Tools to Improve Project Performance Workshop February 26, 2015

Tools to Improve Project Performance Workshop February 26, 2015

Instructor’s Notes – Introduction and Eliminating Fall Hazards
This Morning’s Agenda 7:00-7:30 Registration / Networking /Breakfast 7:30-7:45 Introduction to today’s presentation Steve Bannes 7:45-8:45 Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI), Edd Gibson small industrial projects 8:45-9:05 FEP implementation from AB/InBev’s Thea Cummings perspective 9:05-9:20 Q&A Gibson/Cummings 9:20-9:35 Break 9:35-10:20 CII Risk Management Tools Edd Gibson 10:20-10:45 How Monsanto mitigates risks on Clint Rodenberg projects 10:45-10:55 Q&A Gibson/Rodenberg 10:55-11:00 Wrapup

Project Definition Rating Index: Small Industrial Projects
G. Edward Gibson, Jr. Professor and Sunstate Chair

What is CII? Construction Industry Institute
Research institute for engineering and construction Comprised of >130 member organizations Members fund studies at leading universities to identify ways to improve planning and execution of construction projects

Definition of Front End Planning
“Process for developing sufficient strategic information with which owners can address risk and decide to commit resources to maximize the chance for a successful project.”

Front End Planning Aliases
Conceptual Engineering Feasibility Analysis Programming Schematic Design/Design Development Front End Loading Pre-Project Planning, etc. _H_ Front end planning has many aliases. Do not get hung up on the semantics. Ask the participants what their organization calls this process. In the language of the buildings sector, programming, schematic design and design development are widely used words for the phases of the front end planning process. PDRI was developed to work in all these phases. Optional slide.

The Front End Planning Process
Feasibility Concept 2 Detailed Scope Design and Construction 3 1 Front End Planning Process PDRI most applicable here

Simply, Front-End Planning Is:
Performing the right project. Scoping the right “things” for a good design basis. Setting the stage for successful execution.

What Is the PDRI?

PDRI – The Definition An Acronym Project Definition Rating Index
An Index Score along a continuum representing the level of scope definition A Risk Management Tool PDRI is perceived in different ways by many people. It is a tool developed to help project leaders and teams understand and take action of issues of importance in front end planning. Note that it is a tool, it does none of the planning for the team and the issues it helps identify must be acted upon effectively to help secure project success. Use this slide in the introduction. Be sure to emphasize that PDRI is at its essence a risk management tool. You may want them to open the publication to Appendix A, B, and C of CII IR and give them a quick review of the structure of the tool.

PDRI as a Risk Management Tool
PDRI helps: Identify – score sheet and descriptions Measure – scoring mechanism Mitigate – action items In reality, the PDRI is best used as an in-process risk management tool during the front end planning phase of a capital project. (reference, Chapter 3, CII IR 155-2, PDRI, Building Projects, 3rd Edition) Highlight the PDRI’s use as a risk management tool. This is discussed in detail in Chapter 3, Philosophy of Use, in CII IR 155-2, 3rd Edition. Ask if that is the way participant’s organizations are using the tool.

Three Existing PDRIs PDRI for Industrial Projects, CII IR 113-3, 4th Edition PDRI for Building Projects, CII IR 155-2, 4th Edition PDRI for Infrastructure Projects, CII IR 268-2, 4th Edition

Current Status of Existing PDRIs
Each extensively used; most popular CII products Fourth Editions of each published last year, with new software Major edits since 1995: to include security and sustainability to include specifics for renovation projects Excel spreadsheets Its current status is given on this slide. A second edition of the building PDRI was published in 2004 by CII incorporating security and sustainability concepts, as well as cleaning up the instructions for use and other inconsistencies. The third edition published in 2008, and included in this EM, adds additional information to consider for renovation type projects. It is hard to get a full list of users, but the following organizations have indicated extensive use of the PDRI for buildings in the past: 3M, Amgen, Hensel Phelps, NASA, GM, Dept. of State, GSA, Dept. of Health and Human Services, Smithsonian Institution, LDS, Anheuser Busch, Beck Group, Architect of the Capitol, MIT, University of Alabama, etc. Ask the participants who they know who are using the tool.

Potential PDRI Application Points
FEP and the PDRI Potential PDRI Application Points 1 2 2i 3 Feasibility Concept 2 Detailed Scope Design and Construction 3 1 PDRI 1 Review – this is a high level assessment of the project following Feasibility prior to Phase Gate 1 and is part of the decision criteria for proceeding to the next phase. This assessment is typically held for projects at the initial kickoff meeting when bringing an engineer/architect firm on board early in the project. The PDRI 1 Review should focus on the following areas: Alignment of project objectives Communication tool from Business to project/contractor team Highlight expectations to allow for reasonable engineering estimates Typical PDRI scores at this assessment will be in the 550 to 800 range. PDRI 2 Review – this is a high level assessment of the project following the Concept Development prior to Phase Gate 2 and is part of the decision criteria for proceeding to the next phase. For many projects, a PDRI assessment prior to Phase Gate 2 should be held. For small or simple projects, this assessment may not be necessary. The PDRI 2 Review should focus on the following areas: Alignment of project objectives and stakeholders needs Identify high priority project deliverables that need to be completed Help eliminate late project surprises Communication tool across the project team and stakeholders Typical PDRI scores at this phase of the project may be in the range of The assessment will highlight the areas that resources need to be focused during the next phase of front end project. PDRI 2i Review – this is an intermediate (i) assessment of the project during the Detailed Scope phase of a project, and typically should be held midway through this phase. Section II, the Basis of Design and Section III, the Execution Approach, should be well-defined during this phase of the project. The PDRI 2i Review should focus on the following areas: Assuring alignment of project objectives and stakeholders needs Confirming that resources are properly deployed to get the largest value for the time and effort being applied Verifying scope in relation to the original project goals Identifying and planning remaining activities to achieve the level of detail necessary to complete front end planning in preparation for Phase Gate 3. Typical PDRI scores at this phase of the project may be in the range of PDRI 3 Review – this is typically the final assessment of the project at the end of front end project planning prior to Phase Gate 3. The PDRI 3 assessment should be conducted for all projects. At this stage, risk issues have been identified and mitigation plans are in place or being developed. Typical scores for this review are 150 to 250, with a target of typically 200 or below. In addition to the four PDRI reviews outlined above, the tool can be used at other points. For instance, it can be used early in Feasibility as a checklist to help organize work effort, or during the design phase (after Phase Gate 3) to verify the design before moving on to construction. It has been used effectively as an alignment tool during the kickoff of design/build projects. Point out that the value in multiple assessment is that the needed work and risks can be identified and worked in process as the project proceeds.

What Can the PDRI Do for You?
Helps with alignment of project participants Promotes consistency in planning Identifies project risks Can be used in developing the facilities program The question is often asked “what can PDRI do for me?” If used correctly, the PDRI helps the team understand the critical factors of the project being undertaken, the clients expectations and needs, the cost drivers of the project, and the schedule implication of the important decisions to be made. If the right individuals are involved in the assessment, it will help with integration of the cost and schedule estimates. You may want to spend a little time on this slide. Ask if these are consistent with participant’s experience. Ask if there are others not mentioned. The fourth bullet is related to the PDRI being used to make decisions on which projects are to be pursued as part of the organization’s portfolio of projects. Many organizations use PDRI as part of their project approval process. These observations are based on years of experience in using the PDRI.

Benefits of PDRI to Designers and Contractors
Ability to measure scope Avenue to communicate Reconcile differences Standardized scope package Monitor progress Minimize design rework _H_ Many think that the PDRI is only useful for owner organizations. This is far from the truth. See pages 11 and 12 of CII IR for a discussion of how this tool should be used by designers and contractors. At a minimum, it is an excellent alignment tool for working with clients and allows the contractor an opportunity of understand its scope of work versus the current status of the project.

Why a small projects version?
50 to 70% or more of all projects (by number) are considered small Different considerations when planning these types of projects PDRI Industrial Projects takes 3-4 hours Demand from CII members

General Conclusions No widely accepted definition of “small industrial project” Dependent on the company’s context and criteria Small projects are different: Sensitive to change Funding approval Fewer stakeholders Project member expertise Part-time manpower Interfaces important Shorter in duration and less costly Even a small change has a greater impact on cost and schedule May be at a more department level Smaller team and scope would impact less stakeholders May be few full time and more part time resources Usually the projects are brownfield so interfaces to the existing facilities are important Shorter in duration, less costly but due to number may have larger impacts We will provide guidance on what a small industrial project

Tool Format PDRI Small Industrial Projects available later this spring
The crucial elements that need to be included in a scope definition for small industrial projects. Composition: 3 Sections 8 Categories 41 Elements 20 pages of detailed element descriptions; Rate each of the 41 elements to obtain a project score of up to 1000 points—the lower the better. NEW In 1999, the PDRI for buildings was developed as a weighted check list that contains the most critical elements defining project scope for building projects. (located in Appendices A and B of CII IR 155-2) Forty-four pages of descriptions support these elements (located in Appendix C of CII IR 155-2). The tool has 3 sections, broken into 11 categories, further broken into 64 elements. The tool identifies and specifically describes each critical element in a scope definition package and allows a project team to quickly predict factors impacting project risk. It is intended to evaluate the completeness of scope definition at any point prior to the time a project is considered for approval to begin detailed design and construction. A 1000 point scoring system is used with lower scores indicating a better defined project. The PDRI for Building Projects is very similar in arrangement to the industrial PDRI, which preceded it.

Tool Decision Matrix – which one to use?
Here is the definition of an Infrastructure Project our research team came up with. We have shared with definition with different groups and has received a very good reception. Each company has a different definition as to what a small project is based on various criteria. The decision matrix allows them to choose between tools based on a range of criteria i.e. if there are more checks on the middle column than the right column the recommendation is to use the Small Tool. May be done on a project by project basis (used everytime) or determined by a program basis (determined once per program characteristics

Unweighted Score Sheet (Example)
Definition Levels This slide shows Section I, Basis of Project Decision with the elements weighted. (This score sheet also can be found on page 39 of CII IR ) Point out the number scores. Note that if all weights in column 5 are summed for the entire PDRI, one would get a total of 1000 points. The weights do not change from project to project. As an example, if element A!, Building Use, was definition level 5, it would score 44 points. It is there twice as important, relatively, as element A6, Future Expansion/Alteration Considerations. Also, you will probably want to point out the different components of the scoresheet and that a lower score, is therefore an indication of better scope definition for the project or individual element. 0 = Not Applicable 1 = Complete Definition 2 = Minor Deficiencies 3 = Some Deficiencies 4 = Major Deficiencies 5 = Incomplete or Poor Definition

PDRI Element Descriptions (Example)
B.4 Technology The technology(ies) being used in this project to gain the desired results should be documented. Technologies may include chemical, biological, or mechanical processes, and information technology (i.e., software development/upgrade). Evaluation criteria should include: Existing/proven or duplicate New or experimental Scale up from bench or pilot application to commercial scale Organization’s (or industry’s) experience with the technology Licensing or development implications of chosen technology(ies) Other user defined ** Additional items to consider for Renovation & Revamp projects** Integration of new technology with existing systems, including interface/safety issues Each of the 64 elements has a specific description. This is an example of element B4 and can be found on page on page 52 of CII IR Note the additional items to consider for this element in the case that the project involves renovation. A list of specific PDRI renovation issues related to buildings has been developed and is given in CII IR 242-2, Front End Planning for Renovation and Revamp Projects, which is not included in this education module. That list is reproduced in Appendix B of this education module and is particularly helpful if the project contains renovation. Point out the anti-terrorism and renovation issues in element B4. These are description changes that have been added since the first edition. Walk the class through the particulars that make up the example and point out that this is one of 64 elements. Each element should be considered a deliverable to the front end planning process, although not every sub-element may be applicable.

PDRI for Small Industrial Projects Structure
I. Basis of Project Decision II. Basis of Design III. Execution Approach A. Project Alignment B. Project Performance Requirements Design Guidance Process/Product Design Basis Electrical and Instrumentation Systems General Facility Requirements Execution Requirements Engineering/Construction Plan and Approach The sections and categories making up the building version are shown. Point out that these are self explanatory and show the grouping of front end planning ideas and deliverables. Note that section I is generally at a higher level of perspective than sections II and III.

Refinement of Tool and Development of Weights
Used same method as previous PDRIs Five workshops Verbal and written interaction in a charrette environment Provide input on content and provide weights for each element Each comment addressed Weight information statistically evaluated How were the weights for each element developed? In essence, our research team used the same methods used for the other PDRIs consisting of: Weights were developed in six workshops that were conducted in a Charrette environment. Each participant provided input on content and provided weight for each element based on their best judgment and their cumulative experience. Each comment was addressed and the weight information provided was statistically evaluated.

Number of Participants
Workshops Location Date Number of Participants Baton Rouge, LA, USA April 10, 2014 19 Houston, TX, USA May 9, 2014 12 Greenville, SC, USA June 4, 2014 Indianapolis, IN, USA July 21, 2014 July 30, 2014 10 Total Participants 65 Here is the list of the five workshops conducted for the PDRI for Infrastructure. The workshops were conducted on the east, south and west regional areas of the US. A total of 65 participants participated in the workshops.

Workshops Summary 65 total participants
39 contractor and 26 owner participants 29 organizations Averaged 20 years of experience Provided weighting information for each element, and dozens of suggestions

Organizations Participating in Workshops
Owners Contractors Albemarle Anheuser-Busch InBev Chevron Chevron Phillips Chemicals Cytec Eli Lilly and Company Flint Hills Resources International Paper Meadwestvaco Motiva Phillips 66 Rubicon SABIC Innovative Plastics TransCanada Valero Audubon Engineering BMWC Constructors Burns & McDonnell CH2M Hill EDA Inc. FA Wilhelm Constructors Ford, Bacon and Davis Hargrove Jacobs Performance Contracting S&B Constructors Walbridge Willbros Engineering Wood Group Mustang Here is the list of organizations that participated in the workshops.

Weighted Score Sheet (Example)
Definition Levels 0 = Not Applicable 2 = Minor Deficiencies 4 = Major Deficiencies 1 = Complete Definition 3 = Some Deficiencies 5 = Incomplete or Poor Definition Initially an unweighted score sheet was developed. This is an example of Section I, Basis of Project Decision. (This score sheet also can be found on page 35 of CII IR ) Note that the unweighted score sheet is the presenter’s preferred assessment sheet because it keeps biases out of the evaluation. Point out the various components of the worksheet. Have participants turn to page 35 of CII IR if appropriate.

Section & Category Weights – Small Industrial Version
H. Engineering / Construction Plan and Approach 158 A. Project Alignment 153 Section Weights Section Weight I. Basis of Project Decision 288 II. Basis of Design 425 III. Execution Approach 287 1000 D. Process / Product Design Basis 145 B. Project Performance Requirements 135 C. Design Guidance 133 H. Execution Requirements 129 F. General Facility Requirements Note that all elements, categories, and sections were weighted differently based on their potential impact on project cost. A listing of all elements, categories, and sections of the Building Projects PDRI is given on page 4 of IR 155-2, 3rd Edition. The descriptions of each are given in Appendix C of IR 155-2, beginning on page 43. Point out the relative values of each section or element, if all elements in that section or category are assessed at definition level 5. Ask if there are any surprises. 76 E. Electrical and Instrumentation Systems 71 1000

Top Eight Planning Issues
Project Objectives Statement (A.1) – 47 points Project Strategy and Scope of Work (A.2) – 45 points Project Cost Estimate (H.2) – 39 points Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (D.3) – 36 points Location (A.4) – 36 points Shutdown/Turnaround Requirements (G.5) – 32 points Capacities (B.2) – 31 points Project Site Assessment (C.3) – 29 points Highest weighted elements Total, Top 8 = 295

Fewer Elements and Revised Focus
Points 288 Elements 19 Points 425 Elements 13 Points 287 PDRI for Small Industrial Projects Basis of Project Decision Basis of Design Execution Approach Basis of Project Decision Basis of Design Execution Approach PDRI Industrial Projects Elements Points 439 Elements Points 357 Elements 15 Points 78 There is a slightly different focus from this tool to the Industrial tool. The Basis of Decision section is smaller – less questions and points. The thought was that these projects were given to the project team as opposed to having them as part of the development of the project. i.e. maintenance program developed by the asset management groups The Basis of Decision section has less elements and more relative points. The Execution Approach has less elements but more points. The thought is that more emphasis should be on design and execution since the bulk of costs and activities happen in these areas.

PDRI Structure Comparison
IR 113-2: PDRI-Industrial Projects IR 314-2: PDRI-Small Industrial Projects SECTION I A. Manufacturing Objectives Criteria Project Alignment B. Business Objectives Project Performance Requirements C. Basic Data Research & Development D. Project Scope E. Value Engineering SECTION II F. Site Information Design Guidance G. Process/Mechanical Process/Product Design Basis H. Equipment Scope Electrical and Instrumentation Systems I. Civil, Structural & Architectural General Facility Requirements J. Infrastructure K. Instrument & Electrical SECTION III L. Procurement Strategy Execution Requirements M. Deliverables Engineering/Construction Plan and Approach N. Project Control P. Project Execution Plan All three PDRIs have the same three sections and have similar categories. Elements address different issues pertinent to the different types of projects. The difference between the three PDRIs will be described in detail in the Implementation Session

Comparison of Projects with PDRI Above and Below 300 — Small Industrial Projects
PDRI Score Performance < 300 > 300 Cost 5% under budget 16% over budget Schedule 7% behind schedule 27% behind schedule Change Orders 14% of budget 18% of budget These 108 projects were segregated based on PDRI score at project authorization to move forward with detailed design and construction. On average, lower scoring projects tended to perform better. Therefore, lower scoring projects are more predictable in terms of their authorization estimates for cost and schedule. These 108 building projects represent data from 24 organizations and represent $2.3 billion USD. PDRI scores are like golf, the lower the better. On the PDRI “golf course” a score of 200 is “par.” Note that 25 projects in the sample were at 200 points or less at the end of FEP (Reference CII RS 213-1) (N=20) (N=14)

What Does a Score Mean? A continuum Relative to timing
Only as valid as effort/seriousness Accuracy (the real score) can be improved with facilitation Perhaps not the most important output of the assessment Many people “obsess” about the PDRI score. Let’s talk about what the score means for a few moments….. The best advice is to use the score as indicator, not an absolute. Downplay the score somewhat. It is an indicator, but is tied to how well the tool is used. What is more important to the project is alignment of the project team around the gaps in scope definition, and the subsequent actions that take place.

How to Use the PDRI

Particulars Who? How Long? Facilitated? When?

Overlapping project activities during FEP of small projects
Similarly to the other two PDRI tools, the PDRI for Infrastructure projects will be most useful when applied in the early stages of the project, before the start of the detail design. It can be used multiple times during the front end planning phase to measure progress in the scope definition. It is recommended to be facilitated by a PDRI Facilitator vs. PM to obtain consistent results and minimize group think, eternal optimizim (saying they are a lot further along than reality) Each PDRI session should be minutes in length, naturally less people are involved just due to the size of the project teams.

Process for Using PDRI Read description of each element
Discuss issues and review documents if needed Select definition level for each element Determine score of each element Add element scores to obtain PDRI score Take action Capture “Gaps” The process for scoring is given in this slide. Detailed information on this process is given in Chapter 3 of CII IR rd Edition. Start with element A1 and proceed in order through the tool. Do no skip ahead, but it is ok to go back and reassess an element already covered if needed because of additional information gleaned in the discussion. The best way to determine the definition level is to come to a consensus within the team of its status. This helps to build alignment around the current status of the entire planning effort and makes the evaluation process more rigorous. One of the key deliverable of the assessment effort is a list of issues or “gaps” in the front end planning process. These should be captured as the discussion progresses.

Which definition level?
WELL Defined POORLY Defined Which definition level? CATEGORY Element 1 2 3 4 5 Score Not Applicable COMPLETE Definition No further work required MINOR Deficiencies No further work required prior to Phase Gate 3 SOME Deficiencies Needs more work prior to Phase Gate 3 MAJOR Deficiencies Needs a lot more work prior to Phase Gate 3 INCOMPLETE or POOR Definition Little or nothing known Which definition level should the project team choose? Always push on the side of being conservative. See page 17 of IR for more details. You will probably need to expand on this. See an excellent discussion on pages in CII IR Point out that part of the “magic” of the assessment is to arrive at a consensus within the team as to the level of definition of each element. Yes, the PDRI definition levels are a little “fuzzy”, but that was done on purpose to allow the team to adapt the tool to many different situations. For instance, the relative importance of the sub-elements of one of the PDRI elements on one project may be much higher than another project. The team may decide that what was “minor” for project A is a “major” deficiency for project B based on its importance to the project terms of cost or schedule impact. More discussion on pages of IR

An Example CATEGORY Element Definition Level Score 1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5 E. ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEMS E.1 Control Philosophy E.2 Functional Descriptions and Control Narratives E.3 Electric Single Line Diagrams E.4 Critical Electrical Items List CATEGORY E TOTAL This is one of 11 categories, Equipment, accounting for 36 of the 1000 total points. In order to score this category, the team must evaluate the level of definition for each element. (Page 37, IR 155-2, 3rd Edition) Note that for this example we are assessing one of the 11 categories in the PDRI. Create a verbal scenario where we are evaluating the front end planning effort for a research and development laboratory and have gone through categories A through F already using our integrated project team. This slide and the next several should go quickly. Describe the assessment in relation to the hypothetical R&D facility. You may want the participants to look up this category on page 37 of the PDRI and also to read the element descriptions as the example progresses. Definition Levels 0 = Not Applicable 2 = Minor Deficiencies 4 = Major Deficiencies 1 = Complete Definition 3 = Some Deficiencies 5 = Incomplete or Poor Definition

Example, E.1 Element Description
E. ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEMS The elements in this category are focused on electrical design and control. It should be noted that on some small projects none of the elements in this category may be applicable, in other situations these may be the key items driving the project. E.1 Control Philosophy The control philosophy describing the general nature of the process and identifying overall control systems hardware, software, simulation, and testing requirements should be documented in a functional specification. Items to consider should include: Continuous or batch Cyber security Redundancy requirements Block diagrams Input/output (I/O) list Manual or automatic controls Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) requirements Classification of interlocks (i.e., process safety) Alarm conditions and emergency shut down Startup controls Other user defined ** Additional items to consider for Renovation & Revamp projects** Existing specifications, owner preferences and agreements, and compatibility ** If this is an instance of a Repetitive Program** Compatibility of this project with program’s control philosophy This is the description for element G1, Equipment List. (Page 76, IR 155-2, 3rd Edition). The team should review and discuss how well this element has been addressed for the project. Note that since this is a new facility, the “Additional items” for renovation and revamp projects do not apply for this effort. Other sub-elements may not apply as well. Quickly outline the discussion that the team would be going over at this time. For instance, do we have a written list of equipment, do we know relative sizes, and so on. Have training requirements been identified.

 Example, E.1 Score Sheet CATEGORY Element Definition Level Score 1 2
1 2 3 4 5 E. ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEMS E.1 Control Philosophy E.2 Functional Descriptions and Control Narratives E.3 Electric Single Line Diagrams E.4 Critical Electrical Items List CATEGORY E TOTAL  Element G1: Requirements for most of the installed equipment are well defined. However, process specific equipment for the laboratory is still not nailed down. You feel that this element has some deficiencies that should be addressed prior to moving ahead on the project. The team consensus is that this element is at a definition level of 3 as shown. Actions or gaps in definition for this element are captured on a flip chart or in a text file. You may want to capture actions or gaps as you describe this element. For instance, perhaps all equipment requirements are reasonably known, except for those in 10% of the building space which is controlled by Dr. No, a world class scientist, who is unresponsive. Capture the need to verify equipment requirements in Dr. No’s laboratory space. Definition Levels 0 = Not Applicable 2 = Minor Deficiencies 4 = Major Deficiencies 1 = Complete Definition 3 = Some Deficiencies 5 = Incomplete or Poor Definition

E. ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEMS E.2 Functional Descriptions and Control Narratives Functional descriptions and control narratives should be documented, providing a method of depicting interlock and sequencing systems for the startup, operation, alarm, and shutdown of new equipment and processes. ** Additional items to consider for Renovation & Revamp projects** Field verify functional descriptions and control narratives to ensure they are correct and have been maintained to reflect the actual or current operating scenarios. The next element of the category is Element G2, Equipment Location Drawings. (Page 77, IR 155-2, 3rd Edition); again, read through the element description as a team, discussing areas of concern. Continue the scenario, and in this case, we have a very good understanding of where the equipment is intended to be located, even if we do not have all the details we need. Perhaps capture a gap as “verify equipment location requirements when list is finalized (especially Dr. No’s equipment)”.

1 2 3 4 5 E. ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEMS E.1 Control Philosophy ✓ E.2 Functional Descriptions and Control Narratives E.3 Electric Single Line Diagrams E.4 Critical Electrical Items List CATEGORY E TOTAL  Element G2: Your team decides that this element is in pretty good shape for this project. We need to reconcile the space and location requirements when the laboratory process equipment requirements are known more fully. The consensus is that the element definition is at level 2. Note that this scoresheet is collecting definition levels, but the score is “blind” to the team. This process allows for less bias in the assessment activity. Definition Levels 0 = Not Applicable 2 = Minor Deficiencies 4 = Major Deficiencies 1 = Complete Definition 3 = Some Deficiencies 5 = Incomplete or Poor Definition

ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEMS E.3 Electric Single Line Diagrams Electric single line diagrams document the components, devices, or parts of an electrical power distribution system. These diagrams portray the system layout from the public utility’s incoming supply to the internal electrical power distribution system. Depending on the size of the electrical system, the single line diagrams may include several levels of distribution. Items to consider should include: Incoming utility with owner substation/distribution to high and medium voltage motors and substations Electrical load list Unit substations and switch gear Motor control centers with distribution to motors, lighting panels Other user defined ** Additional items to consider for Renovation & Revamp projects** Field verify existing single line diagrams to ensure they are correct and have been maintained to reflect the actual site conditions. Verify locations and availability of power for new or relocated equipment. The description for Element G3, Equipment Utility Requirements (Page 77, IR 155-2, 3rd Edition) is given here. In this discussion, the team basically realizes that it has yet to address utility issues for installed equipment, which is important for determining the utility load required for the overall facility.

ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEMS E.4 Critical Electrical Items Lists Critical items lists need to be developed and documented. Many of these critical items can be extracted from the single line diagrams and will form the basis for procurement and discipline design. All lists should be in accordance with owner/engineer organization standards. Critical items lists should include: Unit substations and switch gear Transformers Motor control centers (MCC) Uninterruptable power supplies (UPS) Power conditioning equipment Power factor correction equipment High voltage cable Other user defined ** Additional items to consider for Renovation & Revamp projects** Identify existing components to relocate, modify, refurbish or dismantle The description for Element G3, Equipment Utility Requirements (Page 77, IR 155-2, 3rd Edition) is given here. In this discussion, the team basically realizes that it has yet to address utility issues for installed equipment, which is important for determining the utility load required for the overall facility.

Example, E.4 Score Sheet CATEGORY Element Definition Level Score 1 2 3
1 2 3 4 5 E. ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEMS (MAXIMUM SCORE = 71) E.1 Control Philosophy 7 12 17 22 E.2 Functional Descriptions and Control Narratives 11 14 E.3 Electric Single Line Diagrams 9 13 E.4 Critical Electrical Items List 10 18 CATEGORY E TOTAL 39 Element G2: Your team decides that this element is in pretty good shape for this project. We need to reconcile the space and location requirements when the laboratory process equipment requirements are known more fully. The consensus is that the element definition is at level 2. Note that this scoresheet is collecting definition levels, but the score is “blind” to the team. This process allows for less bias in the assessment activity. Definition Levels 0 = Not Applicable 2 = Minor Deficiencies 4 = Major Deficiencies 1 = Complete Definition 3 = Some Deficiencies 5 = Incomplete or Poor Definition

Next Steps After Evaluation?
Focus on: individual elements category scores vital few Understand risk—elements are rated relative to one another Project management and communications among participants Work on Action Items! See the discussion in Chapter 4 of CII IR Lead a quick discussion on this slide. The critical issue is that the PDRI does no actual planning work, other than identifying issues to work on and in helping to align the team. Action must follow or the effort is of little value!

(Sorted in order of PDRI element
Example Gap List Project title/date: Production Line Upgrade, February 4, 20XX (Sorted in order of PDRI element Item # PDRI Element(s) Level of Definition PDRI Element Score Item Description Date Completed Responsible 1 E.1 3 12 Finalize control philosophy; cyber security and interlocks Feb 24, 20xx Smith 2 E.2 4 Final review of control narratives during design Mar 15, 20xx Smith, team E.3 9 Verify incoming utility lines for compatibility for single line diagrams Feb 28, 20xx E.4 14 Put together a critical electrical items list and review And so on

Summary It works! It is more useful as a project management tool, rather than just a scoring mechanism Its use is not as easy as it first appears Use it on every project prior to moving forward with detailed design In summary, the PDRI is a good tool that must be employed intelligently.

Tools to Improve Project Performance Workshop February 26, 2015

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Tools to Improve Project Performance Workshop February 26, 2015"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Tools to Improve Project Performance Workshop February 26, 2015

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Tools to Improve Project Performance Workshop February 26, 2015"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback