HSE Project Quality Assurance

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.
Petroleum Development Oman L.L.C.

UNRESTRICTED Document ID: SP-1122
July 06 Filing Key: Business Control
Project Engineering
Specification for Project Quality Plan
User Note:
The requirements of this document are mandatory. Non-compliance shall only be authorised by
the Document Owner or his Delegate through STEP-OUT approval.
A controlled copy of the current version of this document is on PDO's EDMS. Before making
reference to this document, it is the user's responsibility to ensure that any hard copy, or
electronic copy, is current. For assistance, contact the Document Custodian or the Document
Controller.
Users are encouraged to participate in the ongoing improvement of this document by providing
constructive feedback.
Please familiarise yourself with the

Document Security Classification Definitions
They also apply to this Document!
Version: 2.0.2
Petroleum Development Oman LLC Effective: Jul-06
Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

This page was intentionally left blank
Page 2 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

The controlled version of this CMF Document resides online in LiveLink®. Printed copies are UNCONTROLLED.
Version: 2.0.2

i Document Authorisation
Authorised For Issue July 2006

Version: 2.0.2

ii Revision History
The following is a brief summary of the 4 most recent revisions to this document. Details
of all revisions prior to these are held on file by the issuing department.
Version No. Date Author Scope / Remarks

2.0.2 Feb-08 UOP6 Technical Authority reference document
now SP-2061
2.0.1 Aug 06 Robin Norman UEV11 Minor changes to 3.6.1 para 1 & 2.
Direct link made from document to
Appendix 2 see page 22
2.0 July 06 Kunakorn Vootivakinskul, Covers Project Quality Plan
UEV/1
1.0 Jan 00 Harald Traa, OTE/2 First Issue of Design QA Plan
Specification
iii Related Business Processes

Code Business Process (EPBM 4.0)
EP.64 Design, Construct, Modify and De-Commission Facilities
iv Related Corporate Management Frame Work (CMF)

Documents
The related CMF Documents can be retrieved from the Corporate Business Control
Documentation Register TAXI.
Doc. ID Document Title

CP-117 Project Engineering Code of Practice
SP-1171 Specification for Quality Assurance of Design, Construction and Engineering
Works
PR-1561 WinPCS Procedures
ERD-00-02 PDO Technical Authority System
SP-2061 Engineering and Operations Technical Authority System

Version: 2.0.2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 6
1.1 Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Changes to the Specification.......................................................................................... 6
1.3 Related Documents........................................................................................................ 6
2 Scope................................................................................................................................. 7
2.1 Process Definition.......................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Process Deliverables...................................................................................................... 7
2.3 Process Owner's Responsibility......................................................................................7
2.4 Performance Monitoring................................................................................................. 7
2.5 Review and Improvement.............................................................................................. 7
3 Project Quality Plan........................................................................................................... 8
3.1 Preparation of Project Quality Plan................................................................................9
3.2 Quality Policy and Objectives......................................................................................10
3.3 Scope of the Project..................................................................................................... 10
3.4 Organisation................................................................................................................. 10
3.5 Quality Assurance for Contracts...................................................................................11
3.6 Quality Assurance of Design........................................................................................ 12
3.6.1 Design QA Plan........................................................................................................ 12
3.6.2 Design Review......................................................................................................... 12
3.7 Document Control........................................................................................................ 12
3.8 Material Procurement and Control...............................................................................13
3.8.1 Procurement............................................................................................................. 13
3.8.2 Materials Identification and Traceability...................................................................14
3.8.3 Handling, Storage, Packaging and Delivery.............................................................14
3.9 Construction Quality Assurance...................................................................................14
3.9.1 Construction Material Control...................................................................................15
3.9.2 Inspection Contractor Appraisal...............................................................................15
3.10 Commissioning and Handover.....................................................................................15
3.11 Change Control and Standards Variance.....................................................................16
3.12 Audits and Review........................................................................................................ 16
3.13 Quality Records............................................................................................................ 16
Appendix 1 Glossary of Terms, Definitions & Abbreviations..................................................18
Appendix 2 Project Documents and Design Deliverables Matrix...........................................19
Appendix 3 Process Flowchart for Design Review.................................................................22
Appendix 4 User Feedback Page........................................................................................... 23
Appendix 5 Change Identification Table.................................................................................24

Version: 2.0.2

1 Introduction
1.1 Purpose
This document outlines the minimum requirements for preparation and implementation
of Project Quality Plan (PQP) for all projects within PDO as required by the Project
Engineering Code of Practice CP-117. Reference has been made to the QA requirement
as outlined in the Opportunity and Project Management Guide (OPMG) and DEP
82.00.10.10-Gen. (Project Quality Assurance).
1.2 Changes to the Specification

Any changes that need to be made to this Specification shall be forwarded to the
Corporate Functional Discipline Head (CFDH) for Project Engineering.
In common with other PDO Control Documents, CFDH’s approval via the Variance
Control System (Refer to PR-1247 Project Control and Standards Variance Procedure) is
required to gain support for any deviations from the processes described in this
Specification.
1.3 Related Documents

SP-1171 contains instructions which combined with the PQP specify the Company’s
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.
GU 272 provides guideline on Technical Authorities (TA) system operates by PDO.

Version: 2.0.2

2 Scope
The scope of this specification includes preparation of project specific quality plan (PQP)
for contract, design, procurement, and construction phases for all projects undertaken by
PDO as required by the Project Engineering Code of Practice CP-117. The QA
requirement as outlined in the Opportunity and Project Management Guide (OPMG) and
DEP 82.00.10.10-Gen. (Project Quality Assurance) are also referred to.
The document also defines the formal PDO approvals required for all engineering
project documentation and design deliverables as specified in the CP-117. The approval
is based on the PDO Technical Authorities (TA) system (Refer to SP-2061) to ensure that
important documents and drawings are reviewed and approved by appropriately
qualified and experienced PDO engineers.
SP-1171 shall be referred to for specific quality assurance requirement in contracts such
as contract quality plan, and purchase orders.
2.1 Process Definition

The preparation of Project Quality Plan is an integral part of deliverables under EP.64 –
Design, construct, Commission, Modify, and De-commission Facilities under the EP
Business Model.
2.2 Process Deliverables

Deliverable for this process is the project specific Project Quality Plan document.
2.3 Process Owner's Responsibility

This specification is owned by the CFDH for Project Engineer (UEJ) who is responsible
for the content of this document to ensure that it is up-to-date and fit-for-purpose. He is
also responsible for step-out approval under the Variance Control System (Refer to PR-
1247) for any deviations from this specification.
2.4 Performance Monitoring

Performance monitoring will be carried out using function level 2 audit as a tool to
ensure compliance.
Team Leader – Project Engineers shall ensure that all projects under his (her)
responsibility are compliant with this specification.
Project teams shall discuss and monitor the progress of specific PQP on a regular basis.
2.5 Review and Improvement

This specification shall be reviewed every 3 years (maximum), but may be revised at
any point during this period subject to approval by the Document Owner.
Review and improvement comments shall be submitted using the User Feedback Page
located in Appendix 4 of this document.

Version: 2.0.2

3 Project Quality Plan
Quality is ‘meeting agreed customer requirement’ and quality management aims to do
this at lowest overall cost. Management systems should be used to assure technical
integrity, since quality failures lead to cost and schedule overruns, higher operating costs
and increased safety and environmental risk.
The concept of quality as applied to projects covers both the functional integrity of the
asset hardware and systems handed-over to Operations at the end of ORP Phase 4 –
Execute, i.e. the asset can be started-up and operated in full accordance with project
requirements and objectives, and the quality of the project business processes and the
way in which they are applied in pursuit of the project’s HSE, cost and schedule
objectives. The opportunity / project quality management system and plan should
account for both aspects of quality assurance.
The PDO Project Engineering Code of Practice, CP-117, specifies that all projects shall
have an approved Project Quality Plan, prepared at the define phase of the project by
the project engineer in consultation with other discipline engineers, and updated to
include more detail as the project advances. For project CAPEX of less than $ 5 million,
PQP can be included as part of the Project Execution Plan, otherwise it has to be a
stand-alone document. Site-specific plans should be prepared prior to starting activities
on a construction site.
The Project Quality Plan is a documented description of the project management system
and must be approved by the Project Team Leader and reviewed relevant parties, in part
to demonstrate his commitment to quality but primarily since, it is the means by which
technical and administrative authorities are delegated throughout the project. It draws
together the key documents, which:
- describe the quality objectives of the project,
- identify the critical QA/QC activities and,
- define the controls required to ensure that the project quality objectives are met.
Project Objectives
 Objectives to be achieved
 Criteria requiring to be satisfied (including HSE targets)
 Governing regulations and standards
Description of Measures to Achieve the Objectives, i.e. the Quality System
 Project quality policy and purpose / scope of the Quality Plan
 Organisation, responsibility, resources, skills, training
 Contractors, suppliers, equipment, facilities
 Procedures, controls (matched to critical activities)
Description of the Responsibilities and Schedule for Audits and Reviews
 Map out schedule for all audits and reviews and responsible party for such audit
throughout the project life.
The PDO project engineer is responsible for updating the PQP and monitoring
compliance against it.

Version: 2.0.2
3.1 Preparation of Project Quality Plan

The project engineer shall be responsible for the preparation of the project quality plan.
Assistance from QA engineer either within the engineering function, asset, or project
organisation shall be sought. The PQP shall be drafted during the Select phase and
finalised and approved at the Define phase of the project. A flowchart for the preparation
of a Quality Plan is shown below.
(Refer to other documents where

appropriate)
The Quality Plan document shall be kept as compact as possible by briefly summarising
information contained in other documents.
In general, the contents of a typical Project Quality Plan shall consist of the following.
 Quality Policy and Objectives
 Scope of the Project
 Organisation
 Quality Assurance of Contracts
 Quality Assurance of Design
 Document Control
 Material Procurement and Control
 Construction Quality Assurance
 Commissioning and Handover
 Change Control and Standards Variance
 Audits and Reviews
Version: 2.0.2

 Quality Records
The above have been further explained in the following sections.
It should be noted that for projects greater than US$ 20 Million, benchmarking with
internal and external business processes shall be carried out to improve quality
assurance aspects and their outcomes, and shall be linked to the improvement of the
Value Assurance Review process.
3.2 Quality Policy and Objectives

The project manager (engineer) shall determine and document the project’s policy with
respect to quality management of the project. Quality objectives are to be set out in
measurable terms, e.g. throughput, uptimes, product specification, operations
philosophy, etc.
High-level strategies that will be used to obtain the required policy and objectives
outcomes shall be described in this section.
3.3 Scope of the Project

The background and scope of the project shall be briefly summarised. Key value drivers
of the project and its objectives should also be highlighted. These may be copied from
the PEP.
Key project parameters and objectives shall be defined in the Field Development Plan,
expanded in the Basis for Design / Project Specification and agreed with the asset
owner. They are as follows:
 performance requirements, e.g. throughput, product and waste-stream (to air,
water, and soil) specifications
 production availability
 statutory requirements
 safety
 operability and maintainability
 field or plant Iife expectancy
 extendibility, flexibility
 compatibility with existing facilities.
The project document deliverable matrix as detailed in CP-117 shall be highlighted and
documented in the PQP. The matrix should indicate the approval authorities for each
deliverable (refer to Appendix 2 for guideline to the matrix).
3.4 Organisation
The organisation structure and broad organisational responsibilities for quality shall be
illustrated and described. Depending upon the size of the project, the project team shall
be backed up by delegated or corporate QA staff, who shall retain a high degree of
independence and objectivity, reporting directly to the project manager but with a
functional link to the corporate quality organisation.
The organisation shall be designed to ensure that there is single-point accountability, with
clear responsibility / authority, for each activity, and that staff have the required technical
authority and time to complete the work to the required standard.
The PQP shall identify key individuals within the organisation who shall be responsible
for:-

Version: 2.0.2

 ensuring that the activities required by the quality system or project specification
are planned, implemented and controlled and the progress monitored
 communicating requirements peculiar to the specific product, project or contract to
all affected departments, Contractors, Suppliers and customers.
 resolving problems that arise at the interfaces between such groups
 reviewing the results of any audits conducted
 addressing how concession requests relating to required quality system elements
are to be dealt with
 Implementing corrective actions.
3.5 Quality Assurance for Contracts

The objective of implementing a quality assurance approach for work done by suppliers /
contractors / vendors is to:
 ensure that the equipment or service supplied complies with specification or
contract requirement
 reinforce the Contractor's awareness to his responsibility for the work
 minimise Company's involvement and hence Company's costs
 minimise delays to schedule caused by the use of excessive ‘Hold’ points
 produce evidence of compliance (the 'audit trail') and measure Contractor/Supplier
performance.
The project engineer shall review and identify critical equipment or activities to be
supplied or carried out by others. A system or equipment item will be critical if it
safeguards the integrity of the facility or impacts upon its ability to meet performance
objectives. An activity can be critical by reason of its importance to the success of the
project or through risks associated with it.
The PQP shall address the following subjects based on the approved contracting
strategy:
 Critical activities to be carried out by suppliers and contractors
 Pre-qualification of suppliers and contractor, based on experience, past record, QA
/ QC and safety record, to ensure they are suitable to tender. Only PDO pre-
qualification system shall be applied.
 Requirement of quality documents to be submitted with the Tender (refer to SP-
1171 – Quality Assurance of Design, Construction and Engineering Works) by
which the supplier and contractor will be bound. –.
 Methods for monitoring the implementation of the quality plans.
PQP shall map QA and describe the quality interfaces within and between the main
project functions (e.g. design, procurement, and construction) and departments (e.g.
Petroleum Engineering, Well Engineering, Field Engineering, Operations, Contractors)
and how these will be managed.
The PQP shall indicate when, how and by whom the requirements specified for the
project are to be reviewed and should also indicate how the results of this review are to
be documented and conflicting or ambiguous requirements resolved.
3.6 Quality Assurance of Design

The plan must list all the types of deliverable produced by the design contractor (or EMC
/ ODC and/or EPC) under the project. It must clearly identify which deliverables require

Version: 2.0.2

PDO review / approval and the required TA level of the approving PDO engineer to
ensure the technical integrity of the design.
3.6.1 Design QA Plan

Project Engineer shall prepare a matrix, based on the Design Deliverables Verification
Matrix, defining the required TA level for each type of project document for review and
approval and approved authorisation matrix defining the required TA level for each type
of project documents for review and approval.
The Design Deliverables Matrix is shown in the Appendix 2 along with the other
deliverables as required under CP-117 for the various phases of project development.
The matrix specifies the discipline TA approval required for each deliverable depending
on the criticality level. A default criticality has been assigned to each deliverables but this
can be adjusted based on project specific circumstances and subject to Approval by the
CFDH.
The design contractor produces and verifies the deliverables according to its own ISO
9001 approved QA system before issuing to the PDO engineer. The deliverable(s) is then
issued to the PDO engineer who is responsible for obtaining the correct level of review
and approval in accordance with the approved design QA plan. The PDO engineer has
the option of routing the deliverable(s) to the relevant PDO discipline engineer in series
or parallel. The design contractor shall include an approval signature box on the
deliverable as per the design QA plan. Once the necessary approvals have been
obtained the PDO engineer returns the deliverable(s) back to the design contractor.
Process flowchart for design deliverables is shown in Appendix 3.
3.6.2 Design Review

As part of the PQP, a design review programme shall be developed to address HSE
hazards and exposure (including HAZOP and HAZAN leading to preparation of the
Hazards Register), Reliability, Operability, Maintainability and Standardisation. The
design review programme shall assure:
 compliance of the design
 optimisation for minimum lifecycle costs
 verification of technical integrity
 completion of documentation in readiness for the next project phase.
3.7 Document Control

Document control is a key element of Information Management in engineering projects.
Engineering projects deal with significant quantities of documents, where version control,
correct classification, approval, etc. require to be managed in a professional way.
The main purpose of the control is to reduce a number of critical risks associated with
projects documentation. Primary risks are: -
 valuable information loss.
 information retrieval issues i.e. time wasted finding the correct information etc.
 Information quality issues.
The primary risks can result in secondary risks such as exposure to large financial claims
from contractors and an increased hazard for accidents.
The PQP should indicate:
 what documents are to be provided and controlled
Version: 2.0.2

 how the documents will be stored and retrieved (including retention)
 how, and by whom, access to such documents can be obtained
 how, and by whom, changes to documents are reviewed and approved.
3.8 Material Procurement and Control

Equipment and materials shall be specified in accordance with Company standards,
Group Standards (DEPs), and project specifications and they shall be accurately
transferred into purchase orders. Where Manufacturer's standards deviate from the
requirements in Company or Group standards, the lifetime cost of accepting such
standards should be evaluated before being considered for acceptance. Quality
requirements in a specification include the following:
 functional specification of performance, operational/maintenance requirements,
environmental conditions
 statutory regulations
 essential additional QC requirements
 Company standards
 documentation requirements
 submission of quality plan.
Specification control consists of assuring that each specification:
 is complete and has been verified
 complies with other specifications
 is compatible with interfacing specifications
 contains the necessary quality requirements.
All specifications and standards shall be rigorously vetted to ensure they are applicable
to the product in question. Over specification is costly, leads to delays and does not
necessarily ensure that the product is fit for the purpose intended.
Changes / Deviations from specification shall be controlled, and a Changes Register
kept for handover to the Asset Holder.
PDO system for the selection of suppliers shall be applied fully during the material
procurement process.
3.8.1 Procurement
The PQP shall include:
 the supplier, source of purchase (if different to supplier) for important products,
and the relevant quality assurance requirements that are to be applied
 Identification of the specifications that are to be reviewed by the specialist
discipline engineers
 methods to be used to select, appraise, evaluate and control Suppliers
 requirements for, and reference to, Supplier Quality Plans, where appropriate
 methods to be used to satisfy regulatory requirements that apply to purchased
products
 means of identifying and ensuring that manufacturer’s ITPs are reviewed and
approved by the Company TA.

Version: 2.0.2

3.8.2 Materials Identification and Traceability
The PQP should define the scope and extent of traceability requirements, including how
affected products are to be identified. The plan should indicate:
 how contractual and regulatory authority traceability requirements are identified
and incorporated into working documents
 what records relating to such traceability requirements are to be generated and
how they are to be controlled and distributed.
3.8.3 Handling, Storage, Packaging and Delivery

The PQP should indicate:
 how the requirements for handling, storage, packaging and delivery are to be
specified and met
 how materials and equipment will be delivered to ensure no damage occurs in
transit
 how materials and equipment will be stored at site prior to installation.
 how the preservation of equipment and materials will be addressed.
These activities are mandated and shall be communicated to the contractor who will be
executing these activities.
3.9 Construction Quality Assurance

Quality management of construction should be based on the following contract strategy:
 QA requirements are included in the job specification
 the tender list shall be restricted to contractors who have accredited QA/QC
system
 tenderers submit QA/QC plans including QA organisation and resources in
accordance with SP1171 with the tender
 a PDO-approved QA/QC plan is included in the contract
 contractor’s QA/QC is self-implemented, but monitored by the project team
When due to certain (local) circumstances it is impractical to qualify contractors in this
manner, each tender should be weighted according to the assessment of the additional
surveillance required to provide assurance.
The PQP shall identify controls that are in place, such as formal inspection and
verification of the work, compliance audit, review, etc., to ensure that:
 the work complies with the appropriate specifications, and is carried out in a safe
manner
 the work is verified using previously approved techniques and personnel, at
agreed points in the construction process
 quality verifying records are generated and maintained as the work progresses
 main Contractors impose a suitable level of control over their sub-contractors
 Contractors are fully aware and accept full responsibility for the compliance of the
work with the applicable specifications.

Version: 2.0.2

3.9.1 Construction Material Control
The PQP shall highlight controls to ensure that: -
 material received is properly identified, undamaged and correctly documented
 stored material is adequately protected and clearly identified
 material released for construction is as specified and in good condition
 preservation procedures are applied to maintain material identity and quality.
Project Engineer shall ensure that resources and requirements are specified in the
contract and who will be responsible for the above activities.
3.9.2 Inspection Contractor Appraisal

The PQP shall identify whether in-house TPI or Contractor’s TPI or project dedicated
inspection contractors will be engaged to verify the quality of construction. The plan
shall identify major equipment items that requires full time TPI.
SP-1171 – Quality Assurance of Design, Construction and Engineering Works shall be
applied to establish whether the contractor has the competence, resources and integrity
to fulfil the task. Individual inspectors offered should be interviewed and tested for
competence.
3.10 Commissioning and Handover

It is necessary to verify that the installation:
 has been constructed as designed
 meets its performance specification
 is safe and reliable for operation
 design limits have not been violated.
Mechanical completion of systems shall be confirmed by the completion of both A-and B
Checksheets (Construction and Pre-commissioning respectively) under the WinPCS
system prior to handing the system over for commissioning. Incomplete minor items
must be recorded on punch-lists. Commissioning must be executed using pre-agreed /
approved procedures.
On handover to Operations for Start-up, the package of information transferred into the
operations records will include:
 handover certificates produced from WinPCS system
 agreed punch lists of minor items to be completed after handover
 records of equipment running trials.
The PQP should indicate how the project team will ensure that the Operators are
provided with information and back-up after handover such as:
 training in the use of new equipment including new staff and existing staff in new
or revised roles
 provision of vendor documentation and manuals for all equipment
 operating and maintenance procedures against experience gained during
commissioning
 documentation recording the technical and operational concepts underlying the
plant design

Version: 2.0.2

 completeness of as-built drawings, records and specifications.
3.11 Change Control and Standards Variance

Change can only be controlled when there is a clear definition of the baseline. As the
project moves from conceptual to detailed design and construction, the data which are
'frozen' must be agreed with the future Asset Holder and clearly defined. The current
agreed configuration should be summarised and maintained in a controlled document
such as a Concept Selection Report, Basis for Design. Each parameter should be
formally agreed with the future Asset Holder, and the document then represents the
design 'baseline' for future change control.
A procedure is required whereby proposed changes to baseline documentation are
carefully reviewed to establish all resultant effects on other designers/disciplines before
approval to proceed is given. Proposed changes which would modify a basic design
concept, have HSE implications, increase cost or adversely affect schedule must be
referred to management for authorisation.
Changes to standards and specifications shall be authorized by the appropriate TA level.
The Project Change and Standards Variance Procedure is covered in PR-1247.
3.12 Audits and Review

The plan should indicate the nature and extent of quality audits to be undertaken and
how the results are to be used to correct, and prevent recurrence of deficiencies which
affect the project or contract. Such audits may include:
 internal audits by the project team
 external audits of the project led by staff from other parts of the Principal's
organisation
 Project team or functional QA group audits of Contractors or Suppliers
 third party or regulatory authority audits, including those carried out for certification
3.13 Quality Records

The quality plan should indicate how key records specific to the project or contract are to
be controlled and maintained, including: -
 what records are to be kept, for how long, where and by whom (ref. SP-1131 –
Specification for Handover and As-Built Documentation)
 what the legal or regulatory authority requirements apply and how they are to be
satisfied
 what media the records shall be supplied in, such as paper, microfilm, tape, disc or
other medium (also refer to SP-1131)
 how legibility, storage, retrievability, disposition and confidentiality requirements
will be defined and satisfied
 what methods will be used to ensure that records are available when required
 what records are to be supplied to Operations, when and by what means (ref. SP-
1131)
 in what language the records will be made available.

Version: 2.0.2

Appendix 1 Glossary of Terms, Definitions & Abbreviations
Definitions
Hold Point Process shall not proceed without Company’s written approval of
procedure to be used and the successful completion of the activity
(e.g. welding procedures)
Abbreviations
CFDH Corporate Functional Discipline Head
CoP Code of Practice
DEP Design and Engineering Practice
EMC Engineering and Maintenance Contract
EPC Engineering, Procurement and Construction
ERD Engineering Reference Document
ETL Engineering Team Leader
HAZAN Hazard Analysis Studies
HAZOP Hazard and Operability Studies
HSE Health, Safety and Environment
ISO International Standards Organisation
LDSC Local Design Support Contract
ODC Off-Plot Delivery Contract
ORP Opportunity Realisation Process
OPMG Opportunity and Project Management Guide
PDO Petroleum Development of Oman
PEP Project Execution Plan
PQP Project Quality Plan
QA Quality Assurance
QC Quality Control
TA Technical Authority
TPI Third Party Inspector
VAR Value Assurance Review
WinPCS Microsoft Windows Based Project Completion System

Version: 2.0.2

Appendix 2 Project Documents and Design Deliverables Matrix
The standard level of PDO checking and authorisation/approval for design deliverables
produced by the design consultant or contractor will be set according to the assigned
criticality of the deliverables. A default criticality has been assigned to each deliverable
but this can be adjusted by exception based on project specific circumstances.
The following table provides the basis for assigning the appropriate criticality for each
deliverable.
Table 1: Deliverable Criticality Rating Guidelines
LEVEL IMPORTANCE CHANCE/IMPACT OF HOW/WHAT? IMPACT ON HSE IMPACT ON

TO THE UNREVEALED ERROR (TYPICAL IN CASE OF VALUE (US$)
PROJECT (TYPICAL EXAMPLE) EXAMPLE) ERROR
I Extreme Extremely serious (e.g. relief Highest level Catastrophic Loss >10,000,000
system may be found to be document which of Life
undersized only during a real defines “what” the
plant emergency) project’s Permanent
objectives are Damage to Health
BFD, Cause & Effect, Intolerable

IPF Classification Damage to the
Environment
II High High Impact on full/part project Key front end Single Loss of <10,000,000
scope (e.g. rotating equipment design document Life >1,000,000
incorrectly specified) errors will have
impact throughout Severe Damage
the project to the
Environment
PEFS/Single line
Diagram
III Moderate Moderate Impact (e.g. control Begins to describe Moderate to <1,000,000
valve ordered with incorrect construction Severe Injury >100,000
flange) method – potential
integrity impact if Minor Damage to
incorrect the Environment
Plot Plan/Piping
Layout
IV Low Low Impact (e.g. Bulk Defines only “how” normally No Injury <100,000
materials incorrectly specified to construct the >10,000
or incorrect quantities on MTO) project Minimum
Damage to the
Isometric or cable Environment
routing drawing
The verification matrix in Appendix 2 shows the default criticality for each deliverable.
The matrix is divided into two parts covering:
 the deliverables that have to be reviewed and approved by PDO
 and the other deliverables that have been authorised to the design consultant /
contractor for review and approval internally by their discipline engineers.
Approved documents / drawings shall be issued to PDO for information only
according to the discipline areas.
For PDO approved deliverables, the PDO reviewer will be requested to undertake
different levels of review depending on their discipline and the type of deliverable under
review. These actions are described in more detail below, together with their impact on
the overall design process.
For design consultant / contractor internal approved deliverables, discipline engineer
who have been approved for such TA level by PDO will provide input, comments, and
approval as per their discipline area. Other disciplines within the design consultant /
contractor organisation will be copied for either comments or for information. After
internal approval, such documents / drawings will be forwarded to the respective PDO
discipline area, as indicated in the matrix, for information only. However, PDO will
reserve the to alter or reject such deliverables if errors are found or the quality is poor.
DELIVERABLE REVIEW LEVELS

Version: 2.0.2

I - Issued for Information
Documents issued for Information have in many cases been issued to assist with the
review of other documents and for general awareness of what is proposed. Review of
the documents need not necessarily be required and failure to review will impede the
design process by the design contractor.
 No Response = No comment
C - Issued for Comment
This is one step up the review ladder and the reviewer is expected to take the time to
thoroughly review the deliverable. The design process will be on hold for the comment
period. Project engineer collates all the comments at the end and returns them to the
originator.
 No Response Within the comment Period = DESIGN PROCESS CONTINUES
A - Issued for Review / Approval
This is the highest level of review reserved for high impact deliverables or those
which may result in financial commitment (e.g. requisitions, workscope etc.). At this
level the reviewer must take great care to ensure that the deliverable is indeed
correct. Only one person will actually approve a Deliverable and by signing it off the
reviewer will be accountable for the technical content of the deliverable. The design
process will be on hold until approval is granted. The PDO Project engineer collates
all the comments and returns them to the originator.
 No approval = DESIGN STAYS ON HOLD
Approval by the PDO engineer does not remove the design consultant responsibility for
the preparation of a technically correct, fit for purpose design. Errors or omissions
highlighted subsequent to PDO approval must be corrected without escalation to the
design cost. In the event however, that the PDO engineer requests further optimisation
of the design subsequent to the approvals process this may, depending on the nature of
the design contract, result in a variation to the design cost.
TA Level
Level 1 Corporate Functional Discipline Head. Sets the boundaries wherein the
discipline operates.
Level 2 Experienced Professional. Can handle himself without outside support in
almost all discipline situations.
Level 3 Engineer with specialised but yet incomplete skills in one or more areas of
the discipline.
Refer to SP-2061 – Engineering and Operations technical Authority System for details.

Version: 2.0.2

Design Deliverables Verification Matrix
The following instructions shall be followed when accessing the Design Deliverables
Verification Matrix
1. Right mouse “Click” on the Matrix above. The following dropdown menu will be
displayed
2. Select “Worksheet Object” and from the following dropdown menu select “Open”
3. The Excel Workbook containing the Design Deliverables Verification Matrix will be
opened.
4. Find the information required:
 Find information
 Print worksheet or selection
 Save Workbook under a different file name for future reference.
 Close the Workbook as for any Excel file

Version: 2.0.2

Appendix 3 Process Flowchart for Design Review
CONTRACTOR ETC.)
DESIGN SOURCE
PDO DISCIPLINE
(LDSC, DESIGN
PDO PROJECT
= task = input/output = decision
ENGINEER
ENGINEER
= document
ETL
1 THE DESIGN CONTRACTOR RECEIVES A SCOPE OF WORK FROM 1 1
THE PDO PROJECT ENGINEER AND PREPARES A COST ESTIMATE
WITH FULL DELIVERABLE LISTING AND RETURNS IT TO THE PDO
PROJECT ENGINEER
2 THE PDO PROJECT ENGINEER PREPARES THE DESIGN QA PLAN 2 2

WITH INPUT FROM THE ETL BASED ON THE DELIVERABLE LISTING
RECEIVED FROM THE DESIGN SOURCE (e.g. LDSC/EMC)
No, ETL Review/Approval
3 HAS THE QA PLAN PREPARED USING DEFAULT CRITICALITY 3 3
RATING FOR ALL DELIVERABLES?
4 THE PDO PROJECT ENGINEER DISTRIBUTES A PROPERLY

APPROVED DESIGN QA PLAN TO ALL RELEVANT ACTION PARTIES 4 4 4
(DESIGN SOURCE, DISCIPLINE ENGINEERS, CFDH)
5 THE DESIGN SOURCE PRODUCES THE DELIVERABLES AS PER THE 5

DESIGN QA PLAN AND STAMPS EACH DELIVERABLE WITH A PDO
APPROVED QA STAMP AND TICKS-OFF THE RELEVANT PART.
6 THE PDO PROJECT ENGINEER RECEIVES THE DELIVERABLES 6 6

FROM THE DESIGN SOURCE AND AND CHECKS THAT THE
DISTRIBUTION LIST IS AS PER THE DESIGN QA PLAN. THE
DELIVERABLE IS THEN DISTRIBUTES TO THE APPROPRIATE PDO
DISCIPLINE ENGINEER.
7 THE PDO DISCIPLINE ENGINEER COMMENTS/APPROVALS THE 7

DELIVERABLE AS PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF SP-1122 AND
RETURNS COMMENTS BACK TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER.
8 THE PDO PROJECT ENGINEER REVIEWS THE COMMENTS 8 8

RECEIVED AND FEEDS THESE BACK TO THE DESIGN SOURCE
9 THE DESIGN SOURCE AMENDS THE DELIVERABLE AS PER THE 9

COMMENTS RECEIVED AND RESUBMITS THE DRAWING UNTIL THE
APPROVAL HAS BEEN OBTAINED.
Note: Refer to SP-1171 – Specification for Quality Assurance of Construction and Engineering
Works for details of similar flowchart for Quality Assurance for procurement, construction, and
commissioning process.

Version: 2.0.2

Appendix 4 User Feedback Page
SP-1122 – SPECIFICATION FOR PROJECT QUALITY PLAN USER

FEEDBACK FORM
Any user who identifies an inaccuracy, error or ambiguity is requested to notify

the custodian so that appropriate action can be taken. The user is requested
to return this page fully completed, indicating precisely the amendment(s)
recommended.
Name:
Ref ID Date:
Page Ref: Brief Description of Change Required and Reasons
UEV1
Custodian of Document Date:

Version: 2.0.2

Appendix 5 - Change Identification Table
Section / Para Main Changes

3.6.1 para “Project Engineer shall prepare a matrix, based on the Design
1 Deliverables Verification Matrix, defining the required TA level for each
type of project document for review and approval and approved
authorisation matrix defining the required TA level for each type of
project documents for review and approval”
Appendix 2 “I - Issued for Information
Page 21
Documents issued for Information have in many cases been issued to
assist with the review of other documents and for general awareness of
what is proposed. Review of the documents need not necessarily be
required and failure to review will impede the design process by the
design contractor.”
“A - Issued for Review / Approval
Appendix 2 “Design Deliverables Verification Matrix” embedded in document.
Page 22


HSE Project Quality Assurance

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

HSE Project Quality Assurance

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.

Petroleum Development Oman L.L.C.

Specification for Project Quality Plan

Please familiarise yourself with the

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

Page 2 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

Page 3 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

Version No. Date Author Scope / Remarks

iii Related Business Processes

iv Related Corporate Management Frame Work (CMF)

Doc. ID Document Title

Page 4 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

Page 5 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

1.2 Changes to the Specification

1.3 Related Documents

Page 6 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

2.1 Process Definition

2.2 Process Deliverables

2.3 Process Owner's Responsibility

2.4 Performance Monitoring

2.5 Review and Improvement

Page 7 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

Page 8 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

3.1 Preparation of Project Quality Plan

(Refer to other documents where

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

3.2 Quality Policy and Objectives

3.3 Scope of the Project

Page 10 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

3.5 Quality Assurance for Contracts

3.6 Quality Assurance of Design

Page 11 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

3.6.1 Design QA Plan

3.6.2 Design Review

3.7 Document Control

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

3.8 Material Procurement and Control

Page 13 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

3.8.3 Handling, Storage, Packaging and Delivery

3.9 Construction Quality Assurance

Page 14 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

3.9.2 Inspection Contractor Appraisal

3.10 Commissioning and Handover

Page 15 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

3.11 Change Control and Standards Variance

3.12 Audits and Review

3.13 Quality Records

Page 16 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

Page 17 Specification for Project Quality Plan Printed 26/08/06

Minor Revision February 2008 to Revision 2.0.2

LEVEL IMPORTANCE CHANCE/IMPACT OF HOW/WHAT? IMPACT ON HSE IMPACT ON