Fort Collins Utilities Asset Management Program. Topics

Transcription

1 Fort Collins Utilities Asset Management Program Rocky Mountain Chapter NASTT Fall Conference November 2012 Chris Parton, P.E. Asset Manager Fort Collins Utilities 1 Topics Fort Collins Utilities Organization Financial Projections Capital Prioritization 2 1

2 FCU Organization Executive Director Financial Ops Customer Connections Water Resources & Treatment Ops Water Eng. & Field Services Light & Power Operations Strategic Financial Planning Source of Supply Water Treatment Water Reclamation Biosolids Water Distribution Wastewater Coll. Stormwater Coll. Substations Distribution Asset Management 3 Overview Probability of Failure (PoF) How likely is it that a pipe/asset will experience a failure? Consequence of Failure (CoF) If a pipe/asset fails, how big is the impact of that failure? Risk Score = PoF score x CoF score. Serves as basis for replacement/renewal decisions. 4 2

3 Probability of Failure Assessment Readily Available Data Work order history Age Pipe material Soil characteristics Staff knowledge! Existing Condition Each pipe or piece of equip. gets a PoF score from 1 to 5 5 Condition Assessment Condition Score Description Very good. Sound physical condition. Asset likely to perform adequately without major work for 25 years or more for structures and for 10 years or more for electrical and mechanical assets. Good. Acceptable physical condition. Minimal short-term failure risk, but potential for deterioration in medium- to long-term (10-years plus for structures and 5-10 years for electrical and mechanical assets). Only minor work required, if any. Fair. Significant deterioration evident for structures and deterioration beginning to be reflected in performance and higher attendance in mechanical and electrical assets. Failure unlikely within 2 years, but further deterioration likely and major replacement likely within the next 10 years for structures and within 5 to 10 years for mechanical and electrical assets. Minor components or isolated sections of the asset need replacement now, but asset still functions safely at expected level of service. Work required but asset is still serviceable. Poor. Failure likely in short-term. Likely need to replace most, or all, of the asset within 2 years. No immediate risk to health or safety, but work required within 2 years to ensure asset remains safe. Substantial work required in the short term, asset barely serviceable. Very Poor. Failed or near failure. Immediate need to replace most or all of asset. Component effective life exceeded and excessive maintenance costs incurred. A high risk of break down with a serious impact on performance. Health and safety hazards exist which present a possible risk to public safety, or asset cannot be serviced without risk to personnel. Major work or replacement required urgently. Source: International Infrastructure Management Manual, 2006 ed. 6 3

4 Tabletop Exercise 7 7 Consequence of Failure Consequence of Failure Score Description 1 Low 2 Medium 3 High 8 4

5 Consequence of Failure Proximity to Universities & Schools Proximity to Major Medical Facilities Impacts to Businesses Affected by Asset Failure Major Commercial Centers (Foothills Mall) Average Annual Daily Traffic & Disruptions to Traffic Critical Customers Served by the Asset Triple Bottom Line Impacts (Econ., Social, Enviro.) Number of Customers Attached to the Asset Consequence of Failure Score 9 Risk Score = Condition x Consequence 1 Very Good Condition Score (Probability of Failure) 2 Good 3 Fair 4 Poor 5 Very Poor Consequence of Failure 1 Low Impact 2 Medium Impact 3 High Impact

6 Miles CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAP HIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its i nternal purposes only, and were not de si gned or in ten de d for general use b y members of the publ ic. The City make s no repre se ntation or warranty as to its accuracy, timel iness, or co mp leten ess, and in particu lar, its accuracy in la beling or displayin g dimensio ns, contou rs, p roperty boundari es, or pl aceme nt of l ocation of a ny map features there on. T HE CITY OF FORT COL LIN S MAKES NO WARRANT Y OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITN ESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSE D OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map produ cts, ma p a pplications, o r data, accepts th em AS IS, WITH AL L F AULTS, and assumes all responsib ility o f the use the reo f, a nd furthe r covenants an d ag rees to h old the City h arml ess f rom and agai nst a ll damage, l oss, or li abili ty ari si ng from any use of this map product, in considerat io n of the City's havin g made th is in formati on a vailable. I ndep endent veri fication of all da ta contained herein shou ld be obtain ed by any users of t hese pr od ucts, or underlyin g data. Th e Ci ty disclaims, and shall not be he ld liabl e for an y and all da mage, loss, or lia bility, whe ther direct, indi rect, or con sequential, w hi ch a rises or may arise from these ma p p rod ucts or the u se thereof by any pe rson or e nti ty. Le gen d City of Fort Collins Utilities Water Distribution System Risk Assessment Scale 1:50, RISK Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk RISK Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk Printed: May 01, 2012 Enabling Processes Field crews are your eyes in the field. Every time they repair or inspect, they see: Condition score Pipe material Pipe size Depth of bury Pavement surface Soil conditions Failure Modes beam break, electrolysis, etc. 12 6

7 Financial Forecasting Provide an estimate of capital needs for the future Linear Assets Model Focused On: Pipe Age Pipe Material Condition (Likelihood of Failure Score) Inspection & Replacement Timeframes Budget Scenarios Best ROI for Reduction in Risk 13 Infrastructure Schedules Consequence of Failure Consequence of Failure Risk-Based Inspection Schedule Likelihood of Failure >50 > > Risk-Based Asset Replacement Schedule Likelihood of Failure >50 > >

8 Do Nothing Financial Forecasting Renewal Scenarios Risk-Constrained Current Level Desired Level Alternative Level Budget-Constrained Current Budget Amount Current Budget Increased/Decrease by % 15 Wastewater Collection Do Nothing Scenario % Length Do Nothing Scenario Low Medium High 16 Year 16 8

9 Wastewater Collection 100 Year View - Managed Risk Wastewater Managed Risk Year Projected 25 Risk Constrained (1%) Risk Constrained (2%) Risk Constrained (5%) Average CAPEX (1%) - $8.2M Average CAPEX (2%) - $7.9M Average CAPEX (5%) - $6.8M CAPEX ($M) Average CAPEX (1%) $8.2M Average CAPEX (2%) $7.9M Average CAPEX (5%) $6.8M Year 17 Wastewater Collection Current Budget Level Low Medium High

10 Capital Improvement Planning FCU PM's Collect Information on All Known Projects for Enterprise Funds. Establish Scoring Criteria Assign Weights to Criteria CIP Framework Rate Projects Against CIP Framework Refine Prioritization As Needed Output Is Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 19 Capital Improvement Planning Weight Criterion (out of 10) Regulatory Compliance 10 Public Health & Safety 10 System Reliability & Redundancy 10 Risk Score 10 Coincides with Other Projects 9 Employee Health & Safety 8 Sustainability 7 Operational Cost Savings 6 Revenue Generation 5 Process Improvement 5 System Capacity 4 Public Relations 4 Security 2 Other Community Benefit

11 What did we learn today? Risk scoring Likelihood of Failure Consequence of Failure Drives Financial Forecasting Can incorporate into capital planning process 21 THANK YOU! Contact Information: Chris Parton

12 Questions? 23 12