Figure 2: Risk exposures during the life cycle through asset management represent an opportunity for an owner to improve the measure’s and the asset’s performance through a risk-based plan. Furthermore, if the measures themselves cannot be priced, an additional outer ring can be envisioned with measureable impacts that can be priced. Undoubtedly, there are multiple stakeholders that are and/or could be exposed to var ious r i sks f rom a geotechnical asset during each step in its life cycle. While each of these stakeholders often have separate risk management goals, each one’s decisions and actions do transfer risk that adds to the asset management duties of the owner. For example, during design, the owner manages its risk by relying on design codes and guidelines, external review processes and QA/QC processes; however, at this life cycle stage, the owner and design team hold and assume the majority of the risk exposure. During construction, the contractor’s team, as wel l as the publ ic and private stakeholders, is incorporated into the risk exposure envelope. Then, after the construction activities are complete, the designer and contractor risk exposures diminish while the owner, public users and any affected private stakeholders retain the risk for the life of the asset. Throughout this life cycle process, it is the owner who retains risk exposure in each of the various stages, and thus is most able to influence the outcome (see figure 2). Through maintenance and preservation work during the operations phase, the owner manages the likelihood for physical failures that could occur during routine loading and deterioration. In addition, the 70 • DEEP FOUNDATIONS • JAN/FEB 2018 owner is charged with managing and responding to the risk generated by natural hazards such as floods, earthquakes and/or natural ground movement. These natural hazards can adversely affect an asset regardless of how robust the maintenance program may be, and, thus, can be considered separately for a management plan. Because of this, the risks resulting from physical failure and natural hazards are two separate risk sources identified by AASHTO in the context of as set management. While the measurable risks for the designer and contractor typically reduce to negligible or zero at some time during the operation phase, their decisions and actions earlier during the asset life cycle create risk exposure that lasts throughout the lifetime of the asset. For large organizations with thousands of assets, the maintenance staff often is given the responsibility for risks that result from decisions made by planning and design professionals that are not involved in the operation of the asset. Thus, the value of asset management is readily apparent for those professionals who consider how their decisions will impact risk throughout the asset’s life cycle. By itself, risk is not a bad thing, and risk-based asset management is not an attempt to eliminate risk. In fact, risk acceptance enables a lot of good outcomes, but risk needs to be managed, as its impacts do not disappear through avoidance of awareness. Risk exists whether it is acknowledged and managed through strategic and tactical processes or not. Risk management processes include approaches such as treat, accept, transfer and terminate. In addition, as the familiar saying used to open this article implies, ignoring risk is, by default, acceptance. Therefore, understanding the risk exposure from geotechnical assets is critical for any owner who desi res good inves tment s whi le al so avoiding unforeseen adverse performance from a disabling asset class at some time in the future. Otherwise, the asset owner is knowingly accepting an unknown level of risk or, to borrow a quote made famous by former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, accepting “known unknowns.” Through implementation of risk-based asset management, owners can shrink the pool of “known unknowns,” and can grow, and ultimately better manage, the “known knowns.” The first step in this informed decision-making process involves establishing those strategic objectives that define the desired performance and level of risk acceptance. This is no different than buying a vehicle or piece of equipment — we generally have an expectation for how long it will last, how much maintenance will be required, its safety features, and the nice-to-have features, such as the latest technology enhancements or even a certain color. Once there are defined objectives, an owner’s team can then evaluate the trade- off decisions necessary to reach those objectives. The greatest contribution to value across the l i fe cycle occur s when as set management is initiated in the earliest phase, even before there even is an asset.
