Raymond friem chief operating officer metro st louis mo 314 982 1445 rfriem@metrostlouis org
1 / 29

FTA State of Good Repair Roundtable July 8-10, 2009 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Raymond Friem Chief Operating Officer Metro St. Louis, MO 314-982-1445 rfriem@metrostlouis.org. FTA State of Good Repair Roundtable July 8-10, 2009. Prepared by the Transit Vehicle Maintenance Division of Bi-State Development Agency May 23, 2002.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'FTA State of Good Repair Roundtable July 8-10, 2009' - sal

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Raymond friem chief operating officer metro st louis mo 314 982 1445 rfriem@metrostlouis org

Raymond Friem

Chief Operating Officer


St. Louis, MO



FTA State of Good Repair RoundtableJuly 8-10, 2009

Prepared by the transit vehicle maintenance division of bi state development agency may 23 2002

Prepared by the Transit Vehicle Maintenance Division of

Bi-State Development Agency

May 23, 2002

Scheduled Maintenance Initiative“THE PLAN”

Mission statement
Mission Statement

  • Develop an affordable solution for the long-term maintenance of the Agency’s MetroBus and Call-A-Ride vehicle fleets while improving customer satisfaction and system reliability.

Previous experiences
Previous Experiences

  • Rolling stock declines in operability and desirability from in-service date to retirement date.

  • Major maintenance investments made in the declining years of bus life cycle.

  • Maintenance costs vary widely between fiscal years.

  • Maintenance level of effort not coordinated with rolling stock capital investment cycle.

Situation prior to the plan
Situation Prior to the Plan

  • Three Garages

    • Three completely different Business Models

      • Inconsistent mechanic-to-bus, mechanic-to-operating mile ratios.

      • Average fleet MDBF less than 4,500 miles, varies by garage.

  • Main Shop (Central Repair)

    • 15% of fleet awaiting repair

      • Average turn-around for bus is 117 days.

      • For Sale (Scrap fleet) 20% of buses. decommissioned have drive train components with less than 35,000 miles.

Business concept metrobus
Business Concept: MetroBus

  • Perform specific maintenance at regularly scheduled intervals based on unit mileage.

    • Replace single major overhaul at 400,000 miles with smaller scale rebuilds at 200,000.

    • Perform comprehensive body and minor drive train scheduled repairs at 100,000 mile intervals.

    • Perform pre-programmed tune-ups, and minor scheduled activities at 50,000 mile intervals.

    • Utilize central maintenance facility assets in support of preventative maintenance efforts; reduce focus on break-down maintenance.

      • Perform pre-failure overhauls on individual components.

    • Implement vehicle configuration management system.

Business concept call a ride
Business Concept: Call-A-Ride

  • Pre-programmed overhaul activities at 50,000-mile intervals

  • Development of standard work procedures through M4 system

  • Full integration of Call-A-Ride into storeroom system

Goals objectives
Goals & Objectives

  • 1st year goals

    • Achieve departmental consensus on pre-programmed maintenance activities.

      • Complete audit of original manufacturer suggested maintenance intervals against consensus recommendations.

    • Develop bill of materials/parts requirements for support groups in advance of need.

    • Develop standard work procedures for pre-planned and routine maintenance activities.

    • Determine mechanic abilities/training requirements for proper completion of all maintenance activities.

Goals objectives1
Goals & Objectives

  • 3-year goals

    • Rework inspection maintenance program to better support pre-programmed maintenance intervals.

    • Implement service writer concept (used by profitable maintenance businesses in automotive industry).

      • Improve and standardize data acquisition.

      • Free up existing staff to be more involved with quality of tasks performed and overall product on the street.

  • Full implementation of planned maintenance activities.

Impact on support departments
Impact on Support Departments

  • Create automated interdepartmental interface to work order system, provide for reasonable pre-notification of impending maintenance activity.

    • Reduce reliance on last-minute parts acquisition procedures which are overused and less accountable than standard storeroom procedures.

    • Reduce number of mechanic trips to storeroom window.

Impact on support departments1
Impact on Support Departments

  • Review facility (production plant) capabilities, upgrade as necessary

    • Determine “Choke Points” where out-of-service equipment could impact. maintenance productivity.

      • Hoists, Dynamometers

      • Electrical Service

      • Portable Diagnostic Test Equipment for Field Maintenance functions

Program risks
Program Risks

  • Risks

    • Pre-programmed maintenance outline is fatally flawed at it’s inception

      • Assumptions on component life cycles erroneous

      • Missed or non-addressed components

  • Addressing risk

    • Monitoring of existing system reports

      • Service delays

      • Road calls

      • Customer complaints

    • Implement mean distance between failure measure.

      • Specific to unit and subsystem

Other performance monitoring sources
Other Performance Monitoring Sources

  • Negative Contacts, Equipment, Bus/Van/Rail

    • Compiled by Customer Service Department

  • Monthly Road-calls

    • From Transit Operations

  • Subsystem Mean Distance Between Failure Analysis

    • New measure under development

  • Financial Performance

    • Corporate financial statements

Anticipated program rewards
Anticipated Program Rewards

  • Vehicle maintenance expenses become more predictable

  • Improved “curb appeal” and quality in passenger compartment

  • Predictable vehicle reliability over entire life cycle

  • Improved maintenance productivity without significant increase in costs

Plan costs vs historical total maintenance costs
“Plan Costs” vs. Historical Total Maintenance Costs

Plan costs vs historical main shop costs
“Plan Costs” vs. Historical Main Shop Costs

Key issues
Key Issues

  • Near term

    • Review per-unit replacement schedule, develop interim maintenance programs to extend service life as necessary.

    • Resist temptation to reduce maintenance costs in short term.

  • Long term

    • “Right Sizing” of human assets between maintenance work-sites could cause changes in location of jobs.

    • Current information often lacks sufficient detail. Data acquisition sources and content require additional review.

    • Analytical skills development needed in Supervisory Staff.

    • Increase coordination between capital and operating expense plans.

Plan performance state of good repair 2002 2009

“Plan” Performance: State of Good repair 2002-2009

State of good repair key indicators
State Of Good Repair Key Indicators

  • Measurable

    • Improved MDBF

    • Lower maintenance cost per operated mile

    • Improved fuel economy

    • Fewer passenger complaints against rolling stock

State of good repair lagging indicators
State of Good Repair Lagging Indicators

  • Less training on equipment, more training on system

  • Existing staff has more “research” time

    • “Isolated Failures” are really fleet problems that haven’t drawn attention to themselves….yet!

      • This will lead to detailed study of apparent minutia…. But let it go. You never know where it will lead.

State of good repair lagging indicators1
State of Good Repair Lagging Indicators

  • Improved Test Procedures

    • System and Subsystem certifications.

  • Newest Fleet is averaging no more than 10% above fleet average annual miles operated.

    • Oldest fleet is conversely averaging less than 10% below fleet average.

State of good repair lagging indicators2
State of Good Repair Lagging Indicators

  • Time in Shop is Dramatically Reduced

    • Buses in the shop are there for scheduled activities.

  • No more Maintenance “Campaigns”

    • Updates / Modernizations slotted into most practical maintenance cycle.

      • Fleet achieves conformed state.

        • Tremendous Savings in parts cost.

State of good repair lagging indicators3
State of Good Repair Lagging Indicators

  • With a little coaching…A TEAM is Born

    • Intermodal or inter-garage competitiveness replaced with an ongoing discussion about best practices.

    • Union personnel picking from one location to another find identical tools, procedures and practices in place.

    • Mechanics are more prepared to become supervisors, supervisors are more promotable.

State of good repair coaching tips
State of Good Repair - Coaching Tips

  • Develop One Common Measure for All Managers – Incorporate into Evaluations

    • Modal or garage-level measures still necessary and important but are a lesser measure.

State of good repair coaching tips1
State of Good Repair - Coaching Tips

  • Rotate Key Manager Assignments

    • Central Repair Area Supervisors learn the impact of their teams’ work on finished product.

    • Garage Supervisors assigned to Central Repair learn the level of difficulty involved in meeting the customer expectation.

  • Eliminate “It was Good When I Had It!”