Level of Learning: Conscience Incompetent
Following a good week in the office last week, I am starting to understand BP, Projects & Modifications and my role within it; here’s a flavour.
Ground
BP North sea operations currently own 6 assets in the North Sea. Bruce, Claire, Magnus, Andrew, Foinaven and Eastern Trough Area Project (ETAP), which are a mixture of single and double, steel jacket design platforms, with or without multiple subsea wells connected to the processing platform, with Foinaven being a Floating, production, Storing and Offloading (FPSO) vessel. It is the hub which covers ETAP that I have been assigned to.
Eastern Trough Area Project (ETAP) is an integrated project consisting of 9 independent reservoirs (each containing one or more well heads), 6 owned by BP and 3 by Shell, all linked to a central Processing platform. Considerably different from what a layman might consider a ‘standard’ single well, steel legged rig; the truth is there doesn’t seem to be a standard, with each of the 6 BP North Sea assets different from the next.
The diagram below shows the layout of ETAP. The main structure consists of a Processing, drilling and Raising (PdR) platform connected to a Quarters & Utilities (QU) platform, separated for safety. The Marnock well is directly below the PdR platform, with Monas, Mirren, Machar and Madoes (and Shell Egret, Skva & Heron) all being subsea wells, tied back to the Central Processing platform (CPP). The 6th BP well, Mungo, requires a Normally Unmanned Installation (NUI) in order to carry out additional processes on top of what is required for the other subsea reservoirs.
ETAP Schematic
The picture below shows the QU platform on the left, consisting of a heli deck above the accommodation and welfare facilities, power generation units (gas turbines) and other services, connected to the PdR in the centre. The structure on the right is a Flotel, which provides additional Person on Board (POB) capacity when required (i.e. during construction or Turn-A-Round (TAR)).
ETAP QU & PDR platform with Flotel
Organisation
As mentioned earlier, I am assigned to a hub which currently only deals with ETAP (and Mungo), although asset responsibilities often move between hubs depending on workload, personnel and suitability. The 3 or 4 hubs (again remaining flexible) all work within the Projects and Modifications branch of Engineering Services, which itself lies within BP Global Operations Organisation, comparable, I guess, to a TLB in the MOD.
The main role of the Project and Modifications team is in the title. It doesn’t deal with well drilling or new platform construction (these are dealt with by Global Wells Organisation and Global Projects Organisation (other TLBs)) but instead deal with any routine or emergency upgrades, additions or repairs, primarily to enhance safety or production, up to a value of $15m.
Contract
A contract was renewed this year with Wood Group PSN (WGPSN) called BP Focus, which is a 5 year contract (with a 2 year extension option), which covers Upstream (offshore assets) and midstream (onshore processing) on a cost reimbursement + basis. WGPSN primarily only deal with the latter stages of the project lifecycle, (Define & Execute), with the earlier stages, (Appraise & Select), being delivered by Costain. Again, remain flexible.
The Cost reimbursement + contract means that WGPSN invoice BP for all direct costs incurred, due to general overheads and any work carried out on the specific projects. Added to this is a fixed mark-up percentage, the value of which depends on the cost element but as an example is 6% for ‘Real estate services, desk space, phones etc and up to 8% for personnel. In addition, there is an incentive scheme which offers a bonus of up to 4% against some of the cost elements, primarily personnel if a project meets certain Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) which are agreed annually.
My Role
As a Project Engineer, I am the Single Point of Accountability (SPA) for a number of projects on ETAP. My role is to liaise with the appropriate team within WGPSN and monitor the development throughout each of the project lifecycle phases, engaging with BP staff, WGPSN staff and external agencies as required in order to move the project forward. Budgets and scheduling are key, and it will be my responsibility to ensure that timings are adhered to, budgets are realistic and monitored, whilst constantly feeding this back to the BP side to ensure there is one version of the truth. The BP Method of Change (MoC) process which is there to help identify, assess, manage and communicate risk throughout the project lifecycle also needs to be managed, to ensure the correct processes are being followed and that all relevant documents are up to date and easily accessible. This along with other key documents will form the basis of a go/no go decision at key points along the project life cycle either between phases or at the 12, 6 or 2 week review before the project is executed offshore.
Clearly this is an attempt to summarise in a paragraph what I am meant to be doing, having had very little experience to date; talking to Brendan and Nick, it is clear it is not as simple as it sounds and only be doing it will I get a thorough understanding. My next blog will explain a project I have just taken over, which should hopefully provide some clarity on all the above.
Key points to take away: The military are just amateurs when it comes to TLAs and flexibility is key!
Other news
Pregnancy – Still
New house – aim for contract exchange this Friday, completion next week.
Just been along to a meeting at my local BSAC dive club, looking forward to some off shore diving soon.
Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog 
Hey dude, bit of a specific question (more out of interest than anything) do you know how the 2 year cost option is funded? Out here options like that HAVE to be appropriated at the proposal stage. This means that congress awards the funds to the contract in entirity. The funding for any options which extend the Period of Proposal (POP) like that are therefore known as no-cost time extensions because the money has already been set to one side? I was just wondering if that was the case in the real world also?
Brad, thanks for the question and I think I know what your getting at and I will try to keep things simple to avoid further confusion or indeed an error!
For the contract as a whole, money only changes hands if there are projects taking place. If the BP projects and modifications pot of money dried up, then there would be no projects happening and WGPSN would get no money. (not strictly true, as I’m sure there will be a baseline of overheads etc, but not read the 2 inch thick contract in detail yet!))
What the contract does, amongst many other things, is provide a set of preferential rates and charges that WGPSN will invoice BP for when it carries out any work relating to BP projects.
BP gets guaranteed steady rates throughout the contract period, and a company that is thoroughly integrated and knows BPs ways of working really well, which reduces confusion and the need for BP to tender out work. WGPSN become the ‘preferred’ contractor and gets the kudos for working with BP. I did say preferred above. That because BP reserve the right to tender out anything they want if they believe WGPSN are taking the mick with their estimates. So sometimes Costain (or other) will complete the Define and execute elements, sometimes WGPSN will complete the Appraise and Select elements; it all comes down to cost and suitability.
So when it comes to the 2 year extension option, I believe the set up will just roll through as before with annual updates to rates and charges; there is no ‘stash’ of monies put aside ready to extend it.
As an aside, the Projects and Mods budget was cut following the drop in oil price, this led to a number of projects being either shelved or killed. This clearly led to WGPSN receiving less work and so introduces the benefit of hiring contractors; Sir Alan would have a field day.
Hope this answers your question, at least in part.
Off shore diving in the north sea?! Treat yourself!