Appendix S Network Rail Project Risk Register (Feb

2015)

MSBC Master (for NO use only)_First Issue.docx

 Project Risks Actions and Exposure

Project: 117353: Blackburn To Bolton

PM: Martin Whyatt
Title: High-Level (Client) Risk Register
Date: 13/02/2015

Risk Treatment Current Qualitative Impact

Action Action
Risk Title Risk Description Risk Owner Probability Cost Mean Output Comments
Owner Description
Source record Cause: Signalling source records will be Whyatt, NR NR SPM collating 4: High 1: Very Low 19,833 The use of 'all new' signalling
availability required to carry out the signalling design Martin a record return equipment should reduce this risk.
register.
Risk: Records may not exist or not available or
not returned.

Effect: Create new records, - correlation

exercise, parallel records need to be created,
delay to programme.

Possession Cause: A number of possessions will be Whyatt, VR Ensure blockade 3: Medium 1: Very Low 7,500
overuns required to carry out this work Martin plan is effective
and contains
Risk: Possession may overun enough
contingency.
Effect: Train delay costs

Plant failure during Cause: A large amount of plant will be used Whyatt, VR All plant identified 3: Medium 1: Very Low 13,500 Length of possession allows for trains
the works during the works Martin and secured at an to be temporarily moved should a
early stage. VR to problem occur allowing other trains to
Risk: The plant may fail during the work produce effective continue moving throughout the
mitigation plan. worksite.
Effect: Additional costs for replanning and
carrying out the work

Drainage Cause: Drainage locations within Form B not Whyatt, NR Carry out 4. High 2. Low 9,750 BG are currently investigating culverts
yet verified Martin Drainage Surveys to identify asset, condition and
and investigate location/ depth below track beds
Risk: Additional drainage/culverts may be outfall consents.
required.

Effect: Additional cost of drainage/culvert re-

design.

Bridge 47 Cause: Use of the identified Robin Bank Rd Whyatt, NR BG to submit road 5.V High 2.Low 19,250
Compound compound may be rejected Martin closure
application as an
Risk: Will have to identify less suitable site alternative site
compound
Effect: Additional cost associated with road location and
closures and compensation arrangements continue looking
for alternatives.

Retaining Wall Cause: Due to the fact that the Form 001 has Whyatt, NR BG to progress 2.Low 4. High 11,500 This activity is being accelerated due
Design not yet been issued Martin with two designs to potential of impact.
(soil
Risk: There is a risk that the design may not be nailing/kingpost
buildable or affordable wall) and present
NR with two
Effect: Associated programme and cost costed options
implications with a re-design.

Target cost Cause: Target cost not submitted in a timely Whyatt, Bab/VR Work with 3. Medium 4. High 82,500
submission manner or to budget Martin contractors to
reduce TC
Risk: Contract award delay/unnaffordable to submissions to an
client affordable level.

Effect: Programme/Cost implications

LEP endorsement Failure to secure Lancashire Enterprise James Syson BwDBC Develop strong 2.Low 5.V High A strong business case has been
Partnership (LEP) support for the scheme Outline Business developed and this is now being
Case which reveiwed by the LEPs consultants
justifies the (Jacobs)
economic benefit
of the scheme.
Also need to
ensure local
financial
contribution
Political support Failure to secure local political support James Syson BwDBC Ensure local MPs 2.Low 5.V High Strong business case results shared
and Cllrs are with local politicians and BwDBC have
aware of the agreed to fund a 10% local
strong business contribution to the capital costs as part
case of a LEP bid for Local Growth Funding

Stakeholder Failure to secure local stakeholder support James Syson BwDBC Ensure local 2.Low 5.V High Strong stakeholder support for the
support stakeholders are scheme exists however need to
made aware of ensure that communication is
the scheme and managed espeically with regard to the
its local impact timescales for service introduction
following the completion of the passing
loop

DfT support Failure to secure DfT support James Syson BwDBC Ensure DfT 2.Low 5.V High The DfT have included the service
officials are kept enhancement as part of the baseline
informed of the timetable specification for the next
business case Northern franchise
and are made
aware of the local
economic benefits
and how this fits
with the Long
Term Rail
Strategy for the
North

Active Risk Manager 22/04/2014 11:54 Page 1 of 2

 Project Risks Actions and Exposure
Network Rail Failure of Network Rail to manage scheme James Syson NR Ensure an 4: High 5.V High Strong project management required
project timescales and costs wthin the agreed budget effective Project
management and project plan Team and Project
Board

Timetable and Failure of Network Rail to provide Northern Tom Drury NR Provide Northern 4: High 5.V High The overlaid timetabling for this project
possession with the necessary assurancies and details of with the needs to be contained within the LTP
planning the pathing / track capacity through Farnworth necessary for May 15 and as such the whole
and project details to support the possession assurancies and process requires to be completed by
request details of the the end of Feb 15.
pathing / track
capacity through
Farnworth to
ensure service
capacity can be
maintained. Also
provide the
project delivery
plan including all
timescales any
continengies

Active Risk Manager 22/04/2014 11:54 Page 2 of 2