Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Revision: 5.0
Effective: June 2012
Document ID
Document Type
Security
Discipline
Owner
Issue Date
Revision
Page 1
CP-117
Code of Practice
Unrestricted
Project Engineering
June 2012
5.0
Printed 27/06/12
The controlled version of this CMF Document resides online in Livelink. Printed copies are UNCONTROLLED.
Revision: 5.0
Effective: June 2012
This document is the property of Petroleum Development Oman, LLC. Neither the
whole nor any part of this document may be disclosed to others or reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means (electronic,
mechanical, reprographic recording or otherwise) without prior written consent of
the owner.
Page 2
Printed 27/06/12
The controlled version of this CMF Document resides online in Livelink. Printed copies are UNCONTROLLED.
Document Authorisation
ii Revision History
Revision No.
Date
Author(s)
Scope/Remarks
5.0
June 2012
Paul Sanders
UEP/5
4.0
January
2011
Anton Brouwer/
Mike Turberville
Update/roll-out
4.0
May 2010
Anton Brouwer/
Mike Turberville
3.0
June 2004
Austin Isaac
UEJ1
2.0
April 1999
Ohi Aikhoje,
OTE4
1.0
August
1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
i
Document Authorisation........................................................................................................ 3
ii
Revision History.................................................................................................................... 4
iii
Introduction........................................................................................................................... 9
1.1
Purpose........................................................................................................................ 9
1.2
Target Audience............................................................................................................ 9
1.3
1.4
1.5
Reference documents................................................................................................ 10
1.6
Document Owner....................................................................................................... 10
1.7
Document Hierarchy................................................................................................... 10
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
FEED Office............................................................................................................ 15
3.2.3
3.3
3.3.1
3.3.2
Project Governance.................................................................................................... 18
4.2
Project Assurance...................................................................................................... 19
4.2.1
Pre-DG4 Assurance................................................................................................ 19
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
5.1.1
Concept Engineering............................................................................................... 23
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.2
5.3
5.4
Operations Readiness................................................................................................ 28
5.5
Management of Change............................................................................................. 28
Detailed Design.......................................................................................................... 30
6.2
Procurement............................................................................................................... 31
6.3
6.3.1
Construction Definition............................................................................................ 31
6.3.2
Construction Objectives.......................................................................................... 32
6.3.3
Construction Planning............................................................................................. 32
6.3.4
Mechanical Completion........................................................................................... 33
6.3.5
Pre-Commissioning................................................................................................. 34
6.4
Commissioning........................................................................................................ 34
6.4.2
Pre-Start-up Audit.................................................................................................... 35
6.4.3
Contracting................................................................................................................. 37
7.1.1
7.1.2
7.1.3
7.1.4
7.1.5
7.2
6.4.1
6.5
7
Construction............................................................................................................... 31
7.2.1
Procurement........................................................................................................... 44
7.2.2
7.2.3
Inventory Management........................................................................................... 45
7.2.4
Logistics Services................................................................................................... 45
Project Services.................................................................................................................. 47
8.1
8.1.1
Definitions............................................................................................................... 48
8.1.2
Schedule Development........................................................................................... 49
8.1.3
8.2
Cost Estimating.......................................................................................................... 52
8.2.1
Capex Estimates..................................................................................................... 52
8.2.2
8.2.3
8.2.4
Base Estimate......................................................................................................... 54
8.2.5
8.2.6
8.2.7
8.2.8
8.3
Project Controls.......................................................................................................... 56
8.3.1
Introduction............................................................................................................. 56
8.3.2
Management of Cost............................................................................................... 56
8.3.3
Management of Progress........................................................................................ 57
8.3.4
Management of Change.......................................................................................... 57
8.3.5
Management of Risk............................................................................................... 58
8.3.6
Reporting................................................................................................................ 58
8.3.7
8.4
Project Assurance...................................................................................................... 59
8.4.1
8.4.2
Programme Build.................................................................................................... 59
Quality Assurance............................................................................................................... 60
9.1
10
10.1
Introduction................................................................................................................ 64
10.2
Application.................................................................................................................. 66
11.1
12
12.1
12.2
13
13.1
Opportunity Framing................................................................................................... 76
13.2
Lessons Learned........................................................................................................ 77
13.3
Value Engineering...................................................................................................... 77
13.4
13.6
13.7
Constructability........................................................................................................... 81
13.8
PEP-PER................................................................................................................... 81
13.9
LIRA........................................................................................................................... 81
14
15
Technical Standards...................................................................................................... 83
15.1
15.2
DEM1......................................................................................................................... 83
1 Introduction
1.1 Purpose
This Code of Practice (CoP) is intended to be an instruction manual or recipe book for
how to manage projects in PDO.
Compliance with the requirements stated in this CoP is MANDATORY for all project
development and execution activities.
Application of this CoP is intended to:
-
Project Engineers
QA/QC staff
Setting up the Project for success with realistic and achievable goals from the
outset.
Taking good quality decisions and involving the right people in a clear
governance structure.
Clear roles, responsibilities and competences for the people who lead and staff the
opportunities.
A project only moves as fast as the decisions are taken, and it is important to take
Quality Decisions.
The ORP splits the Project into six phases:
At the end of each phase, up to and including the Define phase, there will be a decision
point called the Decision Gate (DG) where the Decision Executive (DE) will decide
whether the project is ready to proceed to the next phase. The readiness-to-proceed
depends on satisfactory closure of the preceding phase and sufficient business drive,
budget and resources to complete the following phase.
Each Decision Gate has 3 potential outcomes:
1. Project is given Permission to Proceed.
2. Project is told to Stop. (Project is dropped because it is not economic, is not
aligned to PDOs strategic objectives, or does not have sufficient resources).
3. Project is told to Go-back. (Project has to do more work in the current phase to
achieve further definition and/or see if there is a Techno-Economic Solution
Space).
The project team should only go to the decision gate if they have sufficient information
for the DRB to decide on one of the outcomes. If the project team has the information
early (e.g. the project should Stop) then they should hold the decision gate early.
Gate
Objective
Identify
DG1
Assess
DG2
Select
DG3
Define
DG4
Once the Project has been operating for some time, there is a look-back (DG5) where
lessons learned are captured to be fed-back into future Projects.
The table below illustrates the ORP at a high level with key activities for each of the
ORP phases. The key deliverables for each phase are discussed elsewhere in this
document.
Identify
Assess
Select
Initiate Project:
Demonstrate
feasibility of the
Project:
Define the
selected
concept:
Assess a
complete range of
alternative
concepts against
a complete range
of possible
outcomes, in the
context of all
attendant risks:
Technical,
Economic,
Commercial,
Organizational,
Political.
Define technical
scope, cost and
schedule for
Final
Investment
Decision.
Generate ideas.
Verify alignment
with business
strategy,
establish
potential value
and decide
whether to fund
and staff.
Define
Execute
Deliver the
promise:
Deliver an asset
consistent with
the forecast
scope, cost and
schedule.
Leads to handover decision to
user for Operate
phase.
Operate
Start-up,
operate and
evaluate:
Ensure
performance
specifications are
met. Maximize
return to
shareholders.
Protect License
to Operate.
For further details, refer to the Opportunity Realisation Manual (ORM) and Opportunity
Realisation Guide (ORG).
The ORP specifies a number of mandatory actions and deliverables:
ensuring PDOs resources are deployed in the best interest of the Company
and the development of individual staff concerned;
standards and
providing
effective
3.2.1
3.2.2
FEED Office
The Front End Engineering Design (FEED) of projects with an estimated CAPEX above
$100mln shall, by default, be executed by the in-house FEED office. Deviation from this
default requires UEOD approval. Projects of smaller size, but of strategic value (e.g.
sour projects) can also be carried out by the FEED office, subject to mutual agreement
between Function and Asset and subject to FEED office capacity.
3.2.3
Major Projects (generally >$200 mln) move to the Central Project Delivery group at
DG3 and the CPD team is then responsible for delivering these Projects on behalf of
the Assets. As the centre of excellence, CPD will also run certain portfolios of projects
which fit segmentation themes (e.g. high sour, high pressure, thermal EOR, chemical
EOR, etc.). In addition, projects which are particularly complex, contain prototypes or
new technology, or have high strategic or reputational importance may also be executed
under CPD.
Pre-DG3 projects which are likely to be in the CPD portfolio should be identified and
agreed between CPD and the Asset Directors during the Program Build, and will be
assigned Project Engineering support accordingly. The final allocation decision will be
made by the DE (in consultation with the DRB) at DG3, and endorsed by the relevant
Asset Director and Technical Director (TD).
3.3.1
3.3.2
Steer: giving direction to the Project Team; encouraging the Project Team to put
the right emphasis on the right decisions, deliverables and activities.
Supervision: the body providing the governance supervises the quality and
robustness of the Teams output.
Support: the DE/DRB can provide assistance to the Project Team through
expert knowledge and/or providing funds and/or resources.
Governance is the responsibility of the DRB, chaired by the DE, up to and including
Final Investment Decision (FID, usually the end of Define). After FID, the DRB members
may change for continued Governance throughout Execution and Start-up, up to and
including the Post Investment Review.
The DRB, together with the Business Opportunity Manager (BOM), is responsible for
ensuring that Quality Decisions are made throughout the ORP stages.
For Major Projects in CPD the governance Line of Sight runs from the Project
Manager via the BOM and CPDM to the DRB. The PDO Technical Director (TD) acts as
the Decision Executive (DE).
For all other projects, the governance Line of Sight runs from the accountable Project
engineer / leader via a Head of Projects and/or the Asset Engineering Manager to the
relevant Asset Director (GD, OND, OSD, UID), who is also the DE.
4.2.1
Pre-DG4 Assurance
Up to DG4 the Assurance of all Projects with a total estimated Capex above $100mln is
vested in a Decision Review Board (DRB), chaired by the Decision Executive (DE) with
representation from UEOD, and other Asset Directorates and Functional Directorates.
The DRB endorses the Project Control and Assurance Plan (PCAP) and the DecisionBased Roadmap, and advises the DE on key decisions; especially the decision to
proceed with a project to the next phase. The DE holds single point accountability.
In addition, the DRB:
Assigns Resources
Reviews key project documents and activities (e.g. Risk Management Plan)
Ensures all stakeholders remain fully aware of key issues and project progress.
Provides a forum for the BOM and Project Manager to seek help in resolving
issues.
DRB1, chaired by the TD for all projects with a total estimated CAPEX above
$200mln (i.e. all projects in CPD). UCI is the secretary of DRB1 pre-DG4.
DRB2, chaired by the Asset Director, for projects with a total CAPEX above
$100mln and less than $200mln. The DRB composition and frequency of DRB
meetings is defined by the DE. Minutes are taken by a nominated secretary
from the Asset.
The pre-DG4 assurance process for smaller projects shall take place within the existing
Asset Management structure. Projects with CAPEX less than $100mln can also be
covered by a DRB2 if justified by the risk profile or strategic nature of the project.
4.2.2
Verifies compliance with and approves deviations from the Project Control and
Assurance Plan (PCAP).
Monitors progress on audit and review actions follow-up and closure, including
those from VAR4 and Project Execution Reviews.
Ensures all stakeholders remain fully aware of key issues and project progress.
Provides a forum for the Project Manager to seek help in resolving issues.
While the DE has single point accountability, other DRB members retain shared
ownership for the quality of the decisions.
The DRB structure in PDO recognises two levels:
DRB1, for projects with total CAPEX of more than $200mln (i.e. all projects in CPD) with
TD as DE. Other DRB1 members include the Asset Director (deputy DE), UEOD, and
other Asset and Functional Directorate representatives. UEP is the secretary of DRB1
post DG4.
DRB2, for projects with total CAPEX of more than $100mln, but less than $200mln with
the Asset Director as DE. Other DRB2 members include members of the Directorate
Leadership Team, a UEP representative and an Engineering Manager from a different
Directorate. The latter to ensure cross asset exchange of learnings and challenge.
Minutes are taken by a nominated secretary from the Asset.
A key member of the DRB is the Operations representative. Representatives from other
Functions such as HSE, Legal, Well Engineering, etc. should be invited to DRBs as
required.
The assurance process for smaller projects shall take place within the existing Asset
Management structure. Projects with Capex less than $100mln can also be covered by
a DRB2 if justified by the risk profile.
For projects where the costs are dominated by well activities the DE may decide that
the DRB will be achieved through existing Well Delivery assurance bodies, and chose
not to constitute a separate DRB.
4.2.3
4.2.3.1
4.2.4
The early phases (until the end of Define) of the project are the opportunity for Value Creation.
This is where the Value Improvement Practices (VIPs) should be applied and attention given to
producing quality deliverables. The Execute phase focuses on Safeguarding the Value.
5.1.1
Concept Engineering
Support: UEP2
Concept Engineering is the pre-DG3 engineering activity in support of Project
Development and is closely integrated with the subsurface Field Development Planning
for Oil & Gas developments. Key deliverables are as per the Discipline Control and
Assurance Framework (DCAF, see section 9.1), and the Project Specific Control and
Assurance Plans (PCAPs). The main deliverables are summarized below per ORP
phase:
Identify
Assess
Select
Decision-Based Roadmap
Level 1 CES
Stakeholder Engagement
Plan
Stakeholder Engagement
Plan
Ranked Decision Criteria/
Value Drivers
ALARP Demonstration
Execution and Contracting
Strategy
Preliminary PEP/PES
Level 2 Cost Estimate and
Schedule
Basis for Design
(*Except for infrastructure projects)
5.1.2
5.1.2.1
5.1.3
provide a sound technical basis for the Execution Phase (Detailed Design,
Procurement and Construction) with minimal uncertainties;
provide a basis for a Cost Estimate with +15% / -10% accuracy (Level 3);
During the FEED all assurance reviews to meet technical integrity shall be completed,
such as: HAZID, Design Review, HAZOP, QRA, FEA, PDMS Model reviews (3 stages),
SAFOP and IPF.
3D Model Reviews or 2D General Arrangement reviews shall consider, as a minimum,
process issues, safety issues (QRA, SIMOPS, etc) maintenance and operational
accessibility (including manual handling), constructability (equipment handling
requirements and access for construction) and escape routes (on ground and at
platforms).
An update of the Risk and Opportunity Management Plan shall be made shortly after
kick-off of the FEED phase and a risk register maintained during the Define phase to
track the Risk Mitigations. Those risks/opportunities that cannot be closed out before
execution phase should be mitigated and transferred to the execution contractor for
management (see section 5.3).
It is important to have PDO approved facilitators/leaders for HAZID, Design Review,
HAZOP, IPF and Value Engineering. It is the responsibility of the Project Engineer to
ensure close out of all action items resulting from various reviews and maintain the
records for the same.
The FEED shall deliver a Project Specification which will require only addition of vendor
specific information and construction related details. For a detailed list of deliverables
and activities to be covered in FEED reference is made to the list of deliverables in
DCAF. During this stage, extensive vendor communication needs to be established so
that the Process design takes into consideration the most probable scheme in any
vendor package. A black box approach, where minimum information on vendor
packages are provided, shall be avoided. All interfaces with vendor packages shall be
finalised to avoid major changes during Detailed Design. The FEED shall also ensure
that all PDO Environmental and Sustainable Development requirements are met.
A HOLDS list shall be maintained and any residual holds shall be transferred to the
Project Team for management through the execution phase.
In FEED stage, specifications for all major equipment and Long Lead items shall be
developed. Depending on the procurement strategy these shall be used for
procurement by PDO or the contractor.
5.3
The Risk Register is being regularly reviewed and updated, and the risk environment
and the effectiveness of actions taken to manage identified risks are being evaluated on
an ongoing basis and
The risks in the Risk Register are reflected appropriately in the project cost estimates
and schedules, including mitigation and Opportunity cost and schedule impacts.
The development of the Risk Register, Risk Management Plan and RAM is the
responsibility of the Project Manager. These deliverables are owned by the Business
Opportunity Manager, and endorsed by the Decision Executive.
5.4
Operations Readiness
Support: UOP4
Operations Readiness (OR) is a focused, proactive and systematic approach to
successful commissioning, start up and normal operation of a new facility.
The Operations Readiness process in PDO is detailed in PR-1612 - Operations
Readiness
The purpose of OR is to assist Operations and Engineering Teams to collaborate and
ensure that Operations requirements in Engineering Projects are made sufficiently
clear, are of a high quality and are met in a timely manner. It is expected that following
the prescribed methodology will ensure that:
OR aspects and concepts are integrated into all phase of a Capital project. Support
Project Manager to deliver the project to the Asset Owner in compliance with the
minimum Operations Excellence standards. Ensure Future Asset Owner is fully
prepared to receive, operate and maintain the facilities.
Specified operational performance over the lifecycle of the Asset can be realized.
The OR process includes important sub-processes:
Flawless Project Delivery (FPD), which is mandatory for all projects >$100mln.
Total Reliability (TR) and Technical Integrity (TI) (CP-114 - Maintenance & Integrity
Management Code of Practice)
5.5
Management of Change
Support: UEP3
Management of Change is an important factor in ensuring that projects are completed
on time and within budget. Changing the project scope, other than developing and
defining the scope throughout the Select and Define phases and carrying out the
detailed engineering during the Execute phase, should be discouraged in principle and
by definition.
Strict scope management should be applied in order to safeguard the schedule, the
cost and the quality of the project. Any change of scope, or the transfer of scope from
one contractor to another (or one project to another) is subject to formal change control.
Proposals for changing the project baseline documents, scope, quality, schedule and
cost, should be strictly controlled at any point in time in the project once the Select
Phase has been completed.
All projects shall adopt the Management of Change (MOC) procedure PR1247. The
procedure:
Describes the process for controlling and managing technical change during the
concept definition and execute phases of PDO projects.
Sets out a series of key Baseline Value Drivers (BVD) for the projects which
shall be developed during conceptual Select phase and approved by the DRB at
Decision Gate 3 (DG3). If a change occurs through DEFINE an updated set of
BVDs are approved at DG4. These Value drivers are normally captured in the
Field Development Plan, the Concept Select Report, the Basis for Design and the
Project Specification
Sets up the Change Review Panel consisting of senior project personnel that
meets regularly and acts as the Stage Gate screening and approval body for
change impact. The Panel will review every Level 3/2/1 change proposal and
ensure that all implications of the change are considered before being accepted
or rejected. Periodically, the Panel reviews the list of Level 4 change proposals.
The Project Change Coordinator (usually appointed from Project Services) maintains
the Project Management of Change process.
The PEP, Risk and Opportunity Management and Management of Change (as described in
Section 5) continue to be applied and updated during the Execute phase, while the Operations
Readiness becomes increasingly important.
6.2 Procurement
Support: FPO
The Procurement phase may begin before Detailed Design, particularly for Long Lead
materials and equipment. However, the other procurement will commence during the
Detailed Design phase and continue into Construction.
Procurement is discussed in more detail in Section 7 and the Quality Assurance and
Control aspects are discussed in Section 9.
6.3 Construction
6.3.1
Construction Definition
Support: UEP
In PDO construction activities are usually contracted out to third party companies. The
size of construction scopes/projects varies from the very small plant modifications to
multi-million dollar construction projects, involving a large workforce and construction
periods of three or more years. Contracting mechanisms vary depending on size and
complexity of the work ranging from agreed day rates to lump sum prices.
Key Construction activities include but are not limited to the following:
Site establishment including offices, lay down, specialist storage, welfare facilities, local
fabrication areas, workforce accommodation (e.g. onshore camp) supply base and
staging points.
Job hazard analysis and Development of Construction methodologies e.g. stick build
versus modularisation strategies.
6.3.2
Construction Objectives
Support: UEP
-Overall: To construct the Project
as per the approved design drawings,
specifications and standards in a manner that ensures the overall project
objectives are met, typically including specific targets set for cost, schedule ,
HSE, quality and local content:
-
Safety: To design and construct the facility in a manner that minimises risk to
the construction workforce during construction and ensures a safe and orderly
start up on completion.
Cost: To execute the project within budget and to continuously look for the
most cost effective implementation options.
Local Content: To meet the Project local content requirements and support the
development of local capability.
6.3.3
Construction Planning
Support: UEP3
For reliable project execution planning a Level IV Detailed Construction Schedule shall
be prepared soon after the start of the detailed design. This level IV is typically
prepared by the main Construction contractor, shall cover all subcontractor construction
activities, shall be fully aligned and integrated with the design and procurement
schedule and be fully resourced with man-hours and materials from which a progress
S curve can be constructed. Estimated construction durations shall be based on
proven local productivity levels and realistic resourcing levels. It is vital that a Level IV
Schedule is produced before work starts on site and that the plan is adequately
reviewed by all the disciplines to ensure it is a realistic and robust plan.
The absence of a detailed level IV plan is an indication of poor project planning and
control and delays and re-work can be anticipated.
The Level IV Schedule is used by the Contractor in planning, executing and controlling
his work. A Level IV Schedule can also be used in planning work to be implemented
during a plant shutdown. These detailed schedules typically consist of thousands of
activities and are updated at least weekly and in some cases daily.
The Contractor on medium to large Projects should be reporting against the following
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) weekly but certainly monthly:
Progress % actual versus planned (this is physical progress NOT cost progress).
Material requirements.
Scaffolding/Rigging support.
Sheets are developed for activities in both the construction and fabrication sites and
will be updated on an ongoing basis as deemed necessary.
6.3.4
Mechanical Completion
Support: UEP
Mechanical completion is a milestone achieved when all specified construction work is
complete and acceptance inspection and physical testing is satisfactorily performed and
documented.
Typically, inspection and testing activities performed to achieve mechanical completion
will be carried out on a single discipline basis, by construction work packs, building to
systems / subsystems. Such activities will not require equipment or systems to be
energised, but may include bench calibration of instruments, electrical insulation tests,
electrical continuity tests, hydro testing of pipes and integrity testing of valves.
Mechanical completion will be documented on check sheets known as A check sheets,
which will be generated and managed by the Completions and Certification
Management System (CCMS) to ensure that asset integrity can be verified and
demonstrated. On achievement of mechanical completion, responsibility for the facility
will transfer from those responsible for construction to those responsible for precommissioning and commissioning.
6.3.5
Pre-Commissioning
Support: UEP
Pre-commissioning activities undertaken after mechanical completion, but prior to
commissioning, are to prove and validate the functioning of equipment. Such activities
could involve the introduction of fluids into systems, but not hydrocarbons.
Typically, pre-commissioning activities will verify that documentation to support
mechanical completion is in place, and not repeat work carried out to achieve
mechanical completion. Such activities are carried out on a single discipline basis, by
system / subsystem, and require equipment or systems to be energised, but do not
require the introduction of process fluids. Activities include instrument loop checks,
panel function tests, energising electrical equipment and running motors without loads.
They are documented on B check sheets, which will be generated and managed by
CCMS to ensure that asset integrity can be verified and demonstrated.
At the start of pre-commissioning, CCMS needs to be ready, operational and
maintained up to date and the commissioning Permit to Work (PTW) System activated.
Normal dump flushing is typically a construction activity but specialist flushing and
cleaning, e.g. chemical and hydraulic cleaning, drying, oxygen freeing etc, falls within
the integrated Commissioning Teams responsibility - see SP-2051 - Specification for
Flushing, Pressure Testing, Pickling and Sensitive Leak Testing of Mechanical
Equipment and Piping.
6.4.1
Commissioning
Support: UEP, UOP4
These activities are those undertaken after pre-commissioning to dynamically verify
functionality of equipment and to ensure that systems, or facilities forming part of a
system, are in accordance with specified requirements to bring that system into
operation.
Typically, commissioning activities undertaken after pre-commissioning will be carried
out on a system basis by a multidiscipline team of engineers and operations staff under
simulated conditions. Commissioning responsibility may necessitate nitrogen and
helium testing, which shall normally be executed by specialist contractors and
supported by the commissioning personnel.
The Commissioning Start-up (CSU) Team will start up and operate the non-hydrocarbon
systems during commissioning activities until these systems are fully proven and
provisional handover to Operations can be carried out. For hydrocarbon systems,
provisional handover will take place after all pre-commissioning and commissioning
activities have been completed up to the point of hydrocarbon introduction. The
Operations group takes responsibility for the introduction of hydrocarbons, the Start-up
activities and operation of hydrocarbon process systems. Co-ordination between the
Operations and CSU is essential and particularly so on Brownfield sites. In this
instance, a Commissioning Leader may report to an asset owner for the duration of
CSU activities.
The Commissioning plan and Start-up sequence shall be developed for the Integrated
Production System (IPS) during the Front-end Engineering Design (FEED) and detailed
design; with clear distinction between non-hydrocarbon systems (e.g. firewater, utility
air, sewage etc) and hydrocarbon systems (e.g. process system, fuel gas, drains/vents
etc.)
At some point commissioning requires the introduction of fluids (process or nonprocess) and operation of the system. This will be documented using a procedure which
shall be compiled specifically for the project and provide for signature on completion of
each step. The procedure shall form part of the Commissioning Management System
(CCMS) to ensure that asset integrity can be verified and demonstrated.
6.4.2
Pre-Start-up Audit
Support: UEP, UEQ, UOP4
For all projects, a pre-Start-up Audit (PSUA) shall be carried out prior to introduction of
hydrocarbons. The PSUA shall be carried out by an independent Function-led review
team, including representation from Operations, Engineering and HSE. UOP is the
process owner for PSUA and co-ordinates all PSUAs in PDO. The audit shall verify key
items such as:
Asset Integrity Process Safety (AI-PS) requirements have been met and a Statement
of Fitness has been signed;
HSE-MS is in place.
The Pre-Start-up Audit will be used to demonstrate the operational readiness of the
facilities and systems.
6.4.3
Fixed Assets Created, Fixed Assets Made Redundant & Fixed Assets Data Acceptance.
WBS Level 4 and 5 Close Out (including Design project close out).
Complete project file with all project data in the correct data format.
7.1 Contracting
7.1.1
Support: FPO
In PDO all Contracting and Procurement of 3rd party services and materials shall be in
full compliance with the requirements stipulated in CP-129 Contracting and
Procurement Code of Practice and in accordance with GU-425 Contracting and
Procurement Guidelines and PR-1233 Contract & Procurement Procedure.
The governance structure around Contracting and Procurement is provided through 2
different bodies, these are:
Minor Tender Board limit for Goods Procurement above $130k and for Services
above USD 50k to maximum of $2.5mln except for Government Gas
requirements the maximum limit is $650k.
Major Tender Board for all proposals above $2.5mln except for Government Gas
requirements above $650k.
Pre Tender
Contrac
t Stage
Referral Requirement
Contract Strategies
Tender Lists
Company Estimate
Tender Period
Technical Disqualification
Technical & Commercial Evaluation Model
Company Estimate alterations
Opening Commercial Bids
Commercial Clarifications
Con
Contrac
t Stage
Referral Requirement
Failed Tender and CallIn the Tender Bond
tract
Award
Negotiation results
Contract Awards
Contract
Execution
Variations to Contract
Changes
Significant changes to Terms & Conditions
New scope
Extensions of Time
Claims exceeding Review Limit
7.1.2
Assess
Select
** General
Market
Analysis up
to date /
revised.
** Identify major
factors that influence
the project
Execution strategy.
** Identify
standardization and
repeatability
opportunities across
the project portfolio
including category
options.
** Assign Project CP
support personnel.
** In depth and current
market analysis completed.
** Identify ICV
opportunities
** Develop Project
Contracting Strategy
aligned with project drivers
including standardization
and repeatability
opportunities.
** Select appropriate ICV
options
** Identify Procurement List
of Major Long Lead
equipment and critical
materials.
Activitie
s
** Concept Executability
realistic assumptions
(demand & supply).
Define
** CP team fully established and
ready for execute.
**
**
**
Exe
per
Ma
** M
** B
**
var
**
con
** I
com
** P
ma
lev
** C
Identif
y
Delivera
bles
Assess
** CP Objectives
and CP
Assessment of
feasible concept
under
consideration.
** Project Category
Assessment (to be
finalized after
Contracting
Strategy
Workshop).
Select
Define
** Pre-Award Contracting
Activities clearly defined
and dates allocated.
** Project resourced.
**
** C
Do
Pla
** Governance in place.
**
Tra
7.1.3
Contract Owner:
o
Should at all times be aware of HSE and Quality issues in each contract.
Contract Engineer.
o
Shall support and provide Commercial advice to the Contract Holder during
the development and implementation of contracts.
It is mandatory for all Contract Holders & Contract Owners to attend the Contract
Holdership Course and to get assessed and certified for competency.
Appointments of Company personnel:
The Contract Owner shall nominate in writing a competent Contract Holder to manage
the contract.
The Contract Holder shall nominate the Company Representative and the Company
Site Representative if required. The responsibilities delegated to them shall be well
defined in writing and the Contractor shall be informed of the same.
7.1.4
The Contract Holder shall prepare the pre & post contract plan & schedule.
Selection of Tenderers
o
The Contract Holder shall seek Tender Board endorsement of the selected
Tenderers.
The Tender & Contract documents are prepared by the Contract Holder and
Contract Engineer.
The Contract Engineer shall be the single focal point for all correspondence
with the Tenderers at the pre-contract award stage.
Tender Period
o
The Contract Holder has to ensure that all Technical queries from
Tenderers are clarified.
The Contract Holder has to prepare the Technical Evaluation Model and the
Contract Engineer has to prepare the Commercial Evaluation Model.
Tender Evaluation
o
The Contract Holder carries out the Technical Evaluation and the Contract
Engineer carries out the Commercial Evaluation. Results of evaluation with
award recommendation are to be presented to Tender Board for
endorsement.
7.1.5
Mobilisation
o
Contract Holder has to ensure that the Kick-off meetings (Internal &
External) are held.
Execution
o
The Contract Holder has to manage the progress of the work, the
performance of the Contractor and has to be competent in identifying &
managing contract risks and claims.
The Contract Holder has to monitor spend against approved contract value
(ACV) and timely address MTBC in case of foreseeable overspend.
The Contract Holder has to minimise the changes in contract and claims.
For contract above $10M the Contract Holder has to ensure that Annual
Reviews are prepared and presented to Tender Board.
On completion of the contract, the Contract Holder has to ensure that the
Completion certificates, the Site Restoration Certificates and the Final
Account are issued, As-Built drawings & data are received from the
contractor and the Contract Holder has to prepare the final performance
report of the contractor.
7.2.1
Procurement
Support: FPO
Procurement of both materials and services are covered in PR-1233 - Contracting and
Procurement Procedure.
There are four Procurement Options that a project may decide to adopt as part of its
procurement strategy, namely:
1. EPC Projects: Contractor is fully responsible for all aspects of projects
procurement requirements. In this case, PDO involvement is limited to providing
technical support and other relevant clarifications on the materials
requirements.
However, PDO may decide (depending on the approved contracting strategy) to
place the Purchase Orders (POs) of the long lead items then novate the POs to
the EPC Contractor at the award time.
In addition, PDO may opt to Tender the long lead items during the pre-award
phase then handover, at post award, the Tender to the EPC Contractor who
places and manages the PO. In all cases management fees for placing the PO
are included in the EPC Lump-Sum Price.
2. EpC (small p) Projects: This is similar to option 1 but PDO is responsible for
procurement of the critical items. For this type of work, PDO shall arrange
procurement of such materials and free issue to the contractor for installation as
appropriate.
3. EMC/ODC Projects: Contractor performs procurement on behalf of PDO. For
this type of jobs, the respective contractor is expected to use PDO SAP/IX2
systems to perform both the Sourcing (Tender) and Procurement of materials.
PDO will pay the material supplier (not the contractor) directly after the
successful processing of goods receipting in SAP. Good receipting and
transportation of materials to contractors storage sites or work locations will be
done via PDOs nominated LSP (Logistics Service Provider).
4. Stock and Project specific items: PDO C&P Organisation performs the
procurement. This is mainly for standard or project specific items that need to
be stored at PDO logistics warehouses, prior to being (free) issued to
contractors. For stock items, the project pays for the material at the time of
goods issue to the project, while ordering of materials as project items
requires upfront payment by project at time of goods receipting.
7.2.2
7.2.3
Inventory Management
Support: FPC3
CP-193 - Inventory Management provides a mandatory set of guidelines pertaining to
stock levels determinations to ensure that PDO inventory levels are maintained at an
appropriate level consistent with both Company and accounting policies and required
customer service levels.
DEP 70.10.90.11 Gen Spare Parts provides guidelines for the management of spares.
In PDO, all commissioning & insurance spares shall be treated as Property, Plant &
Equipment and orders placed by project under CAPEX. Initial and normal operation
spares shall be ordered under stock account as OPEX and users will be charged on
consumption basis.
7.2.4
Logistics Services
Support: UWL
Logistics services comprise the following:
Cargo haulage and handling services, including water haulage, loading/unloading and
rigs & well test units moves.
Warehousing storage and preservation of all types of material including special projects
material. For further details please see PR-1858 Procedure for Material Handling,
Storage and Preservation
Passenger Commuting by land and air, including scheduled and chartered flights,
international land transport, directors land transport and interior land transport
(villages).
Fleet Management including pool and permanently allocated vehicles, ad-hoc and
specialised and emergency vehicles.
With the exception of materials storage & handling (warehousing) and some coastal
driving activities, all logistics services are contracted out. Logistics employees in UWL
are responsible for managing and monitoring these contracts. The contractors are
responsible for executing the logistics services in accordance with PDOs contract terms
and conditions. Materials storage and handling is managed directly by Logistics,
although warehouse/yard labour resources are contracted out.
More details on Logistics can be found in CP-132 - Logistics Services - CoP.
7.2.4.1
8 Project Services
Support: UEP3
Project Services will provide resources, processes, systems and tools to deliver:
Robust estimates that allow for the uncertainties of our complex reservoirs and
novel development options in a volatile market.
Realistic achievable plans that still provide challenge to our project teams.
Effective controls that manage the work and show where we are and future
possibilities.
Useful close-out processes that capture the lessons and data for future
improvement.
Baselined cost and schedule that enables active change management; impact
of changes to be communicated and understood.
The CFDH for Project Services is the TA1 for the above areas and is responsible for the
setting and maintenance of the associated standards and processes. Once their
competence is proven, the TA1 appoints TA2s who sign off all their Project Services
documents specified as such in DCAF.
Project teams are required to have the above subject areas covered as appropriate to
the current project phase, with suitably competent staff, either directly or as part of a
matrix, as agreed with the CFDH.
Depending on the organisational make up of the project team, responsibility for
Information Management may also reside with Project Services on a day to day basis,
while under the overall management of the Engineering and Operations Information
Management office (UEPI), as described in section 11.
8.1
transparent with regard to understanding the critical path and the possible
impact of project risks;
owned by the Project Team and approved by their Decision Review Board
(DRB); and
Projects should develop an integrated schedule during the Assess phase, which will be
refined as the project progresses through Select and Define. It should be based on
appropriate lower level schedules and used as the basis for all progress measurement
plans and reports. It should reflect all project activities needed to realise the project
objectives at the appropriate level of detail.
It is essential that the basis on which any schedule is made is clearly defined and
recorded, so that any consideration of the schedule is in the context of these
qualifications. In particular, decision makers should be made fully aware of any
limitations or risks inherent in such plans.
8.1.1
Definitions
Planning: Laying out the course of action, including all interfaces, studies, surveys,
reviews, decisions, approvals etc, to achieve the desired objective.
Scheduling: Incorporating time and resources into the plan to form a schedule network
from which control mechanisms can be derived.
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS): A deliverable-oriented hierarchical decomposition of
the work to be executed by the project team to accomplish the project objectives and
create the required deliverables.
8.1.1.1
identify the activity types that need to be done on each of the assets (concept
definition, design, procure etc);
map the activities and assets to identify unique activities that need to be
managed;
define work packages for these individual activities (e.g. design compressors)
or groupings of them (e.g. design topsides); and
The design of the WBS should be a collaborative effort between the Project Engineers,
Project Services, Supply Chain and Finance as these parties have a vested interest in
ensuring that the WBS is adequate to meet their needs for planning, monitoring and
control.
Other factors that may influence the design of the WBS are the:
o
granularity of cost data required for asset definition in the financial system.
PDO will develop local standard WBS templates that are suited to the type of projects
executed. Use of standard WBS templates, where possible, facilitates the comparison
and benchmarking.
8.1.1.2
8.1.2
Schedule Development
Previous similar project plans and templates may be used to help develop a new project
schedule. The normal steps in developing a schedule are:
o
8.1.2.1
Planning Levels
Schedules for controlling and monitoring large projects are produced to different levels
of detail.
Level 1 Summary Schedule (also called Project Management Schedule)
Includes the main functional activities (e.g. design, procurement, fabrication,
construction, commission) for the total duration of the project for the main hardware
items (onshore plant, pipelines) as well as significant business activities (e.g. approvals,
strategy formation, marketing etc) and any key milestones (e.g. FID, first production).
This level of schedule usually fits on a single page and is often used in project status
reports as a simple tool for conveying overall schedule status. This level of schedule is
not detailed enough to show the true critical path but often a high-level, simplified
depiction of the critical path will be shown on this schedule to help communicate which
elements of the project the critical path runs through.
Level 2 Integrated Master Schedule
This is a network-driven schedule, which breaks the project down by phase and
elements and identifies the contractor interfaces. The critical path should be made
visible and major milestones should be identified. This schedule sets the framework for
detailed schedules and resource scheduling.
Level 3 Detailed Integrated Schedules for Major Project Phases
Separate Level 3 schedules are typically prepared for the major phases of a project,
such as engineering and procurement, construction and system testing, and
commissioning, start-up and performance testing.
This level of schedule provides a more detailed representation of the activities,
interfaces and milestones involved within these phases of the project and is better
suited for monitoring progress versus plan. Often this level of schedule is maintained by
the owner, as the owner is in the best position to fully appreciate the interfaces of the
various owner and contractor resources, and the involvement of the owner and partner
organisations in such things as approvals and operations support and handover.
Levels 4 and 5 Work Lists and Detailed Schedules
These levels of detailed planning and scheduling usually lie within the contractors
domain and are used for planning, executing and controlling the contractors work. They
are used for detailed planning, such as the scheduling of work to be implemented
during a plant shutdown or the scheduling of work in a fabrication yard. These detailed
schedules may consist of thousands of activities and are typically updated at least
weekly and in some cases daily.
8.1.2.2
8.1.2.3
Optimisation
The project management software also provides the functionality to evaluate options for
accelerating the schedule, using techniques such as crashing and fast tracking. The
impact of resource constraints can also be evaluated using techniques such as
resource levelling. The project team should be closely involved in any such schedule
optimisation exercise to ensure that the schedule stays grounded in reality.
8.1.2.4
Risk Analysis
Schedule risk analysis is used to evaluate and communicate the possible range of
schedule outcomes taking into account the impact of project opportunities and risks.
The basic premise of schedule risk analysis is that the project team estimates not only
the most likely activity durations, but also the likely range of activity durations based on
the identified project opportunities and risks. These likely ranges of activity durations
are then modelled using the scheduled risk analysis software. The software uses Monte
Carlo simulation techniques to predict the expected (~P50) activity durations, as well
as the P10 and P90 durations (see 8.3.5).
This allows the project team to consider and communicate a range of possible project
schedule outcomes instead of just a single schedule outcome. This analysis also helps
the team evaluate what risk mitigation and avoidance strategies and tactics can be used
to improve the chances of a desirable schedule outcome.
Any schedule risk analysis should be carried out before cost risk analysis. This is
because schedule drives cost and not vice versa. The standard software that PDO has
selected for schedule risk analysis is Primavera Risk (previously Pertmaster).
Schedule risk analysis shall be carried out for all projects >$100mln.
8.1.2.5
the project objectives are clearly stated and understood by those preparing the
schedule (e.g. project policies, strategies, philosophies, objectives and
constraints);
there is an appropriate WBS for the project and it has been used as the basis
for organising the schedule. The WBS is logical and it avoids overlapping
activities;
the project scope and the basis for the schedule development are well defined
and documented;
the overall project duration and key activity durations are benchmarked against
Company (and, if required, external) experience;
key resource constraints (e.g. drilling rigs/ shutdowns) have been considered in
the schedule development, including shutdown timings;
the resulting critical path is logical and correct. The activities just off the critical
path (e.g. activities with less than 1 month of float) have been evaluated to
determine how small changes in their durations or logic could impact the critical
path;
several key interim milestones have been identified so that they can be used
during the life of the project to aid in progress measurement;
a schedule risk analysis has been performed and is closely linked to the key
risks in the project risk register;
representatives from all segments of the project team are involved in the
schedule development;
A formal Estimate and Schedule Assurance Review (ESAR) shall be completed prior (34 weeks) to VAR 3 for all projects with a total Capex greater than $200mln (including
drilling), and at least prior to VAR 4 for projects with a Capex larger than $100mln.
8.1.2.6
8.1.3
integrate the new project activities with the other approved activities to be
executed on the asset, taking account of resource constraints; and
Primavera P6 allows all the activities on an Asset to be integrated into one plan.
8.2.1
Capex Estimates
The quality of an estimate is largely determined by the following:
the associated risks and opportunities of the project should be recognised and
reflected in the estimate;
complete and correct local cost data, at an appropriate level of detail, should be
available covering:
o
equipment;
bulk materials;
import restrictions;
All estimates should correspond to the requirements for the ORP stage and the defined
accuracy levels, which are highlighted in the below table.
ORP
Stage
Type
Accuracy
Engineering prepared
(target)
DG1
+40%/-25%
DG2
+25%/-20%
Preliminary 2
+20%/-15%
DG3
Final 2
+20%/-15%
DG4
+15%/-10%
+10%/-5%
8.2.2
Indentify
&
Assess
DG1
Identify
&
Assess
DG2
Select
DG3a
Select
DG3b
Define
DG4
Execute
Estimate
Type
Purpose of
estimate
Type 0
Type 1
Type 2
(initial)
Type 2
(final)
Type 3
Type 4
Identify
opportunity
Compare
opportunity
Select
option
Budget
proposal or
TB Contract
Award
Changes
Estimating
Tool
Cost
Contingency
CES +
cookbooks
CES +
cookbooks
Capco$t
Costs
aligned with
BfD go
forward to
FEED
Capco$t
Contractor
quotes
Contract
data
TECOP
TECOP
TECOP
Concept/
Process
Eng
Concept/
Process
Eng
Project/
Function
Estimator
ESAR Peer
TECOP,
Proby
>$100
Project/
Function
Estimator
ESAR4
>$50mln
Function
TA2
TECOP
Estimated by
TECOP,
Proby
>$100
Project/
Function
Estimator
ESAR3
>$ 200mln
Function
AT2
Assurance
NA
NA
Project/
DCAF
Asset TA2
endorsement
Table: Estimate overview preparation & assurance
Project
Estimator
Project
estimator
Project/
Asset TA2
Please note project teams must schedule their assurance reviews at least 3 months in
advance with the UEP/3 Function.
8.2.3
8.2.4
Base Estimate
The Base Estimate is first calculated in Estimate Date Money (EDM), which is NOT
the date an estimate is compiled, but the date when the estimation database was last
re-baselined. EDM is then converted to the Money of the Day (MOD) by application of
inflation indices referenced to the Cost Reference Date (CRD).
The Base estimate also includes allowances, usually expressed as percentages, to
allow for the known unknowns for example design growth that could occur in future
phases.
The Base Estimate is recorded in $US and MOD. Within a Base estimate some
equipment quotes may be in another currency, these should be converted to $US using
the prescribed exchange rates. To establish MOD costs the phased estimate is
converted with specified inflation factors. Both Exchange rates and inflation factors are
confirmed each year by UEP/32 in the Programme Build guidelines.
8.2.4.1
8.2.5
8.2.6
8.2.7
8.2.8
8.3.1
Introduction
The key focus areas of Project Controls are
Management of Costs;
Management of Progress;
Management of Change;
Project Reporting;
Project Closeout;
Management of Resources.
Each is covered in a separate section below.
Project Controls provide a series of processes, based on these six focus areas, which
assist in executing a project in the most efficient and economical way. Secondly, but not
less importantly, project controls provide the mechanism to inform management at any
point in time during the project about the actual status of the project, both in cost and
time, so that, if required, corrective actions can pro-actively be prepared and ultimately
exercised in a timely fashion.
The Project Controls Plan (PCP) documents the minimum standards of project controls
systems and processes required to manage the project and provide a clear and concise
explanation of how project controls shall be implemented on a project including all key
references to applicable project procedures, standards and guidelines.
8.3.2
Management of Cost
Support: UEP32
Cost control during any phase of a project comprises the setting up of the cost
procedures and systems and the monitoring and the reporting of the actual project
expenditure and commitments against the approved project budget. The early
identification and registration of deviations together with the following of trends enables
project management to control the project.
All project activities should be broken down into controllable items. For Cost Control
purposes it is important that Cost Estimates shall be carried out in accordance with the
approved Cost Breakdown Structure (CBS).This will ensure that the data can be
retrieved for Cost Control purposes in a systematic manner.
Regular reporting of the Value of Work Done, Commitments and assessment of the cost
of work remaining should detect any potential over or under expenditure in good time
for proper management action. Project progress is continuously monitored, in physical
and financial terms. In addition to these primary objectives of cost control throughout
the various phases of a project, it should provide data for:
Capital expenditure phasing reflecting the anticipated progress of the Value of Work
Done.
Cash flow forecasts, based on the expenditure phasing taking due account of the
payment conditions.
Management of Progress
8.3.3
Support: UEP31
Schedule control is essential to project success, enabling measurement and report
progress relative to the promises made. An effective control system will also provide
timely warning of variances to inform stakeholders and allow remediation.
Schedule control requires scope and execution control. Signs that the schedule is
deviating from plan is usually evidence that the scope and execution are not under
control and/or that external circumstances have not been fully understood and
accounted for.
The basic requirements on schedule (or cost) control are:
Although schedule control is most prominent after Final Investment Decision (FID), it is
also required in earlier phases when significant time is consumed and promises (e.g. on
the FID date) are already made.
Management of Change
8.3.4
Support: UEP3
Management of Change is a key activity in Project Controls and is described in Section
5.5.
All projects >$US50 million will adopt the Management of Change (MOC) procedure
PR1247.
The procedure:
Describes the process for controlling and managing technical change during the
concept definition and execute phases of PDO projects.
Sets out a series of key Baseline Value Drivers (BVD) for the projects which
shall be developed during conceptual Select phase and approved by the DRB
at Decision Gate 3 (DG3). If a change occurs through DEFINE an updated set
of BVDs are approved at DG4. These Value drivers are normally captured in the
Field Development Plan, the Concept Select Report, the Basis for Design and
the Project Specification
Sets up the Change Review Panel consisting of senior project personnel that
meets regularly and acts as the Stage Gate screening and approval body for
change impact. The Panel will review every Level 3/2/1 change proposal and
ensure that all implications of the change are considered before being accepted
or rejected. Periodically, the Panel reviews the list of Level 4 change proposals.
8.3.5
Management of Risk
Support: UEP31
Risk and Opportunity Management is a key activity in Project Controls and is described
in Section 5.3.
Risk Management involves the identification of the risks and opportunities on the project
and ensures that the risk levels are kept as low as practicable (ALARP) and that the
opportunities are exploited to the fullest.
The process includes:
o
A risk work shop at a predefined stage of the project to identify the risks and
opportunities,
Assessing the severity of risks against the Risk Assessment Matrix (RAM a
two dimensional grid of scaled probability and impact for the various
consequences)
Reviewing the risks for mitigation actions and the possibility of utilising
opportunities,
Periodically reassessing the risk register and communicating the status to the
stakeholders
The risk management plan or the Project Execution Plan should explain in detail how
Risk Management will be conducted by the specific project.
The information held in the Risk Register will be used as the inputs to the quantitative
(probabilistic) cost/ schedule risk analysis and to ensure more realistic targets are set.
The development and maintaining of the Risk Management Plan, Risk Register and the
RAM are the responsibility of the Project Manager.
8.3.6
Reporting
Support: UEP31, UEP32
Project Reporting shall provide a true and honest reflection of the status of the project at
the cut off date by reporting of all cost and scheduling elements plus the main project
highlights and areas of concern (without unnecessary details) and including forecasts
and remedies.
For Large (>$50mln) and Major (>$200mln) projects, the project team shall issue a
progress report on a monthly basis, including a Project One Pager that shall be stored
on Project Livelink. All reports must be approved by the project manager before issue.
For specific Flagship Shell projects, each quarter the Shell Business One templates
shall be completed and loaded into the Shell system.
8.3.7
8.4.1
8.4.2
Programme Build
Support: UEP3
All projects provide input to the Programme Build each year. Project teams must ensure
their schedule, costs and resources are realistic and achievable and that their updates
are in line with the Programme Build cost assumptions (Escalation, Exchange rates and
Market factors). For major projects >$US200M the update must include a probabilistic
(Monte-Carlo) re-assessment of the Schedule and Cost contingency that is linked to the
latest project risks and opportunities. To tie in with Programme Build Functional
assurance, the project update exercise must be completed by end March each year.
The Project Services Functional team is responsible to assure the project schedules
and cost estimates created for each years Programme Build by the Asset and Project
teams:
9 Quality Assurance
Support: UEQ
PDOs requirements for Quality
Management Policy PL-15 and;
CP-190 - Quality Management System for Project Delivery: Ensures that quality is
applied and consistently implemented in PDO projects by supporting the ORP to
provide a standardised Governance, Assurance and Delivery process and give direction
to Project Management).
SP-1122 - Project Quality Assurance Plans: Details the minimum requirements for
preparation and implementation of Project Quality Plan (PQP) for all projects.
SP-1171 - Specification for Quality Assurance Requirements for Product and Service :
Provides instructions which combined with the PQP specify the Companys minimum
requirements for Quality Assurance in all contracts and purchase orders and provides
guidelines on the contents and development of a Contract Quality Plan and Quality
Control Plan.
SP-2061 Technical Authority System: Provides information on Technical Authorities
(TA) system operates by PDO.
However, the existence of a good management system does not in itself guarantee a
quality product; this has to be accomplished via a combination of technical competence
and, most importantly, adherence by all contributors to the system.
The commitment and active involvement of the functional leadership team(s) in
developing and maintaining the project Quality Management System (QMS) is therefore
essential for the system to be effective.
The BOM/PM/PE has overall responsibility for quality and its implementation at every
stage of the project. The BOM/PM/PE should ensure that the project QMS is reviewed
at regular intervals ensuring its continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness.
Where repetitive projects (portfolio of projects) are covered within a single contract
scope, a single QMS / PQP may be developed (see CP-190, sections 2.4, 2.6, 2.7),
underpinned by level 3, 4 documents / deliverables.
Adequacy is judged by its ability to deliver the project that satisfies requirements,
standards and regulations.
The review output should include decisions and actions related to the improvement of
the effectiveness of the project QMS, its processes and related resource needs.
Further responsibility and authority include;
Ensuring that project quality requirements are addressed and included within the PEP;
CP-190 Appendix 1, 2 and 4. SP-1122.
Establishing, implementing and maintaining the project QMS including quality strategy
and PQP; CP-190 section 2.3, SP-1122 and DCAF.
Establishing the budget, resource estimate for quality and ensuring that appropriate
quality resources are available within their respective project team and contractors
organisations in order to achieve PDOs Quality Policy & Objectives: Identifying the
objectives and providing the infrastructure and quality resources, clearly defining Roles
& Responsibilities and motivating personnel to improve the processes and product. CP190 section 2.3, 2.6 and 2.8.
Ensuring that project quality requirements are included within contract documents and
that contractors, subcontractors and vendors comply with project QMS requirements.
CP-190 all sections, SP 1122 and SP1171.
Team development to ensure all project personnel are aware of quality responsibilities.
CP-190 section 2.9.
Promoting a consistency of approach & sharing learning across projects and for
promoting continuous improvement within their project organisation. Planning for future
preventative actions (identify, collect, store, update, retrieve and review information).
CP-190 section 2.7, 2.11, 2.12, 1.13 and 2.15.
Taking the appropriate action necessary to address quality issues impacting project
delivery including document reviews, and corrective and preventive actions are
completed in a timely manner (Delivering the project by complying to standards and
developing, implementing fit for purpose processes). CP-190 section 2.12, 2,13, 2.14
and 2.15.
Making use of available quality related information to evaluate options and make
decisions. CP-190 all sections.
Discipline Standards (DS): Defining the controls and Tools of a discipline, these have
been defined by the Functions (CFDH). CFDH is responsible for the discipline
standards, local rules and appointment of Technical authorities.
Discipline Authority Manual (DAM): A list which records who can sign what. Reference
SP-2061 - Technical Authority System.
Project / Asset Controls and Assurance Plan (PCAP / ACAP) template: A plan listing, of
what needs to be quality assured and controlled.
Project / Asset Controls and Assurance Schedule (PCAP / ACAP) template: A template
that translates the PCAP/ACAL into a resourced schedule of Quality Control and
Assurance activities / events.
Each Discipline has a Standard (DS), which lists the decisions and deliverables that the
Discipline head contributes to in each phase of the Opportunity Realisation Process
(ORP), plus the required authority-level for sign off for the Discipline decisions and
deliverables in a precise and auditable manner.
There is no pre-ordained scaling in DCAF. Controls and tools for each discipline have been
base-lined by the Functions (CFDH), but scaling / applicability is left to the Project or Asset, as
ultimate accountability for Controls and Assurance resides with the line of site of that project or
Asset.
The Business Opportunity Manager (BOM), Project Manager (PM) or Asset Manager (AM),
dependent on phase/gate, is responsible for the full day-to-day management of the Opportunity
(Project) or Asset and is responsible (supported by disciplines) for the PCAP/ACAL framing and
maintenance. The BOM/PM/AM or delegate uses the standard PDO template to draw up the
PCAP/ACAL (Mandatory Assurance events and specific controls, including deviations). This
shall be a team effort with all the required disciplines attending.
DCAF works by assigning accountability (ATA) for an overall decision or deliverable to a single
discipline (Competence based Technical Authority SP2061) whilst recognizing that the
contribution from other disciplines (responsibilities, RTA) may be a control in their own right,
finally DCAF acknowledges that other disciplines may have an impact and therefore may need
to be consulted and/or informed (C/I).
In signing off on a business-critical element and/or deliverable the individual is:
ATA Signing as being ultimately accountable for the control: Control Point owner, accountable
for exercising the right Controls are properly identified/ implemented by qualified individuals.
May not claim full competence in all aspects, but he or she is considered to be responsible
enough to pull in necessary counsel to take on the accountability Signs off the end control
deliverable.
RTA - Signing as being responsible for their respective Discipline input into the Control Point on
behalf of their Discipline: Shares in the accountability, personally accountable for their
input/action, the role of an RTA is to QC and sign-off the input of his/her Discipline into the
Control Point (deliverable/decision), he/she must fully understand the requirements
(CoP/SP/PR/DEP) and deliverables to be produced and ensure the Discipline Standard is
properly implemented.
C/I - Most Decisions and Deliverables are multi-disciplinary, signing as being consulted and/or
informed states that you have read the document and any known discrepancies, impacts have
been highlighted and discussed with the RTA/ATA.
PCAP/ACAL adherence will be required to be submitted to the DRB at each DG in order to
proceed to the next gate. Where controls have not been achieved, the BOM, PM, AM will
require to demonstrate (endorsed by CFDH as applicable) that the control has been mitigated
and will not impact the Project progression, delivery and Asset integrity.
10 HSE in Projects
10.1 Introduction
Support: MSE4
Getting HSE (Health, Safety and Environment) right in projects means identifying the
risks, managing them, and being able to demonstrate that they are under control. To do
so, the right organisation, plans and resources need to be in place.
The business expectation for effective management of HSE risks and opportunities is
set out in the PDO HSE Policy (PL-04) and supporting HSE Management System (CP122). In practice this involves working to deliver benefits and reduce impacts through
our operations. Meeting this commitment requires a particular mindset: one where we
balance short and long term interests; integrate economic, environmental and social
considerations into business decisions; and regularly engage with our many
stakeholders.
An HSE Technical Authority must be appointed by the Project Manager. He or she
shall establish, maintain and execute the appropriate HSE studies and/or activities in
order to adequately identify, assess, and document the HSE risks of the project, in line
with the HSE Management System (CP-122).
It is important to recognise that the HSE Function and Technical Safety Engineering
Discipline do not operate in isolation from the Project Team, the existing Asset team or
the wider community in which the Project is operating. Integration of the HSE Technical
Authority into the Project Team is essential to ensure that risks and opportunities are
identified and managed early.
The activities and deliverables required to ensure that HSE risks and opportunities are
appropriately managed will vary depending on the Project. The following table lists the
mandatory HSE activities for every project.
Identify
Assess
Select
Define
Execute
Identify
an
HSE
Technical Authority
Confirm/identify HSE
Technical Authority
Confirm/identify HSE
Technical Authority
Confirm/identify HSE
Technical Authority
Confirm/identify HSE
Technical Authority
Include
HSE
contracting
procurement
in
&
10.2 Application
Support: MSE4
The application of the full suite of HSE activities presented in DCAF is designed for
major capital projects. Some of the activities will not be applicable to smaller projects.
10.2.1
The HSE activities and deliverables shall be documented in the HSE Plan,
which shall ensure that the Project complies with the requirements of the HSE
Management System (CP-122) and with DCAF where appropriate.
All risks shall be identified as early as possible in the project. A Hazards and
Effects Register (refer to SP-2062) shall aid the active management of these
risks. throughout the design phases, such that they are reduced to tolerable
and ALARP levels at handover to the operators. HSE shall be integrated into
project decisions and associated project deliverables.
A HSE Philosophy document shall be developed to identify all the relevant and
agreed external and internal requirements, including regulatory constraints.
The FEED and Detailed Design shall be subject to a HAZOP (refer to PR-1696)
to formally and systematically assess the process hazards and a subsequent
IPF Classification (refer to DEP 32.80.10.10-Gen) to determine the SIL of any
identified instrumented protective functions.
10.2.2
Applicability
It is essential that at the beginning of each project phase, the Business Opportunity
Manager/Project Manager reviews the HSE activities with an HSE Technical Authority to
determine and agree on the studies and deliverables that are required, their timing and
scope as applicable to that Project. Not all the studies in DCAF will be applicable,
depending on the nature of the Project. The following may apply to some Projects:
Project size/cost is not the major indicator of HSE scope; rather the key driver is the
exposure to specific HSE risks. For example, a small project within an existing plant
that cannot impact outside the existing fence-line may not require an Impact
Assessment.
This is not however always the case. Brownfield projects and a few plant modifications
may be small projects but they can often have complex HSE issues associated with
simultaneous operations (SIMOPS) layout, noise, additional effluent streams, etc.
Accelerated projects may combine project phases that will affect the timing and scope
of the HSE activities. For such cases, reduction of HSE scope should be regarded with
caution, as the company assurance requirements will remain.
10.2.3
Type C (judgement based) decisions are those involving hazards that may
create Societal Concerns.
Identifying and documenting Severity Five and High Risk process hazards for
new and existing assets.
Verifying that Contract Holders monitor the HSE (Process Safety) requirements
of the contract that are relevant to the competence and fitness to work of
contractor staff.
Creating and making available the documentation for Safety Critical Equipment
(SCE).
Performing Pre-Start Up Audits (PSUA) for new assets and for modifications to
existing assets.
10.3.1
Statement of Fitness
The purpose of the Statement of Fitness is to uniformly and consistently ensure that key
Asset Integrity Process Safety activities and deliverables have been completed and
verified by competent persons ensuring that hydrocarbons can be introduced safely with
an acceptable level of risk (ALARP).
The Statement of Fitness is an asset level business record required by the PDO HSE
Management System (CP-122) and further defined in the PDO HSE Case specification
(SP-2062). For the majority of projects, it is included in the Operations HSE Case and
signed by the Asset Director, but may in some cases be a stand alone document as
shown in Table below.
The key elements identified for the Statement of Fitness are:
Process Safety Risks have been identified and documented and are managed
to ALARP;
The design and construction of new assets and modifications to existing assets
meet design and engineering requirements (DEM1);
Type
of
Statement of
Fitness (SoF)
Business Control
Signatory
Frequency
New asset
SP-2062,
Case
HSE
Asset Director
Prior to introduction of
hydrocarbons
Restart
following
modifications
Asset Director
Prior to introduction of
hydrocarbons
Operations Manager on
behalf of Asset Director
Prior to introduction of
hydrocarbons
SoF
in
10.3.2
10.3.3
Permit To Work (PTW): The PDO Permit To Work system (refer to PR-1172)
shall be applied.
Avoid Tank Overfill Followed by Vapour Cloud Release: Identify all storage
tanks containing fluids that have the potential to overfill resulting in a vapour
cloud explosion and design safeguarding in accordance with DEP 34.51.01.31Gen. and DEP 32.80.10.10-Gen. Examples of such fluids are natural gas
liquids (condensates) and crude oils with a Reid Vapour Pressure RVP > 2.5
psi.
Mode 1 means the contractor operates within the PDOs HSE Management System
(HSE MS). The contractor provides people and tools for the execution of the work
under the supervision, instructions and PDO HSE MS. The contractor has a
Management System to provide assurance that the personnel for whom they are
responsible are qualified and healthy for the job and that the tools and machinery they
are providing are properly maintained and suitable for the job.
Mode 2 means the contractor operates within its own HSE MS that interfaces with the
PDOs HSE MS and is required to report HSE performance data including incidents to
PDO. The contractor executes all aspects of the job under its own HSE Management
System, provides the necessary instructions and supervision and verifies the proper
functioning of its HSE MS. PDO is responsible for verifying the overall effectiveness of
the HSE management controls put in place by the contractor, and assuring that both the
PDOs and the contractors HSE MS are appropriately compatible.
Mode 3 means the contractor operates within its own HSE MS that has no interfaces
with the PDOs HSE MS and is not required to report HSE performance data including
incidents to PDO. However, this does not exclude the possibility that PDO may wish to
guide and influence HSE performance under the contract.
11 Information Management
Support: UEPI
Designing and managing a project is a business activity that delivers two main assets,
the physical asset and the Information Asset
This Information Asset exists in 2 forms:
Data: to be manipulated by tools e.g. Spare Parts, Tag Register & Maintenance
Routines.
Proper implementation of Project IM achieves two main objectives and serves two
masters:
The Project Team: Support for the engineering processes that deliver the physical asset
(i.e. design, review, approval, and handover between phases)
Operations (Maintenance, Engineering): Delivery of the information asset itself (i.e. final
handover to Operations).
The Information Asset is created in the same way as the Physical Asset and must be
designed, specified, implemented, controlled and handed over with the same attention
to detail and quality as the Physical Asset it represents. It will support commissioning,
start-up, maintenance, Operations, and future engineering activity, and is the
responsibility of the project team to deliver.
The recently (Q42010) established central Engineering and Operations Information
Management office (UEPI) sets the standards and processes to be used by projects,
and provides the resources, support and assurance to carry out these processes on
behalf of the project. Some of those resources will reside in a back office while others
will be co-located with the project team.
PDO engineering function has adopted an Information Management (IM) strategy that
delivers a common framework for IM practice in PDO based on Shell DEP 82.00.10.30Gen Engineering Information Specification (EIS)
This strategy, and the Document and Drawing Management requirements for Projects
are defined in the specifications SP-2065 - Document Management for Projects and
SP-2047 - Preparation & Content of Engineering Drawings.
The various tools used in Information management (which are a requirement for all new
projects) are:
12 Finance in Projects
In PDO, the Finance contribution to projects is delivered through:
For rolling out and implementing a risk based financial and project control
framework;
To ensure management information systems are fit for purpose and produce the
relevant project cost/progress information required for the project, managers
and functional directors to manage their business effectively in order to comply
with budget, forecast, bottom line, cash flow and expenditure requirements and
also complying the requirements of Central Finance.
For Major stand alone projects, the Project Finance Manager (PFM) is part of the
Project Management Team and will have a functional reporting line to the Business
Finance Manager.
For smaller projects executed in the Line, the Finance Manager for the respective
Directorate assumes this role across multiple projects (and usually delegates a senior
management accountant as focal point).
An integrated approach to cost management, work planning, finance, and contracting
and procurement will strongly contribute to a well controlled project environment. In
reality, these activities are often split between the Project Services organisation and the
Finance organisation.
In addition, the Project Finance will provide project teams with a robust set of global
standard processes, controls and tools supporting effective project execution:
Budget Management
Management of Invoices
Manual Of Authorities
The VIP is not merely a detailed review of some portion or aspect of a project.
The results of VIPs exercises must be documented so that the project team is
accountable for incorporating those results into the project.
The manner in which these VIPs will be used on any project is dependent on scale, but
all projects should discuss the following list with the Value Improvement Co-ordinator
(currently UEP2), who will advise which VIPs should be undertaken by the project, and
thus included in the Project Controls and Assurance Plan (PCAP). The main VIPs in use
in PDO are as follows:
Opportunity Framing
Lessons Learned
Value Engineering
Constructability
PEP-PER
The Value Improvement Coordinator can also provide guidance on other VIPs available
(e.g. First Contact Meeting), and give guidance on who in PDO can provide the VIP
support.
VAR3 / DG3
VAR4 / DG4
VAR5
The Lessons Learned are captured in a number of ways, the most important of which
being updates to procedures and standards (where required). Other methods of capture
include the Lessons Learned database, video story capture, project close-out
documentation, knowledge networks, etc.
This VIP enables learnings from previous and current projects to be applied in order to
increase value, and provides assurance that projects have taken on board the
opportunities for improvement and best practices.
Project metrics (cost, schedule and first year production), compared to metrics from
projects (internal and external to PDO) of similar size and complexity.
In addition, by continuous benchmarking of PDO projects, we can improve the
effectiveness of our practices defined in this CoP in order to achieve top quartile
performance in project delivery.
NOTE: benchmarking does not replace effective project management practices but
provides a degree of confidence in the work being done.
13.4.1
Project Metrics
Project benchmarking assesses project metrics related to EP business priorities:
Effective Project Delivery - setting realistic schedule targets and meeting them. The key
metrics here are schedule duration and schedule slip (%).
Competitive Cost Structure - setting competitive cost targets and achieve better than
industry average cost performance. The key metric here is $/BOE.
Production & Operational Excellence setting realistic production targets and meeting
them. The key metric is production attainment (%).
Different projects should focus on different metrics: repeat projects should focus on
beating the performance of the competition, whilst first-off projects should focus on
delivering as per promise.
PDO faces the following special challenges with respect to benchmarking:
The need to benchmark the delivery of a large number of small brown-field projects on
a portfolio rather than a per project basis. Many projects carry CAPEX of less than
$20mln.
The unconventional and novel nature of its major projects, i.e. sour and steam projects
in a desert environment, without many regional or worldwide analogues.
There are 3 different types of external benchmarking conducted at DG3, FID, and after
start-up.
Pacesetter
Prospective
Close Out
Pacesetter (DG3) benchmarking helps the team set define phase targets by providing
project definition status in the form of front end loading factors (reservoir, facilities, and
wells) and provides recommendations to close the gaps before FID. It also provides
performance information in cost & schedule.
Prospective (FID) benchmarking provides project team and stakeholders objective info
about the status of the project and its underlying risks. It also provides performance
benchmarks for cost, schedule, project controls, operability, and predicted outcomes.
Closeout (after start-up) benchmarking provides actual project outcomes (including
production attainment) and lessons learned in order to improve future projects.
PDO uses independent external benchmarking in the following manner:
1. Project CAPEX > $500mln - Mandatory External Benchmarking for all projects
2. Project CAPEX between $100mln and $500mln - Mandatory External
Benchmarking campaigns of all projects in this category at 3 yearly intervals.
This will provide regular snapshots, and will enable long-term tracking of project
delivery performance for the portfolio of medium sized projects.
3. Sample of (10) small (brown field) projects to be benchmarked at 3-yearly
intervals to track project delivery of small projects portfolio (close out
benchmark only)
The structured Technical Standards review should involve interactive meetings attended
by representatives from the engineering disciplines, operations, maintenance, and
construction. Consideration should be given to inviting key contractors and vendors.
The review should eliminate the standards and specifications that are not applicable to
the project, and the team should achieve consensus on the precedence of company
and industry standards and codes.
13.7 Constructability
Support: UEP2
The Constructability VIP is intended to ensure optimum use of construction knowledge
and experience in planning, design, procurement and field operations to achieve the
overall project objectives.
This VIP ensures that construction considerations are identified and properly
incorporated throughout the full course of a project, in line with the project success
criteria.
13.8 PEP-PER
Support: UEP2
The Project Execution Planning using Project Execution Risk (PEP-PER) tool is a VIP
for evaluating and managing execution-specific risk in major projects from early in
Select with further follow-up in the Define phase. The VIP focuses on prevention of
major execution risks as well as mitigation of risk events that may occur.
13.9 LIRA
Support: UWL
The Logistics, Infrastructure and Resource Assessment tool is a VIP for evaluating and
managing logistics and infrastructure risks for capital projects. Further guidance can be
found in PG-19 Capital Project Logistics.
15 Technical Standards
DEP (Shell Design & Engineering Practice) - Sets the recommended standard for good
design and engineering practice and thereby achieves maximum technical and
economic benefit from standardisation. DEM1 denotes that the DEP contains AI-PSM
elements Mandatory when DEP is specified.
15.2 DEM1
Support: UEP1, MSE4
DEM1 is mandatory for all projects and guidelines can be found in GU648 Guideline
for Applying Process Safety in Projects.
DEM1 is discussed in more detail in Section 10.3.2.
5.1.1
Concept Engineering
Reference Information
Concept Selection Handbook
5.1.2
BFD
FEED
Tools
Operations Readiness Portal, ORSAT
5.5
Management of Change
6.1
Detailed Design
PDO Governing Documents
PR-1134, Specification for Detailed Design of Oil & Gas Facilities
Tools
PDMS
6.3
Construction
Reference Information
PG 17a Constructability
PG 17b Construction Management
Shell Wisdom Packs
6.4
7.1
Contracting
Project Services
8.1
Cost Estimating
Project Controls
Management of Cost
Reference Information
Shell Project Cost Reporting Procedure PSM-I-U-001182-FA-6180-0020
Shell Cost Contingency Procedure PSM-I-U-001182-FA-6180-0021
Shell Value of Work Done Procedure PSM-I-U-001182-FA-6180-0022
Shell Earned Value Management Procedure PSM-I-U-001182-FA-6180-0025
Shell Cost Management Procedure PSM-I-U-001182-FA-6180-0028
Shell Management of Invoices Procedure PSM-I-U-001182-FA-6180-0044
Tools
SAP, Dassian
8.3.3
Management of Progress
Management of Change
Management of Risk
Tools
Easyrisk
8.3.6
Reporting
Reference Information
PG 06 Capital Project Controls & Management of Change
Cost and Planning Toolbox
Shell Business One project reporting
Tools
PDO Project One Pager
Shell Major Projects Business One
8.3.7
Project Assurance
Estimate and Schedule Assurance Reviews
Reference Information
Shell PG 02c Capital Project Estimate Schedule & Assurance Review (ESAR)
9
Quality Assurance
HSE in Projects
Information Management
Finance in Projects
Reference Information
Opportunity Framing Resources
Value Engineering Resources
PG 16 TQ for Capital Projects, including Benchmarking
PG 19 Capital Project Logistics
14
Technical Standards
Appendix 3 Abbreviations
BOM
CFDH
DE
Decision Executives
EMC
ODC
CAPEX
Capital Expenditure
PS
Project Standard
PG
Project Guide
TECOP
ORP
ORM
ORG
DG
Decision Gate
FCP
CCET
DSC
FEED
FELT
PCAP
VAR
PEP
FID
VIP
DCAF
BfD
mln
million