Project or Programme?
You will all have been waiting eagerly to hear how the execution of my caisson swage repair went. I mentioned in my earlier post the issues with a crane outage and competition for deck space in the laydown area. It also transpires that the HVAC in the Bruce utilities room (see image) where the work will take place is not working, thus making the room a confined space. These issues have conspired to push the scheduling of the C16 back into late September.
Bruce Utilities Room
By pushing the timing of the C16 repair back, it aligned with the scheduled repair of the next caisson, C15. With typical military enthusiasm I claimed this second repair as my own project and it became clear there were efficiencies to be made by completing both repairs back to back. Wood Group, BP’s engineering partner have produced a combined construction schedule and the saving of combining the work scopes is in the order of £200k.
At this point I hit yet more issues as the repair is dependent on an inspection being carried out by the Integrity Engineering team. This inspection can’t take place until the core Bruce engineers remove the pump and its riser, the sectional pipe that connects the pump to the distribution pipework (top right in the above photo). It transpires that the riser from C16 is sat in the racking in the utilities room (bottom left of the photo). Guess where the C15 riser needs to be put?
So what we have ended up with is a series of 3 related projects all with elements of their scope which are similar, taking place as a sequence, in the same place. From what was covered on the APMP course that sounds very much like a programme. Treating the 3 projects as a programme and appointing a programme lead should ensure any issues which affect the other projects are identified and mitigate and may lead to further efficiency savings.
As if my first project growing arms and legs and becoming a programme wasn’t enough I have been tasked to conduct a portfolio risk review for all the projects being undertaken by the Projects and Modifications team.
Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog 
Sam, good to see you are making a saving. Have you asked what your cut of the £200k is?
Although running the projects back to back reduces costs, does it significantly increase project risk (both in terms of cost and time) as a delay in one project will cause a delay in the others?
If it does increase project risk, have you identified any ways of treating or transferring this risk?
Gary,
I suspect my cut will be a pat on the back and not much more! Treating the projects as a programme is one way of mitigating the risk. Anything that occurs during the pump lift or inspection that may affect my repair can be identified early and steps taken to ensure the repairs are successful. This also transfers the risk to the Bruce platform team, it’s ultimately their asset and they can choose not to carry out the repair and accept the risk the caisson may or may not fall off.
The key issue is that the C15 caisson contains a firewater pump. There are 2 of these and 3 seawater lift pumps on the platform. C16 is currently out of action and C15 will go offline when they start to isolate it for the lift. This leaves only 3 pumps available for the duration of the lift/inspection/repair/reinstatement. This is the minimum number to safely operate the asset so if one failed, production would have to stop. Oil is currently US$50 a barrel, Bruce produces 10,000 barrels a day, so there’s the financial risk!
It will be vital to minimise the time C15 is offline so my main effort is currently aligning my construction schedule so that the start of the swage repair exactly meets the end of the caisson inspection. At project level my main cost is the swaging sub-contractor (Oil States) whose personnel cost around £3k a day and whose equipment costs £5k a day. Ensuring their most efficient mobilisation date and a just in time delivery of equipment will somewhat mitigate my financial risk.
There is plenty of float in my construction schedule due to the combination of two work scopes. Much of the site preparation and lift rigging will be similar if not the same for all three projects so it’s really the Oil States team who are time/cost critical. Fortunately the pump lift and inspection of C16 have been completed very recently and based on the previous time taken on C16 and 2 other caissons the estimated time for those 2 projects on C15 are reasonable accurate.
The only other thing we are doing is making sure that myself and the construction manager are on Bruce at the time of the C15 repair so we can react quickly to any issues as they arise. That and scowl encouragingly at the Oil States personnel to get the repair done as quickly and effectively as possible.
Sam,
You are clearly proving competent in role and are therefore attaching work like iron filings to an eager magnet.
Can I suggest approaching tasks with an air of incompetence? I find a particular favourite is the phrase ” I’v cocked up bigger jobs than this”
MP
I can concur with Mark’s points, it is great that you have impressed them but, it can seriously take up your time, and you have a young family. I have got myself in way too deep and need to starts extracting myself. I might use Mark’s line or start faking a nervous tick while complaining of the voices in my head.
Thanks for the support chaps, I will keep two pencils and a pair of underwear in my desk drawer just in case.