Project Definition/Parameters and Risks
Current project is based on developing Natural gas liquid plant located on the west coast region of South America along with the support of the government as the local government has initiated for this project by giving the contract to a European company named as Inter Europe plc that taken this contract in $195M which consists of $175M as the targets constructions and rest amount includes the profit element demanded from the government for the construction of this project (Kerzner, 2018). This project highlights on various elements which helps completing the same within the stated deadline given strictly by the government as delaying penalty of $1M per well will get imposed on the construction for not giving the final outcome on time which creates a pressure on a project manager to fulfil the aim of its clients within the time (Martinsuo and Hoverfält, 2018).
Firstly, project objectives are created that is based on the entire nature of the overall project to guide a manager to achieve all its targets before the time get elapsed (Remeljej and Hoadley, 2006). Secondly, all the existing and potential risks related to this project are identified to craft mitigation strategy to safeguard the interests of the client (Carnall, 2018). Gantt chart is prepared to visually all the tasks to know the actual completion time required to achieve all the aims (Kidnay, Parrish and McCartney 2011). Resource histogram is prepared to the know the requirements of all the resources required for this project for a weekly period (Jiang and et.al., 2018). Human resource budget is prepared for all the team members to know the personal expenses incurred by all the members separately. Gross profit is determined by deducting all the expenses incurred in the project from the total revenues generated from this project (Tonchia Tonchia and Mahagaonkar, 2018). Re-scheduling of the project plan after considering all the incomplete tasks taken into consideration (Long and Lee, 2013). Earned value analysis will be based on several criteria such as calculating the projected completion date of the project; the projected final costs required in completing this project and also reflect its impact on the entire project (Westerveld, 2003). Justifications for all the acceleration options are covered to decide which option to select or reject (Jiang, Bian, 2017). In the final stage, reflective essay will be attached to this project analysis report to target all the challenges and the problems encountered by the project manager as in this stage the personal experience of the project manager and all its team members are included in this phase as the motive of the owner and the project supervisor is to appreciate the talents and special skills of all the action and the passive users participates in this project to accomplish all the aim and the targets of the project to get it complete within the prescribed time period (Pinto and Prescott, 2018).
Salvaje Bay is a project initiated by the South American government which is based on that is NGL that is Natural gas liquids which is small scale plant about to build on the undeveloped port of the South America country located in the west coast region (Umble, Haft and Umble, 2013). The operation of the plat includes various steps such as filtration phase which covers the separation of oil from the gas to keep the natural ingredient in the produced gas which will further pumped into marine terminal setup at the Salvaje bay. This will piped to two kilometres new plant from which methane is separated and sent to the national grid plant (Kim, Noh and Chang, 2018). Ethane is piped to the nearby ethylene cracker plant for the further processing. In the further processing, propane and butane will get chilled to create liquid solution to get stored in the tanks (Priswanti, Andini and Putri, 2018).
Planning and Costs
This plant have the support the national government as this development of the plant will generates several local jobs and also boosts the overall economy which in turn induces the entire productivity of a start up who intends build NGL plant in the backward area (Matthews and et.al., 2018). South America is good for the education purpose whose tourism will get increases when this plant comes into operation that produces several jobs that enriches the existing capabilities of all the employees are expert in the chemical engineering or related to the current field to give benefit of their skills to the owner of the pant also the government whose motive is to conduct several social welfare activities (Bryde, Unterhitzenberger and Joby, 2018).
Before the final operation of this plant, the government of these regions invites tenders for the construction of the plant by inviting several engineering and oil companies to show their interest in this particular project (Jadhav and Shinde, 2018). After some moths of the negotiations, finally the salvaje bay project were taken by European company named as Inter Europe oil and gas plc in a contract price of $175M for the construction costs and $195M for the profits in the first year (Strucker, 2018). One condition is included in this contract that if the targets costs does not included the profit element for the first year then they will get an additional 5% savings in the total profit in a proportion of 1:1 with the government but if the cost of this project exceeded then the contractor will get liable for first 5% after sharing equal profit with the government as mentioned in the legal contract. Late fee of $M per week will get imposed on the contractor for not submitting the final project within the stipulated deadline (Liu, Sun, Ni, Yang and Song, 2018).
- To determine the scope of the construction of NGL Project
- To evaluate the costs of the construction of NGL Project
- To determine the time of the construction of NGL Project
- To determine quality of the service provided by the contractor in constructing NGL project
Iron triangle parameters of the project play an integral role in determining the project objectives for the current project of constructing plant of NGL located in the countryside area of the South America that is the west coast region which is underprivileged that needs further development in terms of the population residing there, facilities and basic amenities available there (Semerci and Çelik, 2018). These three parameters include scope, cost and time which are the three criteria’s used to accomplish the overall aims and set targets created by the project manager to deliver the quality oriented service to its clients that are the government (Pheng, 2018). Quality is one of the important things uses by a contractor in building existing as well as the future relationship with its clients to increase the quantity of the work supplied by its clients (Pinha and Ahluwalia, 2018). Higher levels of the customer satisfaction will get achieved by an entity by satisfying its current user which will get achieved with the help of high quality of the services provided by the firm to its clients to keep them motivated with their business for a longer period of time (Bredillet, Tywoniak and Tootoonchy, 2018). In the current project (Vinegar, Akkurt and Tutunjian, Shell Oil Co, 2010), European construction companies will create a strong business connection with its clients that is the national government of South American to reduce the complexity of the legal proceedings of its business (Qyyum, Ali, Hussain, Bahadori and Lee, 2018).
Risk Management Register for NGL Project |
||||||||||||
Risk Identification |
Assessment |
Response |
Monitoring and Control |
|||||||||
Reference |
Event |
Cause |
Effect |
Probability |
Impact |
P x L |
Strategy |
Trigger |
Action |
Responsible person/s |
Review Frequency |
Status date and general notes |
1 |
Lack of funding |
Budget Constraints- allocation in doubt or subject to change (Erga, Juliussen, and Lidal, 2015) |
Project delayed |
4 |
5 |
20 |
Mitigate |
Project’s sponsors fail to ensure secure funding level when the plan is presented |
Conduct another funding round, seeking support from key stakeholder groups, including the executive sponsor |
Project Manager, Executive Sponsor |
Monthly |
1/08/18 Register updated. Alternative funding sources identified |
2 |
Unavailability of construction material |
Lack of market survey |
Project delayed |
5 |
4 |
20 |
Mitigate |
Contractor did not enquire about the availability of all the materials before taking up the project |
Stocks are imported from another country to meet the current requirement and also create stock of all these items for the future purpose |
Project Manager |
Weekly |
8/8/2018 |
3 |
Permission of local residents for building chemical plant in the residential area |
Poor property market analysis |
Dissatisfaction among project users(Sanghera, 2019) |
3 |
2 |
6 |
Mitigate |
Project executives did not taken the consent of all their parties before finalizing the project(Gray, and McClintock, ConocoPhillips Co, 2014) |
Questionnaires are created to get the consent of all the parties directly or indirectly related with this particular project(Kerzner, and Kerzner, 2017. ) |
Executive |
Monthly |
9/1/2018 |
4 |
Increase in Cost |
Lack of operational budget |
Leads to the penalty |
2 |
5 |
10 |
Mitigate |
Lack of negotiation policy developed by a manger to reduce the overall cost(Lu, and Wang, 2009) |
The increase in costs issue is controlled by creating a new negotiation policy and forecasted analysis |
Technical analysts |
Weekly |
9/8/2018 |
5 |
Labor strike |
No meeting with the union labour member |
Increasing costs in the project |
3 |
4 |
12 |
Not mitigated |
Demands of the labors are fulfilled by the project sponsor |
This risk will get reduces by fulfilling all their expectations by increasing their monetary compensation(Shuping, Xiaohong, Lianlian, and Jie, G., 2015) |
Manager |
Weekly |
9/16/2018 |
6 |
Site accidents |
No evaluation of the site |
Increasing costs and project delay |
4 |
5 |
20 |
Mitigate |
Poor safety measures followed on the site |
Use of safety gears and measures to save the lives of all the executives working on the site |
Architect |
Weekly |
9/24/2018 |
7 |
Inefficient employees |
Lack of working experience |
Project failure |
1 |
5 |
5 |
Mitigate |
Lack of training and working experience of all the employees |
On- the job training method is followed by an entity |
Team leader |
Weekly |
09/30/218 |
8 |
Increasing client’s requirement |
With the advice of other parliament members |
Increases project timeline |
1 |
5 |
5 |
Not to mitigate |
Contraction or extension in the construction of the plant |
Meeting with the clients on weekly basis to give the status of the work to them to avoid any kind of miscommunications |
Project manager |
Weekly |
10/1/2018 |
9 |
Lack of staff morale |
Due to increasing workload |
Project failure |
2 |
5 |
10 |
Mitigate |
Employees are not satisfied with the work pressure given to them |
Monetary motivation is given to them to keep them motivated towards the work offers to them |
Team leader |
Weekly |
10/7/2018 |
10 |
Poor weather conditions |
Starting the construction in wrong weather |
Project failure |
1 |
5 |
5 |
Not to Mitigate |
Lack of predictive analysis |
Safeguarding the construction of plant by making external arrangements |
Analysts |
Weekly |
10/14/2018 |
Task Name |
Duration |
Start |
Finish |
Predecessors |
Design Work |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
||
Site Surveys |
12 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Tue 10/27/09 |
|
Concept Designs |
20 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Fri 11/6/09 |
|
Detailed Design |
27 days |
Mon 11/9/09 |
Tue 12/15/09 |
2,3 |
Planning Submissions |
5 days |
Wed 12/16/09 |
Tue 12/22/09 |
4 |
Interface Studies |
15 days |
Wed 12/16/09 |
Tue 1/5/10 |
4 |
Design Approved |
0 days |
Tue 1/5/10 |
Tue 1/5/10 |
5,6 |
NGL Plant |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
||
Contractor Design work |
20 days |
Wed 1/6/10 |
Tue 2/2/10 |
7 |
Design Approved by NPI |
0 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
8 |
Site clearance |
15 days |
Wed 2/3/10 |
Tue 2/23/10 |
9 |
Foundations |
20 days |
Tue 10/13/09 |
Mon 11/9/09 |
10 |
Civil Works |
35 days |
Wed 2/24/10 |
Tue 4/13/10 |
11 |
Mechanical systems |
30 days |
Wed 2/24/10 |
Tue 4/6/10 |
11 |
Electrical and control systems |
20 days |
Wed 2/24/10 |
Tue 3/23/10 |
11 |
Piping and utilities |
25 days |
Wed 2/24/10 |
Tue 3/30/10 |
11 |
Pre-Commissioning |
10 days |
Wed 2/3/10 |
Tue 2/16/10 |
7,8,9 |
Ethylene Cracker |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
||
Contractor design work |
25 days |
Wed 1/6/10 |
Tue 2/9/10 |
7 |
Design approved by NPI |
0 days |
Tue 2/16/10 |
Tue 2/16/10 |
17 |
Site clearance |
25 days |
Tue 10/13/09 |
Mon 11/16/09 |
18 |
Foundations |
20 days |
Wed 2/10/10 |
Tue 3/9/10 |
19 |
Civil Works |
30 days |
Wed 2/17/10 |
Tue 3/30/10 |
20 |
Mechanical systems |
25 days |
Tue 11/17/09 |
Mon 12/21/09 |
21 |
Electrical and control systems |
20 days |
Wed 3/10/10 |
Tue 4/6/10 |
22 |
Piping and utilities |
30 days |
Tue 11/17/09 |
Mon 12/28/09 |
21 |
Pre-Commissioning |
10 days |
Wed 3/31/10 |
Tue 4/13/10 |
23,24 |
Port Development |
1 day |
Mon 11/9/09 |
Mon 11/9/09 |
3 |
Dredging Works |
125 days |
Mon 11/9/09 |
Fri 4/30/10 |
3 |
Civil Construction |
80 days |
Wed 12/16/09 |
Tue 4/6/10 |
4 |
Electrical services |
25 days |
Wed 4/14/10 |
Tue 5/18/10 |
27 |
Telecom and Control |
20 days |
Tue 11/10/09 |
Mon 12/7/09 |
28 |
Fire station |
25 days |
Wed 4/14/10 |
Tue 5/18/10 |
27 |
Port Operational |
0 days |
Fri 4/30/10 |
Fri 4/30/10 |
26,29,30 |
Social Infrastructure |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
||
Estate planning |
10 days |
Wed 1/6/10 |
Tue 1/19/10 |
7 |
Service roads |
30 days |
Wed 5/19/10 |
Tue 6/29/10 |
31 |
Drainage and water |
25 days |
Tue 12/8/09 |
Mon 1/11/10 |
32 |
Electrical services |
15 days |
Wed 5/19/10 |
Tue 6/8/10 |
33 |
Housing units |
35 days |
Mon 5/3/10 |
Fri 6/18/10 |
34 |
School complex |
20 days |
Mon 5/3/10 |
Fri 5/28/10 |
34 |
Medical center |
10 days |
Wed 1/20/10 |
Tue 2/2/10 |
36 |
Retail units |
20 days |
Wed 6/30/10 |
Tue 7/27/10 |
37 |
Infrastructure complete |
0 days |
Mon 1/11/10 |
Mon 1/11/10 |
38 |
Road Network |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
||
Layout Finalized |
5 days |
Wed 10/28/09 |
Tue 11/3/09 |
2 |
Leveling works |
60 days |
Mon 6/21/10 |
Fri 9/10/10 |
40 |
Access roads |
40 days |
Mon 5/31/10 |
Fri 7/23/10 |
41 |
Circular roads |
25 days |
Wed 2/3/10 |
Tue 3/9/10 |
42 |
Plant Network |
30 days |
Wed 7/28/10 |
Tue 9/7/10 |
43 |
Road lighting |
20 days |
Tue 1/12/10 |
Mon 2/8/10 |
44 |
Roads Complete |
0 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
45 |
Commissioning |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
||
NGL Process system |
15 days |
Wed 3/31/10 |
Tue 4/20/10 |
16 |
NGL control system |
15 days |
Wed 11/4/09 |
Tue 11/24/09 |
46 |
NGL Fire safety system |
10 days |
Mon 9/13/10 |
Fri 9/24/10 |
47 |
Cracker Process system |
15 days |
Wed 4/7/10 |
Tue 4/27/10 |
25 |
Cracker control system |
15 days |
Wed 3/10/10 |
Tue 3/30/10 |
49 |
Cracker fire safety system |
10 days |
Wed 9/8/10 |
Tue 9/21/10 |
50 |
Site fully operational |
0 days |
Tue 5/18/10 |
Tue 5/18/10 |
31 |
Task No. |
Task Name |
Duration |
Incomplete tasks |
Design Work |
|||
1 |
Site Surveys |
12 days |
|
2 |
Concept Designs |
20 days |
|
3 |
Detailed Design |
27 days |
|
4 |
Planning Submissions |
5 days |
|
5 |
Interface Studies |
15 days |
|
6 |
Design Approved |
0 days |
|
NGL Plant |
|||
7 |
Contractor Design work |
20 days |
|
8 |
Design Approved by NPI |
0 days |
|
9 |
Site clearance |
15 days |
|
10 |
Foundations |
20 days |
|
11 |
Civil Works |
35 days |
|
12 |
Mechanical systems |
30 days |
|
13 |
Electrical and control systems |
20 days |
|
14 |
Piping and utilities |
25 days |
|
15 |
Pre-Commissioning |
10 days |
|
Ethylene Cracker |
|||
16 |
Contractor design work |
25 days |
|
17 |
Design approved by NPI |
0 days |
|
18 |
Site clearance |
25 days |
|
19 |
Foundations |
20 days |
|
20 |
Civil Works |
30 days |
|
21 |
Mechanical systems |
25 days |
|
22 |
Electrical and control systems |
20 days |
|
23 |
Piping and utilities |
30 days |
|
24 |
Pre-Commissioning |
10 days |
|
Port Development |
|||
25 |
Dredging Works |
125 days |
|
26 |
Civil Construction |
80 days |
|
27 |
Electrical services |
25 days |
|
28 |
Telecom and Control |
20 days |
|
29 |
Fire station |
25 days |
|
30 |
Port Operational |
0 days |
|
Social Infrastructure |
|||
31 |
Estate planning |
10 days |
|
32 |
Service roads |
30 days |
|
33 |
Drainage and water |
25 days |
|
34 |
Electrical services |
15 days |
|
35 |
Housing units |
35 days |
|
36 |
School complex |
20 days |
|
37 |
Medical center |
10 days |
|
38 |
Retail units |
20 days |
|
39 |
Infrastructure complete |
0 days |
|
Road Network |
|||
40 |
Layout Finalized |
5 days |
|
41 |
Leveling works |
60 days |
|
42 |
Access roads |
40 days |
|
43 |
Circular roads |
25 days |
|
44 |
Plant Network |
30 days |
|
45 |
Road lighting |
20 days |
|
46 |
Roads Complete |
0 days |
|
Commissioning |
|||
47 |
NGL Process system |
15 days |
|
48 |
NGL control system |
15 days |
|
49 |
NGL Fire safety system |
10 days |
|
50 |
Cracker Process system |
15 days |
|
51 |
Cracker control system |
15 days |
|
52 |
Cracker fire safety system |
10 days |
|
53 |
Site fully operational |
0 days |
|
Total |
1017 days |
62 days |
Resources |
Commission rate |
Days worked |
Total commission |
NGL Process system |
400 |
15 |
6000 |
NGL Control system |
400 |
15 |
6000 |
NGL Fire safety system |
400 |
10 |
4000 |
Cracker Process system |
400 |
15 |
6000 |
Cracker Control system |
400 |
15 |
6000 |
Cracker Fire safety system |
400 |
10 |
4000 |
Managing Progress and Spending
15 |
Frequency |
Cumulative % |
15 |
Frequency |
Cumulative % |
10 |
0 |
0.00% |
More |
5 |
100.00% |
10 |
0 |
0.00% |
10 |
0 |
100.00% |
15 |
0 |
0.00% |
10 |
0 |
100.00% |
15 |
0 |
0.00% |
15 |
0 |
100.00% |
15 |
0 |
0.00% |
15 |
0 |
100.00% |
More |
5 |
100.00% |
15 |
0 |
100.00% |
Resources |
Remuneration |
Business expenses |
Accommodation |
Flights |
Total |
Project manager |
10000 |
1500 |
2500 |
2000 |
16000 |
Other managers |
7000 |
1000 |
4500 |
7500 |
20000 |
Assistant managers |
4000 |
500 |
4500 |
7500 |
16500 |
Project coordinators |
2000 |
500 |
4500 |
7500 |
14500 |
Total |
23000 |
3500 |
16000 |
24500 |
Particulars |
Budget(In $M) |
Costs(In$M) |
GP |
Design work |
5 |
4.2 |
0.8 |
NGL Plant |
50 |
22.1 |
27.9 |
Ethylene cracker |
60 |
16 |
44 |
Port development |
25 |
14.7 |
10.3 |
Social infrastructure |
20 |
6.6 |
13.4 |
Road network |
12 |
5.7 |
6.3 |
Commissioning |
0.5 |
0 |
0.5 |
Total |
103.2 |
Task Name |
Duration |
Start |
Finish |
Predecessors |
Design Work |
0 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
|
Site Surveys |
12 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Tue 10/27/09 |
|
Concept Designs |
20 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Fri 11/6/09 |
|
Detailed Design |
27 days |
Mon 11/9/09 |
Tue 12/15/09 |
2,3 |
Planning Submissions |
5 days |
Wed 12/16/09 |
Tue 12/22/09 |
4 |
Interface Studies |
15 days |
Wed 12/16/09 |
Tue 1/5/10 |
4 |
Design Approved |
0 days |
Tue 1/5/10 |
Tue 1/5/10 |
5,6 |
NGL Plant |
0 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
|
Contractor Design work |
20 days |
Wed 1/6/10 |
Tue 2/2/10 |
7 |
Design Approved by NPI |
0 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
8 |
Site clearance |
15 days |
Wed 2/3/10 |
Tue 2/23/10 |
9 |
Foundations |
20 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Fri 11/6/09 |
10 |
Civil Works |
35 days |
Wed 2/24/10 |
Tue 4/13/10 |
11 |
Mechanical systems |
22 days |
Wed 2/24/10 |
Thu 3/25/10 |
11 |
Electrical and control systems |
18 days |
Wed 2/24/10 |
Fri 3/19/10 |
11 |
Piping and utilities |
28 days |
Wed 2/24/10 |
Fri 4/2/10 |
11 |
Pre-Commissioning |
12 days |
Wed 2/3/10 |
Thu 2/18/10 |
7,8,9 |
Ethylene Cracker |
0 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
|
Contractor design work |
25 days |
Wed 1/6/10 |
Tue 2/9/10 |
7 |
Design approved by NPI |
0 days |
Thu 2/18/10 |
Thu 2/18/10 |
17 |
Site clearance |
25 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Fri 11/13/09 |
18 |
Foundations |
25 days |
Wed 2/10/10 |
Tue 3/16/10 |
19 |
Civil Works |
32 days |
Fri 2/19/10 |
Mon 4/5/10 |
20 |
Mechanical systems |
28 days |
Mon 11/16/09 |
Wed 12/23/09 |
21 |
Electrical and control systems |
22 days |
Wed 3/17/10 |
Thu 4/15/10 |
22 |
Piping and utilities |
35 days |
Mon 11/16/09 |
Fri 1/1/10 |
21 |
Pre-Commissioning |
15 days |
Tue 4/6/10 |
Mon 4/26/10 |
23,24 |
Port Development |
0 days |
Fri 11/6/09 |
Fri 11/6/09 |
3 |
Dredging Works |
125 days |
Mon 11/9/09 |
Fri 4/30/10 |
3 |
Civil Construction |
80 days |
Wed 12/16/09 |
Tue 4/6/10 |
4 |
Electrical services |
26 days |
Tue 4/27/10 |
Tue 6/1/10 |
27 |
Telecom and Control |
25 days |
Mon 11/9/09 |
Fri 12/11/09 |
28 |
Fire station |
30 days |
Tue 4/27/10 |
Mon 6/7/10 |
27 |
Port Operational |
0 days |
Fri 4/30/10 |
Fri 4/30/10 |
26,29,30 |
Social Infrastructure |
0 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
|
Estate planning |
15 days |
Wed 1/6/10 |
Tue 1/26/10 |
7 |
Service roads |
35 days |
Wed 6/2/10 |
Tue 7/20/10 |
31 |
Drainage and water |
36 days |
Mon 12/14/09 |
Mon 2/1/10 |
32 |
Electrical services |
18 days |
Tue 6/8/10 |
Thu 7/1/10 |
33 |
Housing units |
40 days |
Mon 5/3/10 |
Fri 6/25/10 |
34 |
School complex |
25 days |
Mon 5/3/10 |
Fri 6/4/10 |
34 |
Medical center |
15 days |
Wed 1/27/10 |
Tue 2/16/10 |
36 |
Retail units |
26 days |
Wed 7/21/10 |
Wed 8/25/10 |
37 |
Infrastructure complete |
0 days |
Mon 2/1/10 |
Mon 2/1/10 |
38 |
Road Network |
0 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
|
Layout Finalized |
5 days |
Wed 10/28/09 |
Tue 11/3/09 |
2 |
Leveling works |
60 days |
Mon 6/28/10 |
Fri 9/17/10 |
40 |
Access roads |
40 days |
Mon 6/7/10 |
Fri 7/30/10 |
41 |
Circular roads |
30 days |
Wed 2/17/10 |
Tue 3/30/10 |
42 |
Plant Network |
32 days |
Thu 8/26/10 |
Fri 10/8/10 |
43 |
Road lighting |
10 days |
Tue 2/2/10 |
Mon 2/15/10 |
44 |
Roads Complete |
0 days |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
45 |
Commissioning |
1 day? |
Mon 10/12/09 |
Mon 10/12/09 |
|
NGL Process system |
15 days |
Mon 4/5/10 |
Fri 4/23/10 |
16 |
NGL control system |
15 days |
Wed 11/4/09 |
Tue 11/24/09 |
46 |
NGL Fire safety system |
10 days |
Mon 9/20/10 |
Fri 10/1/10 |
47 |
Cracker Process system |
15 days |
Fri 4/16/10 |
Thu 5/6/10 |
25 |
Cracker control system |
15 days |
Wed 3/31/10 |
Tue 4/20/10 |
49 |
Cracker fire safety system |
10 days |
Mon 10/11/10 |
Fri 10/22/10 |
50 |
Site fully operational |
0 days |
Tue 6/1/10 |
Tue 6/1/10 |
31 |
Tasks |
Actual Progress |
Planned Progress |
Variance |
DW1 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
DW2 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
DW3 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
DW4 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
DW5 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
DW6 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
NP1 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
NP2 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
NP3 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
NP4 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
NP5 |
20 |
100 |
-80 |
NP6 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
NP7 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
NP8 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
NP9 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
EC1 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
EC2 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
EC3 |
10 |
100 |
-90 |
EC4 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
EC5 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
EC6 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
EC7 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
EC8 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
EC9 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
PD1 |
84 |
100 |
-16 |
PD2 |
40 |
100 |
-60 |
PD3 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
PD4 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
PD5 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
PD6 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
SI1 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
SI2 |
75 |
100 |
-25 |
Si3 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
Si4 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
Si5 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
Si6 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
SI7 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
SI8 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
SI9 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
RN1 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
RN2 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
RN3 |
100 |
100 |
0 |
RN4 |
15 |
100 |
-85 |
RN5 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
RN6 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
RN7 |
0 |
100 |
-100 |
Estimate at completion schedule
Budget at completion= $17250, 000
Actual costs = $6900000
Planned Value (W.N.1) = 55.83% of $17250, 000
=$9630675
Earned Value (W.N.2) = 42.33 of 17250, 000
= $7301925
Cost Performance Index
= EV/AC
= $7301925/$6900000
= 10.58
Estimate at completion= Budget actual cost/ cost performance index
= $6900000/10.58
= $65217
Working Notes
W.N.1
Planned Value |
|
Design work |
100 |
NGL |
65 |
Ethylene cracker |
20 |
Dredging |
60 |
Social infrastructure |
40 |
Road network |
50 |
335 |
|
Average |
55.83 |
W.N.2
Earned Value |
|
Design work |
100 |
NGL |
46.67 |
Ethylene cracker |
22.22 |
Port Development |
20.67 |
Social infrastructure |
19.44 |
Road network |
45 |
Average |
42.33 |
There are five acceleration options given above such as subcontracting of plumbing will result in the savings of 2 weeks time but by adding extra $100,000, chilling electrical systems requires additional $50, 0000 but this saves 3 weeks, revising specifications will save 1 month time period but requires $175000 cost, two additional engineers recruited in the project will save 1 week but incurs $50,000 and bring additional labours will save 3 weeks and additional cost of 80, 0000.
Out of the above options, last option will be selected in which additional labours are recruited that saves the 3 weeks in a cost of 80,000 as these labours will help in reducing the entire workload to generate higher revenues to cover this cost.
This phase will include the information about the overall experience in conducting this particular project by considering all the need and the expectations of all the users related to this project. South American government was the client in this project as they initiated a government project of Natural gas liquid setting up in the backward region to generate 400 local jobs for all the backward region and urban region people of the country to enhance their skills and knowledge to practice in the chemical engineering field as this particular field has become rare in the current period which requires appreciation by giving ample of jobs in this sector. I witnessed both positive and negative sides of this project just like two faces of a coin which get flipped according to the changes takes places in the external environment. I notices several challenges such as increase in the cost structure which is consider as the biggest challenge for me to encounter before it leads to the penalty of 5% of the total profits after giving 50% share to the government as this information has stated clearly in the contract that I have encountered by creating budgets for all the major costs incurred in this project by comparing the same with the previous year costs structure to know the weaknesses lies in the costs managing system uses by me and my team members. After creating the budget, prediction results are created to know its overall impact as my aim is to remove this issue on a high priority by categorizing all the risks and issues in general in the construction of this project to eradicate the same from this project. If these issues are not rectified then this will leads to the overall delaying in completing the construction of the plant which leads to the clear-cut penalty of $1M per week as imposed by the government. I can’t afford to submit the late work in the first and foremost business deal started with the government as this will affects my overall market image and also affects my credibility in front of all the investors who will divest their shares from my company if I deliver low quality work or withdrawing my interest from this project which is not good for getting all the assignments and the constructions projects in the present and as well as in the future period.
Earned Value Analysis and Acceleration
Another issues I faced in performing this project is related to the site accidents’ due to less efficient safety equipments used on the sites which leads to the site accidents which in turn, increases my overall costs and also creates overall project delay which I can’t afford as my image is on stake while first time dealing with the government. I have encountered this issue by increasing the quality and quantity of the safety measures equipped on the sites to avoid the site accidents and also to safeguard the entire costs incurred in this project.
References
Bredillet, C., Tywoniak, S. and Tootoonchy, M., 2018. Exploring the dynamics of project management office and portfolio management co-evolution: A routine lens. International Journal of Project Management. 36(1). pp.27-42.
Bryde, D., Unterhitzenberger, C. and Joby, R., 2018. Conditions of success for earned value analysis in projects. International Journal of Project Management. 36(3). pp.474-484.
Carnall, C., 2018. Managing change. Routledge. pp.134
Erga, O., Juliussen, O. and Lidal, H., 2015. Carbon dioxide recovery by means of aqueous amines. Energy Conversion and Management. 36(6-9), pp.387-392.
Gray, M. L. and McClintock, W. A., ConocoPhillips Co, 2014. Cryogenic recovery of LPG from natural gas. U.S. Patent 4,430,103.
Jadhav, M. V. V. and Shinde, M. R. D., 2018. Application of Earned Value Management System In Infrastructure Projects-A Review.
Jiang, W., Bian, J., 2017. Investigation of supersonic separation mechanism of CO 2 in natural gas applying the Discrete Particle Method. Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification. 123. pp.272-279.
Jiang, W., Bian, J., Wu, A., Gao, S., Yin, P. and Hou, D., 2018. Investigation of supersonic separation mechanism of CO 2 in natural gas applying the Discrete Particle Method. Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification. 123. pp.272-279.
Kerzner, H. and Kerzner, H. R., 2017. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
Kerzner, H., 2018. Project management best practices: Achieving global excellence. John Wiley & Sons.
Kidnay, A. J., Parrish, W. R. and McCartney, D. G., 2011. Fundamentals of natural gas processing. CRC press.
Kim, J., Noh, Y. and Chang, D., 2018. Storage system for distributed-energy generation using liquid air combined with liquefied natural gas. Applied Energy. 212. pp.1417-1432.
Lee, S., Long, N. V. D. and Lee, M., 2012. Design and optimization of natural gas liquefaction and recovery processes for offshore floating liquefied natural gas plants. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research. 51(30), pp.10021-10030.
Liu, L., Sun, J., Ni, Y., Yang, S. and Song, P. A., 2018. Discussion on cost control experience in construction project management. Smart Construction Research. 2(3).
Long, N. V. D. and Lee, M., 2013. A novel NGL (natural gas liquid) recovery process based on self-heat recuperation. Energy. 57. pp.663-670.
Lu, T. K .S. W. and Wang, K.S., 2009. Analysis and optimization of a cascading power cycle with liquefied natural gas (LNG) cold energy recovery. Applied Thermal Engineering, 29(8-9), pp.1478-1484.
Martinsuo, M. and Hoverfält, P., 2018. Change program management: Toward a capability for managing value-oriented, integrated multi-project change in its context. International Journal of Project Management. 36(1). pp.134-146.
Matthews, L. R., and et.al., 2018. Natural Gas to Liquid Transportation Fuels under Uncertainty Using Robust Optimization. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research.
Pheng, L. S., 2018. Project cost management. In Project Management for the Built Environment (pp. 97-112). Springer, Singapore.
Pinha, D.C. and Ahluwalia, R. S., 2018. Flexible resource management and its effect on project cost and duration. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, pp.1-15.
Pinto, J. K. and Prescott, J. E., 2018. Variations in critical success factors over the stages in the project life cycle. Journal of management. 14(1). pp.5-18.
Priswanti, R., Andini, R. and Putri, M.A., 2018. ANALYSIS THE EFFECT OF RETURN ON ASSETS, RETURN ON EQUITY, GROSS PROFIT MARGIN TO FIRM VALUE WITH LEVERAGE AS INTERVENING VARIABLE CASE STUDY ON TEXTILE AND GARMENT COMPANY LISTED ON BEI (PERIOD 2012-2016). Journal Of Accounting. 4(4).
Qyyum, M. A., Ali, W., Hussain, A., Bahadori, A. and Lee, M., 2018. Feasibility study of environmental relative humidity through the thermodynamic effects on the performance of natural gas liquefaction process. Applied Thermal Engineering. 128. pp.51-63.
Remeljej, C. W. and Hoadley, A. F. A., 2006. An exergy analysis of small-scale liquefied natural gas (LNG) liquefaction processes. Energy. 31(12). pp.2005-2019.
Sanghera, P., 2019. Project Scope Management. In CAPM® in Depth (pp. 135-171). Apress, Berkeley, CA.
Semerci, A. and Çelik, A. D., 2018. Gross profit analysis in cotton production and effects of agricultural subsidies on product cost: a case study of Hatay Region-Turkey. CUSTOS E AGRONEGOCIO ON LINE. 14(1). pp.2-21.
Shuping, Z., Xiaohong, B., Lianlian, F. and Jie, G., 2015. Techniques of Gas Recovery by Water Drainage for Gas Wells with Low Pressure and Production. Natural Gas Industry, 25(4), p.106.
Strucker, T., 2018. Application of project management standards in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)(Doctoral dissertation, Kaunas University of Technology).
Tonchia, S., Tonchia and Mahagaonkar, 2018. Industrial project management. Springer.
Umble, E. J., Haft, R. R. and Umble, M. M., 2013. Enterprise resource planning: Implementation procedures and critical success factors. European journal of operational research. 146(2). pp.241-257.
Vinegar, H. J., Akkurt, R. and Tutunjian, P. N ., Shell Oil Co, 2010. NMR logging of natural gas reservoirs. U.S. Patent 6,094,048.
Westerveld, E., 2003. The Project Excellence Model®: linking success criteria and critical success factors. International Journal of project management. 21(6). pp.411-418.