Engineering Asset Management Principles Framework Sources and Edition Notes
EAM.Sources:1 - Professional and technical sources
| Source | Contribution used here | Applicable limit |
|---|---|---|
| GFMAM Asset Management Landscape, third edition, June 2024 | Professional asset-management concerns, particularly value-oriented decisions, investment, lifecycle work and configuration. | A professional landscape does not validate this repertoire’s effectiveness or prescribe its pattern boundaries. |
| IAM, Asset Management — an Anatomy, version 4, July 2024 | Proportionate appraisal of costs, risk, benefits and time; §7.5.6 supplies the service-loss and recovery comparison used in EAM.6. | EAM develops its own dependency and interval construction; the source does not qualify the case equipment or its recovery times. |
| ISO/TC 251 public ISO 55001 account and ISO 55000:2024 — Asset management — Vocabulary, overview and principles, catalogue entry | The ISO/TC 251 account provides management-system context; the separate ISO 55000 entry identifies its vocabulary, overview and principles publication. | Public descriptions and catalogue metadata only; this is not a clause-by-clause application or a conformity or certification claim. |
| NIST Handbook 135e2025, Life-Cycle Costing Manual for the Federal Energy Management Program, chapters 4, 7 and 8 | Dated initial, recurring, replacement and ending consequences on a common period; competing alternatives and programme selection; sensitivity/break-even reasoning. | Federal rates, legal eligibility and financing rules do not govern the fictional utility. Its 3% real rate and values are constructed inputs. |
| Water resources planning guideline, updated 16 June 2026, sections 6.1 and 6.4.1–6.4.3 | EAM.4 develops component reconciliation, driver changes and critical-period scenarios, with an unchanged-policy baseline distinguished from proposed measures. | The small construction and examples are EAM adaptations; specialist estimation, jurisdictional duties and the source’s planning horizon retain their own conditions. |
| NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook, section 8.4.2.3 | EAM.5’s degradation-model comparator and its assumptions. | An established statistical method, not a pump-specific diagnosis, threshold or life qualification. |
| US EPA, EPANET 2.2, hydraulic modeling capabilities | EAM.6 compares a sufficient capacity/duration bound with extended-period hydraulic analysis. | The software’s capabilities supply no model or verified hydraulic result for CityWater. |
| Magenta Book, updated 15 May 2026, chapter 2 impact-evaluation approach comparison | EAM.13 distinguishes a sufficient plan update from an inquiry into attributable effects. | Method and evidence comparator; no actual outcome or government evaluation obligation is asserted for CityWater. |
These sources have different jobs. Professional coverage supports recognition of the problem; a technical Method supports a specific operation; actual observations and specialist judgements support a case result. The constructed applications are original teaching examples and are labelled as such. No single source is treated as the authority for all these claims.
The Architectural Reference explains the connected language and the consequences of these sources for its use.