The old methodology of delivering hardcopy O & M documentation through binders and boxes of drawings is being recognized as an inefficient method to deliver critical information which leads to additional cost and risk on capital projects.
The use of OMTrak is a replacement to traditional methods of collecting and managing hard copy project Operation, Maintenance, and Handover documentation. The thought that OMTrak is an additional cost on a project is incorrect. While this process is typically not included on a Schedule of Values, collecting data, organizing, scanning, printing, creating binders, submitting drafts which get rejected and need to be revised costs money, particularly when it drags on long after practical completion. OMTrak pricing is similar to actual hard copy costs on smaller projects and is considerably less expensive on larger projects.
By having a standard form for subcontractors to complete during the construction process, this simplifies the O & M requirement as the sub enters the information the system prompts them for. The GC and owners reps simply review and approve the information progressively. Full visibility and reporting provides accurate information for monthly meetings, tying retention to the deliverable prior to the sub leaving the project. At handover all participants are all on the same page which allows the GC to move on faster, while delivering a better result for their client.
To look at true costs, owners need to consider the lifecycle of a building rather than simply the construction budget.
Binders and drawings take a lot of space and space costs money. Hardcopy is the most difficult medium to manage and secure making it the most expensive to access, due to the need for physical handling and the least secure. Managing this information digitally is more efficient, safer and adds to productivity. This is the way the world is going as the need for efficiency and cost reduction needs to be implemented where ever it can add value.
OMTrak’s electronic format is downstream compatible with asset management systems enabling the database to populate other system automatically. Traditional hard copy cannot do this and mining information post-handover is a huge and expensive undertaking.
The cost to add data to an asset management system after the fact is exponentially more than the license cost of OMTrak. We see everywhere, huge sums have been spent to implement an asset management system, but there is no budget to include the data entry so the systems are not providing the value the client paid for. OMTrak provides this as an additional no-cost benefit, stopping the money from flying out the window.
Several technical publications including the US Department of Commerce and Navy’s NAVFAC have indicated the highest costs were incurred by owners & operators and 85% of those costs were incurred during operations & maintenance. The major cost was time finding and verifying facility and project information.
Operations & maintenance personnel were estimated $4.8 billion during 2002 verifying that the documentation represented existing conditions and another $613 million transferring that information into a useful format.
Even the best managed hard copy documentation handover cannot reach the level of asset detail and user access which OMTrak provides. Hard Copy documentation is cumbersome enough and does not have a database behind it to simplify search and access.
Often O & M and Handover documentation is addressed as a project is closing out or has already closed out. This makes it difficult or impossible if sub-contractors have left the job, to provide the information the owners has paid for. As a result, often incomplete, incorrect, or just missing information is part of the traditional handover process.