5.9 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asset Management Plan | 1/2 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asset_Management_Plan | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T16:00:53.426888+00:00 | kb-cron |
An asset management plan (AMP) is a tactical plan for managing an organisation's infrastructure and other assets to deliver an agreed standard of service. Typically, an asset management plan will cover more than a single asset, taking a system approach - especially where a number of assets are co-dependent and are required to work together to deliver an agreed standard of service. The International Infrastructure Management Manual defines an asset management plan as; "a plan developed for the management of one or more infrastructure assets that combines multi-disciplinary management techniques (including technical and financial) over the life cycle of the asset in the most cost effective manner to provide a specific level of service."
== Objectives == Twofold: justification and optimization
Justification - to give visibility of the costs and benefits associated with providing the agreed standard of service. Optimisation - to minimize the whole-life cost, including the operation, maintenance and replacement or disposal of each asset in the system. Clearly for either of the above to work, the Standard of Service needs to be defined (in a measurable way) for each asset in an asset system. The first part can be achieved relatively quickly, and is necessary before the decentralization of decision-making around maintenance and replacement can really occur, but the second requires ongoing work in local teams, together with better guidance from the center. An asset management plan should take a "horses for courses" approach - not a one size fits all, but needs based - taking into account the basic information required. Beyond this, it should be built upon by the local asset manager according to local needs. A fully developed Asset Management approach usually requires a number of iterations of the AMP, and needs to be reviewed more frequently for more complex systems, especially asset systems where the average annual cost required to provide the agreed standard of service is high.
== Typical contents == An AMP typically covers the following areas:
Asset System Description Standard of Service Definition Current Asset Performance Planned Actions Costs Benefits Potential Improvements
=== Asset system description === Description of the problem that the asset system aims to reduce. What assets are currently employed to address the problem? Essentially, why do these assets exist? What would occur if these assets didn't exist. Identify dependencies between different parts of the asset system. This is important to understand why the assets are there in the first place.
=== Standard of service definition === How should the above assets be performing and to what condition? Define the Standard of Service (SoS) for the various parts of the asset system or group (a simple performance specification). Describe how the system, as a whole, is intended to perform in a measurable way. Usually consists of two parts, a measurable performance specification, and a minimum condition grade (CG). The minimum CG should take account of the potential consequences of failure i.e. a flood defence protecting an urban area that would flood to a depth of 1m should the wall fail under design conditions should have a higher minimum CG (2 or 3). An earth embankment that is only protecting agricultural land, where the consequences of failure are significantly less will likely have a lower minimum CG (4 or 5). If further refinement is necessary, the minimum condition grade should also take into account the likely failure mechanism - if failure of an asset is likely to occur very slowly and can be monitored, then a minimum condition of 2 or 3 is unlikely to be required - a minimum of CG4 can probably be justified. Conversely an asset that is liable to a fast failure mode with little warning will likely require a higher minimum condition. Example Standards of Service for Flood Risk Management Assets: A. Walls: 5.2m high until chainage 540m where the height drops to 5.1m. The condition of the walls will be maintained to CG3 or better (due to urban area). B. Culverts: under 3 carriageways, total of 120 m length (40 m each) provide conveyance for 30 m3/s without surcharging. The condition of the culverts will be maintained to CG4 or better (under a rural road with alternative routings). C. Pump station: provides capacity of 12 m3/s to drain the catchment during periods of tide-lock (usually every high-tide, for a period of 4 hours.) The condition of the pump station will be maintained to CG2 or better (no redundancy). D. Weir: provides a minimum water-level of 3.6 m to the watercourse above. The condition of the weir will be maintained to CG5 or better (minimal consequences of failure). For some assets, there may be a legal obligation to maintain and operate the asset to a certain SoS. Therefore, it is important to understand what function the assets were designed to perform, and what minimum condition is considered acceptable.
=== Current asset performance === What condition are the assets currently in? List/inventory and condition of all "assets" within the system, with their unique identifiers. This could include information such as asset owner, age, estimate of remaining life etc. This is important to understand what state the assets are currently in.
=== Planned actions and lifecycle management === A short narrative explaining the near-term actions required to bridge the gap between where we are, and where we want to be. In the case where we are already at or above the agreed SoS, this section explains how we will continue to do so for the least cost - enabling an innovative approach to providing the agreed SoS. This is important to understand what actions are planned to bring or keep the assets above their minimum condition, and able to perform their intended function.