Project Risk Management Plan

10/27/2016

BI-10-00954: REFINED PRODUCTS PIPELINE- DUBA TABUK

(90% PP)

Project Classification: C (ERA Jul 2017, ERC Nov 2020)

Workshop Date & Venue: Oct 2016- MHDP Office-Khobar
Prepared By:
Document Owner(s) Project/Organization Role
Ahmed El Qutob PRM Consultant
PMOD/PEOD Endorsement:
Title Name Signature Date
Lead PRM SME Terrence H. Perez
Distribution:
Name Title
Sami Ismail Risk Manager
Hussam Al Oqaili IPT Leader
Sami Ismail FPD Planning Engineer
Ahmed AL Khalaf Project Manager
Tharwat Al Jamaan Department Manager ((Pipeline and
terminal distribution Department))
Report Version Control:
Version Date Author Change Description
DRAFT 10/25/2016 Ahmed El Qutob Issued for review and comment
FINAL 10/27/2016 Ahmed El Qutob Final Approval

Page 1 of 11
1. High Level Project Description and Key Objectives
• What are high-level project objectives and deliverables?
BI-10-00954: Refined Products Pipeline – Duba Tabuk is composed of two major scope packages (i.e. a Pipeline facility
package and a Bulk Plant facility package) that will be developed in parallel to achieve the ultimate business objective
for the Downstream Distribution system in the north-west of the Kingdom. An identifier (suffix) has been included in
the scoping documents to provide clarity in the cross-referencing and scope responsibility between the two major
scope packages covered under BI-10-00954
• What are main components of the project scope as currently understood?
The bulk plant expansion scope for the additional storage tanks and facilities are to support products handling from
the marine terminal and storage in both Duba BP and Tabuk BP, including products batching through the Duba–Tabuk
Pipeline (DT-1). The additional storage tanks provided under this BI, cargo ships of 330MBBL (ULSD) and 330MBBL
(PG95 & PG91) can be fully received and handled to support refined products demands up to 2040 in both Duba &
Tabuk bulk plants
• What factors define the project’s level of complexity?
1. Power requirements Interface with SEC.
2. Brown field project.
3. Tie-ins and shutdowns.
4. Hot tapping.
5. Utilizing the T&I’s schedules.
6. LUPs are not yet approved.
7. Plant access and work permits.
8. BI is executed in two cities.
9. Key stakeholders level of engagement.
10. Alignment between this BI’s packages.

2. Project Justification
• Why is the project being conducted? How does the project relate to and align with the Saudi Aramco strategic
objectives?
The primary purpose of the proposed pipeline facility is to safely and efficiently transport the required volumes of
refined products (diesel and gasoline) from Duba to Tabuk to meet the long term growth in demand for refined
products (transportation and utility fuels) in the Tabuk region, providing energy for the local industry and
transportation fuels for the citizens of the Tabuk region
• Is possibility of a partnership (joint venture, consortium, etc.) considered for execution of the project?
None.

3. Relative Importance of Objectives

• Please rank the list below and justify your choice.

Page 2 of 11
 Safety
Quality
Schedule
Shutdown
Cost
Community
Environment
Reputation

4. Potential Sources of Risk

a. Project Uniqueness
• What aspects of the project are unique or new to Saudi Aramco?
Project is business as usual and similar projects were executed by S.A.
• Is this type of project a regular occurrence or one-off?
Regular

b. Key Success Factors

• At the completion of the project, what are the key factors that will determine if this is considered a successful
project?
- Meeting the ERC milestone and budget.
- Deliver the required results and meeting the objectives.
- Zero major safety incidents during project execution.
- Improved communication with other similar projects.
- Pass the lessons learned to other similar project.
- Smooth coordination between the BI packages.

c. Project Dependencies
• Are there dependencies on other projects and how these dependencies could affect the project objectives and key
success factors?
BI-10-01031, Upgrade Fire Protection & Industrial Drainage Systems - Western Region Distribution
Facilities (ERA: 7/12; ERC: 8/17):
BI-10-00954-PL, Refined Products Pipeline – Duba Tabuk (ERA: July 2017; ERC: Nov/2020).
BI-19XXX upgrade the existing the TMS and ESD
Existing facilities

• Is the project dependent on external factors (government agencies, market conditions, approvals, permits, etc.)
outside the control of the project management team?
None
• To what extent are the external factors and other projects likely to hinder IPT’s ability to meet the project’s
objectives?
None
• Is a program management approach required for proper integration and interface management with other
projects?
N/A

d. Market & Commercial Uncertainties

• To what degree the supply and demand forecasts for the output products are understood?
N/A
• To what degree potential customers of output products are contractually committed?
N/A
Page 3 of 11
 • Are there any known competitive considerations as related to output products?
N/A
• To what degree the required feedstock supply is secured?
N/A
• To what degree a specification of the feedstock is finalized?
N/A

e. Commercial Infrastructure
• Is infrastructure to deliver feedstock and export output products in place?
N/A
• Are utilities to support the project in place?
Planned to be provided by other BI’s.

f. Economic Uncertainties
• What are expected project’s net benefits and level of profitability?
N/A
• What are major project’s economic sensitivities and uncertainties?
None
• Are there any considerations or uncertainties related to phasing of the project?
None

g. Major Milestones
• What are the major milestones of the project (please fill in a table below using month – year format for both
previous (actuals) and future milestones)?
• Is the project cycle a standard delivery time frame? Yes
• Are there any milestones that have significance over others? Are there major merge points in the schedule?
None
• Were PRM activities undertaken in previous phases of project development? None
• Is information about previous PRM activities available (PRM Plans, Reports, Risk Registers)?N/A

Table 1. Milestones
PROJECT MILESTONE START FINISH
FEL 1 (Initiation)
Business Plan Checkpoint
FEL 1 (Business Case)
Decision Gate G1
FEL 2 (Study)
Decision Gate GAS
FEL 2 (DBSP) Jun 2016 July 2016
Decision Gate G2
FEL 3 (Project Proposal) July 2016 Dec 2016
Project Proposal Approval Checkpoint (ERA)
FEL 3 (Finalize FEL) Jan 2017
Decision Gate G3
Execution – Detail Design Sept 2017 August 2018
Execution – Construction Feb 2018 Oct 2020
Handover Check Point (ERC) Nov 2020

Page 4 of 11
h. Project Location
• What degree of uncertainty is associated with selection of project site(s)?
None
• Should project site(s) be ‘greenfield’, ‘brownfield’ or either?
Brownfield
• Could existing facilities, areas adjacent to existing facilities, existing RoW’s, etc. be used?
Yes
• Are there any preliminary arrangements with the government related to potential site(s)?
Yes.

i. Project Technologies
• What is the level of maturity of key technologies suitable for the project (modeling, lab test, commercial pilot or
commercial)? None
• Were considered technologies successfully used by Saudi Aramco previously? Yes
• Are there any technologies or modules considered by the project that were not successfully tried yet as at least
commercial pilots? None
• Are there any preliminary arrangements with potential technology licensors? None

j. Resources
• What are expected future market conditions to select qualified EPC contractors and/or licensors and acquire
required amounts of labor, materials and equipment?
LSTK contractor is selected.
• Are there known projects that will directly compete for the same resources?
None
• Is Saudi Aramco expected to timely get required number of qualified in-house specialists to develop and execute
the project?
Yes
• What is the level of Saudi Aramco organizational knowledge and experience related to development and
execution of the project?
Qualified resources are present to manage the project.
• Do existing Saudi Aramco standards and procedures cover all major aspects of the project?
Yes

k. Health, Safety and Security Issues

• Are there unique health challenges facing the project?
None
• Are there unique safety challenges facing the project?
- Demolishing scope in brownfield.
- Excavation scope.
- Proximity to near operating facility and equipment
• Are there any security concerns related to project execution?
None

l. Environmental Issues
• Are there any specific environmental considerations for this project?
None
• Is an EIA required and is it expected to raise any considerable concerns (scope changes, delays, extra costs, etc.)?
No additional EIA is required. CAT-III

Page 5 of 11
m. Project Constraints
• Are there any constraints that have been identified that may impact the ability to deliver the project (e.g.,
shutdown windows)?
- Cost driven.
- Supporting vendors and subcontractors Logistics.
- Safety measures for working in brown field.
- Water supply for hydro Testing

• Are there any constraints that will prevent the Proponent, Security, Loss Prevention, Safety, Environment, etc. to
accept the project?
None

n. Assumptions & Stakeholders’ Alignment

Based on information provided in previous sections please point out key project assumptions that have yet to be
validated.
• Are there scope, market, economics, location, technology, etc. assumptions made by the Proponent,
Management or IPT that have not been validated yet?
None
• Are key stakeholders aligned on the objectives of the project?
None
• What differences, if any, exists in expectations of key stakeholders?
None

o. Key Decisions & Main Alternatives

Based on information provided in previous sections please point out key decisions the project has yet to make.
• Have all the alternatives required for making the key decisions been identified?
No
• What are main short-listed project alternatives?
LUP Approvals for DUBA tank farm.
• Does the project have sufficient information to make these decisions?
Yes
• If not, what additional information is required to make these decisions? N/A
• Can IPT obtain the required information in time to make these key decisions? Yes
• What concerns, if any, does the project have about the reliability of the information currently available to make
these key decisions? None

p. Additional Risk Drivers & Other Information

• Are there any risk drivers for this project or similar projects that are not already captured above?
None
• Is there any additional information that could be important in understanding of any challenges confronting the
project and the project’s risk management requirements?
None

Page 6 of 11
5. Scope of the Project Risk Management Process
Will the PRM process cover the entire project scope, and risks affecting all of the project’s objectives (as
described in Section 1) will be addressed? If not, then what is the scope?
Yes

6. Project Risk Management Process & Tools

The Saudi Aramco Project Risk Management Guide (PRM Guide) outlines the standard PRM Process
and tools to be adopted by the project. It can be obtained at the following link:
https://sharek.aramco.com.sa/orgs/30003143/30012601/30012602/Documents/Project%20Risk%2
0Management/V0.93c%20Guide%200.93c%20-%20June%202009.docx

7. Risk Evaluation Criteria

Specific evaluation criteria have been developed by the project team to evaluate the potential effect
of each risk on the project ability to achieve its objectives, as follows in Tables 2 and 3:

Table 2. Probability Evaluation Criteria

Probability Very Low Low Moderate High Very High

% 0 - 5% 5% - 10% 10% - 25% 25% - 50% 50% - 100%

Table 3. Impact Evaluation Criteria

Impact Type of Risk Very Low Low Moderate High Very High

Threat
$500K or less $500K to $1MM $1MM to $2MM $2MM to $5MM Greater than $5MM
(Downside)
Cost3
Opportunity
$500K or less $500K to $1MM $1MM to $2MM $2MM to $5MM Greater than $5MM
(Upside)
1 week or less (5 1 to 2 weeks (5 - 10 2 to 4 weeks (10 - 20 4 to 8 weeks (20 - 40 Greater than 8
Threat
working days) working days) working days) working days) weeks (40+ working
(Downside)
days)
Schedule3
1 week or less (5 1 to 2 weeks (5 - 10 2 to 4 weeks (10 - 20 4 to 8 weeks (20 - 40 Greater than 8
Opportunity
working days) working days) working days) working days) weeks (40+ working
(Upside)
days)
Threat Less than 4 hours (< 4 to 8 hours (0.5 to 1 1 to 2 days 2 to 4 days Greater than 4 days
(Downside) 0.5 days) days)
Shutdown3
Opportunity Less than 4 hours (< 4 to 8 hours (0.5 to 1 1 to 2 days 2 to 4 days Greater than 4 days
(Upside) 0.5 days) days)
1% or less of 2% to 3% of 4% to 5% of 6% to 10% of 10% of
Threat
Quality (Downside)
requirements are not requirements are not requirements are not requirements are not requirements are
achieved achieved achieved achieved not achieved
No risk of injury First aid required or Medical treatment Severe injury, or an Risk of a fatality, or
alarms activated required or emergency fire/explosion, or
failure/damage caused shutdown for up to plant shutdown for
Threat to the existing facility four hours greater than four
Safety (Downside) with no impact on hours
operations, or
violation of work
permit
No environmental Low risk of very Moderate risk of High risk of Very High risk of
impact/damage localized environmental environmental environmental
Threat environmental damage that will damage that could damage to
Environment (Downside) damage that can be require outside lead to ill-health and neighboring regions
cleaned up within assistance to clear and wildlife damage on a scale that
normal operations local notifications may would take months

Page 7 of 11
 Impact Type of Risk Very Low Low Moderate High Very High

be required for nature to

recover from and
could have
economic
implications for our
neighbors
Little or no Community Evident community Significant Overwhelming
Threat
Community (Downside)
Community reaction recognizes issues but reaction community reaction community reaction
or recognition does not react
Internal Reputation Reputation damage Reputation damage Reputation damage International
Threat damage - Staff within region or with that attracts the that attracts the Reputation damage
Reputation (Downside) affected small businesses attention of the attention of the King
Petroleum Minister

8. Risk Reviews
PRM is a continuous process, as a result, risk reviews are held not only during formal desktop
reviews or workshops (PRM events) mandated by SAEP-367. Risk reviews should also be regularly
undertaken (monthly) during the entire project life cycle. Table 4 contains dates of PRM events
according to:
• SAEP-367 requirements
• Current project schedule

Table 4. PRM Events

PRM Events FEL 1, 30% FEL 2 (Study), FEL 2 (DBSP), FEL 3 (Project FEL 3 (Project FEL 3 (Detail Construction,
(SAEP-367) 50% 20% Proposal) 30% Proposal) 90% Design), 20% 10%
Applicability Yes NO Yes Yes Yes
(yes/ no)
Planned Date 3rd April 2016 Oct 2016 Jun 2017 TBD
(month – year)
Actual Date 3rd April 2016 27th Oct 2016
(month – year)

9. Risk Reporting
Regular (monthly) PRM Reports will be prepared to represent current project risk exposure. PRM
Reports are also produced after each PRM event undertaken in accordance with Table 4. Both
Reports are prepared using ARM functionality.

10. PRM Roles and Responsibilities

The Integrated Project Team (IPT) consists of members who contribute to the PRM Process. Full
time participation implies these people are members of the core project team. Part-time members
are seconded to support various aspects of project development and execution. At a minimum, any
IPT member gets a Contributor role in the PRM Process. The general PRM roles are described in
Table 5. PRM responsibilities of the IPT members are put forward by Table 6.

Table 5. Typical PRM Roles

PM Project Manager Approves PRM Plan; fully accountable for PRM system implementation and its effectiveness
RM Risk Manager Manages all PRM risk activities; responsible for PRM process and tool’s implementation
RF Risk Facilitator Runs main PRM events and workshops (either PEOD/ PMOD member or consultant)
Page 8 of 11
SME Subject Matter Expert Provides PRM support (all aspects) in area of expertise
RO Risk Owner Ensures Successful and Timely Risk Addressing and Coordinates Risk Owner’s Activities
AO Action Owner Ensures Successful and Timely Implementation of an Addressing Action
C Contributor Contributes to specific PRM Information (risk identification, assessment, addressing, etc.)
DM Decision Maker Validates and approves PRM results

Table 6. PRM Responsibilities of IPT Members

PRM Role Name Company/ Department Email address Full Time/
Part Time
PM Hussam Al Oqaili S.A. hussam.aloqaili@aramco.com FT
RM Sami Ismail S.A. sami.ismail@aramco.com PT
RF Ahmed Elqutob VMPSC Ahmed.elqutob@gmail.com FT

Page 9 of 11
11. Planning Session Attendees

Page 10 of 11
Page 11 of 11