CSE Pure Power - Fall 2008 - (Page 31)

ideas & innovations 31 ❮❮ PURE POWER // FALL 2008 on indirect maintenance costs such as decreased maintenance-induced failures, breakdowns and downtime, and repair material requirements. Overall, RCM analysis provides the tools and information necessary to realize decreased maintenance costs, while continuing to maintain facility operations. Reliability-based maintenance is the marriage of RCM with supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA). SCADA is the backbone of controlling the operation of a facility. There are several SCADA systems available to do the job, depending on the size and activity of the facility. Combining these two tools will help the facility not only maintain its mission operational capability, but also possibly improve its reliability proﬁle. The old terminology for this is reliability growth. This is a powerful concept to control the cost of maintenance and to directly address the downtime requirements. SURVIVABILITY Yet another important issue to keep in mind is the security of the facility. The Anti Terrorism Force Protection (ATFP) and the Uniﬁed Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4-010-01 Dept. of Defense Minimum Antiterrorism Standards for Buildings is the most widely referenced ATFP criteria publication. It’s the product of a signiﬁcant multiagency effort to seek effective ways to mitigate terrorist threats. Its contributors include the Undersecretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, and the Air Force Engineer Support Agency. The most recent publication, dated July 31, 2002, was preceded by Interim Dept. of Defense Antiterrorism/Force Protection Construction Standards from Dec. 16, 1999. For those who started ATFP-related projects prior to the most recent publication date, it’s important to determine which set of criteria to reference because most projects initiated before the start of government ﬁscal year 2004 fall under the older standards. UFC 4-010-01 is a living document and its contents are updated as events and new information dictate. Dept. of Defense security personnel should regularly check for updates to ensure they are referring to the latest standards. It’s also important to note that the word “minimum” is part of the standard document’s title. The level of protection required for any particular facility must be assessed and deﬁned by the installation commander or an equivalent authority in charge of the mission. Careful attention must be paid to the stated intent of UFC 4-010-01. To paraphrase, it states that the standards are intended to minimize the possibility of mass casualties in Dept. of Defense facilities by establishing a minimum level of protection where no known threat of terrorist activity currently exists. The philosophy that underpins the criteria is based on value. It supports the argument that it would be cost-prohibitive to design facilities that address every conceivable threat, but instead that it is possible to provide an appropriate level of protection for all personnel at a reasonable cost. The concepts and strategies for effective antiterrorism and force protection measures are varied and Government agencies face challenges in the form of fast-changing technology, and confusing terminologies when trying to upgrade their systems. extensive. Dept. of Defense security personnel and their colleagues in similar government roles should, at the very minimum, have a grasp of the subject. A clear understanding of how ATFP differs from “all threats” force protection is critical, as is the relationship of possible issues and mitigation strategies that span site planning, structural design, architectural design, and critical infrastructure design. The concept of designing, building, and operating the most efﬁcient, cost-effective, and safe data centers requires a true understanding of the tools available in all the varying stages. The challenge is to design for the future, which incorporates anticipated IT growth and managing the power consumption, while maintaining a mission-capable, reliable facility. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Coyle is vice president of federal programs for EYP Mission Critical Facilities, a company of HP, in its Washington, D.C., ofﬁce. A seasoned professional with more than 20 years of experience in government contracting and procurement, Coyle has managed and led efforts on vertical construction on larger public works public-private partnership initiatives. Arno is principal and director of the C4ISR Group in the Utica, N.Y., ofﬁce of EYP Mission Critical Facilities. A member of the IEEE and chairman of the Gold Book, Arno’s responsibilities span program management, electrical, and mechanical system analysis and modeling, and data collection and analysis. www.purepowermagazine.com http://www.purepowermagazine.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of CSE Pure Power - Fall 2008

CSE Pure Power - Fall 2008 In the News Commissioning CHP Enhancing Emergency Lighting Data Centers for Uncle Sam Handling a Nuisance Trip Sustainable Projects and Partnerships New Products Ad Index

CSE Pure Power - Fall 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.