February 2011

Asset Management Strategy

Contents
Executive summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
The case for asset management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1 Network Rail in context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

1.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2 Scope and structure of the asset management strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Performance during CP3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Commitments for CP4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Assumptions for CP5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Optimisation criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Current capability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Target capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Components of the framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

2 Current performance and future requirements of the infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

3 Network Rails asset management capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

4 Asset Management Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

4.2.1 Primary decisions and activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 4.2.2 Enabling mechanisms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 4.2.3 Monitoring and review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

5 Asset Management Improvement Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 6.1 6.2 6.3 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Asset Management Policy and Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Asset Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Route Asset Management Plans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Asset Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Asset Management Competencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Asset Management Benchmarking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 Asset Management Research and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 20 Programme outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Governance arrangements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Deliverables and target capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 23

6 Delivery of the Asset Management Improvement Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

Executive summary
Network Rails commitment to its customers is enshrined in a Promise to deliver the Timetable, so that trains run safely, punctually and reliably now and in increasing numbers in the future. Asset Management supports the delivery of the Promise by planning, delivering and making available an infrastructure that supports the current and future timetable safely, efficiently and sustainably.
We recognise that a significant improvement in our asset management capability is required to live up to this commitment. The purpose of this strategy document is to define the trajectory that will lead us to being demonstrably comparable with best practice in Great Britain by the end of this control period (2014). Over .the .following .five .years .we .are .committed . to .improving .our .asset .management .capabilities . further .so .that .we .provide .the .benchmark .against . which .organisations .worldwide .assess .their .own . asset .management .capabilities . Over .the .past .year .we .have .been .working .with .ORR . and .the .Regulatory .Reporter .for .Asset .Management . (AMCL) .to .develop .an .asset .management . improvement .roadmap . .As .a .result .of .this .work, . we .have .developed .a .good .understanding .of .what . needs .to .be .done .to .achieve .our .objectives .and .have . defined .numerical .maturity .targets .against .which . our .progress .will .be .monitored .
l

Route .based .asset .plans: .Bringing .together . . all .maintenance, .renewal .and .enhancement . activities .at .route .and .sub-route .level, .and . linking .that .work .to .the .route .outputs .that .the . infrastructure .is .required .to .deliver . Asset .information: .Improving .the .quality, . . integration, .accessibility, .and .where .appropriate, . extending .the .scope .of .the .asset .information . needed .to .support .strategic, .planning .and . delivery .processes . . Asset .management .competencies: .Extending .our . . well .established .engineering .competencies .to . provide .individuals .and .teams .with .the .skills .and . aptitudes .necessary .to .meet .the .wider .ranging . demands .of .asset .management .

Were committed to setting the worldwide benchmark for excellence in Asset Management.
The .improvement .roadmap .is .comprehensive, . covering .all .aspects .of .asset .management . . . However, .there .are .a .number .of .areas .which .have . been .prioritised .because .they .are .the .fundamental . building .blocks .of .an .effective .asset .management . regime . .These .include:
l

In .the .first .phase .of .our .Asset .Management . Improvement .Programme .(AMIP), .which .will .focus . on .delivering .the .target .improvements .during .the . current .control .period, .seven .major .workstreams . have .been .launched . .A .strong .governance . framework .has .been .implemented .with .a .board .level . sponsor .and .senior .management .leadership .of .the . individual .workstreams . . Criteria .have .been .developed .that .will .assess .the . outputs .from .the .AMIP . .Completion .of .workstreams . to .the .target .levels .will .demonstrate .an .asset . management .capability .that .is .at .least .on .a .par . with .the .best .asset .intensive .companies .in .the . Great .Britain .and .the .best .railway .infrastructure . companies .in .Europe .

Optimisation .of .asset .interventions: .Improving . . our .analytical .and .decision .making .capabilities .so . that .we .can .demonstrate .that .our .maintenance, . renewals .and .enhancement .activities .will .deliver . the .required .infrastructure .outputs .at .the .lowest . whole-life, .whole-system .cost .

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

Background
An .efficient .and .sustainable .asset .management . regime .requires .a .well .developed .capability .in .asset . management .(people, .processes, .technology) .which .is . reflected .in .assets .that .are .performing .optimally .for .the . level .of .funding .available . .This .is .illustrated .in .Figure .1 . . An .asset .management .strategy .needs .therefore .to .set . the .direction .in .two .main .areas, .as .follows:
l

particularly .strong .owing .to .the .scale .of .its .investment, . and .the .importance .of .the .railway .infrastructure .to . Great .Britains .transport .system .and .economy .

The case for asset management

Asset .management .of .the .railway .infrastructure . is .fundamentally .about .delivering .the .outputs . valued .by .our .customers .and .funders .and .other .key . stakeholders, .in .a .sustainable .way, .for .the .lowest . whole .life .cost . . A .more .formal .definition .is .provided .in .the .widely . adopted .Publicly .Available .Specification .for . Asset .Management .(PAS .55) .which .defines .asset . management .as .being .the systematic and coordinated activities and practices through which an organisation optimally manages its assets and their associated performance, risks and expenditures over their lifecycle for the purpose of delivering the organisations strategic plan.

Firstly, .it .summarises .the .high .level .objectives . and .targets .for .the .infrastructure .for .the . remainder .of .CP4 .(2011 .to .2014) .and .the . baseline .assumpions .for .CP5 .(2014 .to .2019) . Secondly, .it .defines .what .needs .to .be .done .to . improve .Network .Rails .asset .management . capability .in .order .to .deliver .these .requirements . and .to .achieve .a .level .of .asset .management . maturity .that .is .at .least .as .good .as .the .best . comparable .organisations .in .the .UK .

Network .Rail .has .been .active .in .asset .management . for .a .number .of .years . .However, .this .is .the .first .time . that .we .have .formally .defined .our .strategy .for .asset . management .and .put .a .systematic .programme .of . work .in .place .to .support .its .implementation . Developing .a .sustainable .approach .to .asset . management .is .central .to .our .strategy . The .case .for .adopting .a .systematic .approach .to .asset . management .by .asset .intensive .companies .is .strong . . The .case .for .asset .management .in .Network .Rail .is .

Figure 1 Sustainable performance (copyright AMCL)

Performing but unsustainable/ uneconomic Output Performance

Performing sustainably & economically

Under performing

Promising

Asset Management Capability

1. Background

While .there .is .little .radical .in .this .definition, .it . does .promote .new .ways .of .thinking, .building .on . traditional .good .engineering .practice .but .with .an . additional .emphasis .in .three .main .areas: . 1 . . . It .explicitly .focuses .maintenance, .renewal .and . enhancement .activities .on .delivering .sustainable . outputs .valued .by .customers .and .funders .at .the . lowest .whole-life .cost, .as .opposed .to .prioritising . work .predominantly .according .to .condition; 2 . . . It .provides .an .integrating .mechanism .that . crosses .boundaries . .between .organisational . functions .and .asset .disciplines, .and .between . the .infrastructure .manager .and .contracting . organisations; . 3 . . . It .places .a .greater .weight .on .evidence-based . decision .making, .using .knowledge .of .how .assets . degrade .and .fail .to .optimise .maintenance .and . renewal .interventions . .

The .potential .benefits .from .applying .an .asset . management .approach .are .recognised .by .many . asset .intensive .companies .as .being .numerous .and . significant . .They .include .the .creation .of .a .line .of . sight .between .strategy .and .implementation, .the . capability .to .deliver .the .same .level .of .sustainable . performance .with .reduced .volumes .of .work, .and .the . ability .to .demonstrate .to .external .stakeholders .that . activities .are .being .undertaken .at .the .lowest .whole . life .cost . The .commitment .required .to .achieve .these .benefits . is .also .significant . .The .programme .of .work .to . implement .the .asset .management .improvement . programme .represents .one .of .the .biggest . challenges .that .Network .Rail .has .faced .since .it .took . responsibility .for .the .infrastructure .in .2002 .

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

1. Network Rail in context

Network .Rail .is .one .of .the .biggest .asset . management .companies .in .the .UK . .In .railway .terms, . we .have .the .oldest .system .in .the .world .and .one .of . the .busiest .networks .in .Europe, .with .20% .more .train . services .than .France, .60% .more .than .Italy .and .more . than .Spain . .Switzerland, .The .Netherlands, .Portugal . and .Norway .combined . . In .terms .of .investment, .Network .Rail .is .also . comparable .at .a .national .level .with .the .privatised . water, .gas .and .electricity .companies .in .the .UK . .For . example, .our .renewals .expenditure, .amounting .to . 12 .5bn .during .CP4, .is .approximately .the .same .as . the .total .equivalent .investment .by .the .23 .water . and .sewerage .companies . .It .is .greater .than .the . investment .made .by .the .11 .electricity .distribution . companies .and .National .Grids .UK .electricity .and . gas .transmission .businesses . .combined . . While .we .share .many .of .the .challenges .faced .by .the . utility .companies, .such .as .a .geographically .dispersed . asset .base, .an .ageing .infrastructure .and .a .constant . drive .for .service .improvement .at .reduced .cost, .there . are .also .some .marked .differences . .For .example, .the . categorisation .of .rail .as .a .high .hazard .sector, .along . with .the .nuclear, .chemical .and .oil .and .gas .industries, . imposes .additional .requirements .including .a .formal . safety .case .regime . .Additionally, .there .is .a .much . higher .rate .of .usage .driven .asset .degradation .as .well . as .more .complex .interfaces: .for .example .between . the .vehicles .and .the .signalling .and .electrification . systems . The .Asset .Management .Policy .also .defines .a .set .of . core .principles .against .which .this .strategy .and .its . implementation .have .been .developed . .The .principles . lead .to .a .number .of .objectives .to .be .delivered . through .the .asset .management .strategy .including:
l l

Maintaining .safety .at .least .to .current .levels . Delivering .outputs .valued .by .our .customers, .in . a .sustainable .way, .for .the .minimum .whole-life, . whole-system .cost . Optimising .decisions .and .plans .based .on .risk . principles, .robust .information .and .innovative . methodologies . Developing .the .competencies .of .our .asset . management .teams .and .individuals .

The .remainder .of .this .strategy .document .is . structured .as .follows:
l

Section 2 .summarises .how .the .infrastructure . is .currently .performing .against .a .range .of . measures . .It .also .outlines .the .committed .targets . for .the .remainder .of .CP4 .and .the .emerging . assumptions .for .CP5 .and .beyond . Section 3 .provides .an .assessment .of .our .current . asset .management .capability, .based .on .an . external .independent .review, .and .identifies . target .levels .of .capability .to .be .achieved .within . the .next .three .years . .It .also .provides .a .roadmap . which .outlines .the .activities .required .to .achieve . the .target .capability . . Section 4 .introduces .our .Asset .Management . Framework, .which .summarises .the .building . blocks .of .asset .management .in .Network .Rail .and . illustrates .how .they .fit .together . Section 5 .summarises .the .workstreams .that . have .been .designed .to .implement .the .roadmap, . linked .to .the .Asset .Management .Framework . Section 6 .provides .an .outline .programme .for .the . delivery .of .the .workstreams .and .the .governance . process .for .leading .and .monitoring .their . implementation .

1.1 Scope and structure of the asset management strategy

As .discussed .above, .the .objectives .of .this .asset . management .strategy .are .to .provide .a .high .level . view .of .what .is .required .from .the .infrastructure, . and .also .to .specify .what .is .required .in .terms .of . asset .management .capability .to .deliver .these . requirements . This .strategy .should .be .read .in .conjunction .with .the . Asset .Management .Policy .which .summarises, .in .PAS . 55 .terminology, .Network .Rails .asset .management . system, .comprising .an .asset .management .framework . and .a .document .hierarchy . .This .strategy .is .one .of .the . components .of .the .asset .management .system .

1. Background

Figure 2 Overview of Network Rails infrastructure

Inverness

Aberdeen

l l l

30,000km .of .track 40,000 .bridges .and .tunnels 2,500 .stations 8,200 .commercial .properties Largest .private .landowner .in .UK Third .largest .telecoms .network .in .UK Largest .purchaser .of .electricity .in .UK, . lowest .transport .carbon .emissions

SCOTLAND
Fort William

Dundee

l
Stirling

l
Edinburgh Waverley

Glasgow Central Berwick-upon-Tweed

l l

Ayr

Newcastle Carlisle

Whitby

Scarborough

Barrow-in-Furness

York Blackpool North Preston Blackburn

Leeds

LNE

Southport

Wigan North Western Liverpool Lime Street Holyhead Chester Wrexham General

Bolton Manchester Piccadilly Stockport Warrington Bank Quay Buxton She eld

LNW
Crewe

Derby

Grantham

MIDLAND & CONTINENTAL

Dovey Junction Birmingham New Street

Norwich

Cambridge

ANGLIA
Ipswich Harwich International

Fishguard Harbour

Milton Keynes Central

WESTERN
Swansea Swindon Cardi Central Bristol Temple Meads London Paddington London Victoria Ascot Feltham London Euston London Kings Cross Southend Victoria London Bridge Lewisham London Waterloo Rochester Herne Hill Clapham Junction

Ramsgate

Redhill

KENT

Ashford International

Salisbury

WESSEX
Exeter St Davids Bournemouth

Eastleigh

SUSSEX
Ford Brighton Hastings

Plymouth

Penzance

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

2. Current performance and future requirements of the infrastructure

2.1 Performance during CP3
By .almost .any .measure, .the .condition .and . performance .of .the .infrastructure .improved . significantly .in .the .five .year .regulatory .control .period . between .2004 .and .2009 .(CP3) . .This .is .illustrated .by . the .trends .in .two .key .corporate .KPIs .shown .in .figure . 3 . .One .provides .an .aggregated .measure .of .the . condition .and .reliability .of .the .infrastructure . .The . other .shows .the .impact .of .infrastructure .failures .on . train .performance . .In .both .cases .there .has .been .a . significant .improvement .during .CP4 . In .parallel .with .these .improvements .in .condition, . reliability, .safety .and .performance .impact, .there . has .been .a .significant .reduction .in .the .cost . of .maintaining, .renewing .and .operating .the . infrastructure . .Over .the .same .five .year .period, .our . cost .base .has .reduced .by .27%, .despite .the .number . of .train .kilometres .(the .major .source .of .asset . degradation) .having .increased .significantly, .by .5% . The .main .areas .for .significant .improvement .relate .to . train .performance .and .network .availability . .During . CP4, .train .delay .minutes .are .targeted .to .reduce .by . 23% .for .passenger .trains .and .25% .for .freight .trains . . The .availability .of .the .infrastructure .is .targeted .to . increase .by .37% .over .the .next .five .years . .These . targets .need .to .be .achieved .in .the .face .of .a .growth . in .the .number .of .train .kilometres . The .condition .and .reliability .of .the .infrastructure . as .represented .by .the .Asset .Stewardship .Index . (ASI), .which .contribute .significantly .to .the .required . improvements .in .train .performance .and .network . availability, .is .targeted .to .improve .by .a .further .5 .6% . over .the .five .years . . The .final .component .of .the .CP4 .challenge .relates . to .cost .efficiency . .On .top .of .the .27% .reduction . that .was .achieved .in .CP3, .a .further .21% .reduction . is .targeted .for .CP4 . .This .amounts .to .a .42% .cost . efficiency .over .a .ten .year .period .

2.2 Commitments for CP4

The .targets .for .the .current .regulatory .control .period . (CP4), .from .2009 .to .2014, .are .equally .challenging, . although .in .certain .areas, .such .as .passenger .safety, . there .is .an .acknowledgement .that .an .acceptable . level .has .already .been .achieved .

2.3 Assumptions for CP5

Work .has .commenced .on .defining .the .requirements . for .the .infrastructure .for .the .five .year .regulatory . control .period .between .2014 .and .2019, .which .will . also .include .a .less .specific, .but .longer .term .view .over . the .next .thirty .years .or .so .

Figure 3 Asset condition and Delay

. ASI

Delay Mins caused by infrastructure faults (millions)

. Total .Delay .Minutes

4.9 4.7 4.5

100

80

Asset Stewardship Index (ASI)

60 4.3 40 4.1 3.9 3.7 20

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2. Current performance and future requirements of the infrastructure 2.4 Optimisation criteria
Asset .management .contributes .to .Network .Rails . Timetable .Promise1 .by .planning .and .delivering .a . railway .infrastructure .that .supports .the .current .and . future .timetable . .safely, .efficiently .and .sustainably . As .stated .previously, .the .objective .of .asset . management .is .to .deliver .the .required .route .outputs . at .the .lowest .whole-life .cost . .The .factors .that .are . used .in .determining .the .balance .between .outputs, . costs, .and .risk .include .the .following:
l

The .specification .of .these .requirements .is . complicated .by .uncertainty .around .the .impact .of . constraints .in .the .level .of .available .funding .and, . to .a .lesser .extent .on .the .short .term .forecasts .of . passenger .and .freight .traffic .levels . . . . In .September .2011, .we .will .publish .our .Initial . Industry .Plan .(IIP) .which .will .inform .funders .of .the . range .of .possible .outputs .that .could .be .delivered .in . CP5 .and .the .scale .of .expenditure .required .to .achieve . these .outputs . A .set .of .baseline .assumptions .has .been .compiled .to . inform .how .the .infrastructure .is .required .to .perform . during .CP5 .and .beyond . . 1 . . . The .rail .sector .will .continue .to .grow .in .the .long . term, .to .drive .economic .growth .in .the .face .of . further .population .growth, .increasing .road . congestion .and .carbon .reduction .targets . . 2 . . . The .infrastructure .outputs .at .the .end .of .CP4 . will .be .broadly .maintained .during .CP5, .in .a .way . that .is .sustainable .in .the .long .term . 3 . . . Targeted .improvements .will .be .sought, .for . example .to .close .the .gap .in .variability .between . individual .operators .by .raising .performance . of .worst .performing .services, .and .to .maintain . relative .safety .performance .when .benchmarked . against .European .peers . 4 . . . All .of .this .will .need .to .be .delivered .at .the .same . time .as .further .reducing .the .cost .base .to .the . lowest .level .commensurate .with .sustained .long . term .performance . While .further .clarity .will .be .added .to .the .infrastructure . requirements .for .CP5, .the .asset .management .strategy . is .concerned .with .the .development .of .a .capability .that . provides .flexibility .to .deal .with .a .variety .of .scenarios . and .potential .constraints . .This .is .considered .further .in . the .next .section .

Whole-life .cost .of .maintenance, .renewal .and . enhancement .interventions Safety .risk .to .passengers, .workforce .and .members . of .the .public .caused .by .infrastructure .faults Impact .of .infrastructure .faults .on .train .performance, . measured .principally .by .train .delay .minutes Impact .of .the .infrastructure .on .the .environment . Sustainability .of .the .infrastructure, .measured .by . long .term .condition .trends .and .assessments .of . asset .residual .life Resilience .of .the .infrastructure .to .weather .and . climate .change

l l

As .stated .above, .the .baseline .assumption .is .that . we .will .seek .to .maintain .the .infrastructure .outputs . achieved .at .the .end .of .CP4 .during .CP5 .and .beyond . . Other .scenarios .will .also .be .considered .that .will . change .the .balance .of .outputs .and .costs . .The . optimisation .criteria .will .change .to .reflect .these . scenarios, .although .the .factors .considered .will . remain .the .same . To .ensure .consistency .in .the .application .of .these . criteria .in .asset .policy .development, .for .example . across .asset .disciplines, .we .will .use .Network . Rails .Corporate .Risk .Matrix .as .a .key .reference . for .categorising .safety, .train .performance, . environmental .impact, .etc .

1 . The .Timetable .is .our .PROMISEWhen .we .PROMISE .a .train .can .run, .it .will .runsafely, .punctually .and .reliably . .And .we .PROMISE .that .more .trains .are .able .to .run, .next .year . . 10

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

3. Network Rails asset management capability

3.1 Current capability
The .previous .sections .highlight .that, .despite .the . significant .improvements .achieved .over .the .past . five .years, .the .asset .management .challenge .of . sustaining .outputs .while .further .reducing .costs .is . going .to .be .even .bigger .and .more .difficult .than .has . been .experienced .to .date . We .acknowledge .that .this .will .require .an . improvement .in .our .asset .management .capability . to .a .level .that .is .as .good .as .the .best .comparable . companies .in .the .UK . The .starting .point .for .improvement .is .a .good . understanding .of .our .current .capability .and .an . appreciation .of .what .good .and .best .practice .looks . like .in .other .companies . Over .the .past .five .years, .in .a .bi-lateral .arrangement . with .the .ORR, .the .Independent .Reporter .for .Asset . Management, .AMCL, .has .assessed .our .asset . management .capability .in .a .number .of .areas .and . made .recommendations .for .improvements . The .most .comprehensive .of .these .assessments . involved .a .review .of .23 .areas .of .capability .using . the .AMCL .Asset .Management .Excellence .Model . (AMEM) . .AMEM .is .a .questionnaire .based .model .with . a .6 .point .maturity .scale .that .ranks .the .responses . in .a .range .from .Innocent .to .Excellent . .The . assessment .has .been .undertaken .twice, .firstly .in . 2006 .and .again .in .2009 . .The .results .are .summarised . in .Figure 4 . . The .2009 .AMEM .assessment .showed .improvement . in .all .priority .areas .relative .to .the .2006 .study . . It .also .found .that .the .distribution .of .strengths . and .weaknesses .had .changed .very .little .in .the . three .years . .For .example, .the .strong .scores .in .the . delivery .of .maintenance .and .renewal .activities .and . contract .and .supply .management .were .confirmed . in .the .2009 .review . .On .the .other .hand, .weaknesses . persisted .in .the .development .of .our .asset .policies . and .our .management .of .asset .information .

3.2 Target capability

Building .on .the .2009 .AMEM .assessment, .AMCL . has .translated .the .recommendations .into .an . Asset .Management .Improvement .Roadmap . .The . proposed .roadmap .activities .are .aligned .with .the . Network .Rail .submissions .to .PR13, .in .particular .the . Initial .Industry .Plan .in .September .2011 .and .the . Strategic .Business .Plan .in .January .2013 . The .roadmap .also .sets .maturity .targets .to .be . achieved .by .the .end .of .2014, .for .each .of .the .23 . activities .in .the .AMEM .model . .The .target .maturity . levels .are .shown .in .Figure .4, .which .also .indicates . where .AMCL .expects .the .highest .scoring .rail .and . utility .companies .to .be .by .2014 . .These .scores .for . each .capability .represent .the .best .practice .achieved . by .any .one .company; .no .individual .company .is . assessed .as .being .best .in .class .in .more .than .four .of . the .23 .activities . The .timescales .for .the .roadmap .extend .to .2014 . although .the .large .majority .of .recommended . improvements .are .expected .to .be .completed .by . January .2013, .which .coincides .with .the .submission . of .the .Strategic .Business .Plan . We .accept .the .broad .thrust .of .the .roadmap, . including .the .method .for .prioritisation .and .the . alignment .with .the .PR13 .submissions . .In .the .next . section .we .will .introduce .our .framework .for .asset . management .which .is .based .on .PAS .55 .and .enables . us .to .align .improvement .initiatives .with .our .process . led .organisation . .We .will .use .the .framework .to . describe .our .Asset .Management .Improvement . Programme, .which .reflects .the .roadmap .and . includes .other .areas .for .development .that .we .believe . are .necessary .

11

3. Network Rails asset management capability

Figure 4 Results from AMEM assessment for 2009 and target capabilities for 2011-2014

. March .2009 . June .2011 . December .2012 . March .2014

.

. Best .in .Rail .or .Utilities .(2014)

Review & Audit Weather & Climate Change Sustainable Development Risk Assessment & Management Individual Competence & Behaviour Organisational Structure & Culture Contract & Supplier Management Asset Data & Knowledge Asset Information Systems Asset Knowledge Standards

Policy & Strategy

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%

Demand Analysis Strategic Planning Asset Management Plans Opex Evaluation

Capex Evaluation

Asset Costing & Accounting Asset Creation

Systems Engineering Maintenance Delivery Resource & Possession Management

Asset Rationalisation & Disposal

Incident Management

Innocent

Aware

Developing

Competent

Effective

Excellent

12

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

4. Asset Management Framework

4.1 Overview
The .integration .of .decision .making .across .an . organisation .is .one .of .the .key .principles .of .good . asset .management . .This .requires .a .clear .conceptual . view .of .how .decisions .flow .from .the .high .level . objectives .for .the .railway .infrastructure .to .the . delivery .of .work .on .the .ground . Figure 5 .shows .the .cycle .of .Network .Rails .asset . management .decisions .and .activities .arranged . in .a .Plan-Do-Review .framework . .The .framework . is .consistent .with .the .PAS .55 .standard .but .uses . terminology .that .is .well .established .in .the .business . and .aligned .with .the .process .led .organisational . structure . The .purpose .of .the .framework .is .to .provide .a .simple . representation .of .the .major .building .blocks .of .asset . management .and .the .key .interfaces .between .them . . It .is .the .starting .point .for .more .detailed .process . mapping .and .the .assignment .of .responsibilities . and .accountabilities . .It .is .also .useful .in .relating . the .activities .specified .above .in .the .roadmap .to . the .parts .of .the .business .that .will .lead .on .and . participate .in .their .implementation . Asset .management .is .a .major .component .of . Network .Rails .business . .Maintenance, .renewal .and . enhancement .activities .account .for .the .majority .of . the .companys .expenditure . .It .is .however .part .of .a . bigger .framework .which .has .parallel .strategic .and . delivery .components .relating .to .the .operation .of . the .network . .The .focus .of .the .asset .management . strategy .is .on .the .optimisation .of .asset .interventions . and .the .management .of .the .interface .with . operations . .

Figure 5 Asset management framework

utilisation, Route t & funding outpu specication

ies olic t P dards se As Stan &

Mon and itorin rev g iew

Enablers:
Asset information Analysis tools Competencies Processes

Ro u t e delivery plans

R a n ou ag te a em sset e nt pla n s
m

k Wor

ex
ec

ut

io

13

4. Asset Management Framework 4.2 Components of the framework

The .asset .management .framework .is .divided .into . three .major .areas .
l

4.2.1 Primary decisions and activities

Route utilisation, output and funding specification . .Specifies .the .customer .oriented . requirements .for .the .infrastructure . .The .specification . includes .the .capacity, .capability .and .availability . of .the .network . .It .also .provides .an .overview .of .the . future .train .service .pattern .and .passenger .flows .and . the .output .requirements .of .the .infrastructure .e .g . . punctuality, .safety .levels . This .specification .is .currently .provided .by .Route . Utilisation .Strategies .and .Route .Plans . .In .the .future, . the .intention .is .to .improve .the .alignment .between . these .customer .orientated .documents .and .the . engineering .specification .in .the .asset .policies . Asset policies. The .policies .document .the . asset .interventions .(maintenance, .renewal .and . enhancements) .necessary .to .deliver .the .route . specifications .at .the .minimum .whole .life, .whole . system .cost . .The .policies .provide .the .pivotal .link . between .customer .requirements .and .asset .plans . . They .are .the .main .driver .of .work .volumes .and .the . basis .for .output .and .expenditure .forecasts . . Our .existing .policies .are .based, .to .a .significant . extent, .on .traditional .practices .and .engineering . . The .next .generation .will .be .based .on .formal .wholelife .costing .methods .and .tools .

Primary .decisions .and .activities: .These .are . the .decisions .and .activities .that .start .with .the . high .level .objectives .for .the .infrastructure .and . end .in .the .delivery .of .work .on .the .ground . .The . framework .facilitates .the .establishment .of .a .line . of .sight .between .them . . . . Enabling .mechanisms: .The .effectiveness .of .the . primary .decisions .and .activities .is .dependent . on .many .support .mechanisms .such .as .asset . information, .analysis .tools, .competencies .and . business .processes . .The .importance .of .these . mechanisms .is .emphasised .by .their .position .at . the .core .of .the .framework . . Reviewing .mechanisms: .Reviewing .mechanisms . provide .the .feedback .loop .between .the . interventions .undertaken .on .the .infrastructure . and .the .asset .condition .and .performance . that .they .give .rise .to . .They .provide .inputs .to . tactical .and .strategic .responses .to .measured . performance .against .targets .and .also .to . the .continuous .improvement .of .the .asset . management .system . . .

Outline .descriptions .are .provided .below .for .each . component .of .the .framework . .In .addition, .a . brief .summary .of .our .current .approach .to .asset . management, .prior .to .the .implementation .of .this . strategy, .is .provided .for .each .component .and .is . linked .to .the .spider .chart .in .Figure 4 .

14

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

Route asset management plans. The .Route .AMPs . result .from .the .application .of .the .appropriate . asset .policies .to .generate .volumes .of .work .to .be . undertaken .on .a .given .route, .and .they .show .the . cost .of .delivering .these .volumes .and .a .forecast . of .the .outputs .that .the .work .volumes .give .rise . to . .The .plans .provide .a .specification .for .the . delivery .functions . .They .also .provide .assurance . to .external .stakeholders, .such .as .regulators .and . governments, .that .the .costs .are .justified .and .that . the .infrastructure .outputs .will .be .delivered .in .a . sustainable .way . . Route .AMPs .have .recently .been .introduced .in . Network .Rail .and .are .now .firmly .embedded .in .our . business .processes . .However, .the .benefits .have .only . just .started .to .be .realised .and .will .become .much . more .evident .as .the .asset .policies .mature .and .the . decisions .change .the .balance .of .the .work .reflected . in .the .Route .AMPs . Route delivery plans. Translate .the .work .specified .in . the .Route .AMPs .into .a .detailed .plan .for .execution . . The .objectives .of .the .Route .Delivery .Plans .are .to . optimise .the .delivery .of .maintenance, .renewal . and .enhancements, .grouping .work .spatially .and . combining .work .to .be .delivered .at .the .same .time . . They .also .provide .a .detailed .design .for .construction . projects, .confirm .the .availability .and .source .of . funding, .agree .the .delivery .programme .with . customers .and .stakeholders .and .align .the .delivery . programme .with .the .local .track .access .regime .and . the .delivery .capability .of .suppliers . Our .approach .to .the .delivery .planning .work . on .the .infrastructure, .including .contract .and . supply .management, .was .assessed .in .the .AMEM . review .as .being .close .to .best .in .class .and .not .an . immediate .priority .in .this .phase .of .the .improvement . programme . Work execution. The .delivery .of .work .includes . mobilisation .of .the .project .or .maintenance .team, . the .scheduling .of .resources .and .booking .of . possessions . .It .also .includes .the .provision .of .tools, . facilities .and .equipment . .The .hand .back .of .work . following .construction, .testing .and .commissioning . includes .updates .to .asset .registers .and .cost . management .systems .resulting .from .interventions . on .the .infrastructure . . As .with .our .delivery .planning .activities, .we .have . made .good .progress .in .recent .years .in .the .execution . of .work .resulting, .for .example, .from .the .insourcing .of . maintenance .and .the .more .recent .standardisation . of .maintenance .under .the .Phase .2b/c .organisation . . For .this .reason, .further .improvements .were .not . ranked .as .a .priority .in .the .AMCL .roadmap . . .

4.2.2 Enabling mechanisms

The .Asset .Management .Framework .includes . some .of .the .key .enabling .mechanisms .for .asset . management, .brief .explanations .for .which .are . provided .below . .There .are .several .more, .including . risk .management, .business .processes, .and .supply . chain .management . Asset information. Supports .all .the .primary .decision . and .activity .components .of .the .framework, .including . the .development .of .optimised .asset .policies .and .the . production .and .implementation .of .asset .plans . .The . scope .of .asset .information .is .broad, .including .asset . type ./ .location, .age, .capability, .and .condition . .It .also . includes .failure .histories .and .consequences, .work . histories, .unit .costs .and .as-built .drawings . The .effective .management .of .asset .information . has .proved .a .difficult .area .for .Network .Rail .over . many .years . .A .major .programme .of .work .was . undertaken .between .2004 .and .2006 .which .delivered . improvements .in .our .primary .asset .information .and . systems .and .enabled .us .to .demonstrate .compliance . with .a .licence .condition .pertaining .to .the .Asset . Register .(LC .24) . .We .have .not .been .able .to .sustain . that .rate .of .improvement .and .are .now .in .a .position . where .the .strategy .on .asset .information .needs .to .be . refreshed .and .implemented . Lifecycle costing (LCC) tools. These .support .the . optimisation .of .decisions .taken .throughout .the .asset . lifecycle, .including .the .maintenance .versus .renewal . trade-off . .They .also .provide .the .basis .for .route .and/or . network .forecasts .of .work .volumes, .costs .and .outputs . . The .tools .are .based .on .a .good .understanding .of . how .assets .degrade .and .fail, .for .example .with .age .or . usage, .and .how .the .degradation .or .failure .impacts .on . service .related .outputs . . The .sophistication .of .our .decision .support .tools .in . this .area .varies .across .the .asset .disciplines . .Some .of . our .tools .and .methods, .such .as .VTISM .and .TRAIL, . are .internationally .recognised .as .best .practice, . while .others .are .based .on .rudimentary .frequency . or .age .based .interventions . .The .development .of . our .tools .and .methods .is .a .key .component .of .our . improvement .programme . . Asset management competencies. Competencies . represent .the .skills, .aptitudes .and .behaviours . required .by .individuals .and .teams . .The .competence . requirements .provide .direction .to .the .recruitment . and .development .of .staff .including .assessments, . training .and .deployment . . Our .technical, .front .line .and .leadership .competency . frameworks .are .well .developed .and .effective . .They . do .not .however .address .all .the .demands .of .a . professional .asset .management .organisation .and . this .area .has .therefore .been .identified .as .a .high . priority, .as .discussed .further .in .Section .4 .6 .

15

4. Asset Management Framework

4.2.3 Monitoring and review

The .purpose .of .the .reviewing .part .of .the .Asset . Management .Framework .is .to .identify .the .measures . that .are .required .to .monitor .the .effectiveness .of . the .core .decisions .and .activities, .and .to .identify . and .implement .corrective .or .improvement .actions . where .required . .The .main .processes .used .to .keep . asset .management .performance .under .review .are . summarised .below . . Audit. A .systematic .programme .of .audits .is .required . in .order .to .confirm .that .the .major .components . of .the .asset .management .system .have .been . implemented .and .are .being .maintained, .that .the . target .levels .of .capability .for .each .component . are .being .achieved .and .that .asset .management . standards .are .being .complied .with . .The .audit .regime . is .risk .based, .focussing .on .areas .where .gaps .in .the . asset .management .or .where .non-compliances .have . a .material .effect .on .business .objectives . Key performance indicators. A .comprehensive .suite . of .leading .and .lagging .KPIs .provides .a .measure . of .how .effectively .each .component .of .the .asset . management .system .is .being .implemented; .for . example .the .delivery .of .work .volumes .compared . to .the .asset .strategies .and .plans . .KPIs .also .provide . measurements .of .the .impact .of .the .implementation . of .asset .management .system .on .the .performance . of .the .infrastructure, .for .example .condition, .failures, . capability, .service .impact, .costs .etc .

Management Reviews. The .outputs .from .the . audit .regime, .measurements .of .key .performance . indicators .and .other .sources .of .feedback .are . reviewed .regularly .by .management .in .order .to . identify .gaps .in .the .implementation .of .the .asset . management .system, .to .identify .the .root .causes .of . deviations .in .key .performance .indicators .from .target . values, .and .to .confirm .that .the .implementation . of .asset .management .is .driving .sustainable . performance .and .costs . . Corrective actions. A .process .for .managing . corrective .actions .arising .from .management .reviews . and .other .sources .is .required .to .remove .noncompliances, .address .short .term .improvements .in . the .performance .of .the .infrastructure, .and .deliver . longer .term .continuous .improvement .in .the .asset . management .system . Our .overall .approach .to .audit, .KPIs, .management . reviews .and .corrective .actions .has .undergone . significant .improvements .over .the .past .five . years . .Improvements .are .still .being .progressed, . for .example .in .the .refinement .of .the .Asset . Stewardship .Indicator .(ASI) .and .the .introduction . of .the .engineering .verification .programme . .Our . relative .strength .in .this .area, .as .evidenced .by .the . AMEM .review, .means .that .it .is .a .lower .priority .for . further .improvement .than .for .some .of .the .other . components .of .the .asset .management .framework . discussed .above .

16

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

5. Asset Management Improvement Programme

5.1 Overview
The .Asset .Management .Improvement .Programme . (AMIP) .is .our .response .to .the .AMCL .roadmap . described .in .Section .3 . .The .roadmap .identifies .the . majority .of .activities .that .comprise .the .AMIP . .Our . Asset .Management .Framework .described .in .Section . 4 .provides .the .structure .for .relating .the .activities .to . Network .Rails .processes .and .organisational .structure . The .AMIP .comprises .seven .major .workstreams . aimed .at .developing .Network .Rails .asset . management .capability . .The .workstreams .are . expected .to .run .for .a .number .of .years . .The .planning . for .the .workstreams .has .been .undertaken .at .a . detailed .level .for .activities .supporting .the .IIP . .As . the .work .for .the .IIP .is .rolled .out, .the .plans .will .be . progressively .developed .to .support .firstly .the .SBP . and .then .the .delivery .of .CP5 . While .the .workstreams .will .drive .change .in .the . business, .they .will .be .run .as .mainstream .activities . integrated .with .our .business .processes . .The .seven . workstreams .are .listed .below .and .explained .in .more . detail .in .the .following .sections .
l l l l l l l

The .Asset .Management .Strategy .is .as .set .out .in . this .document . .It .adds .detail .to .the .Policy, .focussing . on .how .the .infrastructure .needs .to .perform .to . meet .customer .and .stakeholder .requirements . and .on .what .Network .Rail .needs .to .do .to .build .its . asset .management .capability .in .response .to .these . requirements . . The .first .phase .of .this .workstream .will .be .completed . by .the .issue .of .the .Asset .Management .Policy .and . Strategy . .It .is .intended .that .the .documents .will .be . reviewed .on .a .two .yearly .cycle, .with .the .next .formal . issue .coinciding .with .the .SBP .submission .

5.3 Asset Policies

Our .current .asset .policies .specify .the .major . inspection, .maintenance .and .renewal .interventions . for .each .asset .discipline . .Very .few .organisations . document .their .asset .interventions .to .this .level . of .detail . .However, .the .interventions .are .based . predominantly .on .engineering .judgement . .The .links . between .the .interventions .and .the .infrastructure . outputs .they .give .rise .to .are .tenuous .and .only .by . exception .backed .up .by .robust .empirical .evidence . . It .is .difficult .therefore .to .demonstrate .that .our . decisions .are .optimised .to .deliver .the .minimum . whole .life .cost . The .Asset .Policy .workstream .involves .a .fundamental . overhaul .of .our .policies .to .address .the .current . limitations . .The .scope .of .the .workstream .involves . all .the .major .asset .disciplines .i .e . .Track, .Signalling, . Telecoms, .Buildings, .Civils, .Electrification, .and .Plant . (mobile .and .fixed) . An .asset .policy .development .process .has .been . established . .It .comprises .ten .key .stages .which .will . facilitate .a .consistent .approach .across .all .asset . disciplines . . 1 . . Asset .description 2 . . Historical .analysis 3 . . Asset .criticality 4 . . Route .criticality 5 . . Asset .degradation, .failures .and .consequences 6 . . Intervention .options 7 . . Output .and .funding .scenarios 8 . . Model .development .(LCC .and .volume/cost/ . output .forecasting) 9 . . Investment .optimisation 10 . . Policy .selection

Asset .management .policy .and .strategy Asset .policies Route .asset .management .plans Asset .information Asset .management .competencies Asset .management .benchmarking Asset .management .research .and .development

5.2 Asset Management Policy and Strategy

Although .asset .management .has .been .adopted . by .Network .Rail .for .a .number .of .years, .we .have . not .until .now .formally .issued .a .policy .or .strategy . document . . The .Asset .Management .Policy, .which .accompanies . this .strategy .document, .summarises .our .overall . approach .to .asset .management . .It .also .defines .the . principles .against .which .our .asset .management . activities .are .undertaken .and .highlights .the . companys .commitment .to .establishing .a .systematic . approach .to .the .discipline . .The .main .purpose . of .the .Policy .is .to .provide .a .high .level .means .of . communication .to .both .internal .and .external . stakeholders .

17

5. Asset Management Improvement Programme

Completion .of .the .ten .stage .process .will .result .in . policies .that .are .evidenced .based, .have .optimised . maintenance .renewal .trade-offs, .and .enable . short .and .long .term .forecasts .of .work .volumes, . expenditures .and .outputs .

5.4 Route Asset Management Plans

Asset .planning .in .Network .Rail .has .traditionally .been . by .asset .discipline, .e .g . .Signalling, .and .by .function . e .g . .Maintenance . .The .approaches .taken .in .each . area .have .generally .been .robust .and .systematic . . However, .the .plans .are .less .integrated .than .they . could .be .and .do .not .come .together .to .link .to .the . infrastructure .outputs .required .by .our .customers . To .overcome .these .limitations .we .have .shifted .the . basis .of .our .planning .from .asset .disciplines .and . functions .to .routes . .The .network .has .been .divided . into .a .number .of .Strategic .Route .Sections .(SRSs), . currently .circa .300, .each .containing .an .average .of . 100km .of .track .with .approximately .homogeneous . traffic .levels . . .Each .SRS .has .its .own .Route .AMP . The .objective .of .the .Route .AMPs .is .to .bring . maintenance, .renewals .and .enhancements .together . in .one .place .and .show .how .the .interventions .drive . the .required .route .outputs . . We .have .now .been .through .the .first .two .cycles .of . Route .AMP .production, .the .first .in .December .2009, . the .second .in .June .2010 . .The .first .generation .AMPs . were .produced .centrally, .in .the .majority .of .cases .by . assigning .modelled .work .volumes .and .outputs .to . each .SRS . . The .second .generation .AMPs .were .produced .by . route .based .teams .with .bottom .up .workbanks . reconciled .to .the .modelled .volumes .and .aligned .with . the .updates .to .the .asset .policies .for .CP4 . . The .third .generation .of .Route .AMPs, .issued . in .January .2011, .will .be .integrated .with .the . business .planning .process . .The .responsibility .for . their .development .and .upkeep .will .complete .its . transition .from .a .central .team .to .the .relevant . parts .of .the .business . .To .support .the .transfer .to . business .as .usual, .a .Route .AMP .business .process . has .been .developed, .including .the .assignment .of . responsibilities .and .accountabilities . The .structure .of .the .fourth .generation .of .the .Route . AMPs .will .follow .the .work .described .above .to . develop .our .asset .policies . .The .development .activity . will .be .focussed .on .CP5 .and .will .accompany .the . SBP .submission .in .January .2013 . .This .will .include .a . review .of .asset .criticality .and .network .segmentation . which .is .likely .to .impact .on .the .current .structure . .

Our .strategy .for .asset .information .has .both .short . term .and .long .term .components . .The .short .term . component .(Phase .1) .is .focussed .on .ensuring .that . the .asset .information .necessary .to .support .the .IIP . and .SBP .is .fit .for .purpose . .it .does .not .involve .any . significant .system .development . .The .longer .term . component .(Phase .2) .will .build .on .Phase .1, .but .will . also .set .the .strategy .for .the .future .systems .solution . Phase .1 .is .primarily .concerned .with .improving . the .quality .of .information .we .already .hold, .while . ensuring .that .the .appropriate .processes .and . procedures .are .in .place .to .maintain .the .quality . once .it .has .been .improved . .The .requirements .will .be . prioritised, .firstly .on .the .basis .that .it .is .required .to . support .the .modelling .of .policy .options .for .the .IIP . and .secondly .that .it .is .required .to .support .the .more . detailed .planning .for .the .SBP . .The .scope .of .Phase .1 . also .includes .the .requirement .to .have .fit .for .purpose . asset .information .available .at .the .beginning .of .CP5 . Phase .2 .will .be .run .in .parallel .with, .and .will . learn .from, .the .implementation .of .Phase .1 . .A . fundamental .and .comprehensive .review .of .business . processes .and .the .information .required .to .support . these .will .be .undertaken .prior .to .the .consideration . of .the .optimum .system .solution . .Phase .2 .will .also . assess .the .experience .of .other .companies .who . have .successfully .implemented .asset .information . strategies .on .a .similar .scale . .

5.6 Asset Management Competencies

The .engineering .competencies .that .have .served . the .railway .well .over .many .decades .are .as .relevant . today .as .they .have .ever .been . .However, .the . implementation .of .an .asset .management .regime . presents .organisations .with .additional .challenges . that .require .new .knowledge, .abilities . and .behaviours . Most .of .the .additional .demands .result .from . the .asset .management .drive .towards .greater . integration .of .decision .making .and .processes . .The . IAM .Competency .Framework .has .been .developed .to . assist .organisations .identify .the .competencies .they . needs .and .for .selecting, .assessing .and .developing . people .as .individuals .and .in .cross-disciplinary .teams . . . The .IAM .framework .identifies .seven .key .roles .listed . below, .which .are .further .broken .down .into .a .number . of .competence .units . 1 . . Policy .development 2 . . Strategy .development 3 . . Asset .management .planning 4 . . Implement .asset .management .plans 5 . . Asset .management .capability .development 6 . . . Risk .management .and .performance . improvement 7 . . Asset .knowledge .management

5.5 Asset Information

Asset .information .is .critical .to .maintenance .and . renewal .decision .making .at .both .the .strategic .and . tactical .levels . .Currently, .our .asset .information .is .held .in . a .number .of .differing .systems .supported .by .a .range .of . data .maintenance .and .assurance .procedures .

18

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

We .will .integrate .the .IAM .competency .approach .with . our .own .well .developed .competency .framework .in . order .to .identify .competence .requirements, .assess . gaps .and .implement .training .and .development . programmes . .We .will .start .with .the .people .and .teams . involved .in .the .preparation .of .the .IIP .and .SBP . .We . will .then .extend .the .framework .to .include .all .of .our . people .involved .in .core .asset .management .activities .

Progress .has .been .less .evident .in .the .ability .of . organisations .gain .a .better .understanding .of .how: . assets .degrade .and .fail .with .age .and .usage; .how .this . degradation .and .failure .impacts .on .service .outputs; . the .optimum .interventions .to .mitigate .or .prevent . failures . .In .short, .Life .Cycle .Costing .(LCC) .models . have .not .kept .pace .with .the .development .of .the . management .systems . The .development .of .our .asset .policies .and .route . asset .management .plans .is .critically .dependent .on . robust .LCC .methods .and .tools . .In .parallel .with .the . commitment .we .have .made .to .improvements .in . support .of .the .IIP .and .SBP, .we .are .also .supporting . more .fundamental .university .based .asset . management .R&D . The .main .vehicle .of .our .AM .R&D .programme .is . the .Chair .in .Asset .Management .at .Nottingham . University .which .we .are .co-sponsoring .with .the .Royal . Academy .of .Engineering . .The .research .programme . is .built .around .getting .a .better .understanding .of . asset .degradation .and .failure .mechanisms .and .the . optimisation .of .interventions . .The .results .from .the . research .will .provide .the .basis .for .the .next .generation . of .our .Life .Cycle .Costing .tools . A .small .team .of .asset .management .researchers . is .currently .being .assembled .at .Nottingham, . which .will .grow .as .the .research .starts .to .deliver . results .and .attracts .funding .from .other .sources . . The .key .output .from .the .Nottingham .research . will .be .a .compendium .of .asset .degradation .and . failure .relationships .and .the .optimum .mitigating . interventions . . We .also .have .strategic .relationships .with .two . other .universities, .Imperial .College .and .Sheffield . University, .who .are .also .undertaking .technically . based .research .that .is .relevant .to .our .asset . management .objectives . . .

5.7 Asset Management Benchmarking

Benchmarking .is .a .key .component .of .our .asset . management .strategy . .Asset .management .is .still . relatively .new .and .is .rapidly .developing . .A .number . of .companies .have .embraced .the .subject .and .have . attained .best .practice .in .some .key .areas . .We .are . eager .to .learn .from .such .organisations . Our .initial .work .on .benchmarking .will .focus .on .areas . that .support .the .workstreams .in .the .AMIP . .The . following .six .areas .have .been .prioritised .
l l

Asset .Management .Strategy Optimised .lifecycle .decision .making .(including . analysis .tools) Asset .management .planning Asset .information Asset .management .competencies Key .performance .indicators

l l l l

Comparator .organisations, .who .we .believe .to .be . leaders .in .each .area .have .been .identified .and . contacts .established . .Structured .questionnaires . will .be .developed .to .support .discussions .with .each . organisation . .The .results .from .each .exchange . will .be .documented .and .recommendations .for . improvement .will .be .added .to .the .AMIP .

5.8 Asset Management Research and Development

Most .of .the .development .in .asset .management . during .the .past .ten .years .has .been .focussed .on .the . production .of .standards . .e .g . .PAS .55 . .processes, . and .assessment .processes . .These .are .all .necessary . for .an .effective .asset .management .regime .

19

6. Delivery of the Asset Management Improvement Programme

6.1 Programme outline
As .stated .above, .the .AMIP .is .expected .to .be . implemented .over .a .period .of .several .years . . However, .the .PR13 .submissions .impose .a .number . of .key .milestones .including .the .issue .of .the .IIP .in . September .2011 .and .the .SBP .in .January .2013 . . Table .1, .below, . .shows .a .summary .of .the .anticipated . status .of .each .of .the .workstreams .at .the .time .of . issue .of .the .IIP .and .the .SBP . .For .the .longer .term . components .an .indication .of .the .progress .during . CP5 .is .also .provided . .Detailed .plans .have .also .been . developed .for .each .workstream .

Table 1
Workstream Asset Management Policy and Strategy Asset Policies IIP September 2011 First .issue .of .policy .and . strategy .by .September .2010 . SBP January 2013 CP5 Delivery Plan April 2014

Updates .following .first . Periodic .updates .following . biennial .review .in .September . biennial .reviews . 2012 . Third .issue .of .Asset . Strategies .to .reflect .CP5 . Determination . Route .AMPs .aligned .with . CP5 .Determination . Data .maintenance .and . assurance .processes .fully . implemented .and .working . Asset .Management . competencies .fully . integrated .with .NR . Competency .Framework . Recommendations .from . benchmarking .studies .fully . implemented . NR .has .the .most . comprehensive .repository .of . asset .degradation .

First .issue .of .asset .strategies, . Second .issue .of .asset . volumes, .costs .and .outputs . strategies .to .reflect .HLSO . for .CP5 .in .March .2012 . and .SOFA . Route .AMP .structure . Bottom .up .Route .AMPS . adapted .to .CP5 .asset .policies . form .integral .part .of .SBP . by .March .2011 . submission . Fit .for .purpose .asset . information .by .December . 2010 .to .support .CP5 .Asset . Policies . Competency .requirements . established .and .training . provided .to .key .staff .involved . in .PR13 . First .phase .of .benchmarking . complete .and .documented . by .December .2010 . Programme .of .work . underway .compiling . degradation .mechanisms .for . key .asset .groups . Fit .for .purpose .information . available .to .support .bottom . up .SBP .plans . Competency .profiles . produced .for .all .AM . roles . .Training .courses . implemented . .Competence . records .maintained . Key .lessons .learned .from . benchmarking .implemented . to .support .SBP . First .release .of .compendium . of .degradation .mechanisms .

Route AMPs

Asset Information

Asset Management Competencies

Asset Management Benchmarking Research and Development

6.2 Governance arrangements

A .strong .governance .framework .has .been . implemented .to .provide .direction .and .monitoring .of . the .progress .of .the .AMIP . . Figure .6: .Governance .structure .for .the .Asset . Management .Improvement .Programme As .illustrated .above, .the .overall .programme .has . a .Board .level .Executive .Sponsor . .For .each .of .the . workstreams, .the .client, .sponsor .and .delivery .roles . are .separated . .Direction .to .and .monitoring .of .the . programme .is .provided .by .the .Asset .Management . Steering .Group .(AMSG), .which .comprises .senior .

managers .from .across .the .business . .An .AMSG . member .is .assigned .to .each .workstream .and .is . accountable .for .its .success . AMSG .meetings .are .held .every .four .weeks . . Additional .progress .meetings .involving .the .client, . sponsor .and .the .programme .director .for .delivery .are . held .frequently .to .provide .more .detailed .guidance . and .review . . The .majority .of .the .workstreams .form .part .of .a . wider .programme .of .work .for .PR13 . .The .governance . arrangements .for .AMIP .are .consistent .with .and . support .the .governance .for .PR13 .

20

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

Figure 6 Governance structure for the Asset Management Improvement Programme

Executive Sponsor
Director Asset Management

Leadership and Governance

Asset Management Steering Group

Client
Head of Technical Planning

Sponsor
Director SP&C Asset Management

Sponsor Representative

AMIP Programme Delivery Manager

National Route Support Engineer

AMSG Leads
Head of Technical Planning Asset Management Policy and Strategy Director SP&C Asset Management Asset Strategies and Volume Forecasts Director SP&C Asset Management Route AMPs Director Asset Information Asset Information Director Infrastructure Maintenance AM Competency Director SP&C Asset Management AM Benchmarking Director SP&C Asset Management AM Research & Developement

Work stream Programme Managers

6.3 Deliverables and target capabilities

The .AMCL .Asset .Management .Improvement . Roadmap .specifies .groups .of .activities .aligned .with . the .relevant .components .of .the .AMEM .model . .The . roadmap .defines .a .set .of .measures, .with .proposed . completion .timescales .for .each .of .these .groupings . . We .have .used .these .measures .as .the .basis . for .setting .specific .objectives .and .for .defining . the .deliverables .for .the .Asset .Management . Improvement .Programme . .This .involved .a .detailed . mapping .of .the .activities .in .the .AMIP .against .each . of .the .measures .in .the .roadmap . .It .has .enabled . a .coherent .programme .of .work .to .be .established . based .on .the .seven .core .workstreams, .while .ensuring . that .full .coverage .of .the .AMCL .roadmap .has .been .

achieved . .The .mapping .of .activities .to .measures .is . documented .separately .(Summary .of .milestones . and .outputs .from .Network .Rails .Asset .Management . Improvement .Programme, .Version .1 .0, .January . 2011) . .The .document .identifies .the .key .output .from . each .activity .and .the .timescale .for .its .completion, . aligned .to .the .main .PR13 .milestones . The .AMCL .Roadmap .has .been .constructed .in .such . a .way .that .achievement .of .the .measures .would . result .in .Network .Rail .being .classed .as .excellent . in .Asset .Management . .The .trajectories .towards . excellence .for .each .of .the .priority .components .of . the .AMEM .model .are .shown .in .Table .2 .below, .which . . reproduces, .in .tabular .form, .the .Spider .Chart .shown . in .Figure 4 . .

21

6. Delivery of the Asset Management Improvement Programme

Table 2 Activity Targets

Group Strategy & Planning Ref 1 .01 1 .02 1 .03 1 .04 Whole Life Cost Justification 2 .01 2 .02 2 .03 Lifecycle Delivery 3 .01 3 .02 3 .03 3 .04 3 .05 3 .06 Asset Knowledge 4 .01 4 .02 4 .03 Organisation & People 5 .01 5 .02 5 .03 Risk & Review 6 .01 6 .02 6 .03 6 .04 Activity Policy .& .Strategy Demand .Analysis Strategic .Planning Asset .Management .Plans Opex .Evaluation Capex .Evaluation Asset .Costing .& .Accounting Asset .Creation Systems .Engineering Maintenance .Delivery Resource .& .Possession . Management Incident .Management Asset .Rationalisation .& .Disposal Asset .Knowledge .Standards Asset .Information .Systems Asset .Data .& .Knowledge Contract .& .Supplier .Management Organisational .Structure .& .Culture Individual .Competence .& . Behaviour Risk .Assessment .& .Management Sustainable .Development Weather .& .Climate .Change Review .& .Audit Mar 2009 54% 64% 55% 52% 38% 53% 51% 85% 59% 74% 51% 74% 46% 61% 51% 43% 68% 60% 61% 73% 35% 28% 62% Jun 2011 59% 68% 60% 62% 51% 58% 59% 87% 63% 75% 54% 76% 50% 70% 53% 53% 70% 62% 70% 75% 42% 33% 64% Dec 2012 61% 70% 62% 66% 56% 60% 63% 88% 67% 77% 61% 77% 54% 74% 60% 56% 72% 68% 73% 76% 45% 43% 68% Mar 2014 63% 72% 64% 70% 62% 62% 67% 89% 69% 77% 64% 78% 56% 78% 63% 61% 74% 70% 77% 77% 49% 48% 69%

22

Asset Management Strategy February 2011

7. Conclusions
The .purpose .of .this .asset .management .strategy .has . been .to .specify .the .activities .that, .if .implemented . successfully, .will .provide .Network .Rail .with .a . significantly .improved .asset .management .capability . . Such .an .improvement .will .enable .Network .Rail . to .deliver .the .future .requirements .for .the .railway . infrastructure .at .the .lowest .whole .life .cost . . The .programme .of .work .has .been .phased .to . deliver .key .improvements .that .are .aligned .with .the . periodic .review .process .for .CP5, .most .notably .the . IIP .submission .in .September .2011, .the .SBP .in .the . January .2013 .and .the .start .of .CP5 .in .April .2014 . The .programme .is .aligned .with .the .activities .and . measures .specified .in .the .AMCL .Asset .Management . Improvement .Roadmap . .Completion .of .the . programme .will .deliver .these .activities .to .the . required .standard .and, .in .doing .so, .will .establish .an . asset .management .capability .that .would .be .classed . as .excellent .compared .with .peer .organisations .in .the . utility .and .transport .sectors .

23

Tel: 020 3356 9595 www.networkrail.co.uk

101/February 2011

Network Rail Kings Place 90 York Way London N1 9AG