P.16 SMRP IN THE NEWS P.

23 INCHAPTER
YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD:
NEWS P. 25 MEET SMRP’S NEW
STAFF MEMBERS

SOLUTIONS
SMRP Volume 9, Issue 3

AUG. 2014 THE MAGAZINE

BY PRACTITIONERS FOR PRACTITIONERS

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT:
Asset Reliability 4
Is Reliability Really Everyone’s Responsibility? 6
CMMS Return on Investment 12
SPECIAL FEATURE:
Gearing Up For Iso 55000: Making Optimal Decisions For Your Assets 14
Training 2014
Work processes and skills training for
the manufacturing and process industry.

Work System and Processes

Combine work processes and skills to
achieve better reliability and lower cost.

Skill Set Improvements

Work Process and Skills Training 2014 Schedule

IDCON Course Dates
Planning and Scheduling & Spare Parts Management August 25-27, November 17-19
Preventive Maintenance/Essential Care Condition Monitoring August 28-29, November 20-21
IDCON and Reliability Solutions Course Dates
Reliability and Maintenance Management: Processes and Precision Skill Sets October 6-10
Practical Root Cause Problem Elimination September 15-19, November 3-7

Reliability Solutions Course Dates

Precision Maintenance...Essential Craft Skills Assembly and Installation August 18-22
Asset Condition Assessment...Mechanical Condition Monitoring Techniques July 21-25

For on-site training please call:

1-800-849-2041 1-251-490-2999
www.idcon.com www.reliabilitysolutions.net To Register
 CONTENTS
FEATURES
04 DEPARTMENTS
02
ASSET RELIABILITY
Al Poling, CMRP, OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS
Senior RAM Consultant
LOOKING AHEAD: TRENDS, ISO 55000,
02 ANNUAL CONFERENCE
Nick Roberts, CMRP, SMRP Chair

06 16
SMRP IN THE NEWS: VETS FIXING THE
MANUFACTURING SKILLS GAP
IS RELIABILITY REALLY EVERY-
ONE’S RESPONSIBILITY?
20
Dale B. Wilson, CMRP, Q & A: ANNUAL CONFERENCE UPDATE FROM
Qualitest Pharmaceuticals THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE CHAIR

CERTIFICATION UPDATE: A BRIEF HISTORY

12 21 AND UPDATES ON THE CMRT PROGRAM
Vlad Bacula, CMRP, CMRT
CMMS RETURN ON INVESTMENT
Mike Palm,
Convergent Results LLC
22 MEMBER CORNER

23 CHAPTER NEWS

26 WELCOME NEW MEMBERS

14
GEARING UP FOR ISO 55000: 32 NEW CMRPS, CMRTS
MAKING OPTIMAL DECISIONS
36
EXAM CALENDAR,
FOR YOUR ASSETS
Boudewijn Neijens, CMRP, CRL, SMRPCO SUSTAINING SPONSORS
Copperleaf Technologies

BC EVENT CALENDAR
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: info@smrp.org.
 FEATURE
SMRP OFFICERS FROM THE CHAIR
& DIRECTORS LOOKING AHEAD: TRENDS, ISO
Chair
Nick Roberts, CMRP
55000, ANNUAL CONFERENCE
BY NICK ROBERTS, CMRP
DuPont
nick.l.roberts@dupont.com
As your elected leader for SMRP, I am always looking ahead.
Immediate Past Chair What are the emerging trends that will impact maintenance
Shon Isenhour, CMRP and reliability professionals tomorrow? What plans need
Eruditio LLC to be put in place to help SMRP achieve its mission? How
sisenhour@eruditiollc.com am I going to convey all of the hard work and strong results
843-810-4446 achieved by your elected leaders over the past year when I
Vice Chair take the podium at the Annual Conference in Orlando this fall?
Craig Seibold, CMRP When I look ahead at our profession, I see positives.
Newmont Recently, a survey conducted by the National Association of
craig.seibold@newmont.com Manufacturers found that about 86 percent of manufacturers
303-837-6193 were either somewhat or very positive about their own
company’s outlook. Furthermore, sales are expected to grow about 4 percent over
Treasurer
the next year, the fastest pace in a couple of years, according to the data. For many
Bob Kazar, CMRP
of us, our employers are finally starting to feel some sustained relief from the difficult
Roll Global
economic recession. It’s up to each of us, and SMRP as an organization, to ensure
rkazar@roll.com
maintenance and reliability is part of our companies’ long term growth plans.
661-432-4951
New frameworks for how we operate may also play into future plans for many of us. I
Secretary know a lot of SMRP members are starting to wrap their arms around the new ISO 55000
Larry Hoing, CMRP standard for asset management. SMRP recently adopted the following statement:
Wells Enterprises
lmhoing@bluebunny.com SMRP supports the principles of ISO55000 for the management of physical assets
712-548-2328 over their entire life cycle. This includes the design, acquisition, use, maintenance
and disposal of physical assets.
Certification Director
This year, the Conference Committee has planned an education track devoted
Joe Grande, CMRP
exclusively to physical asset management at the Annual Conference, Oct. 20-23 in
Fluor Corporation
Orlando. We feel this new education offering will go well with our traditional tracks, all of
joe.grande@fluor.com
which are designed to help you become a stronger M&R professional.
864-517-3314
For me, the Annual Conference is a unique opportunity to talk with experts and other
Body of Knowledge Director practitioners about the latest developments in technology and use their knowledge to
Bruce Hawkins, CMRP
improve my own organization. While I have attended many SMRP Annual Conferences
Management Resources Group, Inc.
over the years, I always learn something new and applicable to my own work and career.
hawkinsb@mrgsolutions.com
843-670-6435 One of the real highlights will be special tours of different facilities. This year I am
excited to see that attendees have the opportunity to experience up-close the
Education Director maintenance and reliability operations at the Kennedy Space Center, the Orlando
Jay Padesky, CMRP International Airport, SeaWorld, Regal Boats and Walt Disney World.
US Gypsum, Inc.
jpadesky@usg.com The Annual Conference is also a chance to recognize the achievements of SMRP
312-436-4463 members and our Certified Maintenance and Reliability Professionals. Winners of
our CMRP of the Year Award will be recognized in Orlando, and we will be hosting
Member Services Director multiple CMRP and CMRT exam sessions. Interesting to note in relation to professional
Gina Kittle, CMRP certification: a recent survey from the Manufacturing Institute found that 75 percent of
The Timken Companies manufacturers face a moderate to severe shortage of skilled resources. In other words,
gina.kittle@timken.com having “CMRP” or “CMRT” on your business card has never been more valuable!
330-471-7465
I’m looking forward to seeing you at the Annual Conference or sooner.
Outreach Director In the meantime, stay safe and stay reliable!
Howard Penrose, CMRP
Dreisilker Electrical Motors
hpenrose@dreisilker.com
630-469-7510
Nick Roberts, CMRP
SMRP Chair

02 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 FEATURE

August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 03

 FEATURE

ASSET RELIABILITY
THE PATH TO RECORD PROFITABILITY!
BY AL POLING, CMRP – SENIOR RAM CONSULTANT

A ll for-profit organizations operate under the same

fundamental business model. This model can be distilled
down to a basic mathematical formula.
PROFIT = SALES – COST
As can be seen in this equation, as sales go up so does profit.
And as costs go down, profit again goes up. The obvious key
to maximum profitability is to drive up sales while driving down
cost. Asset reliability and corresponding maintenance costs have
a profound, yet not well-understood, effect on both sales and
cost. If corporate executives and site managers could grasp the
magnitude of these effects, RAM (reliability and maintenance)
professionals would be revered for their contribution to business
performance and would no longer be the unsung heroes we
typically find in today’s manufacturing environment.
THE EFFECT OF ASSET RELIABILITY ON SALES.
To understand the effect of asset reliability on profitability, we
must examine each of the components in the equation in more
detail. Sales revenue is driven by two primary levers, unit price
(and related margin) and sales volume. The higher the sales
price per unit the higher the margin and the greater the profit.
Additionally the more product you sell (sales volume), the higher
the sales revenue and the greater the profit. This relationship can
also be easily illustrated in a basic mathematical formula.
SALES = PRICE X VOLUME
To understand the relationship between asset reliability and sales
revenue in this equation we must examine each component in
more detail. The price of a product is largely set by whatever
price the market will bear. But the market places a premium on
quality. In more simplistic terms, customers are willing to pay
more for higher quality product. This is where asset reliability
comes into play; the highest sustainable product quality can
only be produced through uninterrupted manufacturing. As
assets become more reliable, manufacturers are able to produce
consistently higher quality product.
Although it is hard for some to believe that uninterrupted or
failure-free manufacturing is possible, it is being achieved at
select manufacturing sites around the world today. This isn’t
merely an opinion; I have had the opportunity to visit hundreds of
refineries, as well as chemical and petrochemical plants and have
seen the very best. Those who embrace failure-free operation
(and therefore invest in asset reliability), consistently achieve
extremely high levels of mechanical availability. In quantifiable
terms, the most reliable manufacturers are reaching ninety-nine
percent (99%) mechanical availability. This feat would be amazing
even if it was limited to unplanned downtime alone, but it also
includes annualized downtime for planned outages such as
turnarounds.
The best performing manufacturers have all but eliminated
unplanned equipment failures. In a failure-free environment, there
is no lost production or off-spec product. This isn’t new nor is
it rocket science – W. Edwards Deming espoused the virtues of
statistical process control and the reduction in process variation
for decades. A select number of manufacturers embraced Dr.
Deming’s principles while far too few gave it lip service or put it in
a mission statement or company brochure as part of a marketing
campaign.

04 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3


THE EFFECT OF ASSET
RELIABILITY ON COST.
Cost too is driven by two primary
levers, unit price (e.g. fully loaded hourly
maintenance labor rates) and volume (i.e.
maintenance labor hours). The higher
the fully loaded labor rate the higher the
cost and lower the profit. Additionally
the more maintenance labor that is
consumed (maintenance labor hours), the
higher the maintenance cost and lower
the profit. This relationship can also be
easily illustrated in a basic mathematical
formula.
COST (maintenance) = PRICE
(maintenance labor rate) X VOLUME
(maintenance labor hours)
To understand the relationship between
asset reliability and cost in this equation
we must again examine each component
in more detail. The price of labor is
largely set by the market. Trends in
maintenance labor rates are generally
regional with the number of higher labor
rate regions shrinking as companies
move their manufacturing operations to
areas with lower labor rates. However
a close examination of best performing
sites revealed some in locations with
high maintenance labor rates. Although
executives and managers have placed
the blame for high maintenance costs for
years on maintenance wages, it is driven
largely by the volume of labor consumed
rather than the price per hour. There is
also empirical evidence suggesting a
gradual equalization of maintenance labor
wages around the globe. The root cause is
the global shortage of skilled maintenance
workers and the willingness in some
regions to import skilled labor by offering
higher wages and/or benefits.
The connection between asset reliability
and lower cost is found in the relationship
between maintenance cost and asset
reliability. The most reliable operations
cited earlier in this article also have the
lowest sustainable maintenance costs.
Sustainable low maintenance cost can
only be achieved by eliminating the
need for maintenance.1 Until failure-free
equipment is designed, the only way to
effectively reduce maintenance cost is
to eliminate the need for maintenance
through the elimination of equipment
failures. In the process industry, plants
with ninety-nine percent (99%) mechanical
availability typically have maintenance
costs of one percent (1 %+/-) of plant
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3
FEATURE
replacement value. It has been calculated
that each one percent (1%) increase in
SUMMARY
mechanical availability can result in a ten The number of plants achieving the
percent (10%) reduction in maintenance highest levels of asset reliability continues
costs. to grow as manufacturers embrace
the concept of failure-free operation
and invest in asset reliability. It is an
SAMPLE ASSET RELIABILITY EFFECT ON epiphany for executives to learn how
MAINTENANCE COST CALCULATION. much unreliability costs the corporation
Using the simple formula above, it is or how much sales revenue could be
fairly easy to estimate the value of improved through failure-free operation.
asset reliability or conversely the cost of Through improved asset reliability and
unreliability. corresponding lower maintenance
costs, corporations can reach levels of
Maintenance cost (annual) = $25,000,000 profitability never thought possible.
Plant replacement value = $500,000,000
(typical process industry production unit
PRV)
Maintenance Cost ÷ Plant Replacement
Value = Normalized Maintenance Cost
$25,000,000 ÷ $500,000,000 = 0.05
or 5%
Best in class normalized maintenance
cost = 0.01 or 1% of PRV
Opportunity for improvement = (Target
Cost % – Current Cost %) X Plant
Replacement Value
Opportunity for improvement = (5% - 1%)
X $500,000,000 = $20,000,000 Al Poling has over thirty years of
In this example the annual maintenance reliability and maintenance experience
cost savings opportunity is $20,000,000 in the process industry. He started
annually. The purpose of showing this his technical career as a maintenance
sample calculation is to dispel the belief and reliability engineer and has
that asset reliability costs too much. As held plant and corporate leadership
the calculation revealed, it is unreliability roles in maintenance and reliability
that costs too much! with several companies. Al is a
Certified Maintenance and Reliability
On a grander scale, you can take the total
Professional (CMRP). He served as
maintenance cost of the company and
Technical Director for the Society
divide it by the total asset replacement
for Maintenance and Reliability
value of manufacturing assets and get a
Professionals (SMRP) from 2008 to
good indication of the gross opportunity
2010. Most recently he served as
for reduced maintenance costs corporate-
the project manager for Solomon’s
wide. A similar calculation can be done for
International Study of Plant Reliability
the value of lost margin or sales revenue
and Maintenance Effectiveness (RAM
caused by unreliability. It is suggested that
Study) where he worked with clients
a single production unit be selected as a
world-wide to identify performance
starting point. With input from operations
improvement opportunities through
engineers, cost accountants and reliability
the benchmarking process. Al
professionals, reasonable hypotheses can
has presented at reliability and
be made that will reveal the opportunity for
maintenance conferences in North
the plant. A similar analysis can be done
and South America, Europe, Asia
to estimate the potential for increased
and the Middle East. He has also
sales revenue through higher mechanical
published several white papers and
availability corporate-wide although this
written numerous articles on reliability,
will likely involve doing calculations at the
maintenance and related topics.
individual production unit level and then
summing the total.
1
Low maintenance costs can also be achieved by accepting high unreliability although operations with this model typically operate at a
loss and ultimately go out of business because they cannot compete in a global marketplace.
SMRP SOLUTIONS 05
 FEATURE

IS RELIABILITY REALLY
EVERYONE’S RESPONSIBILITY?
DALE B. WILSON, CMRP, QUALITEST PHARMACEUTICALS

06 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3


T he word reliability is the buzzword
in industries across the world.
We often hear statements such
as “our company is a reliability-based
organization” or “we are an RCM
organization.” Other words such as best
practice, lean, Six Sigma and 5S are used
as well. Most companies talk a good talk
and say the right things when prompted,
but in the end do not follow good basic
principles of equipment and process
reliability. In other words, the basic
fundamentals to implement and sustain
all of the concepts above have never been
established.
Most organizations today live in a reactive
culture. They thrive on it and love the hero
mentality and firefighting persona that
goes along with it. Reacting to a failure or
incident appears heroic. This type culture
garners accolades, frequent pats on the
back, awards and recognition.
So why would any organization want to
change from a reactive to a proactive
culture? The primary reason to progress
into a proactive culture is employee and
environmental safety. Reactive cultures
are extremely dangerous. Have you ever
neglected to replace the worn tires on your
car and consequently suffered a blow-
out on an interstate? Did you feel safe
navigating your vehicle to the road side
on three inflated tires? It would have been
much safer to replace your tires based
on the worn condition and avoided the
incident altogether.
When equipment fails, it often fails at the
most inopportune time and is dangerous
in the process. Incidents of explosion, arc
flash, contamination, spillage, chemical
release and airborne projectiles are just
a few of the results of equipment failure.
When your technicians and mechanics
rush in to save the day, they may be
putting themselves, the plant and the
environment at risk.
The secondary reason to progress into a
proactive culture is to save your company
money. It is estimated that reactive
maintenance normally costs three to five
times more than planned or proactive
maintenance. When an equipment
failure occurs and an organization is
not prepared, there are ancillary costs
involved to bring the equipment back on
line. For example, an undetected bearing
defect was not identified and a process
pump failed. During failure, the pump
shaft, impeller, housing, seal, motor, and
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3
FEATURE
coupling were also destroyed along the
way. A complete new pump assembly
must then be procured. Of course a spare
pump was not on site and there was no
redundant pump to switch to. The lead
time on the replacement pump order is
four to six weeks away and manufacturing
for that particular pumping system has
stopped.
A more cost effective way to deal with
this issue is to identify the bearing defect
early in the equipment life cycle through
Condition Based Monitoring, ensure the
repair parts are on site and then plan and
schedule the repair without significant
downtime or costs.
So why do organizations continue to
operate in a reactive nature?
1. Companies do not know how to
change. Reactivity is ingrained into
most plant cultures today.
2. Companies have poor executive
leadership. The “reliability” message
has to be driven from the top down or
it will fail.
3. The initial investment for equipment
reliability can be expensive. One of the
primary building blocks of equipment
reliability is a good CMMS/EAM
system. These systems can range
anywhere from $100,000 to $1million
and tie up company resources during
configuration and implementation.
A world class reliability program
is a lifetime commitment, not a
project. Resources such as planners,
schedulers, reliability engineers,
predictive maintenance and data
specialists are required. Refusal for
allocation of these resources will
lead to over-worked and frustrated
employees and failure of the new
reliability initiative.
To create and sustain a proactive
reliability-based culture, the following
groups and team members must be
aligned and work cohesively as one unit.
CEO/COO/CFO:
The buck starts and stops here. The
reliability initiative and message must
originate from this group. The message
must be strong, loud and consistent.
Without support from this group, a
reactive culture will remain. In these roles,
company strategy, vision and budgets are
defined.
SMRP SOLUTIONS 07
 FEATURE
SALES/MARKETING:
I know what you are asking. What does
the sales department have to do with
reliability? Let’s say for instance that sales
makes a commitment to a customer to
provide 10 million widgets by months end,
but your plant operation and equipment
are only capable of producing 5 million
widgets. The sales and marketing team
should have a basic understanding of
equipment capabilities and operational
parameters before making customer
commitments.
PLANT MANAGER:
Most plant managers focus primarily
on production goals and costs. There is
nothing wrong with having production
goals and we must certainly be concerned
with manufacturing costs. In general,
most plant managers do not recognize
Failure Modes And Effects information
to understand how the asset can fail
and Condition-based strategies are
necessary but critical parts must be
and provide mitigation/prevention stored on site. Your MRO store should
strategies? understand which parts are the critical to
your operation, lead times when ordering,
• What will the (MTBF) Mean Time
Between Failure of this asset be? the minimum and maximum quantities
to stock, the (EOQ) economical order
• Has the asset been installed in a quantities and the inventory and carrying
location that reduces (MTTR) Mean costs involved.
Time To Repair? In other words,
what will the ease or difficulty of
maintenance be to ensure minimal
downtime.
Preventive,
• Can the OEM provide an electronic
O&M manual including diagrams as
Predictive and
well as critical and recommended
spare parts list? Condition-based
• Can the OEM provide operations
and maintenance support during strategies are
necessary but
installation and qualification?
• Has the design engineer collaborated

the maintenance and reliability team as
a profit center. The plant manager must
understand that he is an integral player
to a successful reliability program which
will lead to production goals achieved and
lower costs. He puts his name and face
on your program and says “I am behind
you in our reliability effort and will move
heaven and earth to help get it done.”
That is what a plant manager should do
for your organization to implement and
sustain a world class reliability program.
DESIGN ENGINEER:
Inherent reliability of an asset or system
is fully determined during the design
engineering phase of its life cycle. The
two primary attributes of an asset that
a design engineer should focus on are
(MTBF) Mean Time Between Failure and
(MTTR) Mean Time To Repair. In addition,
total life cycle performance and costs
should be evaluated and not just lowest
purchase price. Here are a few simple
questions a design engineer should ask
when designing new equipment for your
plant:
• Do I know the quality of the sub-
components in this asset? Is there
potential that these bearings or
other parts could be inferior or even
counterfeit?
• Are critical wear parts available when
I need them and will the OEM form a
partnership with my plant to ensure
optimal up time and pricing?
• Does the OEM have current (FMEA)
with Purchase, Finance, MRO,
Operations, Maintenance and
Reliability departments to determine
the optimal design?
Design engineers must ask and answer
these basic questions to effectively break
the reactive plant life cycle.
Purchasing: As mentioned before,
purchasing plays a huge role in overall
life cycle cost of your plant. One can save
a few dollars here and there buying low
cost parts, but the long term results of
unplanned downtime, rejected products,
production losses and increased
manufacturing costs can be astronomical.
The purchasing department must be
aligned with reliability, maintenance and
operations to understand what parts and
materials are needed, what parts perform
and don’t perform well and which are
best to maintain optimal reliability. To
summarize, overall equipment life cycle
costs must be evaluated carefully when
making purchasing decisions.
MRO STORES:
We will define MRO Stores as to how we
store and maintain the plant maintenance
repair, operations, parts and supplies in
your particular environment. In short, the
MRO store is your store. It must look like
a store, be clean, functional and organized
like a store and have what you need when
you need it. Let’s face it, equipment parts
wear out and fail at all manufacturing
plants. We now have data that supports
that 80 percent of equipment failures are
random in nature. Preventive, Predictive
critical parts
must be stored
on site.
Planning and scheduling repairs also
requires alignment with MRO stores.
The stores should have a method and
resources for kitting and delivery of parts
for scheduled repairs. The MRO inventory
should also be linked to the plant CMMS/
EAM system using the proper equipment
hierarchy and BOM’s.
Finally, your MRO store should provide a
safe, secure and stable environment for
your parts. For example, bearings should
remain in their original packaging and be
stored lying down. The storeroom itself
should not exceed 60 percent humidity
and be free of shaking and vibration.
V-belts have a shelf life of two years
and should not be hung vertically on
pegboards but be stored flat on shelves
or in drawers out of direct sunlight.
These MRO best practices will aid in
reducing unplanned downtime and overall
manufacturing costs.
INSTALLATION:
There is a common misnomer that new
equipment always runs well and acts like
new. This is not normally the case. Here
are a few important checklist items one
should ask prior to starting up any new
asset or system.

08 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3


• Have all manufacture, model and serial numbers been
verified? In other words, did we really receive the equipment
that we ordered?
• What is the condition of the asset upon arrival on site? Did
damage occur during transport?
• Has the asset or system been properly anchored to the
structure? Is the equipment plumb, level and square with the
environment surrounding it. Is there any obvious mechanical
looseness?
• Are the correct utilities supplying the asset? Have voltage,
steam, water supply and air pressure been measured and
verified prior to start up? Does each utility have disconnecting
means for employee safety and lock out tag out procedures?
• Are there any signs of mechanical looseness or improper
torquing of fasteners?
• Have all motor-coupling-pump-gearboxes been laser aligned?
• Have all v-belts and sheaves been aligned and tightened
properly?
• Have all lubrication requirements been determined? Was the
equipment shipped dry and requires lubrication before start-
up? Was the initial lubrication already performed by the OEM?
Are the required lubricants on site and in a properly stored
location?
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3
FEATURE
• Has an (ACR) Asset Criticality Ranking been assigned and PM
and PdM strategies determined?
• Are all critical spare parts in the CMMS, on site and being
managed by the MRO store?
• Have maintenance and operations been trained prior to start
up by the OEM to ensure equipment capabilities, parameters
and requirements are understood?
OPERATIONS:
Operators spend far more time with assets than any other
department on site. They know how it sounds, feels, smells and
looks like on its good days and bad days. They are aware of what
its capabilities are and are not. They understand what happens
when the asset is sped up or slowed down. Operators should be
the front lines of basic equipment reliability. In the industry, the
terminology is referred to as (TPM) Total Productive Maintenance
or Manufacturing. TPM focuses on keeping all equipment in top
condition to avoid breakdowns and delays in the manufacturing
process.
In addition, the production planner/scheduler should have a
collaborative role with the maintenance planner/scheduler to
ensure that necessary planned maintenance is executed on time.
SMRP SOLUTIONS 09
 FEATURE
MAINTENANCE:
Maintenance is the group that gets thrown
under the proverbial bus the most often.
How many times have you heard the
phrase “If our maintenance department
would just get their act together, we
would be all right.” As you can see from
the previous responsibilities above,
equipment reliability requires more than
just good “maintenance or fixing things.”
Maintenance is defined as “To keep an
asset or system in designed or acceptable
condition, maintain functional capabilities
and to preserve and protect the asset.
That is it in a nutshell. With that being said,
I will give you some guidelines on creating
and sustaining an effective maintenance
group for optimal reliability.
• Develop a skills matrix to determine
the skills required to effectively
maintain your equipment. Identify
training gaps between current skills
and what is needed. Provide the
maintenance technicians with the
proper level of OEM training. There
will be some initial training costs
involved, but you will glad and enjoy
the long term benefits. It is unfair
and unrealistic to ask a technician to
maintain an asset he has never seen
before.
10 SMRP SOLUTIONS
• Provide the technician with a written
procedure or job plan on what you ask
them to do. Don’t assume the tech
knows what to do just because he/she
has been employed at your plant for a
lengthy tenure. Many times either best
or worst practices are merely passed
down through tribal knowledge or the
“we have always done it this way”
philosophy is prevalent. The job plan
should include all safety requirements
including LOTO, a job hazard analysis,
tools, parts, consumables, tasks and
specifications.
• Document, document, document.
How often have you asked: how many
times have you worked on that pump
in the last year? You get the standard
deer in the headlights look, a shoulder
shrug and then a “I don’t know.” Please
don’t gloss over this next statement.
It is critical that your technicians
consistently document on the work
order their actual labor hours, parts
used, failure codes and any feedback
that may aid in future analysis.
• Have a mechanism in place to monitor,
audit and approve the technicians
work. Technicians will agree that if
their work is being checked, it will be
done right. Get lax on checking their
work and poor execution, performance,
quality and results will soon follow.
• Let maintenance supervisors...
supervise. Most supervisors I see in
industry today do everything but. They
are required to do what little planning
and scheduling takes place, order and
maintain parts and supplies, attend
production meetings and ensure
proper training requirements are
met. How much time does that really
leave for a maintenance supervisor to
spend on the floor teaching, training,
mentoring and disciplining his team?
To summarize, “maintenance” frequently
gets a bad rap. The question really is, has
your organization set your maintenance
group up for success or failure?
RELIABILITY:
• Reliability Engineer: In general this
person is the overseer of all plant
reliability: Facilities, manufacturing,
process and packaging. This position
ensures that all maintenance and
reliability best practices are being
followed. This person consistently
monitors work order history and trends
such as MTBF, MTTR and early signs
of equipment failure. The RE is integral
in defining (ACR) Asset Criticality
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

Rankings and their associated critical
spare parts. In addition, the RE is
responsible to define all preventive,
predictive and condition based
monitoring strategies and fosters
change to a pro-active culture. To be
effective in this role, the RE must work
collaboratively with purchasing, design
engineering, MRO stores, installation,
operations and maintenance. The RE
must also understand the plant culture
and process and spend ample time
on the plant floor. The RE must be a
person of integrity that can be trusted
to make decisions. Without this role
in place, your reliability program will
flounder and the plant will remain in a
reactive state.
• Planner/Scheduler: Planning and
scheduling work is a cornerstone to
a safe and reliable plant. Planning
is simply defined as the “what to do
and how to do it” and scheduling is
defined as “who will do it and when it
will be done.” The planner/scheduler is
like the quarterback of your reliability
team. This person views the field
for incoming maintenance requests,
ensures that they are valid and coded
properly, provides a detailed job plan
and then distributes to the right team
member. Imagine trying to run a team
without a quarterback in the huddle.
The same holds true for the planner/
scheduler. The planner/scheduler
ensures the work management
process flows smoothly and is
seamless. In large organizations, you
will need at least one planner and
one scheduler. In small organizations
the planner and scheduler may be
the same person. A planner should
typically plan for 8-15 technicians.
Any less than 8 and they may be
underutilized, any more than 15 and
they may not be able to plan effectively
and keep up.
You may be asking why the planner/
scheduler is reporting under the
Dale B. Wilson is a Certified Maintenance and Reliability Professional and is currently the reliability
engineer for Qualitest Pharmaceuticals. He has over 30 years experience maintaining electrical and
mechanical systems as a maintenance manager, planner/scheduler, senior consultant, preventive
maintenance specialist and licensed journeyman electrician. He has been involved in numerous
implementations of EAM/CMMS systems while introducing best practices for reliability and
transforming companies from a reactive to proactive culture.
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3
reliability department and not the
maintenance department. This person
should not be involved in the day
to day reactive maintenance. The
planner/scheduler should be looking at
future work at least one week ahead.
They should also be collaborating with
the production planner/scheduler on a
routine basis to coordinate necessary
work into the production schedule. The
planner/scheduler is a special breed
of person. They should come from a
maintenance background preferably
working on the shop floor and
should understand basic principles
of equipment repair, operation and
design. The planner/scheduler should
also be computer savvy or at least
literate, be a good listener, collaborate
well with differing work groups and
yet be meticulous in what they do.
Planning and scheduling work is a
basic building block for improving
plant reliability. If you decide to omit
the planner/scheduler from your
reliability journey, you will end up lost
along the way.
• CMMS Administrator: Many
organizations try and add this
responsibility to the maintenance
planner, maintenance supervisor,
reliability engineer or an IT specialist.
You must understand proper roles and
responsibilities for reliability. Adding
these CMMS administrative duties
to these particular roles will end in
failure of your fancy new system and
long term reliability program. Similar
to the planner/scheduler, the CMMS
admin should have specific skills.
They must have exceptional computer
understanding and experience with
basic SQL programming and query
development skills. The CMMS admin
must understand the back end of your
CMMS system and how it relates to
typical user function. The role doesn’t
end there. The CMMS admin must
understand the day in the life of a
FEATURE
maintenance technician and how their
day to day responsibilities correlate
with the CMMS. The CMMS admin
must understand that the system
functionality must support planning
and scheduling to eventually progress
into a pro-active culture.
• Data Entry Specialist: Last but
certainly not least is the data entry
specialist. Again, many organizations
dump this duty on the technicians,
planners or supervisors. The DES
plays a key role in ensuring work
order accuracy in the CMMS. This
person must have an attentive eye for
detail, work well with technicians and
have exceptional typing skills. At a
minimum, the DES is your last line of
defense to ensure that all work orders
closed out include the following:
• All labor hours recorded
• All parts used recorded
• Failure code, Cause Code,
Remedy Code
• Feedback for any work performed.
(Feedback such as “fixed” is
unacceptable.)
If any of the information above is omitted,
the DES has the authority to reject a
completed work order and route back to
the appropriate supervisor or technician
for correction. Do not get frustrated with
the DES if he/she rejects a work order for
improper documentation. They are simply
doing what they are instructed to do. What
the DES does or does not do may directly
affect your organization when OSHA, the
FDA or FM Global show up in your lobby
and ask to see maintenance records.
Reliability really is everyone’s
responsibility. It takes each of us to
create and sustain a safe and reliable
plant. What are you doing today to make
a difference and improve the reliability in
your own plant?
SMRP SOLUTIONS 11
 FEATURE
CMMS RETURN
ON INVESTMENT
BY MIKE PALM, CONVERGENT RESULTS, LLC
P rocess automation has been a
source of phenomenal leaps in
productivity in the last thirty years.
Enterprise asset management systems
(EAMS) and computerized maintenance
management systems (CMMS) are the
indispensable neural networks of large
corporations. Information is structured
and sent instantly where it is needed.
Data is available for powerful analysis
at the fingertips of any user. The result
is a significant increase in performance
and reduction in cost. Industry authors
such as Terry Wireman and Doc Palmer
both point out significant improvements
in manpower and material costs and
reliability as a result of introducing
automation.
So why is it that we hear all the painful
stories about getting automation in
place because of hidden costs, schedule
overruns, and wasted capabilities? Worst
of all, we have even heard of the entire
effort being abandoned after millions have
already been spent.
Our experience is that the technical
design of systems has nothing to do with
success or failure. It is not the “what” of
the system, but instead the “how” of the
12 SMRP SOLUTIONS
system. How is the organization prepared
for and guided through implementation?
Over the years, we have seen the
organizational mistakes companies make
when pursuing the bright promise of
automation. Here are some of the most
common:
• Executives enter into the change
because “it’s the right thing to do”
and never identify, measure, realize, or
prove the proposed gains in efficiency.
• Existing work processes are not
well defined, even undocumented.
Off-the-shelf processes often cannot
cater to unique company needs.
Detailed process design occurs during
programming, which increases the
cost and sets up unpleasant surprises
during implementation.
• The reasons for proposed changes
are not articulated, not aligned in
the organization, or the working
levels do not relate to them. The new
process does not arrive in front of
the work force until the first day of
implementation training.
• Line management and union
leadership learn about the
changes at the same time as the
general employee population. Line
management starts asking the same
questions as their employees rather
than being part of the support group
answering the questions.
• The IT trainers cannot answer
questions related to specific issues in
the work environment of the end users.
• Directives from top management and
one-time training sessions do not
assure understanding, learning, and
compliance in the work place.
LESSONS LEARNED
We have learned from our experience.
We’ve developed an implementation
process that reduces organizational
trauma and assures realization of the
promised financial benefits. Grounded in
the change management theories of gurus
such as John Kotter and Jeffrey Hiatt, our
recommended approach has six major
stages.
Define the purpose. Clearly identify
what top executives need to achieve and
what are their objectives. Define how to
measure the achievement of the objective.
How will they know it when they see it?
And begin measuring performance.
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

Formulate the team. Identify a sponsor
and charter a knowledgeable and credible
team to lead the effort. Free the team from
current responsibilities to concentrate on
the new objectives. Make this their fulltime
job through implementation.
Define the process and automation
needs. Document the current process.
Bring in subject matter experts, whether
formal or informal, and the user population
to identify current work flow. Work at
a fair level of detail describing roles
and responsibilities as well as approval
levels and routings. This is the time to
establish “best practice” changes. Fix
any points in the process that are known
to cause problems. Establish necessary
consistency between divisions, regions,
and locations. Develop a list of functional
requirements for the software based
on your process. These will form the
basis of your user-driven and IT-based
specification and selection criteria in the
next phase.
Select the software and partner with
the vendor. All CMMS and EAMS are
not created equal. They have different
capabilities. The tasks can be as
amazingly simple as routing requests for
authorization. Some do it well, and others
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3
do not. Review the full list of requirements
with the technical people from several
vendors. Select the best fit, understanding
that any system may not perfectly meet all
criteria.
Train the organization. In our experience,
“Train the Trainers” is the most effective
approach to implementation training. Use
company people who know the company
and have lived in the work environment
to deliver the training. This has the
highest credibility with the organization
and provides trainers who can answer
department-unique questions outside
the system. While training the trainers,
also prepare line management. Position
them to actually lead implementation in
their areas. Train them on their part in
the system ahead of their employees.
Get them ready to help answer questions
as implementation begins. Provide them
with the structure and tools to supervise
implementation.
Coach the organization. True learning
does not happen in the classroom. The
critical time for learning is after the
classroom, in the live situation. The
“trained trainers” become implementation
coaches. They proactively work with each
individual in their work area and check that
FEATURE
Palm has 35 years of redesign and
implementation in engineering,
maintenance and operations
generating significant ROI for his
clients. He has worked in product
development, work management and
major design and building projects for
manufacturing, chemical, automotive,
utility, oil and gas industries. He is
currently the president and managing
partner of Convergent Results, LLC.
the trainees can do the task as trained.
Was the training clear? Did the trainee
miss something? Does each individual
have the tools to perform the task? We
have seen situations in which individuals
are not provided with what they need to
get their jobs done. They might have no
access to a computer, or the wrong job
classification, and errors in reference
tables. Line management leads the
implementation coaching teams to correct
these conditions, preventing minor blips
from becoming showstoppers.
SUMMARY
The largest gap we see in implementing
automation is in implementation training.
The most common model is classroom
training supported by help desks.
Given that true learning happens from
live experience, a large portion of the
employee population risks not learning
in the classroom model. These are the
people who do not learn well in the
classroom and may not be inclined to ask
for help. Implementation coaching is the
only way to ensure that the necessary
learning occurs. Line management leads
the effort with temporary assistance
from the coaching team, accelerating the
learning curve.
SMRP SOLUTIONS 13
 FEATURE

GEARING UP FOR ISO 55000:

MAKING OPTIMAL DECISIONS FOR YOUR ASSETS
BOUDEWIJN NEIJENS, CMRP, CRL, COPPERLEAF TECHNOLOGIES, CANADA

I n a world of aging assets and limited

financial and human resources,
companies often struggle to decide
which asset-related capital projects
should get the most attention. Managers
are required to compare vastly diverging
project justifications and must somehow
decide which projects bring most value
to the company. The new ISO 55000
standard clarifies some of the principles,
but doesn’t help you select or apply a
methodology. This article explores how
combining asset failure risk evaluations
with a well defined corporate value
function can lead to optimal decision
making and how the resulting decisions
should be tracked and adjusted over
the lifetime of the underlying projects to
maximize the execution rate and return on
investment.
ISO 55000 stresses the importance of
asset-related risks as a key factor in
decision-making, complementing the
more traditional life-cycle cost analysis.
As an asset condition degrades, its
probability of failure increases, as do
the associated risks. Such risks should
typically be mitigated before they
become unacceptable to the corporation
(See Figure 1). Assuming the asset is
already subject to the most appropriate
maintenance regime, this effectively
means the asset needs investment.
The term “investment” is used here in
the generic sense: it could be an asset
replacement, a redesign, a partial change
or refurbishment, a swap of assets, or
even “soft” investments such as retraining
staff to operate the asset differently.
Investment projects generally require
approvals that involve a wide group of
internal stakeholders such at finance,
operations, engineering, planning, etc.
These various stakeholders look at
asset management through their own
needs, with their own data and their own
processes and systems. In this context,
asset risk and project value can be used
as a “common denominators” to allow all
stakeholders to evaluate the merits of a
project.

ASSET INVESTMENT PLANNING

& MANAGEMENT
Making decisions around asset
investments, replacements,
refurbishments and retirements is a
complex process. Many factors need to be
considered and significant financial and
resource constraints often limit the leeway
of decision-makers.
(Figure 1)

14 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3


(Figure 2)
In addition to functional alignment, we need to consider
integrating all the IT systems, which each hold some part of
the necessary data. Effective decision support solutions draw
upon the data of multiple existing departmental and enterprise
IT systems to present a full picture of all assets and of the
challenges and the consequences of each decision (Figure 2).
Solutions based on these principles are increasingly been referred
to as Asset Investment Planning solutions, or if also including
an ongoing performance management component, Asset
Investment Planning and Management solutions.
INVESTMENT DECISION OPTIMIZATION
Capital investments typically require fully documented business
cases to gain project funding and resourcing. Best practices
recommend that each business case present a few alternative
solutions, both to ensure that due diligence has been adequately
performed and to allow decision-makers to consider various
options when evaluating portfolios of investment candidates.
This is especially important when competing for limited
resources (financial, labor, tools and inventory).
The process of selecting the optimal blend of investments
requires the evaluation of the potential contribution of each
candidate investment by using value functions. These
functions include and weigh all the investments’ benefits
that the corporation is trying to maximize (e.g. safety, uptime,
ROI, reputation). Investment portfolio optimization seeks to
maximize value, while respecting all financial, resource and
timing constraints and while ensuring unacceptable risks are
avoided. Such optimizations can happen at the departmental
level, across multiple departments or even across multiple lines
of business, depending on how the corporation is organized
and how budgets are allocated. Optimizations can become
quite complex, especially if each investment draws upon many
classes of resources and has timing constraints. This calls for
advanced computational techniques such as Mixed Integer
Linear Programming to swiftly optimize portfolios of investments
and allow users to test various scenarios and perform sensitivity
analysis.
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3
FEATURE
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
The outcome portfolio optimization is a list of approved,
funded projects. Once these projects enter the execution phase
they might slip or accelerate and over- or under-spend. Such
variances should be made visible to the organization during the
execution phase as quickly as possible to allow the corporation
to adjust its plans and redeploy resources accordingly. By
combining and analyzing all the variances in a specific portfolio,
it is often possible to reallocate resources and improve on the
overall execution rate of projects in near real-time. Users of
advanced Asset Investment Planning and Management tools
discovered that their project execution rate typically increases
from 50-70 percent to over 90 percent.
Finally, when an investment is fully executed, it is important to
understand what really happened during the project execution,
versus what had originally been planned and promised. This
is true at the level of an individual investment and across full
portfolios. Regulators, investors and other stakeholders want
to know if resources were optimally applied and if results are in
line with what had been “sold” to them. One must therefore track
all decisions and changes, allowing the corporation to perform
full audits, and therefore build stronger internal and external
credibility and apply the lessons learned to the next budgetary
cycle.
CONCLUSION
The result of applying the AIPM methodology is a holistic and
dynamic asset investment plan covering all time horizons:
from projects already under way, to investments planned in the
coming years, to growth investments, and finally to suggested
reinvestments necessary to ensure a sustainable long term
future for the existing asset base. AIPM allows the corporation
to develop and maintain a defensible, well-documented asset
investment plan built around actual asset, risk and financial
data that can be used confidently with internal and external
stakeholders.
If well executed, such a solution offers the corporation a perfect
line of sight between the strategic objectives and imperatives
(top-down) and the actual condition of its assets, the risks
attached to each asset and the investments planned to mitigate
risks and asset degradation (bottom-up). It helps the corporation
extract maximum value of its assets over all time horizons and
align itself with leading asset management standards such as
ISO 55000.
Boudewijn holds a degree in
mechanical engineering from
the University of Brussels,
a Master’s in Business in
Administration from INSEAD
in France, and CMRP and CRL
certification. He is the CMO of
CopperLeaf Technologies in
Vancouver. He is also the vessel
and equipment manager at the
Royal Canadian Marine Search
and Rescue.
SMRP SOLUTIONS 15
 SMRP IN THE NEWS
How Veterans Could Help Manufacturing Fix The Skills Gap
Joel Hans, Managing Editor, Manufacturing.net
This is an all-too-familiar story: a young
man or woman enlists in the U.S. military,
completes their service — whatever that
might be — and then finds themselves in
a difficult period of transitioning back into
civilian life. Sometimes, they’re carrying
burdens from that service. Sometimes,
they think the skills and qualities instilled
into them through the military can’t
translate to the lives that most Americans
are living. And, in many cases, they truly
struggle to find good work, which is
fundamental to stabilizing the overall
transition.
Michael Aroney
Michael Aroney and Alan Knight have both
experienced these difficulties. Aroney
joined the military in the 1970s because
he was “looking for an adventure.” He flew
the first F-4 Phantoms and F-14 Tomcats
throughout a 20-year career. Knight
served for five years during Desert Storm
as a mechanic for M1 Abrams tanks and
Bradley Fighting Vehicles, and then as a
quality control inspector.
And while the day-to-day their military
service was dramatically different, both
men experienced similar difficulties in
transition — trying to figure out how their
skills might translate into well-paying jobs,
and which industries they might be most
qualified for. According to Aroney, most
veterans “stumble [their] way” into work
outside the military, which often means
taking a job at a local sporting goods
store, for example, or something else that
under-utilizes what they’ve learned.
16 SMRP SOLUTIONS
Since that difficult transitional period,
Aroney has found work as a maintenance
and reliability professional, and he’s been
there for the last 18 years, “tapping into
[his] experience keeping airplanes safe and
reliable.”
Knight, on the other hand, says the
transition was “a rude awakening, thinking
that just because I was in the Army, my
skills would transfer over.” He eventually
found work as a truck mechanic making
$6.50 an hour — far below a working wage
and certainly not enough for the skills he
had acquired in the military.
From there, he “stumbled” his way
into a manufacturing facility where he
began working on conveyors and other
machinery. He adds: “There really weren’t
a lot of call for military mechanics, even
though the equipment we used was state-
of-the-art.”
Alan Knight
And to Aroney, that’s a major problem. He
says, “If somebody had told us, three-to-
six months before we had gotten out, that
these jobs were available, we’d have gone
there immediately. These young kids that
are getting out [of the military] are being
told they need a college degree. That’s not
true. What they need to know is how their
military training has prepared them to be
a skilled craftsperson (who is) able to fix
equipment in a factory to keep the plant
running — just the same as the way they
kept those tanks operational during their
deployment.”
When it comes to understanding the
need for reliability and maintenance, it’s
hard to look further than veterans — they
know the stakes if a piece of equipment
fails. As a former fighter jet pilot, Aroney
is familiar with high-risk endeavors, and
what keeps them as low-risk as possible
— maintenance is absolutely necessary
to the equation. He says, “You want the
airplane to do two things: you want it to
take off, and come back to land. I have a
balanced logbook — all my take-offs equal
all my landings.”
VETERANS IN MANUFACTURING
— FROM HIRING TO CULTURE
Two years ago, Aroney says, a typical
manufacturer would look at a resume
from a veteran and “their eyes would glaze
over” at the military jargon, which doesn’t
seem to translate well to operations
on the plant floor. But since then, he
manufacturers have “broken the code” as
to what that jargon might translate into.
A big part of that shift in thinking is the
ever-widening need for skilled technicians
in manufacturing. Compare that to the
fact that 400,000 military people will be
leaving in the next two years, and there’s
a massive potential to supply a demand
that’s increasingly dire. But the current
veterans have also done extraordinary
work to prove themselves, both in
technical aptitude and work ethic.
When it comes to technical skills, it would
be harder to find people acquainted with
more advanced machinery than veterans.
Aroney says, “The military always has
state-of-the-art technology, so these guys
are learning tremendous skills on how to
maintain and keep the machines operating
within tolerances, which translates directly
into what manufacturers are looking for.”
He says, for example, an ex-Navy
submariner is a “golden” opportunity for
any manufacturer — they understand to
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

a degree most of us cannot the need to
ensure that systems are reliable for the
long haul, and they have the patience,
drive and commitment to get the tough
work done.
This submariner, for example, might not
hold a college degree, Aroney says, but
they have learned the skills and techniques
to get the job done in a manufacturing
setting. Military maintenance specialists
are uniquely familiar with standard
operating procedures — the military has
a set process for all its equipment and
all its maintenance people — along with
the most prevalent processes, such as
preventative maintenance, that keep plant
machinery running smoothly.
An F-14D Tomcat conducts a mission over the Persian Gulf-region. Michael Aroney flew similar jets
during his military career. Credit: U.S. Navy
Those skills are only half the equation
when it comes to hiring veterans — the
military instills in its people a certain
work ethic and focus on accomplishing
the mission that transitions well into the
manufacturing world. Aroney says, “The
military, over 13 weeks, tears us down as
individuals and builds us back up as ‘battle
buddies,’ where the emphasis is on ‘we,’
and mission accomplishment. We learn
how to take the egos and set them aside
and do what’s right for the mission.”
That emphasis on accomplishing the
mission at hand actually leads often to
quick movements up the corporate ladder
— Aroney says that typically, in a span
of three to four months, many veterans
move into supervisory roles because of
that dedication and work ethic. Knight
says that in the military, the mindset is
“pitching in, being able to think on your
feet, making decisions on your own, and
doing it quickly.”
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3
If a company is in need of good managers
to ensure plant floor staff stay on task,
one would likely already be off to a good
start in looking at the resumes that feature
military experience.
WHAT MORE CAN BE DONE?
If one considers the personal histories of
Aroney and Knight, there’s a few simple
conclusions about the role of veterans in
manufacturing. The first is that there’s a
major disconnect between available jobs
and the skilled people who are looking
for them. Aroney is the first to say that
the military isn’t stepping up to the plate
here — to a degree, they simply don’t want
the people they spent time and money
training to leave as soon as they can —
but manufacturers can also do quite a bit
more than simply saying, “I guess I should
do my civic duty and hire a veteran,”
without much follow-through.
For veterans —
the Society for
Maintenance &
Reliability Professionals
offers programs
that will accredidate
graduates as a
Certified Maintenance & Reliability
Professional (CMRP) or a Certified
Maintenance & Reliability Technician
(CMRT). These programs test and validate
the skills necessary to do maintenance
and reliability work, and tell potential
employers that the candidate knows
the ropes. The best part is that Veterans
Affairs will pay for that certificate, even if
they aren’t actively telling future veterans
about it.
SMRP IN THE NEWS
Acquiring that certificate can make a
big difference between finding a job in
manufacturing and accidentally stumbling
one’s way into it. Aroney says, “If the
Society for Maintenance & Reliability
Professionals had been around when I
was transitioning, I would definitely have
done that.”
On the manufacturer side, there’s a lot
more to be done, even before a veteran’s
resume lands on a hiring manager’s desk.
Part of that is branding, which means
showing up to military job fairs and
setting up a booth. Aroney says major
companies are already doing that to a
degree, but it’s not enough. As with young
people who have do military experience,
many veterans have a wrong idea about
what manufacturing looks like today, and
the benefits for pursuing a job within the
industry. Advertising manufacturing as
a place where veterans can utilize both
their learned skills and leadership qualities
would go a long way, and it would be an
investment guaranteed to get a return,
considering the aforementioned benefits.
Knight says, “If [manufacturers] want to
tap into this workforce, it would be good
to work with the organizations that do just
that.” He suggests collaborating with an
organization like Hiring America’s Heroes
— a 503(c)3 non-profit organization
helps bridge the gap between companies
and skilled veterans by promoting best
practices in recruiting, hiring, on-boarding
and retaining throughout the military-to-
corporate transition.
He adds: “The majority of the veteran
applicants you have are going to have the
qualities you look for in a worker, as far as
what’s instilled in their character.”
When it comes to maintenance-focused
veterans like Aroney and Knight, there’s
no question they have the necessary
qualities. They helped maintain vehicles
that, if failing, could cost the lives of their
fellow soldiers, and they understand the
stakes at hand, even when it’s keeping a
plant operational.
But there’s an even more simple truth at
hand: manufacturing needs more skilled
and dedicated employees, and there will
soon be an influx of veterans who have
the qualities necessary to be successful.
Knight says, “The thing inherent about
the military is the leadership training that
goes on daily. Number one is that you’re
constantly training the guy behind you to
take your place. It’s instilled into you pretty
thoroughly.”
SMRP SOLUTIONS 17
 SMRP IN THE NEWS
A left front view of the XM-1 Abrams tank. Alan Knight helped maintain these
types of vehicles during Desert Storm. Credit: U.S. Department of Defense
There will likely be situations where an ex-military applicant
doesn’t have the breadth of skills or familiarity with certain
machines that a company is looking for. Say, for example,
an applicant has worked on fighter jets but has never
maintained a conveyor system. Typically, an HR manager
might toss that resume aside, but Knight says it’s important
to remember that military veterans are better at receiving
training than just about anyone else in the work force — who
else has had to endure 13 weeks of being rebuilt?
In addition, Knight argues, there are certain qualities instilled
in the military — “leadership ability, decision-making ability,
integrity and being accountable” — that translate across all
career fields and all positions. So, even if there’s a little more
training involved, there’s a better guarantee that the veteran
candidate will have the intangible qualities necessary to
make the best of that training and get off-and-running as
soon as possible.
And who is going to argue with a man who knows how to
tear down and rebuild a tank?

Discover
the hidden
treasure in
Maintenance

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 find 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.

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

18 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 SMRP IN THE NEWS

Companies Trust Their Most

Knowledgeable Employees.
Be Reliable. Be Smart. Be Certified.

The CMRP certification 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.

Become a CMRP/CMRT today!

August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3
www.smrp.org/certification SMRP SOLUTIONS 19
 Q&A

QUESTION & ANSWER WITH CONFERENCE COMMITTEE CHAIR CARL SCHULTZ

Carl Schultz, CMRP, is a Business Development Manager and Consultant with

Advanced Technology Solutions, Inc. an integrated predictive maintenance
services provider. A Certified Maintenance and Reliability Professional (CMRP)
with more than 30 years of experience in the maintenance and reliability industry.
His specialties include Level III Certification in Thermography, Level I Ultrasound,
Level I Vibration, and Basic Lubrication Analysis. He has applied PdM skills to
global implementation and business development efforts within the maintenance
and reliability field as well as reliability engineering consulting, predictive
maintenance service, and CMMS implementation projects.

What sets the 2014 SMRP Annual
Conference apart from other conferences
in the industry?
This year’s conference will be SMRP’s 22nd. Our organization
has over two decades of experience planning and executing
one of the best maintenance and reliability events in the world.
Our process for selecting educational content is also very
strong and ensures our Conference delivers lots of value to
attendees.
Our Conference Committee carefully considers whether each
activity and session will truly benefit attendees in order to
create the best possible conference experience.
This year’s Conference will feature a
track session devoted to physical asset
management. Why did the committee
decide to focus on this topic?
With the release of the new ISO 55000 specification, there
is new emphasis on asset management, including physical
asset management. We developed this track session as part
of SMRP’s continuing efforts to serve its membership by
providing educational opportunities that meet and exceed
their needs. For example last year, we offered a track tailored
to Certified Maintenance and Reliability Technicians (CMRT)
and many of those themes will be “peppered into” our
education program again this year.
October 20-23, 2014
What are some of the benefits of
attending the SMRP Annual Conference?
Our Conference provides an excellent opportunity for you to
network with both peers and industry experts all under one roof.
The lessons and insights picked up over the four days can
also be taken home and put into action. And we have a little
fun at the Conference too.
What do you think this year’s pool of
speakers will add to the Conference?
The track sessions and workshops are led by experience
professionals who are willing to share their knowledge and
experience with attendees. Each of us individuals can only
learn or figure out so much within our own experiences.
Learning from a variety of colleagues makes us all better.
What are you looking forward to the most
this year?
I look forward to the seeing all of the preparations of the
volunteers, speakers, staff and exhibitors come together for
a truly unique Conference. A lot of effort goes into this event
and it’s exciting to see attendees – particularly first-time
attendees – getting a lot out of it.
Any plans of your own while you are
in Orlando?
Hopefully, after the Conference, I will get a chance to spend
some time with my son and daughter-in-law that live in
northern Florida.

20 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 CERTIFICATION UPDATE

A Brief History and Updates on the CMRT Program

By Vlad Bacula, CMRP, CMRT
SMRP CERTIFYING ORGANIZATION (SMRPCO)

request, we researched information given by other organizations

I am sure that by now, most of you have heard about the Certified
Maintenance and Reliability Technician (CMRT) exam. But you
may not be aware of the enhancements SMRP has recently
made.
In 2008, SMRP purchased this exam from the International
Society of Automation (ISA) and spent about two years shaping it
into a well-rounded certification for a multi-skilled maintenance
technician working in either process or manufacturing plants. In
February 2011, the exam was officially launched under the new
name CMRT. This certification is designed to complement the
well-known CMRP certification.
As expected, maintenance technicians from many different
industries showed interest and received their certification. But
to our surprise, a large number of community colleges, technical
and vocational schools showed interest in the CMRT exam as
well. Their interest was in using the exam as validation of their
technical training programs. Then, internal training groups
within different companies were looking to use the CMRT exam
as a skills assessment and as a foundation for their technical
development programs. We realized that there were multiple
demands and multiple uses for the CMRT exam.
We met with community colleges and technical schools that used
the CMRT exam as a validation tool and with training managers
who were using the CMRT exam as a skills assessment. Both
groups asked for more detailed feedback information in the
letter given to the candidates after the exam. After hearing this
to candidates taking their certifications and discovered that these
organizations provide a detailed exam results.
Earlier this year, the decision was made 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,
but there are 23 tasks within these domains. 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.
Through the work of the SMRPCO Board, the CMRT is an
excellent certification designed for maintenance technicians and
also a way to measure the skills of maintenance personnel. The
CMRT brings credibility and recognition within the maintenance
community.
For the individual, professional credibility and reputation is
enhanced by having the CMRT certification. It demonstrates a
high level of commitment to best in class maintenance practices
with a specific level of knowledge and skills. The certifications
also increase opportunities for career advancement and higher
earnings.
Organizations benefit from having their maintenance personnel
certified, by having employees with high skill levels, as well as
having confidence in the employees’ abilities to work on complex
assets. These organizations also demonstrate a commitment to
continuous education and ongoing enhancement of knowledge
and skills of their employees.
To learn more about the CMRT exam please contact Shenell
Ramos: sramos@smrp.org

CMRP & CMRT Paper Exams:

Turnaround Time from SMRPCO
The SMRP Certifying Organization (SMRPCO) and SMRP strive to score, process, and
mail exam results to CMRP and CMRT candidates within a reasonable amount of time
— four to five weeks — from when the exam was administered. There are, however, a
number of variables that may impact the rate at which these results are received.
For the paper exam sessions held in April 2014, results were mailed from SMRP, on
average, 21 days following the exam date.

August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 21

 MEMBER
FEATURE CORNER
Executive Members Tour One of the Largest DuPont
Facilities at Summer Executive Meeting
The summer Executive Meeting this July
featured a tour of the DuPont facility in
West Virginia. Executive members took a
behind-the-scenes tour and networked
with other industry professionals. The
event was also an opportunity for several
days of strategic planning meetings
for the SMRP and SMRPCO Boards of
Directors.
In April, SMRP’s Executive Members
participated in a special tour at the
National Institute of Standards and
Testing (NIST) in Boulder, Colorado.
Newmont Mining Corporation hosted the
Spring Executive Meeting, which provided
Executive Members an opportunity to
network and catch up in a unique setting –
while also getting an up-close look at how
NIST maintains an efficient operation.
SMRP’s quarterly Executive Meetings
are a special privilege for our Executive
Members. For more information
about these events, or on Executive
Memberships in general, please visit the
SMRP website (www.smrp.org) or call us
at 1-800-950-7354.

Oil, Gas & Petrochemical SIG Educates Through Webinar

Cindy Boyd of CBM Enterprise Solutions presented a webinar on technology trends impacting
maintenance and reliability professionals on June 4. Boyd presented an overview of cloud,
automation and mobility trends and how these technologies from the consumer sector now affect
the industrial and manufacturing sectors. Joining the panel discussion were enterprise automation
and mobility solutions experts Majdi Rajab, CBM Enterprises Solution, and Fred Ungerer, an asset
management professional.
By taking advantage of relevant information maintenance and reliability professionals can advance
their careers and improve their companies. Much of the discussion focused on how collaboration
with other departments will be important to prepare for the evolution and will be necessary to achieve
Cindy Boyd of CBM a return on investment with these new technologies.
Enterprise Solutions

Pharma and Biotech SIG Represent SMRP at International

Pharmaceutical Expo
The Pharma and ITT valves for their improvement of removing after steaming
Biotech Shared Interest torqueing on there “Envizion” sanitary valve, and Getinge for their
Group represented use of a VHP generator integrated in the Iso Flex isolator.
SMRP at the 2014 Conversations with young engineers at the tradeshow were as
Interphex show March inspiring as those with the OEMs, according to Mr. Ganaway and
18 – 20 in New York Mrs. Getsug. The young engineers shared ideas on how to design
City. SIG Chair John reliability into new assets and how to integrate these ideas in the
Ganaway and Past design phase of the asset’s life cycle.
Chair Marie Getsug
were present to
Booth Drop Card discuss the usage
of Failure Mode and
Effect Analysis (FMEA) in design stage with various original
equipment manufacturers (OEMs), asking the OEMs to “submit”
their design for possible recognition. A booth drop card was
delivered to every show participant. The criteria for recognition
was based upon their usage of RCD (Reliability Centered Design)
concepts, bill of material standardization and use of condition-
based maintenance. Of those that submitted entries, three
manufacturers have been selected for recognition: Pharmix John Ganaway (second from the left) and Marie Getsug (third from the left)
Agitators, for their use of common, off-the-shelf components; help kick off 2014 Interphex Show.

22 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 CHAPTER NEWS

IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD:
CHAPTER NEWS
NC CAROLINAS CHAPTER
CHAPTER TAKES EDUCATIONAL TOUR OF BEARING MANUFACTURING FACILITY
SMRP Carolinas Chapter held their spring meeting at Timken Bearing in Gaffney, SC on
SC May 2. Jeff Taylor, maintenance and engineering manager, and his staff were very gracious
hosts. We enjoyed a very informative presentation by Jeff then a detailed tour of the bearing
HOU
manufacturing facility. The 28 attendees of the meeting were impressed by the facility and
all of the pro-active initiatives being implemented in Timken’s plant.
The next event for the Carolinas Chapter will be our Annual Meeting in Charleston, SC,
August 21-22. Watch the Carolinas Chapter webpage at www.smrp.org and the SMRP
Carolinas LinkedIn site for details.

ON

OH
KY

HOUSTON CHAPTER
WESTSIDE GROUP GROWS OUT OF HOUSTON CHAPTER
Traditionally the Houston chapter meets
quarterly for lunch in southeast Houston. By
virtue of its sprawl, Houston offers challenges
to many members wishing to attend these
HOU midday events without having to take a day off.
Recognizing the problem, the Board of
Directors of the Houston chapter endorsed
additional gatherings to better serve the local
maintenance and reliability professionals.
A steering committee was established in
January 2014 to determine the best approach
to increase participation/membership in
the Houston Chapter. Lisa Lange with BP
volunteered to lead the group effort. She was
supported by Board Members: Scott Meador,
Shermco, and Chad Broussard, Phillips 66.
The initial meeting of volunteers resulted
in adoption of “the West Side Group” as the
“handle” for the new outreach.
On April 14, the Houston Chapter’s West Side
Group has its first event, which was hosted
by Toshiba International Corporation (TIC).
More than 30 members enjoyed a barbeque
dinner and a tour of the Toshiba Motor Plant.
The facility has more than 1 million square
feet of modern motor manufacturing. The
plant has been in operation for 30 years at the
northwest Houston campus, where electric
motors up to 5500 horsepower are produced.
During the tour, Toshiba Maintenance Manager
Lynn Cummings gave an overview of his
department’s efforts to decrease costs while
driving reliability.

OH
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 23
 CHAPTER NEWS
ON ONTARIO CHAPTER
ONTARIO MEMBERS MEET AT SKF CANADA FACILITY
The SMRP Ontario Chapter conducted
a meeting on Wednesday, April 30 at
the Toronto facility of SKF Canada. The
organizer for this event was SMRP Ontario
Chapter Chair Carlo Odoardi and Vice Chair
Pasha Mohammed. Jennifer Mortiz, SKF
Canada Training Manager, hosted the event
and Past Ontario Chapter Chair Allan Hines
spoke.
The event was well attended by many
SMRP and OACETT (Ontario Association
of Certified Engineering Technicians and
Technologists) members from the Toronto
chapters (East, Central, and West). Toronto
East Chapter Chair, Clive Banton was in
attendance to say a few words. Combining
these meetings with other organizations
was an excellent idea, especially with the
younger crowd that we attracted from the
nearby colleges and universities: Humber
College, George Brown and Centennial
College, University of Toronto and Ryerson
University.
Jennifer Moritz hosted the event on behalf
NC of SKF and gave an excellent plant tour and
short talk on SKF’s strategy and facility. The
company’s approach to business is through
understanding the engineering problem, and
SC there was an emphasis on getting people
of different expertise to provide a holistic
solution. This was shown through personal
HOU
stories and from demonstrations. The
examples covered included several different
industries, including Pulp & Paper and
Mining, which is admirable as its audience
comes from various backgrounds.
ON
GREATER CINCINNATI-NORTHERN KENTUCKY CHAPTER
NEWLY-LAUNCHED CHAPTER KICK STARTS EDUCATIONAL MEETINGS
On May 8 the chapter held its first educational chapter meeting, which was
focused on PM Optimization. This was the second meeting held in 2014. The first
was a plant tour and discussion at Miller-Coors in Trenton, OH. We are averaging
about 25 people in attendance and hoping to grow that number in the coming
years. Since we agreed to alternate between educational events and plant tours,
our next meeting will be a tour, possibly at the Toyota plant in Georgetown, KY.
We are currently reaching out to the Middle Ohio chapter to see if there is a way to
join together resources and members.
24 SMRP SOLUTIONS
Allan Hines provided a very insightful
presentation on how to apply asset
OH
management to facilities through case
studies. Although vibration-based analysis
KY
is the commonly used method, his
seminar had a focus in thermography and
thus provided some insight. There was
good feedback from OACETT attendees,
especially the international delegates who
were familiar with some of Allan’s locations,
such as Dubai.
The event attracted 35 attendees and
Jennifer conducted two excellent SKF tours
with half the group each time. Allan guided
the remaining group through introductions
and discussions. More than 75 percent
were prospective members from the food,
pharmaceuticals and power generation
industries and students from local colleges
and universities. Pasha Mohammed
provided a discussion about the advantages
of joining SMRP and worldwide recognition
of CMRP certification. Many international
organizations prefer CMRP certified
personnel when hiring maintenance and
reliability professionals.
It should be noted that a large part of
attendees were recent immigrants, and
SMRP Ontario Chapter may consider
helping immigrant workers learn
maintenance practices thus orienting them
to the Canadian workforce. Ron Gavrin, Dan
Arsenault and Pasha Mohammed discussed
how this could be done through a mentoring
program or through CMRP preparation
courses.
OH
KY
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3
 CHAPTER NEWS
MEET SMRP’S NEW STAFF MEMBERS
Erin Erickson Mike Niederpruem
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR DIRECTOR OF CERTIFICATION & EDUCATION
Direct: 678-303-2966 Direct: 678-303-3017
eerickson@smrp.org mniederpruem@smrp.org

Susan Montgomery Direct: 678-303-3043

smontgomery@smrp.org
CERTIFICATION PROGRAM MANAGER

DON’T MISS THE UPCOMING

2014 ISSUES OF SOLUTIONS:
FALL 2014, Annual Conference
WINTER 2014, Manufacturing Process Reliability

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!

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

August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 25

 WELCOME
New Members Julio Baldassarre
Cenovus Energy
Ed Bryant
Nova Chemicals Inc.
Feb 27 - Jun 4, 2014 Maha Bamatraf Vincent Buker
Patrick Abbott RasGas
P&RO Solutions, Inc. Larry Cable
Paul Barna Alexandria Renew Enterprises
Barbara Absher SKF USA Inc.
Emerson Process Eduardo Cabrera
Plinio Barrera Ras Gas Company Ltd.
Timothy Adelman Tecnicontrol
Darwin Calderon
Alaa Alhamal Timothy Bass Gran Tierra Energy Colombia
SABIC Calumet Specialty Products
Bill Callaghan
Shiras Aliyar Troy Belbeck Nova Chemicals, Inc.
RasGas Canfor Pulp Limited Partnership
Javier Camacho
Mohammed Al-Kaisi Kathryn Benson Minera Yanacocha S.R.L.
RasGas Company Ltd
Steven Bergen Manuel Caro Ospino
Joe Allaben Cenovus Energy Inc. Ams Group Ltda
Koch Industries, Inc.
John Bickley Tom Carr
Fahad Al-Mahmoud Hydrotex Reliability Solutions LLC

Hasnaa Al-Qahtani Teresa Blackett Andres Carrascal

Suncor Energy Inc. Ecopetrol
Ali Al-Qarni
Saudi Aramco Johnny Bofilios Steve Carter
AssetAnalytix
Omar Alsa’ady Terry Carter
CRISTAL David Bonfante Nova Chemicals Inc.
Koch Industries, Inc.
Ferney Alvarez Zapata Brian Cary
Ams Group Ltda Eduardo Borbon Lyondellbasell
Johnson Controls GWS Mexico
Roger Amos Luis Castaneda
Solvay Specialty Polymers David Branson Minera Yanacochas SRL
The Hershey Company
Douglas Andrus Julio Castillo
General Mills David Brewster Newmont Mining Corporation
Alexandria Renew Enterprises
Geoffrey Angevine Aldemar Castillo Manrique
Sierra Briese Stork Colombia
Michael Asquini Rio Tinto Kennecott
T.A. Cook Consultants, Inc. Charles Chapman
Kirk Brincks Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.
William Averill Christensen Farms
Chevron DWEP Daniel Charlebois
Mark Broussard Mosaic
Daryld Bachelder SAMI
Nova Chemicals Inc. Richard Cherney
Lawrence Brown SEMEQ, Inc.
Faisal Baig Solvay Specialty Polymers
Nova Chemicals Inc. Coy Christoffel
Ron Brunick Southwestern Controls
Jaishankar Balasubramanian R. S. Stover Company
Hofinsoft Technologies

26 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 WELCOME
Michael Ciccone Robert Devereaux Cameron Ford
Cargill Alexandria Renew Enterprises DigitalThinker Inc

Tony Cimino David Diaz Kathi Forrester

Owens Corning Energy International Westar Energy

Jabren Clarke Anthony DiCillo Pierce Freeman

Owens Corning Leak Finder, Inc. Gwinnett County Department
of Water Resouces
Timothy Cole Brian Dietsch
ADA Carbon Solutions Bunge Ítalo Freitas
AES Brasil
Ana Torrealba Contreras Mike Doolan
Meridium Johnson Controls Martin Gagnon
Cascades, Inc.
Marc Cote Paul Dufresne
CB Fleet Koch Industries, Inc. Michael Gaines

Dean Cotton James Duncan Frank Gamboa

Vistakon Jacobs Senior Aerospace Ketema

Sebastien Cournoyer Mike Dye Rolando Garagatti

Dte Energy Solvay Specialty Polymers Minera Yanacocha

Michael Courtney Bill Eckert Rafael Gargantini

ABS Consulting Ascend Performance Materials Brasil

Robert Cox Jason Eisele David Geaslin

Hydrotex Geaslin Group
David Eisenhawer
Alfred Crain Nova Chemicals Inc. Paul Gilman
Ontracks Consulting Kaiser Permanente National Facility
Nathan Elder Services
Lynn Cummings
Toshiba International Jesus Esquivel Roger Gissoni
Cuasmex Asociacion Columbiana de Ingenieros
Lisa Curtis
Owens Corning Andres Lopez Espitia Lary Gojkovich
RMS S.A. Freeport-mcmoran Copper & Gold
Matthew Curtis
Goldcorp, Inc. Todd Evans Dave Golieri
A-dec Emerson Process Management
Umesh Dabhi
Qatar Gas Farhad Farmanara Silvio Gomez
Cristal ECOPETROL SA
Sanjib Das
Koch fertilizer Canada ULC Stephen Feddor Lucero Gonzalez
Owens Corning DuPont
Rene Davila
AngloGold Ashanti James Feeney Mack Graeme
Strategic Reliability Services Nova Chemicals Inc.
Chris Davis
La-Z-Boy South Gene Fife Debbi Gray
ConAgra Foods Wyle Laboratories
Dale Deem
Zimmer, LLC Michael Finley Danielle Groccia
Alexandria Renew Enterprises National Oilwell Varco
Dean Dehod
Nova Chemicals Inc.

August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 27

 WELCOME
Bradley Gulka Larry Housden Sam Kantimathi
Spartan Controls Alexandria Renew Enterprises Fatigue Concepts

Bill Gutsche Anthony House James Karl

Nova Chemicals Inc. Renessenz University of Michigan

Therese Hagedorn Chris Hurrie Ahmed Khalifa

Gallatin Steel CanforPulp Ltd. Sidi-Kerir Petrochemicals Co. (SIDPEC)

Oung Han Todd Huxter Mansoor Muhammad Khan

Modec Management services Canfor RasGas Company Limited Qatar

Muhammad Haq Daniel Ingold Shayaque Khan

Saudi Aramco Solvay Specialty Polymers Advanced Petrochemical Company

John Harden Nandu Jalumuri John Kiefer

Tate and Lyle South Plant Air Liquide Large Industries Global PTM

Mahmoud Hares Patricia Jaworski Kent Knight

Suncor Energy, Inc. Fluid Life
Samuel Hatch
Barrick Gold Corp Disneyra Jimenez Varghese Komban
DIAA Datactivos y Consultorias SAS Apotex Inc
Ian Hedding
SAMI Nigel John Roy Korompis
Rio Tinto Relogica
Roger Hedman
SAMI Brian Johnson Timothy Kuzmicky
Canfor-Intercon Pulpmill USS-Posco Industries
Enrique Hernandez
Consultant David Johnson Jacob Lane
MD Building Products Inc. Owens Corning
Kimberley Herrala
Oracle Greg Johnson Andy Lape
Canfor Pulp Products, Inc. Iluka Resources Inc
Dendi Hertawan
RasGas Company Limited Lee Johnson Roy Larry
Barrick Gold Corp International Paper
Jerry Hicks
Johnson Controls Daniel Jones Kenneth Latino
Owens Corning Mead Westvaco
Stephen Hicks
Nova Chemicals Inc. Farris Jones Herbert Lee
Aloe Vera of America Alexandria Renew Enterprises
Mike Hildebrand
Spectra Energy: Union Gas Limited Gary Josebeck Brian Letendre
Owens Corning Johnson Controls
Steven Hill
Alexandria Renew Enterprises Chandrashekhar Joshi Mike Lewis
Services & Trade Co. LLC Owens Corning
Timothy Holloway
Ingersoll Rand Thomas Justice David Lister
Honda of America Mfg. Tate and Lyle
Mateus Holman
Tecnicontrol SA Mujeeb Kabeer Ed Litiborski
QAPCO Owens Corning
Adam Horelik
SAMI Jorge Kalocai Doug Little
Profertil

28 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 WELCOME
Trever Lively Evan McManomy Darryl Norman
Canfor Pulp Products Inc. Tate & Lyle Penford

Thomas Pascal Ashe Menon Lawrence Nyengerai

Commissioning Agents, Inc. Rio Tinto
Jeff Merrithew
Timothy Long Owens Corning Jonathan Nyson
GE Energy
Caleb Lovell Robert Miller
KBR Eduardo Guzman Olivares
Yuri Minnick Pemex
Jon Lowis MainteananceRecruiter.com
SEMEQ, Inc. Denis O’Reilly
Lee Minor Downer
Daryll Lyles Minor and Associates LLC
Praxair Ahmed Orfali
Gary Mintchell Saudi Aramco
Bill MacFalls
Bentley Ali Mohammed Jose Orrggo Aguilar
Johnson Controls Minera Yaua Cocha
Mike Maciag
Larry Moore Daniel Ortiz
David Madsen Ascend Performance Materials Ortiz Ruiz Consultores
Rio Tinto
Leigh Mork Karl Ouellette
Michael Makuta Suncor Energy Inc
Caterpillar Jhony Perez
Atif Mughal Minera Yanacocha SRL
Jose Martin Jimenez
Owens Corning Joel Mukollos Alex Padilla
Warri Refining & Petrochemical Hess Corporation
Roberto Martinez Company Limited
Diageo Doc Palmer
Eric Mundy Richard Palmer And Associates
Stuart Mason Owens Corning
Canfor William Palmer
Scott Myers International Paper
Gerald Matiyow Tate and Lyle
Industrial Vibration Consultants Ashim Parmar
Oscar Navas Symrise Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
Juan Manuel May Confipetrol
Charles Pate
Mark Mayworm Terance Neal API
Westar Energy Iluka Resources Inc
Pulkit Patel
Igor Mayzelshteyn Rohit Neerackal Newmont Asia Pacific
TFH Publications/Nylabone Products RasGas
Guy Pelletier
Patrick McBride Nestor Enrique Alcoa, Inc.
Nova Scotia Power, Inc Herrera Stork Technical Services
Adalberto Pereira
Brian McConville Kashan Mohammad Niazi Exterran Australia PTY LTD
Kens Foods Inc.
Michael Nicklay Brad Peterson
Richard McKeldin Gopher Resource SAMI

Scotty (Ian) McLean Robert Nixon Tinh Phan

Bentley Owens Corning Emerson Process Management

August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 29

 WELCOME
Doug Pittman Larry Roberts Greg Sharp
AEDC/ATA Bentley
Keith Pitzer
Allison Transmission Perry Robin Izzeddin Shehada
Jacobs RasGas Company Limited
Latevi Placca
Michael Robson Mike Shekhtman
Jeff Porzondek The Toro Company Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
EOG Resources
Richard Rodgers Damian Shelvin
Joe Potter Fluor Corporation Weatherford
R. S. Stover Company
Miller Rodriguez Levi Shepherd
Stephen Powers Nestle USA
Eastman Jeffrey Rogers
Owens Corning Azmatullah Siddique
Joey Price RasGas
Eduardo Romero
Scott Pritchard Celec EP. Hidropaute Arshad Siddiqui
Banner Engineering RasGas
Gary Royer
Murali Mohan Reddy Punnam Godiva Chocolatier Lydia Sierra
Qatargas Operating Company Ltd Barrick Gold Corp
Prapat Saengjaruk
Lucia Radut Mark Siford
Owens Corning Jose Salazar Nova Chemicals Inc.
Soenergy
Ryan Rahier Albert Sijm
Canfor Pulp Robert Salido RasGas
BioMarin Pharmaceutical
Alan Ralph Sergio Silva
Orange County Sanitation Bibiana Rondon Salomon AES Tiete SA
Ams Group Ltda
Willmar Ramirez Jaime Silva
Allan Sam-Epelle Ecopetrol SA
Gregory Ramsey Gas Compression
Gary Simpson
Ali Rastegari Douglas Sampson Management Resourcesa Group, Inc.
Volvo GTO Solvay Specialty Polymers
Derek Sindelar
Mike Raughton Iban Sanabria Kohler Co
KaMin performance minerals Stork
Sanjai Singh
Brent Ray Jose Santiago Saudi Basic Industries Corporation -SABIC
Marathon Petroleum Company Suncor Energy
Apriyan Sirait
Chandrashekhar Reddy Jeff Sapach Wesfarmer Curragh
Emirates Aluminium Company
Glenn Schaffrick Steven Sloane
Randy Reid Tero Consulting Ltd. Johnson Controls
Honda Manufacturing of Alabama
Mike Schmaus Georgia Smart
Ivette Daniela Valenzuela Canfor - Northwood
Matthew Smith
Robert Rice Terrence Schoenborn
Newfoundland Desin Associates Ltd. GE Energy Shawn Spargo

Miguel Rizo Tyler Schwartz Patrick Spink

URS Corp / BP BC Hydro Bentley

30 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 WELCOME
Stephen Srnensky Marlon Soto Urbina Oliver Weish
Iluka Resources Inc Ecopetrol S.a. Alexandria Renew Enterprises

Donnie Steele Tim Usher Walt Weller

Jacobs Owens Corning Owens Corning

Ken Stevens Faraz Vakili Robert Wesley

Koch Industries, Inc. BPX Alaska
George Valadez
Ernie Stidham Alcoa Barry Wheat
Owens Corning Kroger
Luis Segundo Flores
Tracy Strawn Minera Yanacocha S.R.L. Chris White
Marshall Institute Wood Group PSN
Juan Valdez
Robert Stuart Sisamex Kirk Wilcox
Pilkington, NA BioMarin Pharmaceutical
Freddy Valera
Ian Sudlow Qatargas Operating Company Ltd Gregory Williams
Nova Chemicals Inc. Ellwood Mill Products
Rob Van Dongen
Timothy Taber Mainnovation, Inc. Gregory Wingert
Barton & Loguidice Mars Chocolate NA
Matthew Van Klink
David Thompson MRO Connection John Witte
Owens Corning R. S. Stover Company
Gerben Vandenham
Gerald Thompson IBM Global Business Services Mark Wolfgram
AO Smith Genesis Solutions
Lyndon Vidale
Jerry Thompson Grand bay Paper Products Limited James Wood
Freeport McMoRan Copper & Gold
Luis Villate Marc Yarlott
Doug Thomson Veolia Environment North America
Nova Chemicals Inc. Garry Vinje
Canfor Sergey Yaryshkin
Alex Titmus Lifteme reliability
Iluka Resources Inc Heinrich Vorster
Qer Pty Ltd Randy Yount
Gregory Trahan FilterMag International, Inc.
Trevor Walker
Snjezana Trpevski Weatherford Lorne Zawislak
PG Pulpmill Canfor Pulp
Robert Trucksis Harry Warner
Ball Corporation Arcelormittal USA - Cleveland Works Essam Zayed
Railway Inc. Kharafinational
Lawrence Tuoyo
Qatar Foundation Bruce Warthen Muhammad Zubair
Tate & Lyle
Dennis Uhl
R. S. Stover Company Jennifer Webb

Noor ul Hassan Matthew Weber

Fauji Fertilizer Co. Ltd. Submepp Activity

Thomas Underwood Ronnie Weeks

Advanced Technology Services Magnetech Industrial

August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 31

 WELCOME
New CMRT’s Travis Huff
Schreiber Foods
Paul Tucker
Delta Airlines
Jan 31 - May 20, 2014
Jason Morris Philip Kirst
Vijay Narain Schreiber Foods Delta Airlines
AEDC/ATA
Jason Busker Roger Abbott
Michael Dedeaux NTS LLC. Delta Airlines
Jacobs/SSC
Terry Harris Ronald Shacklett
Ernest Robertson Reliable Process Solutions Delta Airlines
Jacobs/SSC
Larry Goodpasture John McWilliams
Donald Seymour Allied Reliability Group Delta Airlines
Jacobs/SSC
Lawrence Hoing Lester Kelly
Bryan Burleson Wells Enterprises Inc. Delta Airlines
Jacobs/SSC
Ramesh Gulati Wesley Norman
Jason Cooper AEDC/ATA
Jacobs/SSC Danny Hansen
Bill Lyons Delta Airlines
James Croll Holcim US, Inc.
Jacobs/SSC Steven Williams
Mary Ortiz Delta Airlines
Mark Lichtenstein Holcim (US) Inc.
Jacobs/SSC Ross Beasley
Vlad Bacalu
Joseph Glidewell URS Corporation Kenneth Caldwell
Jacobs/SSC Delta Airlines
Dean Appel
David Brewster City of Sarasota Sigmond Bush
Alexandria Renew Enterprises Liberty Machinery Testing
Frank Peter
Robert Devereaux City of Sarasota John Kravontka
Alexandria Renew Enterprises Fuss & O’Neill Manufacturing
Samuel Sahatoo Solutions LLC
Larry Cable City Of Sarasota
Alexandria Renew Enterprises Perrian Sayre
Daniel Dunsmore Unicco
Edward L. Chavez City of Sarasota
ABCWUA Clark Wolfe
Carl Lofstrand DTZ
Michael Williams City of Sarasota
Albuquerque Bernallio County Justin Miller
Water Utility Authority John Hayes DTZ
City of Sarasota
Chad Bouchey
Dennis Kennedy
Oscar Sanchez
Exelis Cory Boyes

Kristy Lynch Christopher Medley

Schreiber Foods Mosaic

Donald Bolser Steven O’Donnell

ConAgra Foods

32 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 WELCOME
New CMRP’s Scott Grezeszak
Merck & Company
Dyanand Bhola
Trinidad Generation Unlimited
Jan 31 - May 21, 2014 Kenneth Delaruelle Richard Chatoor
Merck & Company Trinidad Cement LTD
Michael Aldridge
Merck & Company
Donna Cericola Imran Khan
Merck & Company Neal and Massy Wood Group LTD
Carmen Ratchford
Merck & Company
Faisal Baig Emma Mangaroo
Nova Chemicals Inc. Neal and Massy Wood Group LTD
Paul Fedyna
Merck & Company
Anthony Layhew Ronald Ramnarine
Nissan North America Trinidad Cement LTD
Jonathan Van Derzee
Merck & Company
Carl Parrott Raidal Persad
NNAS Methanex
Paul Boettcher
Merck & Company
Ernie Winchester Amrith GoKool
Nissan Methanex Trinidad Ltd
Bob Dontonville
Merck & Company
Steve Olejniczak Denise Bhagwat
Nissan North America Methanex Trinidad
Steve Ferguson
Merck & Company
Michael Lett Shurlan Griffith
Petrotrin
John (Sean) O’Keefe
Abdullah Alghamdi
Merck & Company
Maaden Aluminum Scott Carey
Fibervisions
Christopher Golie
Patrick Wooters
INVISTA Mark Leary
Ted Buczacki
US Navy
Merck & Company
Eric Carlson
Advanced Technology Services Victor Foster
Keith McDonough
Cargill
Merck & Company
Jeremy Inman
Advanced Technology Services Mark Baker
John Wilson
Mississippi Lime Co.
Merck & Company
Raymond Plewa
Kaiser Aluminum Frits Schultze
Jonathon Strachan
Sabic
Justin Perry
Todd Moody
Huber Engineered Woods, LLC. Alfonso Carlos Garcia Diaz
Merck & Company
SABIC
Fred Pare
Kyle Diffenderfer
UGL Mark Harmison
Brian Edmonds
Paul Kight Falah Al-Musalami
Wyle Saudi Aramco
Aaron Raudabaugh
Merck & Company
Godfrey Amoye Dacheng Liu
Audrey O’Reilly
Warren Rodgers Chad Mouton
Merck & Company
Nova Scotia Power Shell Exploration & Production Co. Inc.
Chris O’Donnell
Maria del Pilar Valderrama Brian Boldt
Merck & Company
Shell
Daren Ramsaroop
Steven Brock
Neal and Massy Wood Group LTD Graham Schmidt
Merck & Company
Shell Canada Ltd
Feroze Khan
Michael McGowan
Methanet Trinidad LTD
Merck & Company

August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 33

 WELCOME
Jon Goetsch Brad McCain Kenneth Latino
Shell Jacobs Technology MeadWestvaco

Lary Gojkovich Kevin Berry Gurudeep Rao

Freeport-mcmoran Copper & Gold ERC, Incorporated Meridium Inc

Kyle Ford Donnie Steele Mark Siford

Shell JACOBS Nova Chemicals Inc.

Jose Muguerza Ray LeBlanc Matthew Peterson

Jacobs FOSC Dupont
Robert Carpio
Lisa Chapman Clifford Ellis
Brian Smith ERC Jacobs Engineering
Advanced Technology Services
Jeffery McAlear Brian Cary
Jason Richardson Jacobs Technology Lyondellbasell
ATS
David Taurasi Jose Maria Gurria Llorente
Bradley Wilson Jacobs GE Energy
Advanced Technology Services
Ralph Rohloff Tom Ranna
Christopher Wozniak Aerodyne Industries ExxonMobil
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Ahmad Ekhlassi Thomas Underwood
Cole Knudsen Jacobs Technology-JSOG, KSC Advanced Technology Services
Pepsico
David Yarborough Nathan Elder
Brad Hayes Jacobs/SSC
Pepsico Vijay Mohan
Michael Braiwick BP
Barry VerMeer
Rockwell Automation Ngoc Nguyen Ronald Ricci
NASA Lorillard Tobacco
Milena Luna Rojas
AMS Group Louis Bachand Kevin Joos
Jacobs Burke Marketing Corp.
Javier Antonino
Aguilar Ovando Ian Campbell John Buckles
Hormel Foods Hormel Foods
Pablo Barrera
CIDIM-IPN Mark Carey Gerardo Revelo
Imperial Oil Ejercito Nacional de Colombia
Pragna Bhakta
Fluor Fahad Al-Mahmoud Juan Carlos Villanueva Perdomo
Ejercito Nacional de Colombia
Timothy Hamberg Sebastien Cournoyer
Baldor Electric Dte Energy Juan Napan Garcia
San Miguel Industrias Pet.
Roy Thompson Michael Ciccone
ATA Cargill Humberto J Alfaro G
Petrobras Energia Peru
Launa Konyndyk James Young
Aerospace Testing Alliance The Dow Chemical Company Jorge Villalva Flores
Particular
Olawale Ogunleye Deryk Anderson
Chevron Nigeria Ltd AMVEC Sohaib Ahmed
Petrofac
Lorna Hall Richard Downer
Jacobs TOSC KSC MWV Steven Smith
State Farm Insurance

34 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 WELCOME
Joseph Zaccaria Mark Pederson Lee Minor
Rockwell Automation Georgia Pacific Minor and Associates LLC

Hussain Al Ali Dean Cotton Tom Carr

Vistakon Reliability Solutions LLC
Abid Saood
Saudi Aramco Mathieu Aumais Steven Mjoen
Catalyst Paper Corp.
Yousef Al Dowais Brian Goode
Saudi Aramco B. D. Goode Consulting LLC Kerry Pitts
Hormel Foods
Paul Casey Mark Rodgers
Hydrotex Iban Sanabria
James Lindsay STORK
Alcoa Julio Castillo
Newmont Mining Corporation Mateus Holman
Allen Garcia Tecnicontrol SA
ARMS Reliability Edward Espinosa
Puget Sound Energry Matthew Rozema
Christopher Milligan Management Resources Group, Inc.
Nissan North America Brett Mohr
UE Systems Luis Hinestroza
Brent Hale Axionlog Grupo Arcos Dorados
Nissan North America Dennis Sisco
Mosaic Edgardo Carrillo
Jonathan Sumners Consorcio Confipetrol
Nissan Robert Snyder
UE Systems Edgar MejãA
David Sliger Gecolsa
Nissan Alan Kelley
Scott Janzen
Christopher Wall Adam Irion
Horizon Milling, LLC Jacobs Gary Simpson
Management Resourcesa Group, Inc.
David Branson Wendy Serra
The Hershey Company Jacobs Luis Granados
Ecopetrol SA
Mark Smith Eric Greenslade
Alliant Energy Jacobs Technology German Morales
Ing Ingenieria
Amr Abbas Ronald Sirhan
Jacobs Jimmie Hanks
Sanjai Singh MRG Solutions
Saudi Basic Industries Corporation -SABIC Craig Comstock
Wyle Nestor Niño
Kumar Shobhit Stork
Rio Tinto Brian Baird
Northstar Bluescope Steel Amanda Egerton
Phillip Reynolds Egerton Consulting Ltd
The Hershey Company Lewis White
DuPont Sudhendu Prakash
Boris Blancovich
Merck Arecibo Richard Garcia
Wyle
Darren Billings
First Quality-SE LLC David Garcia
Hecla Mining
William Smith
PPMS, LLC

August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 35

 EXAM CALENDAR 2014
9/18 9/26
MARSHALL INSTITUTE EXAM SESSION MEDIMMUNE EXAM SESSION
Thursday, September 18 Friday, September 26, 2014
NC State, McKimmon Center 1 Medimmune Way
1101 Gormon Street Raleigh, NC 27606 Gaithersburg, MD 20878

To register for an exam, please go to:

www.smrp.org/cmrt www.smrp.org/cmrp

SMRPCO SUSTAINING SPONSORS

The 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!

Advanced Technology Services, Inc. Dupont Merck & Co., Inc.

AEDC/ATA Eli Lilly & Company Meridium, Inc.
Agrium Emerson Process Management Mondelez Global LLC
Air Liquide Large Industries Esco Products Inc. Mosaic
Alcoa, Inc. Fleming Gulf Nexen Inc.
Allied Reliability, Inc. Fluor Corporation Nexus Alliance LTD
AMS Group Gallatin Steel Co. Nissan North America
ARAMARK Facility Services GreenWood, Inc. Noble Drilling Services, Inc.
ArcelorMittal Flat Carbon America Holcim US, Inc. Nova Chemicals, Inc.
ARMS Reliability Hormel Foods Novelis, Inc.
Ascend Performance Materials Iluka Resources Inc. Owens Corning
Bentley (formerly Ivara Corporation) Instituto Peruano de Mantenimiento SAC Pfizer, Inc.
BP - Gulf of Mexico JACOBS Process Solutions Group
CACI, Inc Jacobs Technology – JSOG, KSC STLE Caribbean
Cargill, Inc. Jacobs/MAF T.A. Cook Consultants Inc.
CBRE JESCO Maintenance Corporation Tero Consulting Ltd.
Chester Mead Associates Ltd. Kaiser Aluminum The Dow Chemical Company
Chobani, Inc. Life Cycle Engineering Turner Industries
City of Sarasota Louis Dreyfus Commodities UE Systems
Commissioning Agents, Inc. Luminant Power URS Corporation
Cornerstone Chemical Company Mainnovation Inc. Wells Enterprises Inc.
Delta Air Lines Management Resources Group, Inc. Wyle Laboratories
Diageo Mead Johnson Nutrition

36 SMRP SOLUTIONS August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3

 WELCOME

Educate. Equip. Excel.

OCTOBER 20-23, 2014

Hilton Orlando Lake Buena Vista Resort • Orlando, Florida
An event for practitioners, by practitioners, this is a once-a-year educational opportunity designed
to help you be a stronger maintenance and reliability professional. Insightful education delivered
by your peers, practical, hands-on training at workshops and plenty of chances to network with
friends and colleagues – it’s all waiting for you at the SMRP Annual Conference.

Sign up before September 5 for the best rates!

Visit www.smrp.org/annualconference for more information.
August 2014 • Volume 9, Issue 3 SMRP SOLUTIONS 37
 1100 JOHNSON FERRY ROAD, SUITE 300
ATLANTA, GA 30342

www.smrp.org

October 20-23, 2014

Orlando, Florida
Educate. Equip. Excel.

EVENT CALENDAR
Summer Executive Meeting 2015 SMRP Annual Conference
July 29-31, 2014 October 12–14, 2015
Washington, WV Cincinnati, Ohio

Maintenance and 2016 SMRP Annual Conference

Reliability Symposium October 17–19, 2016
August 14-15, 2014 Jacksonville, Fla.
Galveston, Texas

2014 SMRP Annual Conference

October 20–23, 2014
Lake Buena Vista Resort
Orlando, Fla.

SOLUTIONS EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT

DAN ANDERSON ANN CANTRELL JON KRUEGER
Chair, Communications Committee Communications Specialist Executive Director
Life Cycle Engineering 678-303-3044 678-303-3045
danderson@lce.com acantrell@smrp.org jkrueger@smrp.org
843-414-4866