000.200.0350 Key Engineering Risks

12/18/2019 000.200.0350 Key Engineering Risks.
pdf
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Engineering Management
Full Practice Printed from Quality Requirements System Global Library
KEY ENGINEERING RISKS
1.0 PURPOSE
This practice defines the work process and tools to be used for reporting and tracking the Key Engineering
Risks.
2.0 APPLICATION
This practice applies to any Home Office project in the FEED and detailed engineering phases. The
Project Engineering Manager implements this practice and the Office Manager of Engineering makes sure
each Project Engineering Manager is performing this work.
It should be noted that the work process to define the Key Engineering Risks and load the risks into the
BRMF system is started during the proposal phase. It is the responsibility of the Engineering Manager
assigned to the proposal to initiate and implement the requirements of this practice during the proposal
phase to, at a minimum, identify the appropriate Key Engineering Risks and quantify those risks in concert
with the Proposal Manager and the office Risk Representative.
3.0 INTERFACING DISCIPLINES

Corporate Risk Group
Project Management
Civil / Structural Engineering *
Process Engineering *
Mechanical Engineering *
Piping Engineering *
Electrical Engineering *
Control Systems Engineering *
Project Controls
Supply Chain
HSE *
* Included in “Project Engineering Leads” role in this practice
4.0 DEFINITIONS
See glossary at the end of this practice
5.0 This section has been left intentionally blank
© 2019, Fluor Corporation. All rights reserved. Fluor Restricted Data. Further copying or distribution only by permission.
http://localhost:8082/PDF/000.200.0350%20Key%20Engineering%20Risks.pdf 1/20
12/18/2019 000.200.0350 Key Engineering Risks.pdf
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
6.0 REQUIREMENTS
6.1 The Project Engineering Manager will review the listing of key engineering risks and
identify those risks applicable to the project.
Twenty-nine key engineering risks that have the most impact on projects in the FEED and
detailed engineering phases have been identified. These key engineering risks are identified in
Attachment 01.
The Project Engineering Manager must review and address all 29 risks. Of the total 29 risks
shown on the list the first eighteen risks (risks 1 to 18) are considered mandatory for inclusion in
the BRMF, provided the risk topic applies to the project Scope of Work (FEED project risks will
differ from Detailed Design risks). In addition to the first 18 risks, the remaining eleven (risks 19
to 29) are to be analyzed and if applicable to the project scope, must be added to the BRMF. The
total of the risks judged to apply will be included in the Project’s business risk management
framework (BRMF). As additional engineering risks arise during the course of the project, the
Project Engineering Manager needs to inform the Project Manager and Project Risk
Representative for inclusion in the BRMF and for review during the next project BRMF review
session.
6.2 The Project Engineering Manager will develop mitigations for the identified key
engineering risks applicable to the project in cooperation with the Office Risk
Representative to develop mitigation strategies for each selected Key Engineering Risk
and then upload into the BRMF system.
The Project Engineering Manager, with the assistance of the Office / Project Risk Representative
will develop mitigation strategies for all the applicable identified engineering risks to be included
in the project BRMF. The work process provided in BRMF Practice 000.000.2000 section 6.2.5 is
used by the Risk Representative to guide the risk discussion. Included as Attachment 02, is a
snapshot of pertinent columns of the BRMF Engineering Risk input sheet used by the Project
Risk Representative to input the selected Engineering Risks into the project BRMF. This
Attachment 02 includes sample mitigation strategies for all of the 29 Key Engineering Risks that
should be considered by the Project Engineering Manager when developing their mitigations.
6.2.1 The Project Engineering Manager will develop the mitigations for the key
engineering risks with collaborative input from the Engineering Project Leads.
6.2.2 The Engineering Project Leads will incorporate the key engineering risk
mitigations into their execution plans and communicate the mitigation to their
functional teams.
6.2.3 The Project Engineering Manager will contact the Office Risk Representative and
the Project Risk Representative (if one is assigned) and provide the selected risks
and mitigation strategies for input to the project BRMF.
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
6.2.4 The Project Risk Representative will facilitate the input of the selected risks and
the developed mitigation strategies into the project BRMF.
6.3 The Project Engineering Manager will attend monthly key engineering risks review
meetings with the Office Manager of Engineering to review the risks and mitigations.
The Office Manager of Engineering sets up monthly key engineering risks review meetings with
the office Project Engineering Managers to review the project Key Engineering Risks with the
Mitigation Strategies and Action Plans. This is the opportunity for the Project Engineering
Manager to present the selected Key Engineering Risks related to each project to the Office
Manager of Engineering and others attending this review. It is the opportunity to review the
critical engineering risk items and receive comments and guidance. To facilitate review and
discussion of the risks, BRMF generated reports need to be used. There are a number of reports
that can be easily generated from the BRMF system which present the BRMF information in a
number of ways (refer to BRMF Practice 000.000.2000 Attachment 05 for a list and description
of reports available). Exhibit AB (see Attachment 03), which contains the Project’s Key
Engineering Risks and mitigations, need to be used to review risks and mitigations. The Project
Engineering Manager can obtain a copy of the BRMF reports from the Office and/or Project Risk
Representative.
These meetings occur prior to the monthly office project status reviews. The Office Managers of
Engineering discuss the Risk issues with the Project Engineering Managers in detail outside of
PSR meetings to confirm appropriate mitigation actions are taken.
6.3.1 The Project Engineering Leads will communicate any issues with current key
engineering risk mitigations to the Project Engineering Manager for discussion in
the monthly key engineering risk meeting.
6.3.2 The Project Engineering Manager will communicate any updates or changes to
key engineering risk mitigations from the monthly meeting back to the Project
Engineering Leads for implementation.
6.4 The Business Line Risk Executive and the Office Risk Representative will attend the key
engineering risks review meetings on a quarterly basis at a minimum, or more frequently
as needed.
The Business Line and Office Risk Representatives attend the key engineering risk review
meetings set up by the Office Manager of Engineering on a quarterly basis to stay informed of
potential key engineering risk impacts on the projects in that office and to provide direct support
to the project for BRMF and risk issues.
In the event that the project engineering risk profile changes, or a key engineering risk is
manifesting on a project, the Office and Business Line Risk Representatives can be called to
attend key engineering risk meetings more frequently.
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
6.5 The Project Engineering Manager will attend the PSR each month.
The Project Engineering Manager needs to attend and participate in the monthly office PSR
meeting. The Project Engineering Manager will present the PSR Key Engineering Risk slide. The
Key Engineering Risks PSR slide is found in 000.200.F0350. Not all the Risks identified on the
Key Engineering Risks PSR slide(s) need to be discussed. The only engineering risks to be
reviewed during PSR are those where the mitigation is not being supported by internal or
external influences increasing the probability the risk event will occur.
Note: The Key Engineering Risks slide mirrors the Engineering Risk information included in the
BRMF Exhibit AB and is prepared by the Project Controls group on the project. The PSR slide
includes the 18 key risks and mitigations. Additional sheets, if required, may be added by the
user to cover any of the remaining relevant Engineering Risks 19 through 29.
In the event the Project Engineering Manager is away from the office when PSR occurs the
Project Engineering Manager selects a delegate to attend on their behalf.
In addition, the Office Manager of Engineering attends the office Project Status Review (PSR)
each month. In the event the Office Manager of Engineering is away from the office when project
status reviews occur, the Office Manager of Engineering selects a delegate to attend on their
behalf.
6.6 The Project Engineering Manager will attend the initial Business Risk Management
Framework (BRMF) meeting and each subsequent BRMF update meeting.
The Project Engineering Manager is required to attend each project BRMF update session.
6.7 The Project Manager will verify the key engineering risks identified on the project are
included and updated in the BRMF.
The Project Manager has the responsibility to maintain the project BRMF throughout the life of
the Project.
6.8 The Project Engineering Manager will inform the engineering team that confidentiality
requirements exist for sharing BRMF information.
Fluor’s Business Risk Management Framework (BRMF) is a Company confidential program. The
documents generated from the BRMF system are designated as “ATTORNEY – CLIENT
PRIVILEDGED COMMUNICATIONS”. Fluor employees will not give Owners or Clients any
aspect of Fluor’s Business Risk Management Framework (BRMF) including risk practices, risk
bulletins, risk lists, BRMF reports or otherwise provide access to the software or the printed
materials, including the Key Engineering Risks Table in Attachment 01 of this document. If any of
the Engineering Team is approached by a Client to share the BRMF information, the Project
Engineering Manager should immediately inform the Project Manager of such request. There is a
specific Corporate Risk Practice that must be implemented by Senior Management to facilitate
the sharing of the BRMF information with Clients.
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
7.0 SUPPORTING RESOURCES

Attachment
Attachment 01 Key Engineering Risks Table
Attachment 02 Condensed Sample BRMF Engineering Risk Import Sheet
Attachment 03 Sample BRMF Exhibit AB Report - Risk and Mitigation Strategies
Refer to Section 9 for more information.
8.0 SUPPORTING KNOWLEDGE
9.0 ATTACHMENTS, ADDENDA, WORK INSTRUCTIONS

Addenda
Not Used
Attachment
Attachment 01 Key Engineering Risks Table
Attachment 02 Condensed Sample BRMF Engineering Risk Import Sheet
Attachment 03 Sample BRMF Exhibit AB Report - Risk and Mitigation Strategies
Work Instructions
Not Used
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 01
01 KEY ENGINEERING RISKS TABLE

Risk Description
Slow Client approvals, or decision making (e.g. PAF approvals, change orders, late changes, etc.) lead to
1
schedule delays and cost overruns.
2 Late or non-compliant vendor data leading to engineering recycle and rework.
Significant and / or extensive revisions after issue of (AFD / IFD / IFC) P&IDs as a result of late design
3
changes or late information availability.
4 Inexperienced personnel in key roles (leadership or technical) on complex projects resulting in poor execution.
5 Lack of teamwork / silo mentality among disciplines / functions / offices resulting in poor project performance.
6 Lack of effective vendor or supplier management resulting in poor performance.
Optimistic cost / schedule expectations that are not supported by a radically different execution approach or
7
funding requirement
8 Poor or incomplete front end planning resulting in unexpected cost and schedule delays to the project.
9 Cultural differences across stakeholders result in miscommunication and poor performance.
10 Poor management of material quantities by engineering.
Inadequate alignment with JV partners, contractors, suppliers, DEC offices, etc. leading to rework and
11
schedule delays.
12 Quality compromised in order to meet the schedule milestones.
13 Incompatibility of our software tools resulting in errors.
14 Engineering errors leading to additional audits and QC, resulting in more labor hours and schedule delays.
Failure to effectively communicate and implement "project experiences" and "lessons learned" resulting in key
15
execution improvements not being applied to the project.
Procurement and contracting strategies not aligned with the project schedule and PEP resulting in costly
16
rework and schedule delays.
Design and model reviews not held in accordance to Fluor practices (i.e. being done too early) resulting in
17
construction deliverables delays.
Piping isometrics are inconsistent with P&IDs, line list, or model inconsistencies resulting in incorrect piping
18
isometrics being generated.
19 Lack of training or knowledge of Fluor team or JV partners with common execution tools.
Poorly defined scope or aggressive FEED schedule resulting in inaccurate engineering man-hour estimating
20
and forecasting.
Late information from HAZOP, vendor data, additions / changes by design teams causing changes to the
21
P&IDs which affect the schedule and quality of the work.
22 Unexpected materials and equipment delays resulting in additional engineering effort and schedule delays.
23 Lack of available information resulting in P&IDs not complete before starting production engineering.
Failure to implement appropriate design freezes of key documents (i.e. plots plans, P&IDs, specifications,
24
etc.) resulting in rework.
Incomplete design and poor planning resulting in late material identification and purchase of key items
25
(valves, instruments, pumps, etc.).
26 Poor application of the FDCN process resulting in late changes.
27 Piping stress analysis not completed in timely fashion causing rework of isometrics.
28 Lack of real change from reimbursable to lump sum mindset across disciplines and offices.
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 01
01 KEY ENGINEERING RISKS TABLE

Risk Description
29 Baseline schedule acceleration resulting in out of sequence work and inefficient execution.
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 02
02 CONDENSED SAMPLE BRMF ENGINEERING RISK IMPORT SHEET

IDENTIFIED RISKS & OPPORTUNITIES STRATEGIES & OPTIONS
Risk Risk Category or Strategy
Risk or Opportunity Strategy
# Opportunity #
1 Key Engineering Risk: Slow Client approvals, or 047. Client 1.01 Secure alignment with the client on the change
decision making (e.g., PAF approvals, Change Indecision / management work process, forms, approval
Orders, late changes, etc.) lead to schedule Interference durations, definitions, etc.
delays and cost overruns.
--- 1.02 Have the Project's Prime Contract Administrator
develop and manage all required approvals.
--- 1.03 Demand Client compliance with the Prime
Contract.
--- 1.04 Show all Client obligations in the project schedule
--- 1.05 Include the client in key decisions and draw him
into forming a solution.
--- 1.06 Engage the Fluor Executive Sponsor when
necessary.
2 Key Engineering Risk: Late or Non-Compliant 084. Key 2.01 Add Vendor data duration to bid tabs in bid
Vendor data leading to engineering recycle and Suppliers / evaluation process
rework Subcontractors
--- 2.02 Tie supplier payments to the receipt of compliant
vendor data and delivery.
--- 2.03 Consider incentives / LD’s in the PO
--- 2.04 Engage Supply Chain to expedite priority data
--- 2.05 Align priorities of Vendor requirements at PO kick
off
--- 2.06 Engage senior level executive & owner for
strategic supplier agreements
3 Key Engineering Risk: Poorly defined scope or 061. Estimate 3.01 Have Department Managers review the discipline
aggressive Feed schedule resulting in inaccurate Quality estimates.
Engineering Man-hour estimating and
forecasting.
--- 3.02 Review the allowances and contingency allocated
for poorly defined scope items.
--- 3.03 Include the secondary impact of change in
change orders and forecasts.
4 Key Engineering Risk: Late information from 078. Project 4.01 Have Process/Engineering Leads review and sign
HAZOP, vendor data, additions / changes by Schedule off on late changes.
design teams causing changes to the P&IDs
which affect the schedule and quality of the
work.
--- 4.02 Schedule key meetings that could affect the
P&ID's (ie:HAZOP's) as early as possible to get
changes on P&ID's in a timely manner
--- 4.03 Allow for float in schedule to account for some
late changes.
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 02

# Opportunity #
5 Key Engineering Risk: Significant and/or 078. Project 5.01 Hold internal P&ID reviews prior to issue at IFD
extensive revisions after issue of (AFD/IFD/IFC) Schedule and IFC
P&IDs as a result of late design changes or late
information availability.
--- 5.02 Have Process/Engineering Department Managers
review and sign off to improve quality control.
--- 5.03 Create a checklist for P&ID checking
--- 5.04 Verify the quality of black box information (vendor
scope/supplied packages) to ensure accurate
quantities.
6 Key Engineering Risk: Unexpected Materials 085. Material 6.01 Assign in shop expeditor or discipline engineers
and Equipment Delays resulting in additional Management / to manage vendor for critical items.
Engineering effort and schedule delays. Procurement
--- 6.02 Tailor expediting strategy to level of experience of
supplier
--- 6.03 Prior vetting of supplier with supply chain
--- 6.04 Include quantified execution risk assessment in
bid evaluation to include past vendor
performance issues
--- 6.05 Fluor to control the logistics rather than supplier
--- 6.06 Improve visibility of vendor data turnaround for
PMT review
--- 6.07 Include critical milestones (other than final
delivery) in the order and clarify during KOM
7 Key Engineering Risk: Inexperienced personnel 043. Skilled 7.01 Implement Know Your Team process at the
in key role (leadership or technical) on complex Personnel / beginning of the project
projects resulting in poor execution. Leadership
--- 7.02 Provide leadership skills training; address the
how, not just the what.
--- 7.03 Create project teams with a blend of experience.
8 Key Engineering Risk: Lack of available 078. Project 8.01 Identify early and expedite intensely key vendor
information resulting in P&IDs not complete Schedule information
before starting production engineering
--- 8.02 Hold internal P&ID reviews prior to issue at IFD
and IFC.
--- 8.03 Create a checklist for P&ID checking
--- 8.04 Verify the quality of black box information (vendor
scope/supplied packages) to ensure accurate
quantities.
9 Key Engineering Risk: Lack of teamwork / Silo 074. Inter- 9.01 Arrange for communication to be via video-
mentality among disciplines / functions / offices discipline conference or Movi if applicable.
resulting in poor project performance Coordination
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 02

# Opportunity #
--- 9.02 Hold formal team-building and alignment
sessions including cultural understanding
--- 9.03 Increase travel between lead offices and DEC’s to
allow the development of personal relationships
--- 9.04 Hold unit based taskforce set-up vs. project
based if appropriate
--- 9.05 Establish workshare coordinator / coach in larger
offices (lead and DEC); focus is on driving the
right level of collaboration between teams
--- 9.06 Develop and align on common drivers for the
project and have office management support
these drivers (rather than traditional office drivers
like man-hour productivity)
--- 9.07 Maintain alignment (mgt in both offices, project
teams in both offices) on purpose, drivers, status,
path forward, impact of actions (or lack thereof),
etc. to ensure mgt and team members continue to
understand the bigger picture.
10 Key Engineering Risk: Failure to implement 078. Project 10.01 Manage changes, only implement changes if it is
appropriate Design freezes of key documents, Schedule required for HSE or to make the design work after
e.g., plots plans, P&IDs, specifications, etc. the design freeze has been implemented.
resulting in rework.
--- 10.02 Define freeze dates in the schedule and
communicate to the design team.
11 Key Engineering Risk: Incomplete design and 085. Material 11.01 Greater utilization of material substitutions
poor planning resulting in late material Management /
identification and purchase of key items (valves, Procurement
instruments, pumps, etc.)
--- 11.02 Improve inter-discipline work process between
process and control systems
--- 11.03 EM to enforce the usage of discipline specific
material control plans
--- 11.04 Enforce use of Practice 000.200.3000:
Management of Materials / Engineering
12 Key Engineering Risk: Lack of effective Vendor 080. Quality 12.01 Escalate supplier issues early to senior mgt /
or supplier management resulting in poor Control / exec sponsors
performance. Validation
--- 12.02 Tailor expediting strategy to level of experience of
supplier
--- 12.03 Prior to award have the supplier reviewed through
supply chain management group
--- 12.04 Have the Supply Chain group contact suppliers
who are having performance issues
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 02

# Opportunity #
--- 12.05 Include quantified execution risk assessment in
bid evaluation (even if owner does not agree)
--- 12.06 Have Fluor be responsible for logistics rather than
supplier and engage logistics during the pre-
award stage
--- 12.07 Assign and enforce expediting group to be
accountable
--- 12.08 Tailor agreed vendor data turn-around time to
project needs rather than putting in the standard
10 days for all documents.
--- 12.09 Improve summary level reporting in a visual way
for PMT review and action
--- 12.10 Include critical milestones (other than final
delivery) in the order and clarify during KOM
--- 12.11 Assign a shop expeditor or discipline engineers to
manage vendor for critical items.
13 Key Engineering Risk: Optimistic cost/schedule 036. Alignment 13.01 Apply benchmarks from Historical database to
expectations that are not supported by a validate baseline cost and schedule
radically different execution approach or funding
requirement
--- 13.02 Mandate schedule development through
workshop-type collaboration with all stakeholders
--- 13.03 Perform Schedule Risk Analysis to determine
probability of schedule success. Plan to an 85%
to 90% schedule probability of success.
14 Key Engineering Risk: Poor application of the 068. Change 14.01 Allow client 2 weeks for FDCN approval
FDCN process resulting in late changes Management
--- 14.02 Set up a meeting with the client to discuss the
procedure for FDCN approvals
15 Key Engineering Risk: Poor or incomplete Front 078. Project 15.01 Apply the FEED verification practice where we
End Planning resulting in unexpected cost and Schedule haven’t completed the FEED and conducted a
schedule delays to the project. Gate C review
16 Key Engineering Risk: Cultural Differences 050. Client Profile 16.01 Hold formal team-building and alignment
across Stakeholders result in miscommunication / Culture sessions including cultural understanding
and poor performance
--- 16.02 For cultural differences between DEC offices
increase travel between lead offices and DEC’s to
allow the development of personal relationships
17 Key Engineering Risk: Poor management of 080. Quality 17.01 EM to enforce the usage of discipline specific
material quantities by engineering. Control / material control plan
Validation
--- 17.02 Enforce use of Practice 000.200.3000:
Management of Materials / Engineering
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 02

# Opportunity #
--- 17.03 Evaluate the quality of the design documents to
be used to develop the MTO's and come up with
an appropriate design allowance to include in the
take -offs
18 Key Engineering Risk: Piping Stress analysis 067. Piping 18.01 Project to seek department and global support for
not completed in timely fashion causing rework Engineering execution of complex stress requirements
of Isometrics Items
--- 18.02 Lead piping engineer needs to identify priorities

for stress based on size/criticality/impact on plot
19 Key Engineering Risk: Inadequate alignment 036. Alignment 19.01 Conduct thorough alignment (in addition to KO)
with JV partners, contractors, suppliers, DEC including team building if required
offices, etc. leading to rework and schedule
delays.
--- 19.02 Tailor commercial model to drive desired
collaboration (incentive, alliance, other)
--- 19.03 Treat vendors as partners while keeping
commercial / TIC focus.
20 Key Engineering Risk: Quality compromised in 080. Quality 20.01 Apply benchmarks from Historical database to
order to meet the Schedule milestones. Control / validate baseline cost and schedule
Validation
--- 20.02 Implement a quality focused recognition
campaign on each project
--- 20.03 Make sure that partially completed documents
are not issued just to meet a schedule milestone
date.
--- 20.04 Perform Schedule Risk Analysis to determine
probability of schedule success. Plan to an 85%
to 90% schedule probability of success.
21 Key Engineering Risk: Incompatibility of our 069. Compliance 21.01 Create a position for a single manager to
software tools resulting in errors with Specs / coordinate delivery of the suite of tools being
Procedures used by the project.
22 Key Engineering Risk: Lack of Real Change 038. Change 22.01 Sharing of commercial data with the engineers so
from Reimbursable to Lump Sum mindset across Readiness they understand our profitability constraints
disciplines and Offices. (Culture Change)
--- 22.02 Apply Know Your Team process to understand
the team’s weaknesses.
--- 22.03 Have key project personnel attend Just in Time
training for Lump Sum Mindset Development
--- 22.04 Assign an Lump Sum experienced Business
Manager to instill LS Mindset implementation
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 02

# Opportunity #
23 Key Engineering Risk: Engineering errors 080. Quality 23.01 Implement Data integrity checks between P&IDs
leading to additional audits and QC, resulting in Control / (SP3D), Line Lists, Electrical Lists (SPEL) and
more labor hours and schedule delays Validation Instrument Data (SPI) to ensure data integrity is
complete
--- 23.02 Perform Technical Audits that focus on
deliverables not just processes to ensure Quality
Systems are in place and working.
--- 23.03 Implement review of ongoing deliverables by
project Sr. Design staff to ensure final product is
on track before final QC checks.
--- 23.04 Implement and ensure Vendor Data has been
checked for latest revision and incorporated into
the design before final issue.
24 Key Engineering Risk: Failure to effectively 044. Training / 24.01 Ensure a Lessons Learned review has taken
communicate and implement "Project Knowledge place early in the project by all disciplines
Experiences" and "lessons learned" resulting in Analysis /
key execution improvements not being applied to Knowledge
the project. Sharing
--- 24.02 Refresh and revisit Lessons Learned at key
milestone dates to ensure compliance and
mitigations have been followed for previous
Lessons Learned.
--- 24.03 Capture Key Lessons Learned by Discipline at
the end of the project and archive in appropriate
place for future use by new projects.
25 Key Engineering Risk: Procurement and 078. Project 25.01 Finalize PES and CES early to establish
Contracting Strategies not aligned with the Schedule procurement and contracts baseline requirements
project schedule and PEP resulting in costly at project initiation
rework and schedule delays
--- 25.02 Ensure experienced Material Management
resources are in place well before equipment and
materials are required to be requisitioned.
26 Key Engineering Risk: Design and Model 078. Project 26.01 Identify the vendor data that has an impact on the
Reviews not held in accordance to Fluor Schedule model review and prioritize this with the vendor
Practices (i.e.: being done too early) resulting in
construction deliverables delays.
--- 26.02 Analyze the risk or proceeding with the model
review without / or with uncertain data and align
with the Client on what data is to be reviewed at
the model review
--- 26.03 Develop a standard approach to the timing and
duration between Model Reviews and do not
proceed with MR without meeting the minimum
requirements.
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 02

# Opportunity #
27 Key Engineering Risk: Baseline Schedule 078. Project 27.01 Perform Schedule Risk Analysis to determine
Acceleration resulting in out of sequence work Schedule probability of schedule success. Plan to an 85%
and inefficient execution. to 90% schedule probability of success.
--- 27.02 Mandate schedule development through
workshop-type collaboration with all stakeholders
--- 27.03 Apply benchmarks from Historical database to
validate baseline cost and schedule
28 Key Engineering Risk: Piping isometrics are 067. Piping 28.01 Line condition changes need to be communicated
inconsistent with P&IDs, Line List, or model Engineering by FDCN
inconsistencies resulting in incorrect piping iso's Items
being generated.
--- 28.02 Ensure Line List and FDCNs are up to date prior
to Isometric issuance
--- 28.03 Implement data integrity consistency checking
29 Key Engineering Risk: Lack of training or 069. Compliance 29.01 Assign a Data Steward on project to coordinate
knowledge of Fluor team or JV partners with with Specs / delivery of the suite of the tools being used by the
common Execution tools Procedures project.
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Attachment 03
03 SAMPLE BRMF EXHIBIT AB REPORT - RISK AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
DEFINITIONS
The following terms and acronyms apply to this practice.
Title Description
API American Petroleum Institute
BRMF Business Risk Management Framework
CA Contract Administrator
CII Construction Industry Institute
Client Owner or their authorized representative.
Criticality Rating (CR) A method of assessing the importance of an item with respect to various
categories such as its design, manufacturing routines, and the consequences
of failure. The criticality for equipment and materials is established on a scale of
1 to 4 with 1 being the most critical, 4 being the least critical. Form
000.200.F0077, Criticality Rating Form, has the standard categories and
definitions for criticality used on Fluor projects.
CWP Construction Work Package
DAS Discipline Application Specialist
DHA Dust Hazard Analysis
DMS Document Management System
EI Energy Institute
EOR Engineer of Record
FAT Factory Acceptance Test
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Front End Engineering and A project planning document (UG Philosophy) produced prior to project
Design (FEED) initiation that serves as the basis for final EPC construction document
development.
GRW Global Reference Warehouse
GSM Global Supplier Manager
HSE Health, Safety and Environmental
ICP Individual Contract Plan
IFC Issued For Construction
IFD Issued for Design (Approved for Design)
Installation Work Package An Installation Work Package (IWP) is a portion of scope derived from a CWP.
(IWP) It is comprised of an Installation Code and a Sequence number, which contains
all necessary elements for a single construction crew to complete that portion of
the scope of work. It includes critical documents along with a detailed execution
plan. The WFP team will confirm that a released IWP will contain constraint free
work that can be executed by a single foreman and crew within a practical
construction timeframe (typically a 1-2 week shift).
LE Lead Engineer
Lessons Learned A Project Experience that is implemented into any Fluor numbered document
(e.g., practices or guidelines).
MDR Master Document Register
Model Review (MR) A plant design review with the Client and/or Licensor that uses an electronic 3D
model.
MTO Material Take Off
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Notified Body (NoBo) European Conformity Assessment Institute. This is the Authority Inspection
agency that conforms to Article 24 of the PED, accredited by the EU member
states and appointed by the Manufacturer, designated to assess conformity of
pressure equipment and piping to the essential safety requirements of the PED,
and to ensure consistent technical application of these requirements.
NTE Not-to-Exceed
OBS Organizational Breakdown Structure
Particular Material Appraisal A document that - for materials which are not listed in a harmonized standard
(PMA) nor have European approval - provides a statement that a material fulfills the
requirements of the ESR and are suitable for the proposed use and conditions.
It prescribes the physical and chemical properties of a material. PMA’s shall be
submitted by the Manufacturer to the Notified Body for approval.
PCM Project Contracts Manager
PDN Potential Deviation Notice
PEP Project Execution Plan
PFD Process Flow Diagram
PIM Project Information Manager
PM Project Manager
Process Industry Practices Process Industry Practices is a process industries standards organization that
(PIP) issues practices suitable for purchase orders or contracts. The practices are
harmonized from non-proprietary best practices from member companies.
PSR Project Status Review
PU Package Unit
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
Purchase Order (PO) A PO is the Buyer's official notification to the seller of authority to manufacture,
supply, ship, and invoice for the goods specified in the order and Fluor’s
commitment to pay for the value of the goods ordered. It is a legal document
and should clearly and precisely cover the essential elements of the order in a
manner that will render misunderstandings improbable.
Request for Proposal (RFP) The Request for Proposal is assembled and prepared by the Contract
Administrator, and issued to Bidders.
Request for Quotation (RFQ) Taken to be synonymous with inquiry, it is the document used to obtain price
and delivery on a competitive basis for the goods required for projects.
RFI Request for Information
RPC Revamp Planning Coordinator
S3D Smart 3D
Scope of Facilities (SOF) The Scope of Facilities is part of the Project Baseline Scope of work. It
describes the facilities that will be provided as part of the project.
Scope of Work (SOW) The Scope of Work is the Baseline Document for the project that includes the
Scope of Services (SOS) and Scope of Facilities (SOF) for the project.
SPC SmartPlant Construction
SPEL SmartPlant Electrical
SPI SmartPlant Instrumentation
Statement of Compliance (SOC)Document prepared by the manufacturer of a product (not being the “overall”
manufacturer) or their authorized representative which states compliance to the
PED of the pressure equipment considered based on examinations performed
by the Manufacturer’s Inspection/QA department and/or assigned Notified Body
according to the applicable Conformity Assessment Procedure.
Supplier Person or legal entity that is responsible for supply of goods or products.
Practice 000.200.0350
Date 18Dec2019
The Technical Control Plan A risk based quality control execution plan that emphasizes the critical and
(TCP) challenging technical aspects of the project and demonstrates the discipline-
specific criteria for preparing, checking and approving the critical deliverables
that require further validation above the standard discipline checking matrix.
UG Underground
Very Large Module (VLM) A VLM is a module weighing more than 600 tons. Generally, above 600 tons
requires nonconventional lifting / jacking and transporting methods.
Transportation is often by barge or heavy transport vessel (HTV). VLMs provide
an opportunity to maximize modular content. Construction of a VLM is often
segregated into stages in the module yard and the WBS level – Stage – is used
to define these boundaries.
Work Breakdown Structure Represents the way the project work will be defined, planned, managed, and
(WBS) controlled by subdividing the project scope of work into manageable segments
(elements). A WBS is a hierarchical framework (family tree), composed of
products and services that progressively and logically subdivides the entire
work content. It serves the control needs of a project by providing a structure
for performing work and defining how cost and schedule data are summarized
and reported. The WBS is developed from the project scope to a level of detail
that defines the framework for the organization and reporting of project
information, allowing for effective project control of costs and schedule.
Elements of the WBS serve as the foundation for the Project Execution Plan as
well as project control functions.
Z+F Suppliers of high-speed accurate phase-based laser measurement and

scanning systems.

000.200.0350 Key Engineering Risks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

000.200.0350 Key Engineering Risks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

12/18/2019 000.200.0350 Key Engineering Risks.

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

3.0 INTERFACING DISCIPLINES

* Included in “Project Engineering Leads” role in this practice

5.0 This section has been left intentionally blank

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

7.0 SUPPORTING RESOURCES

8.0 SUPPORTING KNOWLEDGE

9.0 ATTACHMENTS, ADDENDA, WORK INSTRUCTIONS

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

01 KEY ENGINEERING RISKS TABLE

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

01 KEY ENGINEERING RISKS TABLE

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

02 CONDENSED SAMPLE BRMF ENGINEERING RISK IMPORT SHEET

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

02 CONDENSED SAMPLE BRMF ENGINEERING RISK IMPORT SHEET

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

02 CONDENSED SAMPLE BRMF ENGINEERING RISK IMPORT SHEET

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

02 CONDENSED SAMPLE BRMF ENGINEERING RISK IMPORT SHEET

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

02 CONDENSED SAMPLE BRMF ENGINEERING RISK IMPORT SHEET

--- 18.02 Lead piping engineer needs to identify priorities

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

02 CONDENSED SAMPLE BRMF ENGINEERING RISK IMPORT SHEET

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

02 CONDENSED SAMPLE BRMF ENGINEERING RISK IMPORT SHEET

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

03 SAMPLE BRMF EXHIBIT AB REPORT - RISK AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

API American Petroleum Institute

BRMF Business Risk Management Framework

CII Construction Industry Institute

Client Owner or their authorized representative.

CWP Construction Work Package

DAS Discipline Application Specialist

DHA Dust Hazard Analysis

DMS Document Management System

EOR Engineer of Record

FAT Factory Acceptance Test

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

GRW Global Reference Warehouse

GSM Global Supplier Manager

HSE Health, Safety and Environmental

ICP Individual Contract Plan

IFC Issued For Construction

IFD Issued for Design (Approved for Design)

MDR Master Document Register

MTO Material Take Off

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

OBS Organizational Breakdown Structure

PCM Project Contracts Manager

PDN Potential Deviation Notice

PEP Project Execution Plan

PFD Process Flow Diagram

PIM Project Information Manager

PSR Project Status Review

KEY ENGINEERING RISKS

RFI Request for Information

RPC Revamp Planning Coordinator