work
practices, or management practices, it is to be identified and addressed as an operational or management solution
to mitigate risk rather than as a responsive maintenance task or EA work item. Solutions may be short term or
long term.
Estate Solution
85. The purpose of the EA is to focus on identifying major maintenance works that are packaged together to
form risk managed works. Capturing large numbers of small value work items is not efficient and is a
duplication of the responsive maintenance process delivered by the EMOS. The rationale of this approach is
reinforced by the determination of the cost threshold for EA works item being typically no less than $10,000 and
typically not greater than $500,000.
86. The following information is to be recorded for each work item:
a. proposed action (responsive maintenance task, operational solution, trade type);
b. the year that the action should be completed in (enables identification of proactive maintenance
plans for an asset);
c. cost estimate;
d. reason for work (maintenance, change in capability, change in compliance or end of life
replacement); and
e. value for money assessment, i.e. will the work become costlier if it is delayed.
87. A prioritisation score is automatically generated for each work order within the EA model made up of
weighted scores for differences between condition and functionality and raw scores for impact of non-
compliance and value for money: see Attachment 3 - Estate Appraisal Data Model for further details.
Hazards
88. If the WO has arisen from a WHS hazard, a separate hazard identification and risk assessment is to be
undertaken. This involves describing the hazard and the potential harm it may cause. A consequence and
likelihood assessment of the hazard are then made using the following criteria applied to the risk matrix, shown
below.
Likelihood Rare May occur only in rare or exceptional circumstances, but would be highly
unexpected
Unlikely Could occur in some circumstances; surprised if it happens
Possible Possible or likely to occur in some circumstances
Likely Will occur in most circumstances; not surprised if it happens
Almost Certain Is expected to occur; almost inevitable
Consequence Negligible Injury treatable in the workplace (first aid)
Minor Injury requiring professional medical attention
Moderate Injury requiring hospitalisation and/or permanent partial disability
Major Single fatality and/or permanent total disability
Severe Multiple fatalities
Risk Matrix
Likelihood Rating Consequence Rating
Severe Major Moderate Minor Negligible
1 6 11 16 21
Almost Certain Very High Very High High Medium Low
1 2 7 12 17 22
Version 2.2 Page 15Likely Very High High Medium Medium Low
3 4 9 14 19 24
Possible High High Medium Medium Low
5 6 11 16 21 26
Unlikely High Medium Medium Low Low
7 8 13 18 23 28
Rare High Medium Low Low Low
9 10 15 20 25 30
89. The process for assessment and management of hazards will then be informed of the newly created
hazard and appropriate action can be subsequently undertaken.
Appraisals by Other Parties
90. Defence will use a variety of methods for conducting EA. All appraisals are to use the same process and
the same information basis which this includes: all technical consultancies, environmental plans, plant and
equipment audits and FSS. This allows subsequent consideration of all issues on the estate when developing,
prioritising and making investment and other decisions in the broader estate management business.
Final Review
91. Prior to completion of the appraisal, all WO are to be reviewed for the asset or group of assets to check
for overall effectiveness and efficiency. Strategic impacts are to be updated at the completion of the appraisal.
Useful pieces of information gleaned in the appraisal process, that don’t have a direct bearing on WO, may
nevertheless be valuable for capture and use in other estate processes.
Work Packages
92. WO are separately packaged into projects as part of the DEWPO program initiation process for the Estate
Maintenance Program. EA practitioners will be asked to review work packages prepared by DEWPO for
effectiveness and value for money before DEWPO progress for wider consultation and approval.
93. Advice on proposed work packages is to be provided in the following areas:
a. value for money;
b. technical issues including preventative design recommendations;
c. effectiveness of outcomes and mitigation of risks;
d. regulatory requirements;
e. known constraints and project logistics requirements including access, base activities, occupancy
requirements, impacts on EMOS services; and
f. forecast of EMOS and other operational implications.
Version 2.2 Page 16You can also read
