May - Library

23
Infrastructure Projects
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS:
POST-CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS
AND MAINTENANCE. WHO CARES?
John Wilson
John Wilson has worked in Malaysia in Facility Management positions as a Team Leader - Facilities,
General Manager and Consultant with international/local Joint Venture companies.
Introduction
T h e re is generally great motivation and interest in the funding and
design of infrastru c t u re projects, especially for developing countries.
These projects include power stations, roads, bridges, ports, airport s ,
dams, hospitals, housing and other projects related to economic
g rowth and development. Such projects typically involve multi-million,
or multi-billion dollar investments and are the pride of the financier
and the recipient.
Infrastructure projects for developing countries are often funded
by world bodies such as the UN, ADB, World Bank or other
I n t e rnational Aid Agencies and are provided to those that are in need
but do not have sufficient internal re s o u rces for self-development.
These projects are often more of a political or economic investment
rather than based on hard loan financing as would apply to businesses
or individuals. In some cases the funding for the project is really a gift
- with an understanding that ‘re-payment’ is in the form of economic
or political co-operation rather than cash. In most cases the debt
repayment scheme is clouded in the prevailing or future economic
situation and rarely directly attributable to or reliant upon the returns
from the project itself.
Once a concept is framed, usually after laborious studies and
re p o rts, and once funding approval is obtained, some of the world’s
best Architects and Engineers are engaged to design the asset using
the latest technologies and envisaging cost efficient constru c t i o n
practices. In reality the construction may involve inferior local
materials, unskilled or inexperienced labour and generally lack rigid
quality control and competent supervision.
S o m e w h e re along the concept/acquisition/ownership chain there
is a fundamental oversight - the re c i p i e n t ’s ability, or indeed desire ,
to adequately operate and maintain the finished product. This
oversight is probably due to several factors, not the least being the
political and financial imperatives that become elevated and tend to
take precedence over the whole-of-life engineering re q u i re m e n t s .
T h e re is a tendency for the focus to remain on the
economic/political/financial showcase agenda and the functional
re q u i rements tend to be left on the designer’s drawing board or in the
technical specifications.
In essence, many of the huge investments in infrastru c t u re pro j e c t s
a re not protected by an insistence by the sponsors on sound postc
o n s t ruction management and engineering maintenance; there is
often just a hope that the project will fulfil its needs and that it will
remain functional throughout its designed life. In terms of resources
- both financial and material - this leads to significant and costly
waste.
This Paper discusses some of the shortcomings of larg e
i n f r a s t ru c t u re financing in terms of ‘ownership’ management and
investment protection. It attempts to raise the awareness of this
critical need.
The Problem - Design Life
E v e ry infrastru c t u re project has a design life, or more pre c i s e l y,
e v e ry physical element in the project has a lifespan related to its
usage, location, materials and construction - and its care. For
instance, a concrete column located on a tropical shoreline may
deteriorate within five years due to its location whereas the same
column situated in a hot desert environment may last many decades
and perhaps centuries longer.
In the example, the columns would be designed to withstand the
w e a t h e r, loadings and other assumed conditions for a pre - d e t e rm i n e d
lifespan, based on materials and engineering sciences. If say the
lifespan selected was 50 years in both cases then the columns may
not be physically the same. The column in the tropical enviro n m e n t
may be larger with a greater cover of concrete over the embedded
reinforcing steel or it may be coated with a protective shield to keep
out deleterious salts and chemicals. The column in the desert may be
shielded with a tough coating to resist the eroding effects of winddriven
sand. These factors usually emanate from the designer’s
drawing board and are written into the construction specification that
is aimed at satisfying the design intent and design life of the columns.
A static element such as a concrete column may have its design life
compromised or considerably shortened if say the protective coating
is damaged or if it is overloaded. The design life is a theoretical factor
o n l y. On the other hand if the column is not loaded as intended and
its protective barrier is maintained or improved then its actual life may
be extended well beyond its design life; this is related to the care it
receives.
T h e re are usually provisions or notations in the accompanying
documentation, such as the Operations and Maintenance Manuals
handed to the user post-construction, that prescribe some care or
maintenance criteria, or even replacement, for individual items during
the design life of the asset. Not all elements have the same reliability
and maintainability nor re q u i re the same care - some must be re p a i re d
or replaced many times due to factors such as wear and deterioration
as a result of use and abuse. Often the maintenance documentation
is merely a product catalogue rather than a maintenance guidebook,
inserted to bulk up the handover documentation.
Almost everyone appreciates that expensive infrastru c t u re pro j e c t s
will not reach a productive design life without due care and attention.
The meaning of care in this context may include reducing abuse, such
as operating beyond design capacity, and providing adequate
maintenance. Over the design life of the asset, the cost of this care
may be many times the acquisition cost. Failing to adequately care for
the infrastru c t u re will result in pre m a t u re failure, reduced capacity or
even the need for untimely replacement.
Although recognised, few appear to apply the concept of care for
i n f r a s t ru c t u re projects - unless lack of care results in exceptional
adversity such as unforeseen breakdowns, power outages, traff i c