SMRP Solutions Article, Feb' 2015

SOLUTIONS SMRPFEB. 2015THE MAGAZINE BY PRACTITIONERS FOR PRACTITIONERS

Volume 9, Issue 5

P.22 WELCOME NEW MEMBERS P.21 IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD:

CHAPTER NEWS P.18 SMRP IN THE NEWS

EQUIPMENT RELIABILITYFive Things You May Not Know About ISO 55001 4Reliability Considerations for Wind Turbine Generators 6Developing Proactive Maintenance Strategies 10

CONTENTS

IDCON’s Best Practice Seminar Schedule for 2015Course Dates LocationPlanning and Scheduling February 23 - 24, 2015 Raleigh, NC June 1 - 2, 2015 Longview, WA November 2 - 3, 2015 Raleigh, NCMaterials and Spare Parts Management February 25, 2015 Raleigh, NC November 4, 2015 Raleigh, NCEssential Care and Basic Inspection Techniques March 18 - 19, 2015 Raleigh, NC September 16 - 17, 2015 Raleigh, NCPreventive Maintenance/Essential Care & Condition Monitoring (PM/ECCM) March 16 - 17, 2015 Raleigh, NC September 14 - 15, 2015 Raleigh, NCRoot Cause Problem Elimination - Work Process and Forensics April 27 - May 1, 2015 Beaumont, TX October 5 - 9, 2015 Raleigh, NC

IDCON’ B t P ti S i S h d l f 2015

Training 2015

Reliability and maintenance training for the manufacturing and process industry

For more information about onsite training or to register, go to www.idcon.com or call us at 1-800-849-2041 Scan code to register

04FIVE THINGS YOU MAY NOT

KNOW ABOUT ISO 55001 Mike Poland,

Life Cycle Engineering

06RELIABILITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR

WIND TURBINE GENERATORS Howard W Penrose, Ph.D., CMRP

Dreisilker Electric Motors, Inc.

10DEVELOPING PROACTIVE

MAINTENANCE STRATEGIES Loganatha Pandian

14SMRP ANNUAL

CONFERENCE: Uniting the Maintenance & Reliability Community

in Orlando

CONTENTSFEATURES

DEPARTMENTS

SMRP Solutions (ISN#1552-5082) is published bi-monthly by the Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals, exclusively for SMRP members. The annual subscription rate is $15 for members, which is included in dues. If you would like to subscribe to SMRP Solutions and you are not an SMRP member, the magazine is $15 for an annual subscription. The Society was incorporated as an Illinois not-for profit corporation in 1992 for those in the maintenance profession to share practitioner experiences and network. The Society is dedicated to excellence in maintenance and reliability in all types of manufacturing and services organizations, and promotes maintenance excellence worldwide. SMRP’s Mission is to develop and promote leaders in Reliability and Physical Asset Management.

The products featured in SMRP Solutions are not endorsed by SMRP, and SMRP assumes no responsibility in connection with the purchase or use of such products. The opinions expressed in the articles contained in SMRP Solutions are not necessarily those of the editor or SMRP.

Back Issues: The current issue and back issues of SMRP Solutions can be downloaded from the library area of the SMRP Web site. Original versions of the current issue and some back issues of Solutions are available by contacting SMRP Headquarters ($5 per copy for members, $10 per copy for non-members).

SEND ADDRESS CHANGES AND INQUIRIES TO: SMRP Headquarters, 1100 Johnson Ferry Road, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30342, 800-950-7354, Fax: 404-252-0774, E-mail: [email protected].

02 OFFICER AND DIRECTORS

FROM THE CHAIR: 2015 OUTLOOK Craig Seibold, CMRP, SMRP Chair

Q&A WITH CRAIG SEIBOLD, SMRP CHAIR

SMRP IN THE NEWS

CERTIFICATION UPDATE

IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD: CHAPTER NEWS

WELCOME NEW MEMBERS

NEW CMRPS, CMRTS

EXAM CALENDAR, SMRPCO SUSTAINING SPONSORS

02

1618

202122

27

33

SMRP SOLUTIONS

FEATURE

February 2015 • Volume 9, Issue 502

FROM THE CHAIR

BY CRAIG SEIBOLD, CMRPChair Craig Seibold, CMRP Newmont Mining Co. [email protected] 303-837-6193

Immediate Past Chair Nick Roberts, CMRP Chemours [email protected] 304-863-4144

Vice Chair Bob Kazar, CMRP Roll Global [email protected] 661-432-4951

Treasurer Larry Hoing, CMRP, CMRT Wells Enterprises [email protected] 712-548-2328

Secretary Howard Penrose, CMRP Dreisilker Electrical Motors [email protected] 630-469-7510

Certification Director Joe Grande, CMRP Fluor Corporation [email protected] 864-517-3314

Body of Knowledge Director Bruce Hawkins, CMRP Emerson [email protected] 843-670-6435

Education Director Jay Padesky, CMRP US Gypsum, Inc. [email protected] 312-436-4463

Member Services Director Gina Kittle, CMRP The Timken Companies [email protected] 330-471-7465

Outreach Director Carl Schultz Advanced Technology Solutions [email protected] 866-398-9778

SMRP OFFICERS & DIRECTORS AN OUTLOOK FOR 2015

As the incoming Chair for SMRP, I want to thank all of the previous Chairs and dedicated members of the Society for their efforts in promoting and improving the profession. I am excited to take on this new role and lead initiatives that will create new opportunities for our members.

2015 PLANSOne of main initiatives for the upcoming year is to expand our educational offerings particularly related to ISO 55000 and physical asset management. We are launching in early 2015 a new education program whereby the Society

approves and recognizes our important Industry Partners who can delivery effective training materials aligned with physical asset management (specifically GFMAM’s Asset Management Landscape) and SMRP’s current Body of Knowledge.Through this program, Industry Partners gain a new level of industry acknowledgment for their education programs, while practitioners can feel confident that the training they’re receiving has been vetted by a qualified, neutral third-party (SMRP).

We are also excited to announce that SMRP has joined a worldwide partnership to provide certification for asset management assessors. The certification will assure the quality of assessors, and confirm their knowledge and comprehension in asset management systems to the ISO 55001 Standard. You will be provided more details on this program in the very near future.

The Board also plans to continue to grow the number of Certified Maintenance and Reliability Professionals (CMRP) and Certified Maintenance and Reliability Technicians (CMRT) worldwide. This year, a record number of exams were administered and the number of exams has grown nearly 60 percent since 2009. Companies are increasingly looking to hire individuals with these certifications and they continue to be a standard when employing maintenance and reliability professionals.

INDUSTRY TRENDS I am excited to see that the U.S. manufacturing industry continues to grow. A recent study from National Association of Manufacturers showed increased demand and output, and the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) reported an increase in the pace of production this fall.

More and more major manufacturing companies are also moving operations and production back to U.S. and looking for technicians to fill the “skills gap.”

With these developments, there will continue to be an increased demand for maintenance and reliability professionals who can effectively manage their physical assets and lower the total cost of ownership.

If you need assistance or have any questions about certification, membership benefits, education or any other offerings, please do not hesitate me or one of our Officers. I look forward to working with and hearing from our many maintenance and reliability professionals around the world.

Sincerely,

Craig Seibold, CMRP SMRP National Chair Newmont Mining Co.

FEATURE

03SMRP SOLUTIONSFebruary 2015 • Volume 9, Issue 5

E vents like the Ohio Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station near-miss in 2002 when a football-size hole from boric acid corrosion was found in the reactor vessel head and

the 2010 drilling tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico are case studies used to define why organizations must control not only the risk to internal stakeholders, but also the risk to external stakeholders. The Ohio residents and the businesses on the Gulf of Mexico were certainly external stakeholders at significant risk if the assets, while employed to create value, were not controlled appropriately.

As the audit and consulting communities prepare for the potential of an ISO 9001-like rush to compliance and organizations evaluate their level of interest in an international standard relating to asset management, it’s important to understand some elements of the standard that may not be immediately apparent to all readers of the ISO 550001 standard. These five elements clearly differentiate this standard from any other previously published management system standard and set the tone that all future standards will follow.

1) ISO 55001:2014 – Asset management – Management systems – Requirements is the first management system that was developed from the high-level framework defined in ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1,

Consolidated ISO Supplement – Procedures Specific to ISO. This “Annex SL”, as it is more commonly referred to, is the former ISO Guide 83, High level structure and identical text for management system standards and common core management system

terms and definitions. This annex contains the framework for all management systems going forward and contains 10 common elements (Scope, Normative References, Terms and Definitions, Context of the Organization, Leadership, Planning, Support, Operations, Performance Evaluation, Improvement) that are assembled in a Deming “Plan-Do-Check-Act” continuous improvement process as shown in Figure 1. ISO 9001:2015 is currently being developed using this framework for quality management systems and will be released next year.

Figure 1: Common Framework of the Management System Standard

BY MIKE POLAND, LIFE CYCLE ENGINEERING

YOU MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT ISO 55001FIVE THINGS

SMRP SOLUTIONS

FEATURE


2)As alluded to in the introduction, ISO 55001 emphasizes identifying and controlling risk to internal and external stakeholders of the defined asset portfolio, while looking for opportunities for continuous improvement

throughout the life cycle. Documenting risks and opportunities are common themes throughout the standard and an organization will find it difficult, if not impossible, to comply with the requirements without following the principles and guidelines found in ISO 31000:2009, Risk Management, as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management Process

3)The Strategic Asset Management Plan (SAMP) is derived from the Asset Management Policy and specifies the asset management objectives. In development of the SAMP, some level of stakeholder

mapping is required in order to define the expectations of both internal and external stakeholders and communicate those expectations through the objectives. This ensures that the plans created for the defined asset portfolio take into account the risk to all stakeholders and specify how that risk will be managed and controlled. Line of sight is a significant theme in the standard. A corporation must be able to follow the golden thread from life cycle activities of their asset portfolio contained within the asset management plans all the way back to their business strategy to show documentation and control of risks and opportunities.

4)The asset management plan is an output of the asset management system and takes into account the technical requirements of the asset portfolio that is within scope of the system. The asset management

plan is developed to ensure the asset management objectives are achieved throughout the life cycle. An organization should start small on its asset management plan. When planning how to achieve its asset management objectives, the organization needs to determine and document:

• the method and criteria for decision making and prioritizing of the activities and resources to achieve its asset management plans and asset management objectives

• the processes and methods to be employed in managing its assets over their life cycles

• what will be done

• what resources will be required

• who will be responsible

• when it will be completed

• how the results will be evaluated

• the appropriate time horizons for the asset management plans

• the financial and non-financial implications of the asset management plans

• the review period for the asset management plans

• actions to address risks and opportunities associated with managing the assets, taking into account how these risks and opportunities can change with time, by establishing processes for:

• identification of risks and opportunities

• assessment of risks and opportunities

• determining the significance of assets in achieving asset management objectives

• implementation of the appropriate treatment, and monitoring, of risks and opportunities.

It is top level management’s responsibility to ensure the organization provides competent resources required for meeting the asset management objectives and for implementing the activities specified in the asset management plans.

5)This management system standard also differs from previous system standards in its focus on collaboration. Top management is required to demonstrate leadership and commitment with respect to the asset

management system by promoting cross-functional collaboration within the organization. In his September 2014 keynote address at the 2014 IADC Drilling HSE Europe Conference in Amsterdam, Transocean President and CEO Steven Newman urged the offshore drilling industry to embrace collaboration in order to go from good to great. BS 11000-1:2010, Collaborative business relationships - A framework specification, considered the standard for collaboration, is currently being adopted by ISO and will be published as ISO 11000:2015 next year.

These five elements represent common themes that are critical to the successful implementation of an asset management system in accordance with the ISO 55001 standard. They reflect the significant move toward one management system for an organization within a common framework that follows the plan-do-check-act continuous improvement methodology.

Mike Poland is the Vice President of Asset Management Services for Life Cycle Engineering and recently completed an internal auditor course for the ISO 55000 series led by the British Standards Institute. You can reach Mike at [email protected].

YOU MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT ISO 55001

FEATURE


INTRODUCTIONThe availability of wind generation systems has undergone significant changes over the past two decades. It was only five years ago that gearbox bearing issues remained in the top 5 of overall wind turbine system failure. Number one was and remains the large blades, while well down the list was the generator itself.

As recently as 2012, the Sandia National Labs CREW (Continuous Reliability Enhancement for Wind) program noted that the statistics have changed such that the generator is rated second behind the blades for failure and gearboxes have dropped significantly down the list. This is believed to be a combination of overall reliability improvements in gearbox manufacturing as well as improvements in bearings. The data, which is based upon a reporting from 37% of the wind fleet, identifies that generator bearings are the primary reason for failure, but that it is an assumption.[1]

BY HOWARD W PENROSE, PH.D., CMRPDREISILKER ELECTRIC MOTORS, INC.

RELIABILITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR WIND TURBINE GENERATORS

SMRP SOLUTIONS

FEATURE


At this time, there does not seem to be a significant amount of data on the number of electrical versus mechanical failures of the generator portion of the wind turbine system, nor is there specific information as to the failure rates based upon the type of generator – permanent magnet, DFIG (Doubly Fed Induction Generator) or induction system. However, a majority of the literature and work has been on the impact of the insulation system of the generator in this environment, which from an insulation system standpoint makes more sense.

In the systems that we have been exposed to both through the repair process as well as discussions and visits with other facilities, it appears that a significant number of failures actually relate to the insulation system. Exact statistics on this failure rate are not known at this time, but it has been noted that the types of failures are relatively similar and are more severe depending on climate. It is our belief that the insulation and related system failure

is for a combination of reasons beginning with one primary assumption: the machines operate in a multi-dimensional movement space versus what is expected of most machines mounted in-place in a building or out of doors.

ELECTRICAL INSULATION SYSTEM PRIMARY OBSERVATIONOne of the observations that has provided misleading root-cause-analysis of machines is the quick and easy identification of missing wedges in a slot and a failure that has occurred in that immediate area. Normally it will be a short to ground between the top edge of the stator winding and the core of the machine. This has also been noted in the literature [2],[3], with a great deal of effort being put into the manufacture and placement of magnetic wedges, primarily in induction and DFIG generator systems. However, as is usually the case, the obvious is not always the answer.

We performed as series of investigations across a number of manufacturers plus evaluated published results of generator failure investigations, which are rare. The primary reasons relate to the manufacturers keeping the failure information relatively close. The results are quite different than those published, when a full RCFA is performed.

FEATURE


PROCESS OF THE INVESTIGATIONPerformed across induction and DFIG generators from several manufacturers, the first step was to throw all assumptions out the window. We started from scratch with a full PROACT®[4] analysis of the generators with our focus being on those machines which had stator insulation failures. We did note that there were a number of rotor failures in the DFIG machines, which is a separate topic.

Through the process we selected the failed coils to remove as well as the removal of coils in areas that were in relatively good shape. It was immediately identified that the machines, even at the points of failure, rarely had severe iron or winding damage. A majority of the failures to ground were almost pin-point faults with only a few showing any more significant damage. In machines that have a high level of energy, either in current or high voltage, the damage to the area around a ground fault tends to be fairly severe.

As Dreisilker does not use burnout ovens to remove coils but instead uses a warming method, it allows the forensics team to remove intact insulation systems from the electric machine for investigation. We pulled samples of several generators of different manufacture from both the failed coil and unfailed areas within the insulation system including areas that had missing wedges and others that did not. These samples were sectioned and put under a microscope as each layer of insulation was peeled back.

What we found in each system, regardless of voltage, was astounding, although somewhat expected. In large generators and electric motors, small pieces of iron or filings that enter into the machine as contamination will start to embed themselves into the insulation system. This effect is known as the ‘magnetic termite’ and is a direct result of a strange effect that occurs with magnetic materials in alternating current magnetic fields. The material will begin to spin and, in the case of small particles, will begin to burrow its way into the insulation system. Where this material gathers can be excess heating and, in the worst cases, a straight path between conductors and ground.

With standard electric machines of the sizes we see in large wind generators, from about 1400 kW to 2500 kW, failures between conductors tend to be more prevalent than the majority of failures we

have found in wind generators, which are direct ground faults. These systems are also rated at above 480 Volts with 690 Volts being the most prevalent (systems to 12.4 kV are also present in the fleet), but carry higher current than standard electric machines.

As a result of the significant number of failures to ground where wedges have been forced out of the slot, there has been a general focus on the wedge materials and slot tightness. However, based upon the type of investigations we are performing, we approached the wedge failure as a symptom and not the root-cause. The end result of this string of the investigation was that the wedges came out of the slots and material collected in the slots of which some became magnetic termites. After some period of time, the termites would generate a path until the insulation system failed. In some instances, the wedge would wear against the insulation system until it became weak enough to short to ground.

As we are performing forensics, this information was valuable, but we needed to know why the wedges were coming out in some slots and not in others and, in some machines, would progress around the circumference of the machine.

During the stripping process a particular design had an insulation system with a very low ignition rate. Even though it

was rated at 155oC, during the warming process it would ignite and generate significant smoke at 210oC, which is unusual as ignition normally does not happen in this type of insulation system until it approaches 340oC. As a result, the technicians ‘cold stripped’ it by warming the stator slightly in an oven and then removing the coils intact from the stator core. This should have been very difficult, but was instead relatively easy to perform.

A closer look was given to the coil insulation and varnishing systems used on the machines being investigated. It was quickly discovered that in a number of the designs the coils were relatively loose in the slots and relied upon a global vacuum pressure impregnation varnishing system to hold the coils in place with epoxy. The reason for this can be speculated as a method to install coils faster and then relying upon the epoxy system to ‘glue’ the coils in place. This method may work in a different environment, but the particular environment and forces that a wind generator is subject to are quite different.

SMRP SOLUTIONS

FEATURE


FORCES AND CONDITIONSA wind generator consists of a heavy module and blades mounted upon a tall tower. If the tower were rigid, it would snap or shatter during high gusts of wind. Therefore, they are made to be able to flex slightly and in high winds, the module at the top of the tower will see a significant amount of sway. This movement, much like that found on a seagoing vessel or mobile equipment, subjects the internal components to mechanical forces that far exceed those of a standard machine.

As an electric machine operates, the coils move towards and away from the center of the stator radially and there is a ‘swaying’ motion at the coil ends. The amount of radial force on the coil depends upon the loading of the machine and how tight the coils are in the slots. The force can be significant and blocking, wedges and side and wedge packing are used to hold the coil rigidly in the slots, limiting movement.

Thermal shock is of particular concern in a wind generator. While there are space heaters in the generator or system, they must be functioning and they must be sized correctly as the machine will come up to temperature relatively rapidly. As the machine changes temperature, the different components increase in size at different

rates. This causes a shearing motion through the length of the slot and will eventually break down the bond between the coil, epoxy and generator core. In addition, the movement will eventually start to wear away the insulating materials and blocking, loosening the coil in the slot. The more severe the thermal swing, the less reliable the system will be.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONSThe overall mechanical system appears to be relatively sound in many DFIG and induction generator systems. However, based upon the thermo-mechanical dynamics of the system, additional work should still be performed in order to improve the reliability of these components, such as bearings.

In general, it was found that due to the operating conditions the winding systems in a wind generator, and the associated mechanical systems, must hold tighter tolerances. Insulation systems, including slot-packing systems, must be chosen in order to maintain tension between the coil and slot system regardless of the thermal changes. The overall mechanical system must be capable of withstanding the overall dynamic mechanical, electrical and thermal stresses inherent in the wind generation system.

[1] Peters, Valerie A., et.al., Continuous Reliability Enhancement for Wind (CREW) Database: Wind Plant Reliability Benchmark, Sandia National Laboratories, NM, 2012

[2] Alewine, K; Chen, W., “A Review of Electrical Winding Failures in Wind Turbine Generators,” Proceedings of the 2011 Electrical Insulation Conference, pp. 392-397, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., 2011.

[3] Daneshi-Far, Z., et.al., “Review of Failures and Condition Monitoring in Wind Turbine Generators,” Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Electric Machines, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., 2010

[4] PROACT®, Reliability Center, Inc., reliability.com, 2014.

FEATURE


SMRP SOLUTIONS

FEATURE


DEVELOPING PROACTIVE MAINTENANCE STRATEGIES

INTRODUCTIONMaintenance has been around almost as long as humans. Everything eventually needs maintenance, though reasons to maintain different types of assets often differ. With increasing pressures to optimize costs and reduce the risk of industrial incidents, it’s critical that inspection and maintenance efforts be streamlined for utmost efficiency. Balancing inspection costs with safety and regulatory compliance can only be achieved by understanding the risk that an asset poses to a manufacturing facility. That process is called Asset Performance Management (APM).

In very broad terms, we can categorize maintenance as either aesthetic maintenance or operational maintenance. We do aesthetic maintenance in our daily life, like maintaining a coat of paint on our house, maintaining the cleanliness of our vehicles, maintaining our lawns/ gardens

and maintaining ourselves. We carry out operational maintenance on our typical household assets like washing machines, driers, refrigerators, air conditioners, vacuum cleaners, vehicles, etc. at varying levels and intervals. However, do we follow a strict schedule to maintain our household assets? The frank answer would be ‘No.’ We prioritize them based on the risk of not maintaining them. For example, in our household portfolio, we all may agree that not maintaining our vehicles is the highest risk, as we may get stranded in some remote area or may get stuck while on holiday or business travel. On the other hand we may not consider maintaining our vacuum cleaners or refrigerators because they do not cause any immediate concern on failure, though their unavailability may cause us some inconvenience. Rather, we might not worry about an asset until it actually fails.

Nevertheless it still is maintenance. We don’t have procedures & systems in

place to maintain these particular assets because the stakeholders – ourselves and our family – understand and accept the risks associated with them. However, this philosophy can no longer be extended to industrial maintenance because of multiple stake holders, the enormity of risks associated with industrial operations and varying risk tolerance limits.

In industry, it takes forward‐thinking leaders to define and develop new processes that are effective and drive improvement. In our maintenance strategy, we have been moving away from a layered architecture to a near‐real‐time environment, which can dramatically improve the quality of strategic decisions. The transition to proactive asset performance management allows industry operators and leaders to more efficiently manage sustainability risk across the enterprise. But first, let’s look at how we arrived at this point.

BY LOGANATHA PANDIAN, MERIDIUM INC., USA

FEATURE


HISTORY OF INDUSTRIAL MAINTENANCEIndustrial maintenance has played an important role since the start of the industrial revolution in the 18th century, though the term revolution and the exact century or date is a subject of debate among historians. By nature, the initial form of maintenance that was followed was ‘breakdown maintenance’ or ‘fix it as it breaks’. This simplistic methodology resulted in increasing number of accidents, lost lives and serious business consequences. Maintenance challenges grew with the spread of mechanized industry and with the development of strict regulatory norms for the welfare of society. This also had a bearing on the business growth as competition grew, breaking the ‘monopoly’ rule. As the oil & gas industry evolved, a third dimension was added in

conjunction to business loss and human health/safety – i.e., environmental norms. Many industry segments simply have to prevent failures to eliminate or mitigate environmental emissions caused by equipment breakdown.

These factors resulted in the concept of ‘preventive maintenance’. Why not maintain assets before they break? Be proactive instead of reactive. Industrial subject matter expertise and operational history were combined to determine the timeframe and activities that need to be carried out on each type of equipment.

However, since the human brain seeks new challenges, we started questioning our scheduled maintenance approach. Do we really need to maintain certain assets when they are functioning just fine? Why not optimize maintenance strategies? We spend time and resources just to find out that many assets are in good condition. And many times, we induce problems when we open equipment which is in good operating condition. In turn, this logic led to the concept of predictive maintenance. A simple LLF (Look, Listen and Feel) approach often could tell volumes about the condition of an asset. As technology advanced, various predictive maintenance techniques like ultrasonics, vibration analyzers, infra‐red cameras, thermography, etc. were used to observe the health of assets and take timely corrective action before an abnormal condition could manifest itself in the form of a failure.

Did we stop with this new level of asset performance success? As humans, we tend to be competitive, even to the point of improving on our own performance. So, the logical question that arose was ”Why maintain something which presents such a low or even zero risk to business?” In a complex industrial arena there are various types of equipment operating under a variety of conditions. Some pose very low threat to business and safety while some pose very high risk due to failure. Hence, the concept of Risk-Based Maintenance evolved. That was further divided into Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) for rotating equipment, Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for static equipment, and Safety Integrity Level (SIL) analysis for Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS). Qualitative risk modelling was developed for other types of equipment not falling in these categories.

STRATEGY MANAGEMENTIn today’s world, we need to operate in the precision category in order to compete and sustain our business. The process of deciding what to maintain and how to maintain it will vary depending on the type of business environment. Precise maintenance strategies have to align with business needs and regulatory norms.

The process starts with identifying and prioritizing assets that need to be maintained. The best way to begin is to conduct a criticality analysis on your assets. The two common ways of carrying out criticality assessment include: Qualitative Methodology and Semi-Quantitative Methodology.

The qualitative approach is the simpler of the two methods, and involves subject matter experts prioritizing the assets based on some criteria. Traditionally, assets were classified as Vital, Essential, or Desirable based on their importance to operations. Later when OSHA regulations were introduced, assets were given an additional identity and were called safety critical equipment (SCE), process safety critical’ (PSE) or process safety management critical (PSMC). With the evolution of the risk-based methodology, wherein corporations developed a risk matrix that considered both Probability of Failure (POF) and Consequence of Failure (COF), where POF and COF levels were defined by business needs considering safety, environment and production components of the risk. Business also defined the acceptable risk criteria or the level of risk tolerable to the corporation, considering business and regulatory requirements. This matrix can be used to qualitatively screen assets by summoning a team of subject matter experts (SMEs) to identify POF and COF of failure based on industry experience.

A semi-quantitative approach to screening assets is also possible within the risk matrix. Screening can consider only the consequence of failure, or both consequence & probability. Considering the consequence, corporations can develop a simple semi-quantitative screening criteria to identify safety, environment and production loss consequence in the event of failure. Factors can include equipment metallurgy, fluid (flammable, reactive, inert), toxic component, operating pressure and temperature. Considering probability a component of the risk matrix in a semi-

SMRP SOLUTIONS

FEATURE


quantitative criticality assessment may complicate the process of screening, unless industry‐wide data is readily available to compare failure mode/ failure frequency statistics for each asset type under consideration.

Once criticality of the assets have been identified based on one of the above methodologies, assets can be passed through the strategy development process. For high critical assets, risk/reliability‐based approaches like reliability centered maintenance (RCM), risk-based inspection (RBI), and Safety Integrity Level (SIL) analysis can be applied. For less critical assets, a simple qualitative assessment might involve a team of SMEs to develop maintenance strategies. It should be noted that for very low criticality assets even ‘no maintenance’ can be considered as a viable maintenance strategy, unless prior experience indicates that a minimum level of maintenance may prove more cost‐effective than refurbishing or replacing the asset after complete breakdown.

One of the most evident threats to sustainability are asset failures that cause a huge impact in terms of maintenance costs and lost production. While it is important to focus efforts on preventing such events from occurring, it is equally important to focus on seemingly low‐impact but high frequency failures, or chronic failures. Chronic failures use a lot of manpower, but may not cost significant cumulative maintenance dollars. In many cases we fail to look at the associated production loss due failure or unavailability of the equipment. Hence, identifying ‘bad actors’ considering total cost of unreliability becomes important to focus our improvement efforts. Also, due to their repeated occurrence they might give a false appearance of being the norm, or part of the required maintenance. Because of these hidden losses, there is a need for benchmarking to identify assets having chronic failures and drive ‘failure elimination’ efforts to improve sustainability and availability while reducing costs.

It is equally important to focus on seemingly low impact but high frequency, or chronic failures.

Sometimes failure analysis can be a simple task, and other times, the analysis could take more than a year to identify the root causes that led to the failure event. Different levels of risk and rigor determine different levels of analysis.

General methods of analyzing past performance of assets include variations of root cause analysis, including: Five‐why,

fishbone, tripod diagram, bowtie, fault tree, event tree or logic tree analysis. Different tools can be used, like MS® Excel and Word, or more structured tools. But we need to remember that the primary outcome of any investigation or analysis should be some type of actionable recommendations. We also need to track the implementation of those recommendations in a structured way as part of an overall process to eliminate the problem. As a note of caution, recommendations that reside in a spreadsheet or Word document are generally waiting to be lost or not acted upon.

For a proactive maintenance strategy to remain effective, the following ever‐greening activities are essential to the process:

a. Bad actor analysis using Integrity Operating Window (IOW) Monitoring, Health Indicators, Metrics, Benchmarking, Key Performance Indicators, etc.

b. Root Cause Analysis (RCA) to analyze and prevent recurrence of failures for both sporadic and chronic events. Chronic events can be identified using bad actor analysis, and prioritized for RCA considering total cost of unreliability (Maintenance Cost + Lost Opportunity Production Value)

c. Re‐evaluation of RBI analysis using updated inspections and related inspection confidence levels (typically following turnarounds)

d. Routine operator rounds to identify tell‐tale signs (per approved maintenance strategies)

e. Updating maintenance strategies/plans using past observations from incidents/ failure analysis.

MESSAGE This kind of risk‐based maintenance approach can help maintenance personnel to identify the cost component of unmitigated risk vs. mitigated risk and the amount of money required annually to mitigate the risk. This way the maintenance department or inspection department that was traditionally considered to be a mere cost center can turn into profit management centers, elevating their importance, presence and reputation in the view of top management.

We also need to accurately identify problems and then uncover solutions. Very often, the kind of solutions that we find are “below the surface.” The above ground “failure” is well known. We all know what happened; or we all think we know what happened. Something broke. Something was fixed. But what we don’t know is the underlying cause(s) of that failure.

We have moved from a reactive maintenance mode to one of being proactive by applying the principles of asset performance management. Asset performance management (APM) is all about connecting people, information, and devices to create a holistic view of plant operations used to better manage reliability strategy and operational risk.

Adding context to data helps reduce unplanned downtime by identifying potential failures in real time.

Companies Trust Their Most Knowledgeable Employees.

The CMRP is the #1 leading credentialing program for certifying the knowledge, skills and experience of maintenance and reliability professionals. This experience-based exam is a thorough examination of expertise in five areas: business and management, equipment reliability, manufacturing process reliability, organization and leadership, and work management.

For maintenance technicians, becoming a Certified Maintenance and Reliability Technician is the best way to stand out from the crowd. Validate your knowledge in the five domains of maintenance practices, preventive and predictive maintenance, troubleshooting and analysis, and corrective maintenance.

Be Reliable. Be Smart. Be Certified.

www.smrp.org/certificationBecome a CMRP/CMRT today!

10127-556_SMRP Certification Ad_2.indd 1 9/30/2014 2:49:57 PM

FEATURE


Companies Trust Their Most Knowledgeable Employees.

The CMRP is the #1 leading credentialing program for certifying the knowledge, skills and experience of maintenance and reliability professionals. This experience-based exam is a thorough examination of expertise in five areas: business and management, equipment reliability, manufacturing process reliability, organization and leadership, and work management.

For maintenance technicians, becoming a Certified Maintenance and Reliability Technician is the best way to stand out from the crowd. Validate your knowledge in the five domains of maintenance practices, preventive and predictive maintenance, troubleshooting and analysis, and corrective maintenance.

Be Reliable. Be Smart. Be Certified.

www.smrp.org/certificationBecome a CMRP/CMRT today!

10127-556_SMRP Certification Ad_2.indd 1 9/30/2014 2:49:57 PM

SMRP SOLUTIONS

SMRP ANNUAL CONFERENCE

14 February 2015 • Volume 9, Issue 5

UNITING THE MAINTENANCE & RELIABILITY COMMUNITY IN ORLANDONearly 1,000 maintenance and reliability professionals met in Orlando to learn, network, take care of business and have some fun at the SMRP Annual Conference.

Crowds of practitioners explored the exhibit hall, learning about the latest products and services in the field. Attendees also experienced a total of 54 education sessions, 21 hands-on workshops, plus several off-site facility tours at the Kennedy Space Center, Walt Disney World, Sea World and the Orlando International Airport. Nearly 100 practitioners also took exams at the Conference to achieve their goal of becoming professionally certified by SMRP.

New this year, SMRP focused an entire education “track” on physical asset management, with an emphasis on preparing attendees for implementing the new ISO 55000 standards.

“This year was a huge success, and the SMRP Annual Conference continues to be the premier educational event for the maintenance and reliability professional,” said SMRP Chair Craig Seibold, CMRP, with Newmont Mining.

“I want to commend the Conference Committee for its outstanding execution, particularly organizing the new education offerings on the broader aspects of Physical Asset Management and ISO 55000. SMRP is dedicated to continuing to be a key resource for our members and as this new global standard continues to take hold, this Conference delivered solid foundational information for the attendee’s to bring back to their own organizations.”

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS DELIVER MANAGEMENT AND RELIABILITY LESSONS Management expert Chester Elton, best-selling author of “The Carrot Principle,” kicked off the Conference with a presentation that had attendees buzzing with excitement.

15SMRP SOLUTIONS

SMRP ANNUAL CONFERENCE


Mr. Elton encouraged managers to recognize their employees often, especially when they’ve done something well.“When people feel valued and recognized, it accelerates business results and creates lasting relationships with clients and employees,” he said.

Heinz Bloch, a well-known consultant and reliability expert, took the stage at the Closing Session offering attendees applicable enhancements for their facilities with calculated paybacks of 10:1.

CMRP OF THE YEAR AWARD WINNERS Winners of the CMRP of the Year Award were recognized and honored for their dedication to, and accomplishments in, the profession.

Ramesh Gulati, CMRP of the Year in the Veteran Professional category, is the asset management and reliability planning manager at Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC), Arnold Air Force Base in Tennessee. Mr. Gulati was part of the original team that developed the CMRP certification, has authored several books on maintenance and reliability and has presented over 85 workshops in numerous conferences around the world.

Rising Leader winner Mary Jo Cherney earned her certification in 2013 and serves as the manager for engineering and maintenance at Nissan Motor Company in Smryna, Tenn. She is a past winner of the GE Eco-Imagination Award.

“I share the CMRP Award with my team at Nissan, who give me strength and support every day,” Ms. Cherney said.“I also want to thank Nissan for their support of our reliability program.”

JOIN US NEXT YEAR!Next year’s SMRP Annual Conference will be held at the Duke Energy Convention Center in Cincinnati, Ohio, October 12-15. Stay tuned for more information or visit www.smrp.org.

QUESTION & ANSWERWITH INCOMING SMRP NATIONAL CHAIR CRAIG SEIBOLD, CMRP, WITH NEWMONT MINING.

Can you tell us about your career in maintenance and reliability? I started focusing on asset management in 2004 as a Master Black Belt assigned to improve current manufacturing output to meet business plan through a reliability program. In this role, I deployed physical asset management business processes and CMMS (SAP) configuration.

I moved to mining as it is a major capital intensive industry with multiple aspects of asset management including:Fleet Management (Open Pit and Underground) and Continuous Process plants.

Working with Newmont Mining, I lead efforts to drive the global asset management quality and process maturity components to world class business management and industry leading performance levels.

In your opinion, why are maintenance and reliability practices so important in a facility?With today’s global economy, the manufacture and production of quality products at competitive costs is strategic to an organization’s long term survival.To achieve the lowest and optimal total cost of ownership of value-adding physical assets in the production of these goods requires applying the right maintenance and reliability strategies to effectively and efficiently manage these assets over their entire lifecycles.

How can maintenance and reliability practices improve a company’s performance?With an engaged, knowledgeable maintenance and reliability workforce and their engagement in effective deployment of best practices and technologies, companies will have their physical assets consistently available to meet their business plans.

There are many other intangible benefits that sites have achieved through reliability culture and programs.Strategic maintenance and reliability practices make solid business case sense. For instance, the net cost of performing proactive maintenance on the physical assets has been measured and reported in many sources as being three to five times more effective than the net costs of reactive maintenance. Performing proactive maintenance at the right time avoids physical asset failures on off shifts – creating unnecessary and potentially unsafe workforce conditions and work life balance interruptions.

What can members look forward to in the upcoming year?Before I expand on some of our next year initiatives we should recognize the great job the past leadership has done and set up the current SMRP leadership team for success.

When I project ahead to the next 12 months, I foresee a lot of positives within each of those responsible for physical asset management that is highly noteworthy. We have built an even stronger organization in SMRP to support our continued global growth. Additionally, the area of asset management continues to expand and earn recognition -- at all levels of business -- as a critical need and valued business investment. And globally, as many of you are already aware, ISO 55000’s series of global standards were published in January.

In my term as Chair, I will support the expansion of SMRP’s educational offerings by building on our portfolio of educational resources for physical asset management and the broader aspects of ISO 55000.This goal and initiative was truly a voice of the SMRP membership.

Currently, SMRP is developing a new concept to deliver professional education beyond our current Body of Knowledge in maintenance and reliability by initiating a collaboration and sponsorship program with our current Industry Partners.

SMRP is also participating in a worldwide joint venture to launch a new certification. This credential will qualify professionals who are training to be certified assessors of the new ISO 55000 standards.

Certification is also on a strong growth trajectory and the leadership team intends to keep that positive momentum alive. Soon you will be able to take our exams in many more locations inside the U.S. and worldwide.

We will continue to drive our strategic partnerships with third-party organizations and that includes the Global Forum Maintenance and Asset Management and all of our fellow global members within that organization. We are also partnering with other societies that share our interests.

SMRP is also embedding itself in the political and legislative arena. We’re currently in the middle of a government affairs campaign to raise awareness of SMRP -- and the field of reliability -- on Capitol Hill.

What do you look forward to as the National Chair of SMRP?Maintenance and reliability is getting more recognition globally for the business value and enhanced safety performance that it can deliver. It’s going to be an exciting year for all of us in this area and I’m looking forward to further developing the value and influence of SMRP.

Q & A

SMRP SOLUTIONS16 February 2015 • Volume 9, Issue 5

SA

VE

TH

E D

AT

E

SMRP SOLUTIONS18

SMRP IN THE NEWS


Matthew Philips from Bloomberg Businessweek wrote, “There is no skills gap.” James Bessen, in the Harvard Business Review, heartily disagrees in his article, “Employers Aren’t Just Whining—the ‘Skills Gap’ Is Real.” And in his State of the Union address, President Obama declared the need to “train Americans with the skills employers need, and match them to good jobs that need to be filled right now.” The administration’s $2 billion punctuation mark—in the form of an Apprenticeship Training Fund—highlights a very real perception problem.

No matter the method of analysis or the terminology applied to the issue, one thing is certain: As the Manpower Group Talent Shortage Survey 2014 reveals, “Despite the continuing caution exercised by many companies amid ongoing economic uncertainty, a substantial portion of employers in the U.S. and worldwide identify a lack of available skilled talent as a continuing drag on business performance.”

Albert Einstein put it this way: “Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.” In other words, to the man or woman on the short end of a job search, the perception of the reluctant employer is a crucial reality for them!

Manpower’s survey reports that the top three jobs employers are having difficulty filling are:

1. Skilled trade workers

2. Engineers

3. Technicians

That finding is not a surprise to Shon Isenhour or Michael Aroney, who have been creating solutions for the manufacturing sector for the past 15 years. Isenhour and Aroney are reliability and maintenance consultants. Equipment reliability is a huge factor in whether a manufacturing company is profitable—and reliability and maintenance professionals fall squarely into the engineer and technician groups identified by the survey as difficult to fill.

Isenhour and Aroney share some of their wisdom on the problem and solution:

Quality Digest Daily: So is there really a skills gap or not?

Michael Aroney, principal consultant at Allied Reliability Group

Michael Aroney: In this arena, yes. It’s very difficult to find someone with the specific reliability and maintenance skills they need out there because a qualified engineer or technician will get hired immediately; they don’t spend too much time on the streets. The critical gap is in the precision maintenance.

Shon Isenhour, a partner at Eruditio LLC

Shon Isenhour: A lot of the baby boomers filling those positions are finally starting to retire. The downturn of the economy postponed that, but now that the economy is coming back and some of the 401Ks are in better shape, lots of guys are exiting that industry pretty quickly. Unfortunately, they’re taking a lot of great knowledge with them. It is definitely changing the dynamics of the workforce.

QDD: Why are reliability and maintenance professionals so critical?

Aroney: Simply put, if your equipment isn’t producing, you’re losing money. An

effective reliability program not only saves money, but it also increases capacity due to more assets being online at any given time. The best analogy I can use is to think of maybe laser alignments, where one employee uses precision tools and another might use duct tape. Obviously, a lot of problems can be introduced. What our clients find is that the knowledge of a reliability and maintenance professional is lacking in their organizations, and they’re typically about two years behind in their ability to get the needed skill sets to qualify as a certified reliability and maintenance professional.

QDD: Why do you think so few young people go into those fields?

Isenhour: One of the baby-boomer legacies is that, to “be more successful than the old man,” you have to go to college.

Aroney: Well, part of our culture for decades has been that everyone has to go to college to get a good-paying job. Everyone wants to be a knowledge worker.

QDD: Does becoming a certified reliability and maintenance tech or engineer really make sense for newcomers to the workforce?

Isenhour: What we find is that, in reality, if you go back to working in these skilled trades, you’re able to generate and make more money than the average college student coming out with a four-year degree. Not only that, but you don’t have all of the debt associated with a four-year degree.

Aroney: Now the opportunity for a revitalized middle class is going back full circle to getting your hands dirty because these positions pay very well, and there’s some 600,000 positions open right now in North America.

QDD: What about company apprenticeships?

Isenhour: Company apprenticeship programs fell by the wayside, and first-generation tech schools began to take their place. Too many people thought the solution was to send an employee to a class in some sunny locale, and he would learn about something for a week or so and then supposedly come back to the facility and make a big difference in the way the business would run. That’s really just industrial tourism. One of the key pieces of those bygone apprenticeship

19SMRP SOLUTIONS

SMRP IN THE NEWS


programs was having a coach or a mentor to help people through that process. Unfortunately, the rapid loss of key personnel in the industry also means the loss of experienced mentors.

QDD: What are some options for companies experiencing the skills gap in this industry?

Isenhour: Our consulting clients understand the value of growing these skills organically from within their existing personnel, so Eruditio came up with a model very similar to an apprenticeship program where it’s hands-on in the plant. It’s a blended learning curriculum that involves an applied learning process that’s all about getting employees or students introduced to a learning objective, having them apply it in their company, and then having a qualified, seasoned coach/mentor working them through to project completion. That process then has a quick return on investment (ROI) and can help change the culture of the facility.

Aroney: Of course, some clients just don’t have anyone to train, and that’s where Allied’s targeted talent acquisition comes in. One of the ways we’ve been able to fill these gaps is with guys who are transitioning out of the military. They’ve learned how to troubleshoot, they’re mission-focused, they have leadership skills, and they know how to fix things properly and keep equipment up and running. Another need in the market is stop-gap personnel while Allied goes out and tries to recruit a permanent person able to bring those skills to the site and provide stability. That’s a real challenge, so we typically bring in one of our own consultants who will operate as on-site staff augmentation while the employee seen as their future comes up to speed.

QDD: Is corporate perception of a transient workforce an issue?

Isenhour: Well, it seems a cliché, but would you rather have someone who hasn’t been trained work for you for years, or someone who has been trained work for you for a shorter period? In other words, who will you get the most results from? But yes, that’s why we are so focused on getting a return on investment as an employee is going through the program. Then our typical students are showing a tenfold ROI. In fact, one of our recent students presented a training project, and just one module of that project saved the company $250,000 in the first year.

QDD: What certifications are associated with this industry?

Isenhour: The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals (SMRP) has two certifications. There is the Certified Maintenance Reliability Professional (CMRP), which is your engineers, managers, and supervisors, and then there is the Certified Maintenance Reliability Technician (CMRT), which is a newer certification for your technicians, craftsmen, and folks who are actually repairing the manufacturing assets.

QDD: What do those certs really mean to employers and employees?

Aroney: When somebody has a CMRP or CMRT certification, you can assume a certain body of knowledge, and when you combine that with their work experience, you pretty much know what you’re getting. We find that candidates who do affiliate with the SMRP have a higher likelihood of getting placements with our clients. More companies are realizing that their assets are holding them back, so they are getting very involved with SMRP, and list those certifications as required or “nice to have” for job candidates.

Isenhour: The CMRP is especially valuable for employees to increase their mobility within the field. The CMRT is used in two ways. One way is for a company—like an airline company—to communicate its dedication to top-shelf maintenance by requiring all its techs to be CMRT-certified, and then they can also use the cert as an internal measuring stick to ensure that their training programs have been effective.

CONCLUSIONIsenhour: What we really do is look at the individual needs of our clients. Sometimes Allied has the best solution, sometimes Eruditio is a better fit. We’re able to flex back and forth. The idea is that as long as a company contacts one or the other of us, we can get them connected to the right folks to provide the solution that works best for them.

Aroney: Between us, we can cover everything from job-task analysis, to talent acquisition, to testing the craftsman or engineer, to developing the necessary skills and applying them.

BY VLAD BACALU, CMRP, SMRPCO CHAIR

SMRP SOLUTIONS

FEATURE


The annual conference in Orlando was a success with close to record attendance and great presentations. Our certification program is going strong and currently we have 4,113 individuals certified as CMRP and 463 CMRTs. This last fiscal year, the number of CMRTs increased 113% compared to the previous year. There are two enhancements to introduce in this article: Increasing the number of domestic and international certified test centers and providing feedback to the CMRT candidates at the task level.

CERTIFICATION UPDATE

INCREASED TESTING CENTERSFor over a year, SMRP has been working with a new electronic testing partner Kryterion to integrate their processes with our online sign up process and membership database. Kryterion allows our candidates to take the CMRP exam at any of their certified testing centers thus bringing our exam close to our members. Kryterion offers 428 testing centers in North America and many locations worldwide. Our next step is to roll out the CMRT exam and use the same certified locations for both exams. The interested candidates can sign up to take the exam at any of the Kryterion locations by going to the www.smrp.org and follow the instructions under ‘apply online’ link. The ‘on-demand scheduling’ allows the candidate to select the best date, time and location.

FEEDBACK AT THE TASK LEVEL FOR CMRTEarlier this year, the SMRPCO Board made the decision to define the CMRT exam as a ‘skills assessment / certification’ and keep the CMRP as a ‘certification’ only. To fulfill the ‘skills assessment’ part of the CMRT exam, the SMRPCO board also decided to provide feedback at the task level, giving more detailed information to the candidate and showing the candidate the tasks he/she needs to focus on. Previously, the feedback was given at the domain level.

Just for clarification purposes, the CMRT exam is based on 4 domains and each domain has a series of tasks.

Domain 1: Maintenance Practices, nine tasks

Domain 2: Preventive and Predictive Maintenance, five tasks

Domain 3: Troubleshooting, five tasks

Domain 4: Corrective Maintenance, four tasks

After this change, the candidate received a bar graph showing his/her strengths in each of the 23 tasks instead of a bar graph showing the strengths in the 4 domains.

We are looking forward to hearing your feedback regarding our certifications. Please send your comments to SMRPCO Chair Vlad Bacalu at [email protected] or contact our staff at 1-800-950-7354.

IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD: CHAPTER NEWS

HOUSTON CHAPTER ESTABLISHES ENGINEERING SCHOLARSHIP The Houston Chapter of the SMRP was proud to present Texas A&M with a $25,000 gift to establish the Ed and Debbie Foster Scholarship to be given to a deserving engineering student. The scholarship recognizes the hard work and dedication that Ed Foster has contributed to the

Houston Chapter of the SMRP. Ed was one of the founding members of the Houston Chapter and a former SMRP Board member. Ed pioneered our annual Maintenance and Reliability Symposium (MaRS), which has been an annual event for our chapter for the last eight years. Benefits of the MaRS event have enabled the chapter to donate over $160,000 to support the education of engineering students and craft development during this time.

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!

VISIT WWW.SMRP.ORG/FEEDBACK and share your thoughts with us!

Pictured: Ed Foster accepts a plaque commemorating the event from Jimmy Jernigan the Houston Chapter Chairman along with family and Andy Acker (far right) from Texas A&M.

NC

SC

ON

HOU

OH

KY


CHAPTER NEWS

WELCOME


New MembersSeptember 17-November 20

Abdullah Aldossari Aramco

AbdulRahman Al-Shamiri Safer Exploration & Production Operations Company

Abigail Kaeli MillerCoors

Adam Brown AES

Ademola Akanbi

Ahmad Al-Ali KNPC

Ahmad Al-Tuwaijri SIPCHEM

Ahmed Al-Waili

Alan Whitham Alan Whitham & Associates Pty Ltd

Albert Ryan Merck & Co., Inc.

Alton Popp Edward C. Levy Co.

Amakiri Jonathan The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria

Anthon Pasaribu Petronas Carigali Muriah Ltd

Anthony Grinstead PepsiCo

Anthony Kurek

Anthony Muratore

Armando Arciaga Energy Development Corporation

Bahvahnie Smith Oklahoma Gas & Electric

Barry Coultas Equipment & Controls Inc

Barry Cross Schlumberger

Barry Rice Olin

Bill Alston

Brandon Brownlee Motion Industries, Inc.

Brent Gattoni Lakeside Process Controls

Brian Donlan Long Island Rail Road

Brian Fair

Brian Konkoly

Brian Moore ABB

Brian Shealy VIZIYA

Bruce Otruba Medimmune LLC. Cade Schoonover Cargill, Inc.

Cary Weaver IRISS. Inc.

Chad Hollier Honeywell Chemicals

Charles Griggs Norris Cylinder Company

Charles Smith Mueller Co.

Cherish Esquivel Orange County Sheriff’s Department

Chris Long

Chris Robbins Hormel Foods Corporation

Chris Schwarz Dakota Gasification Company

Christopher Nesbitt County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County

Clayton Cooke Novelis, Inc.

Colby Lebsack Basin Electric LRS

Craig Bishop Nissan North America

Curtis Braggs ARAMARK Facility Services

Dale Green Michelin Tire

Damaris Walls

Daniel Aymond Axiall

Daniel Evoy DLPE Management

Daniel Roberts BASF

Darel Cantrell Fritz Industries

David Andrews Acuren

David Diaz COLP, Natural Gas liquefaction Hunt Oil

David Heubel Endress + Hauser Flowtec DG

David Mason GE Energy

David Murray Triple R Oil Cleaner

David Parsons

David Reed Commonwealth Laminating & Coating

David Wilson TECO-Westinghouse Motor Company

Dean DelGrosso Hillsborough County Public Utilities Department

Dekheel Al-Harthi Saudi Aramco

WELCOME


Del Ng Stanford Health Care

Delvis Castellanos Integrity Assessment Services

Derek Mitchell NOVA Chemicals

Diego Acosta DC Teknicalderas

Dmitry Fedoseev

Douglas Bowker BASF

Dwight Johnson Mosaic Fertilizer LLC

Edward Curello Pratt & Whitney

Edward Kelly BIC Graphic

Edward Morenc Solvay USA

Edzel Lapira Predictronics Corp.

Emeline Song-King DuPont

Fahmi Reza Oman Gas Company

Fernando Montoya United States Gypsum

Francisco Cano Monroy Pacific Rubiales

Francisco Garcia Rivera Ecopetrol S.A.

Frank Haysley Brown Forman

Frank Purser Bath Iron Works

Fred Hutchinson

Gabriel Fagade ExxonMobil

Gary Shukle Ash Grove Cement

Geoffrey Johnson

George Dandaneau Rayonier Advanced Materials

Gerald Meek Genentech

Glenn Haste

Greg Goodwin Trimble - Mobile Computing Solutions

There is value hidden in every maintenance organization. All companies have the potential to further improve, either by reducing

costs, improving safety, working on the lifetime extension of machinery or by smart maintenance solutions that improve uptime.

The question is where maintenance managers should be looking to fi nd these areas of improvement and where they need to start.

Mainnovation can assist you in answering this question. With Value Driven Maintenance® and the matching tools like the VDM Control

Panel, the Process Map and our Benchmarking Database myVDM.com, we will help you to discover the hidden treasure in your company.

Do you want to discover the hidden treasure in your maintenance organization?

Go to www.mainnovation.com/en/home.html

CONTROLLING MAINTENANCE, CREATING VALUE.

Discoverthe hidden treasure inMaintenance

MAINNOVATION ad (US Solution) 7.5"x5".indd 1 27-11-13 20:45


WELCOMEGreg Jester Camber

Hassan Alshehri

Ira Long URS

Jace Dille FMC Corp.

Jack Nelson Perfect Fit Placement, Inc.

Jakub Dzielski Allied Reliability, Inc.

James Jackson Advanced Technology Services

James Ketterer

James Knott Novelis, Inc.

James Spence City Of Chattanooga

James Stinson Ascend Performance Materials

Jamie Townsend BP Refinery Kwinanan

Jane Ciancio-Green Praxair

Jared Bears

Jared Sobczak Trinity Industries, Inc.

Jared Tanton Teck Coal Ltd.

Jared Tanton Teck Resources Ltd.

Jason Anzai Hawaiian Electric Company

Javier Galvez Newmont

Jay Kriner

Jay Kruse PepsiCo

Jeff WittOwens Corning

Jeffery Moore IVC Technologies

Jeffrey Fink Titan America

Jeffrey Little S&C Electric Co.

Jennifer Jordan University of Central Florida

Jennifer Vicknair BASF

Jeremy Hine MillerCoors

Jeremy Smith Alpina TechnicalConsulting

Jerry Tettey

Jimmy Thomas Aera Energy LLC.

Joao Selva Petrobras Transporte SA

Joe Bianchi

Joe Knox NB Power

Joe Mckenzie Mars Petcare

Joel Barger

Joel Nelson Meijer

John Bryant Ascend Performance Materials

John Green Chevron

John Harper Sodexo

John Monahan NRG Energy

John Willems Johnsonville

Jolito Jr. Ramos Kinsajasa Sdn Bhd

Jon Ambrose Ias Cloud

Jonathan Aragones Energy Development Corporation

Jose Baptista ABB

Jose Contreras JRCM Consultants

Joseph Brown Genzyme

Joseph Ouellet Owens Corning

Joshua Aburn Medimmune

Joshua Huseth FMC Corp.

Juan Ustiola Saudi Aramco

Juned Kazi ORPIC Katie Salter

Keegan Mclevin Nova Chemicals Inc.

Kelly Brooks SABIC

Kendall White Allied Reliability Group

Kenneth Reikofski US Navy

Kenneth Smith Georgia-Pacific

Kerry Chreist Jacobs/KSC

Kevin Boone Brown - Forman


WELCOMEKevin Cavanaugh Cheniere Energy, Inc

Konstantin Zyrianov

Kristen Nelson

Kuarlal Rampersad Society of Tribologists and Lubrication Engineers

Kyle Bowman

Larry Burdette Cargill, Inc.

Larry Cantrell OGE

Lateef Salam

Leesa Nacht Annex Business Media

Lora Flanigan Myers Inc.

Louis Morgan Hydrotex

Louis Wang IKO Industries

Luis Gonzales Energy Development Corporation

Luis Gutierrez C.I. PRODECO S.A.

Luis Khalil Petroleum Development Oman

Luis Rattia PDVSA

MÃ³nica Cristina Pino Alfonzo Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A.

Mahdi Alimardani

Mahesh Datla Zeon Chemicals L.P.

Manuel Franco United States Gypsum

Manuel Haro Flextronics

Manuel Robinson Michelin North America

Maria Contreras Cervecera de Puerto Rico

Mark Hochhaus Asset Mgmt Advance

Mark Hondro Novelis, Inc.

Mark O’Brien SD Myers Inc.

Mark Sheahan School District U-46

Mary Rozakis PBM Valve

Matthew Quick Fluid Life

Maxime Durocher

Maxwell Gott Pfizer, Inc.

Michael Dougherty City of Cuyahoga Falls

Michael Hall Owens Corning

Michael Muiter Baxter Healthcare

Michael Ott Koch Nitrogen Company

Michael Ussery Sandia National Labs-N.M.

Michael Wilkes Wilkes Company

Mihrez Suleiman Saudi Aramco

Mike Starr Century Foods(Hormel) Mohammed Alilskaafi University of Tennessee - Knoxville

Muhammad Akif Engro Foods Ltd , Sahiwal , Pakistan

Nardito Cornelio Jr. Energy Development Corporation

Nathan Sandefur Koch Nitrogen

Nelson Betancourt Integrity Assessment Services

Nikola Mrvaljevic Fluke

Ogochukwu Ndubisi-Igwilo Wood Group Kenny

Oladipo Ososami

Osberto Diaz

Oscar Rodriguez

Oyaje Omakwu Baywood Continental LTD

Pablo Correa Fuentes Chevron Petroleum Company

Patrick Huth APR Energy

Paul Meriano Praxair, Inc.

Peghi Webb Aera Energy LLC

Philip Brown Qatargas (NES)

Philip Pombier

Pieter D’Hamers Solystic Belgium Branch

Preston Rubottom Lubrication Engineers

Pui-Hang Tam Fluid Life

Raghid Najjar Ball Corporation

Reynaldo AÃ±abieza Energy Development Corporation

Richard Frank W.E.B. Aruba N.V.

WELCOME


Riley Wilson Rolta

Robert Griffith Accenture

Roger Hackett

Rolando Sarvida Energy Development Corporation

Romeo Kee Energy Development Corporation

Ron Ealey Advance Business Solutions Enterprises Inc.

Ron Pristash Penn State University

Ross PetersenArdent Mills, LLC

Russell Thomas La-Z-Boy Incorporated

Saidu Abdullahi Yola Electricity Distribution Company

Scott Graham CB Fleet

Sean Barnes

Sergio Roca BP

Shaiju Soman Emirates Global Aluminum

Sherwin Mendoza Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Stephen Holland

Stephen Mitchell

Steven Blake PepsiCo

Sunil Thekkepat Texas Instruments Inc.

Susan Chatman County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County

Taz Cole Louis Dreyfus Commodities

Terry Glaser AkzoNobel

Thomas Koontz Abbvie

Thomas Powers Whitewave Foods

Thomas Sanchez CPS Energy

Tim Cowan Blount Inc.

Tim Dinsdale BC Hydro

Tim Green Rayonier Advanced Materials

Timothy Bobb Westar Energy

Timothy Bolger Cintas Corporation

Timothy McCollister LifeNet Health

Todd Cranford Meridium International

Tony Buffington Vesta Partners, LLC

Tony Byrd Grifols Biotherapeutics, Inc.

Trevor Thomas NIKE, Inc.

Tugbe Sulureh

Tyler VanCannon Louis Dreyfus Commodities

Van Richard Shell Chemicals, LP

Varun Shrivastava

Vicente Jr. Omandam Energy Development Corporation

Vinay Joshi RAK Steel, LLC

Voltaire Jerome Cruz Shell Philippines Exploration B.V.

Wade Konotopsky

Warren Lawrence Enbridge Pipelines

Waylon Barabas Bimbo Bakeries USAWilfredo Arinquin

William Dias Petrobras

William Kirkpatrick Mississippi Power Co.

William Larson CSX Transportation

William Rinehart Arcelormittal

William Sanders Argotec

William Sleep

Yoann Urruty Fluid Life

Yuna Kim

Yury Fedichkin Meridium

Zachary Pincus The Mosaic Company

Zohaib Ali AkzoNobel

WELCOME


New CMRT’s May 22 – July 31John Bonner Luminant

Damien Lang Nissan

David Leach Ludeca

Orlan Lyle Noble Drilling Services, Inc.

Juan Marquez Lilly del Caribe

Robert Seward Nissan

Brad Willert Corden Pharma Colorado

Jo Worthen Oklahoma Gas and Electric

Larry Wright Luminant power

Gerald Zalecki North Star Blue Scope

Randy Shepherd

WELCOME


New CMRP’s Jan 31 - May 21, 2014Jeffery Aaron Luminant Energy

Aliro Abarca Molyb

William Abernathy Rehrig Pacific Co.

Glenn Abrahamson Cargill

Scott Abramson Duke Energy

Lawrence Adjei Goldfields Ghana Ltd. Tarkwq

Fatih Aksoy Fleming Gulf

Saad Al AliSaudi Aramco

Ali Al Shurafa Saudi Aramco

Faisal Al-Anazi Sabic/Jubail Unied Petrochemicals company

Bader Albader Aramco

Matthew Alberts Georgia Pacific

Yousef Alghamdi Saudi Aramco

Casey Allen INVISTA S.Ã .r.l

Jubal AllisonSinclair Wyoming Refining Company

Eid Alotaibi Saudi Aramco

Ali Al-Shurafa Aramco

Mohammed AlSulami Saudi Aramco

Carolina Altmann Macchio

Ilich Alvarado Particular

Ako Amegah Aramco

Brieg Anderson

Simon Andrew BP Upstream

Jason Anzai Hawaiian Electric Company

Dennis Armitage Jacobs/MAF

Andrew Arterburn Energy Automation Systems, Inc.

Ronald Ascencio Skanska del Peru

Arslan Aslam Pakarab Fertilizers Multan Pakistan

Ismail Aykut Avci Fleming Gulf

Eric Bacher Mars Petcare

Mark Backer Novelis

Amadou Bah SMD/Nordgold

Cagri Bahadir Fleming Gulf

Julio Baldassarre Cenovus Energy

Vicente Barbeiro Cargill Agricola S/A

Rafael Barros AES Tiete

Dennis Barry Sayres & Associates Corp

Scott Basden Nissan

Jared Bears

Toon Beddegenoodts Imec vzw

SHANE BEGOSKE Novelis

Steven BergenCenovus Energy Inc.

Jason Bheekoo Point Lisas Nitrogen LTD

Joe Bianchi

Wouter Bijnens ZF Windpower

Richard Bjornson BP Exploration Alaska

Juan Blanch Jacobs/MAF

Timothy Bobb Westar Energy

Hollis Bobinger Jacobs/MAF

Norbert Boes Novelis Deutschland GmbH

Erik Borgendale Genzyme

Scott Bowker

Jeremy Boyer Citizens Energy Group

Jenifer Brand Jacobs/KSC

Joshua Britt INVISTA S.Ã .r.l.

Ryan Brown

Adam Brown AES

Alfred Bukuro-Ankomah [email protected]

Ted Burns Emerson Process Management

Hector Cabezas BHP Billiton Iron ORE

WELCOME


Lynn Caillouet Cargill Corn Milling

AndrÃ© Camilo

Jeffery Campbell Kinder Morgan

George Canady DuPont

William Carr Jacobs/KSC

Mauel Carrillo Particular

Jeffrey Catron Sinclair

Raul Chauca

Newmont Ghana Golden Ridge ltd.

Justin Chiasson Shell

Scott Christensen Graham Packaging

Kenneth Clawson

Joel Coble BASF

Aaron Collins Celanese

Joel Colvis Nissan

Francis Concemino Inland Empire Utilities Agency

Maria Contreras Cervecera de Puerto Rico

Clayton Cooke Novelis Corp

Steve Courchesne Air Liquide Canada

Don Couture Advanced Technology Services (CAT NLR)

Kevin Cox Barrick Cortez Underground

Timmy Crowe Yates Construction

Voltaire Jerome Cruz Shell Philippines Exploration B.V.

Mark Danaher Fleming Gulf

Nick Darr

Amir Datoo ARMS Reliability

Walt Davis Alcoa, Inc.

Ryan Davis Celanese

James Dean Santos Ltd

Dean Dehod Nova Chemicals Inc.

Michael DeLuca SAMI

Michael DenoNovelis

Daniel Dexter Vallourec Star

Pieter D’Hamers Solystic Belgium Branch

David Diaz COLP, Natural Gas liquefaction Hunt Oil

Joe Diaz Mosaic

Benjamin Dickinson OGE

Jace Dille FMC Corp.

Sean Dubois Ethicon

Michael Easley Jacobs/Stennis

Curtis Eddie

Keyvan Ehsanifard SABIC Europe

Victor Ekpenyong United Cement Company

Michael Elliott

Gabriel Fagade ExxonMobil

Brian Fair

Mark FalconeAlcoa

Yury Fedichkin Meridium

Dmitry Fedoseev

Mitchel Fehr Mars Petcare

Thomas FergusonFacility Integrations, LLC

Jeffrey Fink Titan America

Blair Flebbe Cenovus Energy Inc.

Charles Foote JESCO Maintenance

Johan Franck Maxgrip BV

Garrett Fravert Kohler Company

Neil Frost Fonterra

Edward Gann Surry Community College

Steve Gilfillan Westar Energy

Gino Gonzalez Codelco Chile Div. El Teniente

Lucero Gonzalez DuPont

Travis Gooden Cargill

Walter Goodine Verso Paper

WELCOME


Bill Gray Fleming Gulf

Mike Greer Spartan Controls

Junior Gregory Mosaic Fertilizer LLC

Julio Gutierrez Marcelo

Muhammad Haq Saudi Aramco

Ryan Harwell Raytheon

Glenn Haste

Dick Haun Gunite

Pablo Herrera SPM Ingenieros S.A. Chile

Vitaly Hewlett

Stephen Hicks Nova Chemicals Inc.

Elmer Hill

Bradley Hocking Santos Ltd

Robert Holland Fleming Gulf

Stephen Holland

Richard Homan DTZ

Joshua Huseth FMC Corp.

Nigel Inch Enbridge Pipelines, Inc.

Sarah Ioup Jacobs/MAF

Oluwaseyi Iwaeni

Joseph Jameson USG Interiors, LLC

Yves Janssens Total Olefins Antwerp

Mitchell Johnson Turner Industries Group

Kevin Johnson Alcoa

Farris Jones Aloe Vera of America

Robert Kalwarowsky Fluid Life Corporation

Romeo Kee Energy Development Corporation

Todd Kelley INVISTA

Sharib Khan Aramco

Chris Kibermanis Jacobs

John Kiriazes NASA Kennedy Space Center

Jeffrey Kmoch Sinclair Wyoming Refining Co

Terry Knight Jesco Maint. Division

David Knowles Genesis Solutions

Thomas Koontz Abbvie

Guy Labrecque

Regina Lacy DuPont

Rahul Lall Advance Foam Limited

James LaRocqueJacobs/KSC

Juan Latorre Tecsup

Meryl Latouche Petrotrin

Ibrahim Lawal CCHellenic-Nigeria

David LeÃ³n

David Leach Ludeca

Andrea Lewis Williams

Mike LewisOwens Corning

Jorge Leysen Stork

David Lightbody

Jason Lines Fonterra

Ryan Lowe Hormel Foods Corp

Matthew LuimesCelanese

Valerie MacNairalcoa

Stefan MaereCargill France SAS

Michael MakutaCaterpillar

Sarel Marais Fletcher Building

Matt Markham Meridium, Inc.

Camilo Martinez MeloSTORK

Igor Maslennikov Lawrence Livermore National Lab

Roger MayJacobs/MAF

Hassan MaziSaudi Aramco

Chris McCallum PwC

WELCOME


Joshua Mccarthy Fonterra

Kasey McClain Pioneer Engineering

Colin McDonald Axiom Project Services Pty LTD

Todd Mcdonald Jesco

Michael McHale Parsons

Jonathan McNees Sinclair Wyoming Refining Company

Teo Mejia The Nutro Company

Juan Carlos

Mejia Cardona Meridium

Eduardo Mendoza Ferreyros S.A.

Michael MeyerBristol-Myers Squibb

Donald Meyer IIAdvanced Technology Solutions, Inc

Brent MileyMSD of Greater Cincinnati

Kerry MillerJacobs/MAF

Scott MillerNovelis

Kerry MitchellFleming Gulf

Roberto Moraga

Cesar Moreno Ayala Databank MKS

Michael Morris

David Mowat QNP

Atif Mughal

Garry Murdoch Yara Belle Plaine Inc.

Manjish NaikMeridium

Rammohan Nandiraju Alta Steel Ltd.

Frank NewmanJacobs/MAF

Kashan Mohammad Niazi

Achille Njike

Ahmed Noaman Meridium

Eric NodesWilliams

Randy Nolasco Steven NorrisURS

Hugo NunezHunt LOC

Keith NyeWalmart

Chike OdebeatuShell Nigeria

Edgar OsumiliNexus Alliance

Bruce Otruba Medimmune LLC.

Michael OttKoch Nitrogen Company

Kenan Ozdemir Fleming Gulf

Stephen Palazzo Chevron

George ParadaCargill Inc.

Walter Perez Luz del Sur

Keith Phelps Novo Nordisk

Angel Pinilla Rodriguez

Andrew Pinsent

Diego Pinzon

Philip Pombier

Anthony Ponceti Jacobs/MAF

Brian PrayCargill

Matthew PriorNobles Drilling

Naved QureshiCenovus Energy Inc.

Daren RackalBG TT

James RaderOGE Energy

Nalini RaimonFonterra

Shiva RamjattanAtlantic LNG

Jolito Jr. RamosKinsajasa Sdn Bhd

Steven RathbunJacobs/Stennis

Mike RaughtonKaMin performance minerals

Brett RaulersonJacobs/KSC

Corey ReadyNissan

Marcelo RetamalRockwood Litio

Jane ReuttERC

Kristian RichardsIrving Oil

David RobbieFleming Gulf

Daniel Roberts BASF

Juan Ernesto Rodriguez Boeing

Stephen RossJacobs/KSC

Kyle RothanzlNovozymes

Mitchell Rucker Allied Reliability

Harry-Lionel Salamin Novelis

Dan SandersJacobs

Jimmy ScaliseSabic Innovative Plastics

Steven Schrecengost Novelis Inc.

Jaimie ScottSiemens

Saurabh Sharma Krishnan Shrikanth

Lewis Shull IVCoffeyville Resources

Michael Simpkins Nissan North America, Inc.

Timothy Simpson Hollister Incorporated

Rishi SinghAtlantic LNG

Kleber SiqueiraGenesis Consultants - Houston

William SleepAlta Steel

Joel SmebyARMS Reliability

Pamela SmithJacobs/MAF

WELCOME


To register for an exam, please go to www.smrp.org/certification

Jared SobczakTrinity Industries, Inc.

Miguel Solis Torres Yanbal International

Nicolas SookdeoPetrotrin

David SpencerSpartan Controls

Brian SpindorHDR Inc.

Eric StevensMSD of Greater Cincinnati

Kevin StofkoUSG Interiors, LLC

Steven StorzParsons Engineering

Jerson Sucre

Brian SullivanNissan North America

Faraz Syed

Obaidullah SyedSaudi Aramco

Carlos TakanoNovelis

Pui-Hang TamFluid Life

Glenn TerrellBWWB

David ThomasonAlcoa, Inc.

German TobarEl Teniente

Mike TonerJacobs/KSC

Glenn ToshachFonterra

Ken Trotta

Gonul UlugtanFleming Gulf

Yoann UrrutyFluid Life

Stephanie Van DeurenSABIC Europe

Daniel VarnerSinclair Wyoming Refining Company

Lenard Vaz

Mike VockrodtCargill, Inc.

James WagonerCintas

Steven WaldenHoneywell

John Walker

Troy WassonHormel Foods

Stephan WelchMueller company

Barry WheatKroger

Austin White

John WidstrandKohler Company

Frederik Willems GEA Westfalia Separator Belgium SA

James WilsonMeridium, Inc.

Kent WilsonOG&E

Benjamin WilsonPraxair

Peggy WoutersDupont de Nemours Belgium

Nathan Wright

Michael WyckoffJacobs/KSC

Jason WyckoffUniversity of Central Florida

Marc YarlottVeolia Environment North America

Ahmet Aykut Yazici Fleming Gulf

Konstantin Zyrianov


EXAM CALENDAR 2015

www.smrp.org/cmrpwww.smrp.org/cmrt

MARCON 2015 EXAM SESSION Tuesday, February 24

Knoxville, Tennessee2/24

SMRPCO SUSTAINING SPONSORSThe SMRP Certifying Organization (SMRPCO) developed a program of benefits for companies or organizations wishing to provide support to the mission of SMRPCO. For an annual contribution of $1,000, sponsors receive discounts on exams, recertification fees, and much more!

AEDC/ATAAgriumAir Liquide Large IndustriesAlcoa, Inc.Allied Reliability, Inc.AMS GroupARAMARK Facility ServicesAscend Performance MaterialsBentley (formerly Ivara Corporation)Cargill, Inc.CBRE Chester Mead Associates Ltd.City of SarasotaCoca-Cola RefreshmentsDiageoDupontEli Lilly & CompanyEmerson Process ManagementEsco Products Inc.Fleming Gulf

Gallatin Steel Co.GreenWood, Inc.Hillsborough County Public UtilitiesHolcim US, Inc.Hormel FoodsIDCON, Inc.Iluka Resources Inc.JACOBSJacobs Technology – JSOG, KSCJacobs/MAFKaiser AluminumLife Cycle EngineeringLouis Dreyfus CommoditiesLuminant PowerManagement Resources Group, Inc.Mead Johnson NutritionMerck & Co., Inc.Meridium, Inc.Mondelez Global LLCMosaic

Nexen Inc.Nexus Alliance LTDNissan North AmericaNova Chemicals, Inc.Novelis, Inc.Owens CorningPfizer, Inc.Process Solutions GroupSabic Innovative PlasticsSasol Synthetic FuelsSTLE CaribbeanTero Consulting Ltd.The Dow Chemical CompanyTurner IndustriesUE SystemsURS CorporationWells Enterprises Inc.

Wyle Laboratories

To register for an exam, please go to www.smrp.org/certification

ASSURED RELIABILITY TECHNOLOGIES EXAM SESSION Thursday, March 5

Accra, Ghana3/5RELIABILITY 2.0 Friday, April 17

Las Vegas, Nevada 4/17 NORIAWednesday, April 22

Cleveland, OH4/22MARSHALL INSTITUTE EXAM SESSION Thursday, April 30

Raleigh, North Carolina4/30

DAN ANDERSONChair, Communications Committee Life Cycle Engineering [email protected] 843-414-4866

1100 JOHNSON FERRY ROAD, SUITE 300 ATLANTA, GA 30342

www.smrp.org

SOLUTIONS EDITORIAL DEPARTMENTANN CANTRELLCommunications Specialist 678-303-3044 [email protected]

JON KRUEGERExecutive Director 678-303-3045 [email protected]

EVENT CALENDARMARCON 2015 February 23, 2015 Knoxville, Tennessee

2015 SMRP Annual Conference October 12–15, 2015 Cincinnati, Ohio

2016 SMRP Annual Conference October 17–19, 2016 Jacksonville, Florida

SMRP Solutions Article, Feb' 2015

Documents

Transcript of SMRP Solutions Article, Feb' 2015