14 JULY 2020, by Maurice Merzian, Senior Project Advisor
Through 45 years of Project experience in Oil, Chemicals and Gas/LNG projects I have seen many times gaps are generated during the FEED phase and they are identified late, mostly during the implementation phase, where they will be costly to address, rectify or eliminate.
I would like in this write-up to list some of the typical technical gaps and some of the typical execution gaps and how best to avoid them through independent cold eye reviews, workshops or programs.
Typical Technical FEED gaps:
- Many studies such as HAZOP, IPF’s (Instrument Protective Functions), Model Reviews, etc. are often conducted, but the difficult issues are often deferred to later due to complexities, absence of personnel (such as Operation & Construction personnel), etc.
- Instrument I/O count often unreliable due to lack of Vendor data
- Utilities balances are often immature and incomplete
- Geotechnical incomplete & lightly done
- Infrastructure and Underground detailing insufficient and immature.
- Novelties addressed but not really developed or engineered with equipment suppliers or specialty Contractors
The key thing in here is to identify and capture them at the right time and address them in the design & EPC documentation before FEED phase completion. While the assurance reviews or gate reviews may identify some of them, but it is often too late, hence resorting to compromised solutions. It is best to conduct multidiscipline independent peer reviews during the latter part of the FEED by experts who have experience in similar plants or installations.
FEED is a technical term, Front End Engineering Definition. It provides mostly a technical definition of the scope. However, Execution Definition is equally as important as Technical Definition and often not been given the same priority or emphasis. It needs to be addressed in parallel with Engineering Definition with comprehensive Execution Planning. The Project team tend to rely mostly on Vendors and past execution to develop their plans. It requires supplementing the project team with competent seasoned Project Managers who have been there and done that before, to assist them in the development of the execution plans.
Typical Execution Planning gaps:
- Vendors Market is unreliable, “the big boys are the worst”. They will not commit on technical detailing until a handshake is in sight. The worst are packaged equipment.
- Subcontractors are engaged lightly with very little execution definition on their work scope.
- Prefab location, pre-assemblies, modules, heavy haul/lift, infrastructure scope often have light definition.
- Project team manpower availability, in particular Labour and Supervisors availability during the construction phase.
- Full understanding of EPC Main Contractor or Joint Venture Consortium organisation, governance, authorities, and competence.
- EPC LS tender challenges; there are many but the most critical is to understand how tenderers will address technical, execution and business risks. Also, operation and funded liabilities contingencies, especially if a JV EPC consortium.
As indicated before a comprehensive Execution Planning Process (EXP) will overcome most of these gaps and provides a clear roadmap for Execution.
The EXP is a planning program. It will consist of several workshops of project team supplemented by seasoned experienced project professionals and as required technical experts to establish a list of execution approaches for Mitigating Vulnerabilities and Capturing Opportunities. It will consolidate assumptions, unknowns, opportunities, and cost drivers. It will encompass a review and upgrade of key EPC scope of works documentation and EPC tender documentation towards securing solid and robust EPC bids that will sustain potential EPC challenges during execution.
Overall, it will result in an optimised Execution Plan that provide efficient capital cost performance, and cost and schedule predictability.
If you are in FEED or Pre-FEED phase, LR Consultants will be happy to assist you in shaping the road map to secure FEED and Execution Planning robustness and completeness.